- 1 -
CITYof BRISBANE
Thursday, March 6, 2025 at 7:30 PM ● Hybrid Meeting 50 Park Place, Brisbane, CA The public may observe/participate in City Council meetings using remote public comment options or attending in person. City Council members shall attend in person unless remote participation is permitted by law. The City Council may take action on any item listed in the agenda.
TO ADDRESS THE COUNCIL
IN PERSON
Location: Community Meeting Room 50 Park Place, Brisbane, CA 94005 Councilmember Davis will join via teleconference at 251 Mendocino St. Brisbane, CA.
Masking is not required but according to the California Department of Public Health guidelines, people at higher risk for severe illness should consider masking. To help maintain public health and safety, we respectively request that people not attend in-person if they are experiencing symptoms associated with COVID-19 or are otherwise ill and likely contagious (e.g., respiratory illnesses).
To address the City Council on any item – whether on the posted agenda or not – please fill out a Request to Speak Form located in the Community Meeting Room Lobby and submit it to the City Clerk. Speakers are not required to submit their name or address.
REMOTE PARTICIPATION
Members of the public may participate in the City Council meeting by logging into the Zoom Webinar listed below. City Council meetings may also be viewed live and/or on-demand via the City’s YouTube Channel, youtube.com/brisbaneca, or on Comcast Ch. 27. Archived videos may be replayed on the City’s website, brisbaneca.org/meetings. Please be advised that if there are technological difficulties, the meeting will nevertheless continue if remote participation is available.
The agenda materials may be viewed online at brisbaneca.org at least 72 hours prior to a Regular Meeting, and at least 24 hours prior to a Special Meeting.
Remote Public Comments:
Remote meeting participants may address the City Council via Zoom Webinar. Aside from commenting personally while in the Zoom Webinar, you can also use the call in number. The public comments received will be noted for the record during Oral Communications 1 and 2 or during an agenda item. We encourage you to email comments on or not on agenda items in advance of the meeting to [email protected].
That email address, however, will not be monitored during the meeting and emails received during the meeting will not be responded to or brought to the attention of the City Council during the meeting.
Join Zoom Webinar: zoom.us (please use the latest version: zoom.us/download) brisbaneca.org/cc-zoom
Webinar ID: 991 9362 8666
Call In Number: 1 (669) 900-9128
Note: Callers dial *9 to “raise hand” and dial *6 to mute/unmute.
City Council Meeting Agenda
1 March 6, 2025 - 2 - 7:30 PM
SPECIAL ASSISTANCE
If you need special assistance to participate in this meeting, please contact the City Clerk at (415) 508- 2113. Notification in advance of the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to this meeting.
WRITINGS THAT ARE RECEIVED AFTER THE AGENDA HAS BEEN POSTED Any writings that are received after the agenda has been posted but before 4pm of the day of the meeting will be available for public inspection at the front lobby in City Hall and on the internet (brisbaneca.org/meetings). Any writings that are received after 4pm of the day of the meeting will be distributed to the Council and made available for public inspection at the front lobby and on the internet the day after the meeting (brisbaneca.org/meetings).
7:30 P.M. CALL TO ORDER – PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
ROLL CALL
A. Consider any request of a City Councilmember to attend the meeting remotely under the “Emergency Circumstances” of AB 2449
ADOPTION OF AGENDA
AWARDS AND PRESENTATIONS
B. Women’s History Month Proclamation
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS NO. 1
CONSENT CALENDAR
C. Approve Minutes of City Council Meeting of February 20, 2025 D. Approve Minutes of City Council Closed Session Meeting of February 20, 2025 E. Approve Minutes of City Council Special Meeting of February 12, 2025 F. Approve Minutes of City Council Special Meeting of February 11, 2025 G. Approve Investment Report as of December 2024
H. Adopt Resolution Outlining City Councilmembers’ Membership in County Assignments and Subcommittees
I. Approve Co-sponsorship of Brisbane Dance Workshop Spring Performance J. Approve Co-Sponsorship of the Brisbane Chamber of Commerce’s and the Brisbane Lions Club’s A Night in Little Reno Event
2 March 6, 2025 - 3 - 7:30 PM
OLD BUSINESS
K. Discuss Fiscal Year 2026 Congressional Appropriation Requests (Staff is recommending to provide direction to staff on projects suggested for support by Congressman Mullin’s office for the Community Project Funding requests to the FY26 annual federal budget process. The following three potential projects’ design level estimates range between $2.5 million and $5.5 million and the Community Project Funding projects typically require a 20% match from the applicant. The source of that match will depend on the selected project.)
NEW BUSINESS
L. Informational Update Regarding Development Impact Fees (Staff is recommending to review the information provided regarding the four Development Impact Fee reports currently being drafted and provide direction to staff on the process for which the related reports should be brought forward for consideration) M. Discussion on Vehicular Traffic Flow and Parking on Visitacion Avenue during peak traffic times
(Staff is recommending that the City Council hold a discussion on the above topic. There are no action items for Council adoption/approval in this item.) N. Receive the Fiscal Year 2024/2025 Budget Review Report (The City expects its budgeted use of fund balance for FY25 will be reduced to $1,380,248. Any savings net of pension transfer allowed by budget policy will be rolled over to be considered for the FY26 budget and be used to pay for the level of services requested by the Council.)
STAFF REPORTS
O. City Manager’s Report- City Updates and Upcoming Activities
MAYOR/COUNCIL MATTERS
P. Countywide Assignments and Subcommittee Reports
i. Report Out on Subcommittee Meetings
ii. Upcoming Subcommittee Meetings
Q. Written Communications
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS NO. 2
ADJOURNMENT
3 File Attachments for Item:
C. Approve Minutes of City Council Meeting of February 20, 2025 4 BRISBANE CITY COUNCIL ACTION MINUTES
CITY COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA
THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 20, 2025
HYBRID MEETING, 50 PARK PLACE, BRISBANE, CA 94005
7:30 P.M. CALL TO ORDER – PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Mayor Lentz called the meeting to order at 7:34 P.M. and led the Pledge of Allegiance.
ROLL CALL
A. Consider any request of a City Councilmember to attend the meeting remotely under the “Emergency Circumstances” of AB 2449
No Councilmembers made a request under the Emergency Circumstances of AB 2449.
Councilmembers present: Councilmembers Davis, Kern, Mackin, O’Connell and Mayor Lentz Councilmembers absent: None
Staff Present: City Manager Dennis, City Clerk Padilla, City Attorney McMorrow, Sustainability Manager Etherton, Fire Inspector Preston, and Administrative Management Analyst Ibarra
ADOPTION OF AGENDA
Councilmember Davis made a motion, seconded by Councilmember O’Connell to adopt the agenda as it stands.
The motion was carried unanimously by all present.
Ayes: Councilmembers Davis, Kern, Mackin, O’Connell and Mayor Lentz Noes: None
Abstain: None
Absent: None
REPORT OUT OF CLOSED SESSION
City Attorney McMorrow reported that Councilmembers did not take any action and provided directions to staff on Anticipated Litigation Item D.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS NO. 1
No member of the public wished to speak.
5 C.
City Council Meeting Minutes
February 20, 2025
CONSENT CALENDAR
B. Approve Minutes of City Council Closed Session Meeting of February 6, 2025 C. Approve Minutes of City Council Meeting of February 6, 2025 D. Adopt Ordinance, Waiving Second Reading, Amending Section 2.44.010 of the Brisbane Municipal Code Establishing the Time of the Regular Meetings of the City Council as Six Thirty (6:30) P.M.
F. Pool Electrification Contract Construction Amendment (It is being recommended to authorize the City Manager to sign the design-build contract amendment in the amount of $1,649,584. This project is categorically exempt from further environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act. §15301, CEQA Guidelines (Class 1- Existing Facilities).)
Councilmember O’Connell made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Mackin, to approve Consent Calendar Items B, C, D, and F. The motion was carried unanimously by all present.
Ayes: Councilmembers Davis, Kern, Mackin, O’Connell and Mayor Lentz Noes: None
Abstain: None
Absent: None
E. Adopt Resolutions Appointing Commissioners and Committee Members Staff had an amendment to the Consent Calendar Item E’s staff report. Anna Dennis’ appointment by City Council to the IDEA Committee for a term ending in January 2026 will be added to the list of adopted resolutions.
Councilmember O’Connell made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Davis, to approve Consent Calendar Item E as amended. The motion was carried unanimously by all present.
Ayes: Councilmembers Davis, Kern, Mackin, O’Connell and Mayor Lentz Noes: None
Abstain: None
Absent: None
G. Receive the 2024 Mandated Fire and Life Safety Inspection Report (It is requested that the City Council acknowledge that North County Fire Authority has completed the required annual mandated fire and life safety inspections within the City of Brisbane for 2024.) After some council questions and discussion, staff was directed to coordinate with the North County Fire Authority on inspections of short-term rentals.
Councilmember Mackin made a motion, seconded by Councilmember O’Connell, to approve Consent Calendar Item G. The motion was carried unanimously by all present.
Ayes: Councilmembers Davis, Kern, Mackin, O’Connell and Mayor Lentz Noes: None
Abstain: None
Absent: None
6 C.
City Council Meeting Minutes
February 20, 2025
AWARDS AND PRESENTATIONS
H. Swear In Newly Appointed Commissioners and Committee Members City Clerk Padilla administered the oath of office for the following newly appointed commissioners and committee members:
• Cristian Cabrera - Complete Streets Safety Committee, 1 term ending January 2026 • Raymond Liu - Complete Streets Safety Committee, 1 term ending January 2029 • Juli Armstrong – Open Space & Ecology Committee, 1 term ending January 2029 • Anna Dennis - Inclusion, Diversity, Equity, and Accountability (IDEA) Committee, 1 term ending January 2026
• Masha Kohn - Inclusion, Diversity, Equity, and Accountability (IDEA) Committee, 1 term ending January 2027
• Maria Marc - Inclusion, Diversity, Equity, and Accountability (IDEA) Committee, 1 term ending January 2027
• Parks and Recreation Commission
• Byron Anderson- Parks and Recreation Commission, 1 term ending January 2029 • Leesa Greenlee - Parks and Recreation Commission, 1 term ending January 2029 The following appointed members will be sworn in at a later date by City Clerk Padilla:
• Julie Sims – Parks and Recreation Commission, 1 term ending January 2029 • Barbara Ebel – Open Space and Ecology Committee, 1 term ending January 2026 • Rohendra Atapattu- Open Space and Ecology Committee, 1 term ending January 2029
NEW BUSINESS
I. Use of Development Mitigation Funds/Development Impact Fees to Support Sierra Point Open Space Opportunities – Parcel R
(Staff recommend that the City Council provide direction for the use of the remaining development mitigation funds/development impact fees designated for park planning, including improvements, at Sierra Point)
City Manager Dennis reported that the City has received a total of $2,027,901 toward park planning for Parcel R and adjoining areas. As of December 2024, the City has $1,906,916 total remaining in these funds.
The $1.5 million received from Healthpeak is subject to the Mitigation Fee Act provisions as it was negotiated outside a development agreement. As such, these funds must be spent within five fiscal years from the time the fee was received (August 2020), although an extension of time to spend the funds may be permitted in order to prevent the $1.5 million being returned to the developer, those funds must be spent or allocated by June 30, 2026, or findings made to extend the time to spend the funds.
After Council questions of staff, Michele Salmon advocated to take care of serious business, such as, a potable water supply to the Marina and fixing facilities, before Council considers recreation. Kim Follien commented that she is concerned and feels betrayed since the community worked hard and provided feedback to use funds for a park.
After Council discussion, Council provided direction to staff to call a future meeting of the Sierra Point Park & Open Subcommittee of the City Council to discuss improvements to the City’s current recreational infrastructure/public amenity at Sierra Point (at and adjacent to “Parcel R”), using funds set aside in two separate agreements with 7 C.
City Council Meeting Minutes
February 20, 2025
developers for projects at Sierra Point. The Subcommittee will return to the Council at a future meeting with recommendations.
STAFF REPORTS
J. City Manager’s Report- City Updates and Upcoming Activities City Manager Dennis reported on the latest City new and upcoming City activities.
MAYOR/COUNCIL MATTERS
K. Countywide Assignments and Subcommittee Reports
i. Report Out on Subcommittee Meetings
Councilmembers reported out on their county assignments and subcommittee meetings. ii. Upcoming Subcommittee Meetings
City Manager reported out on the following upcoming subcommittee meetings and the topics being considered:
• Age Friendly
• Communications, Outreach & Engagement Subcommittee
• Economic Development
• Facilities
• School 2X2
• Sea Level Rise
• Quarry
L. Written Communications
Written communication was received from the following members of the public:
Pera (02-15-2025) Proposed Warehouse Project
McCarroll (02-17-2025) No on Quarry
Barnes (02-19-2025) 2-20-2025 Council Mtg Agenda Item I Riedell (02-14-2025) Correcting Public Record of Letter Dated 3-18-2024 ORAL COMMUNICATIONS NO. 2
Elaine Straw suggested having a subcommittee to address issues concerning the Ridge such as repairing of Mission Blue beams
Michele Salmon commented that accessing Sierra Point due sea level rise is an important matter to consider when it comes to Sierra Point and Parcel R. She reminded Council that a roof leak destroyed the Teen Center building. She also asked to remove the painted marks in front of Midtown Market and the broken benches within the Brisbane Village Shopping Center. 8 C.
City Council Meeting Minutes
February 20, 2025
ADJOURNMENT
Mayor Lentz adjourned the meeting at 9:13 P.M. City Dennis reported that the April 3rd, 2025 City Council Meeting will be held at the new meeting time of 6:30 P.M. _______________________
Ingrid Padilla
City Clerk
9 C.
File Attachments for Item:
D. Approve Minutes of City Council Closed Session Meeting of February 20, 2025 10 BRISBANE CITY COUNCIL
ACTION MINUTES
CITY COUNCIL CLOSED SESSION MEETING AGENDA
THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 20, 2025
HYBRID MEETING, 50 PARK PLACE LARGE CONFERENCE ROOM,
BRISBANE, CA 94005
6:30 P.M. CLOSED SESSION
A. Approval of the Closed Session Agenda
B. Public Comment. Members of the public may address the Councilmembers on any item on the closed session agenda
C. Adjournment into Closed Session
D.CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL—ANTICIPATED LITIGATION
Government Code, Section 54956.9 (d). Number of Cases: One Mayor Lentz called the meeting to order at 6:30 P.M.
Councilmember O’Connell made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Mackin, to approve the Closed Session Meeting agenda as it stands. The motion passed unanimously by all present.
Ayes: Councilmembers Davis, Kern, Mackin, O’Connell and Mayor Lentz Noes: None
Absent: None
Abstain: None
There was no public comment. Mayor Lentz adjourned the meeting into Closed Session.
REPORT OUT OF CLOSED SESSION
City Attorney McMorrow reported that Councilmembers did not take any action and provided directions to staff on the Aniticipated Litigation Item D.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 7:30 P.M.
11 Ingrid Padilla, City Clerk
D.
File Attachments for Item:
E. Approve Minutes of City Council Special Meeting of February 12, 2025 12 BRISBANE CITY COUNCIL
ACTION MINUTES
CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING AGENDA
TUESDAY, FEBRARY 12, 2025
HYBRID MEETING, 50 PARK PLACE, BRISBANE, CA 94005
6:00 P.M. CALL TO ORDER
Mayor Lentz called the meeting to order at 6:00 P.M.
PUBLIC COMMENT
No members of the public wished to make public comment.
COMMITTEE INTERVIEWS AND POSSIBLE APPOINTMENTS
A. Interview Applicants for 3 Parks and Recreation Commission terms ending January 2029 • 6:05 pm Julie Sims
• 6: 15 pm Leesa Greenlee
• 6:25 pm Jessica Aloft
• 6:35 pm Byron Anderson
• 6:45 pm Napallo Gomez-Somer
• 6:55 pm Jason Nunan
Applicants Simes, Greenlee, Aloft, Anderson, Gomez-Somer and Nunan applied or reapplied for the vacant seats in the Parks and Recreation Commission. All applicants were interviewed by Councilmembers Davis, Kern, Mackin, O’Connell and Mayor Lentz.
B. Interview Applicants for 2 Open Space and Ecology Committee terms ending January 2029 and 1 term ending 2026
• 7:05 pm Jason Nunan
• 7:15 pm Juli Armstrong
• 7:25 pm Rohendra Atapattu
• 7:35 pm Barbara Ebel
*Note Carl Lam withdrew his application
Applicants Nunan, Armstrong, Atapattu, and Ebel applied or reapplied for the vacant seats in the Open Space and Ecology Committee. All applicants were interviewed by Councilmembers Davis, Kern, Mackin, O’Connell and Mayor Lentz.
13 E.
City Council Meeting Minutes
February 12, 2025
C. Discuss and Consider making Appointments for 3 Parks and Recreation Commission terms ending January 2029
City Clerk Padilla was directed to draft a resolution appointing the following members to the Parks and Recreation Commission:
-Byron Anderson, Julie Simms and Leesa Greenlee for three terms ending January 2029 D. Discuss and Consider making Appointments for 2 Open Space and Ecology Committee terms ending January 2029 and 1 term ending 2026
City Clerk Padilla was directed to draft a resolution appointing the following members to the Open Space & Ecology Committee:
- Barbara Ebel for a term ending January 2026
- Juli Armstrong & Dulip Rohendra Atapattu for terms ending January 2029
ADJOURNMENT
Mayor Lentz adjourned the meeting at 8:40 P.M.
_______________________
Ingrid Padilla
City Clerk
14 E.
File Attachments for Item:
F. Approve Minutes of City Council Special Meeting of February 11, 2025 15 BRISBANE CITY COUNCIL
ACTION MINUTES
CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING AGENDA
TUESDAY, FEBRARY 11, 2025
HYBRID MEETING, 50 PARK PLACE, BRISBANE, CA 94005
6:00 P.M. CALL TO ORDER
Mayor Lentz called the meeting to order at 6:00 P.M.
PUBLIC COMMENT
No members of the public wished to make public comment.
COMMITTEE INTERVIEWS AND POSSIBLE APPOINTMENTS
A. Interview Applicants for 2 Inclusion, Diversity, Equity, and Accountability (IDEA) Committee terms ending January 2027 and 1 term ending 2026 due to a resignation • Committee Member Anna Dennis (per IDEA Committee by law requesting reappointment for 1 year term)
• 6:05 pm Masha Kohn
• 6: 15 pm Maria Marc
• 6:25 pm Raymond Liu
Applicants Dennis, Kohn, Marc and Liu applied or reapplied for the vacant seats in the IDEA Committee. Applicants Kohn, Marc and Liu were interviewed by Councilmembers Davis, Kern, Mackin, O’Connell and Mayor Lentz.
B. Interview Applicants for 1 Complete Streets Safety Committee term ending January 2029 and 1 term ending 2026
• 6:35 pm Raymond Liu
• 6:45 pm Cristian Cabrera
• 6:55 pm Laron McNally
Applicants Liu, Cabrera and McNally applied or reapplied for the vacant seats in the Complete Streets Safety Committee and were interviewed by Councilmembers Davis, Kern, Mackin, O’Connell and Mayor Lentz.
C. Discuss and Consider making Appointments for 2 Inclusion, Diversity, Equity, and Accountability (IDEA) Committee terms ending January 2027 and 1 term ending 2026 due to a resignation 16 F.
City Council Meeting Minutes
February 11, 2025
City Clerk Padilla was directed to draft a resolution appointing the following members to the IDEA Committee:
- Anna Dennis for 1 term ending January 2026
- Masha Kohn and Maria Marc for 2 terms ending January 2027 D. Discuss and Consider making Appointments for 1 Complete Streets Safety Committee term ending January 2029 and 1 term ending 2026
City Clerk Padilla was directed to draft a resolution appointing the following members to the Complete Streets Safety Committee:
- Cristian Cabrera for 1 term ending January 2026
- Raymond Liu 1 term ending January 2029
ADJOURNMENT
Mayor Lentz adjourned the meeting at 7:40 P.M.
_______________________
Ingrid Padilla
City Clerk
17 F.
File Attachments for Item:
G. Approve Investment Report as of December 2024
18 Memorandum
To: City Council
From: Carolina Yuen, Finance Director
Date: March 6, 2025
Re: Changes in Monthly Investment Report
You will notice some changes to the monthly Investment Report starting with the month of December 2024. Staff wanted to provide additional information we felt would assist in your review.
The first page is the report as has been presented. The second page adds comparative information and includes the following:
o Comparative to Previous Month Balances at a Summary Level o Comparative to Previous Year Balances at a Summary Level o 13-month Trend of Interest Rates to include:
▪ Benchmark of the 2-year Treasury Bill Rate
▪ LAIF (CA Local Agency Investment Fund) Rate
▪ BNY Mellon Custodial Account Money Market Rate
▪ The City’s Portfolio Investment Return
Future reports will contain additional descriptive narratives.
We are open to your feedback and hope this provides useful information. 19 G.
FACE CARRY MARKET COUPON
INVESTMENT DATE OF VALUE OF VALUE OF VALUE OF INTEREST MATURITY RATING/ NAME OF DEPOSITORY TYPE INVESTMENT INVESTMENT INVESTMENT INVESTMENT RATE % DATE COLLATERAL WELLS FARGO Checking A/C $ 8,455,703 $ 8,455,703 $ 8,455,703 0.000 110% collateral STATE FUND (LAIF) Deposit on call continuous $ 610,592 $ 610,592 $ 610,592 4.480 on call no rating Other Investments
FHLB 3/24/2022 $ 1,000,000 $ 1,000,000 $ 994,820 2.000 03/24/2025 FHLB 4/22/2022 $ 1,000,000 $ 1,000,000 $ 995,070 2.750 04/22/2025 FHLB 7/28/2022 $ 1,000,000 $ 1,000,000 $ 997,650 4.050 07/28/2025 FHLB 12/31/2021 $ 1,000,000 $ 1,000,000 $ 978,400 1.300 09/30/2025 FHLB 10/27/2022 $ 1,000,000 $ 1,000,000 $ 1,003,820 4.750 10/27/2025 FFCB 9/12/2022 $ 1,000,000 $ 1,000,000 $ 997,700 4.125 12/12/2025 FFCB 12/1/2023 $ 1,000,000 $ 1,000,000 $ 1,005,340 5.060 12/01/2026 FHLB 3/25/2022 $ 1,000,000 $ 1,000,000 $ 962,490 2.600 03/25/2027 FHLB 5/26/2022 $ 1,000,000 $ 1,000,000 $ 997,850 4.000 05/26/2027 FHLB 5/26/2022 $ 1,000,000 $ 1,000,000 $ 984,290 3.750 05/26/2027 FHLB 11/19/2024 $ 1,000,000 $ 1,000,000 $ 1,000,240 4.650 11/19/2027 FHLB 12/20/2024 $ 1,000,000 $ 1,000,000 $ 999,030 4.800 12/20/2027 FFCB 8/6/2024 $ 1,000,000 $ 1,000,000 $ 999,990 5.340 11/06/2028 FHLM 6/25/2024 $ 1,000,000 $ 1,000,000 $ 1,001,070 5.500 06/25/2029 FHLB 7/29/2024 $ 1,000,000 $ 1,000,000 $ 998,010 5.150 07/25/2029 FHLB 10/30/2024 $ 1,000,000 $ 1,000,000 $ 997,660 5.020 10/30/2029 FHLM 11/19/2024 $ 1,000,000 $ 1,000,000 $ 1,000,580 5.000 11/19/2029 BNY Mellon Treasury Obligations continuous $ 5,020,267 $ 5,020,267 $ 5,020,267 4.390 on call 110% collateral Sub-total $ 22,020,267 $ 22,020,267 $ 21,934,277
U.S. Bank 2014 BGPGA Bond (330) Improvements Fed Treas Obl $ - 10031 Reserve Fund Fed Treas Obl $ 1 10032
Revenue Fund Fed Treas Obl $ - 10034
Expense Fund Fed Treas Obl $ - 10035
Principal Fed Treas Obl $ 1 10036
Interest Fund Fed Treas Obl $ 0 10037
U.S. Bank 2015 Utility Capital (545) Improvements Fed Treas Obl $ - 10031 Reserve Fed Treas Obl $ 566 10032
Expense Fund Fed Treas Obl $ - 10035
BNY Mellon 2023 BGVMIDFA Bond (328) Improvements Fed Treas Obl $ 33 10031 Reserve / Project Fed Treas Obl $ 1,804,457 10032
Expense Fund Fed Treas Obl $ 5 10035
Principal Fed Treas Obl $ - 10036
Interest Fund Fed Treas Obl $ - 10037
PARS OPEB Trust Trust Cash Investments $ 4,311,484 13050 PARS Retirement Trust Trust Cash Investments $ 1,676,624 13050 Sub-total Cash with Fiscal Agents $ 7,793,170
Total other investments $ 29,813,437 $ 29,813,437 $ 21,934,277 TOTAL INVESTMENTS & CASH BALANCES $ 38,879,731 $ 38,879,731 $ 31,000,572 Outstanding Loans to Department Heads / Former Employees Date of loan Amount Amount Remaining Interest Rate
Stuart Schillinger 4/1/2002 318,750 $ 318,750 Variable, LAIF + 1% FFCB - Federal Farm Credit Bank
FHLB - Federal Home Loan Bank
FHLM - Federal Home Loan Mortage Corporation
FNMA -Federal National Mortgage Association
Two year Treasury 4.25%
Weighted Interest 3.04%
Weighted maturity 1.48 Years
TREASURER'S CERTIFICATE
These are all the securities in which the city funds, including all trust funds and oversight agencies funds, are invested and that (excluding approved deferred compensation plans) all these investments are in securities as permitted by adopted city policy.
It is also certified that enough liquid resources (including maturities and anticipated revenues) are available to meet the next six months' cash flow.
Carolina Yuen
CITY TREASURER
CITY OF BRISBANE
CASH BALANCES & INVESTMENTS
SOURCE OF FUNDING
December 31, 2024
20 G.
FACE MARKET FACE FACE
INVESTMENT VALUE OF VALUE OF VALUE OF VALUE OF
NAME OF DEPOSITORY TYPE INVESTMENT INVESTMENT INVESTMENT INVESTMENT WELLS FARGO Checking A/C $ 8,455,703 $ 8,455,703 $ 5,762,198 $2,693,504 46.7% $ 8,208,461 $ 247,242 3.0% STATE FUND (LAIF) Deposit on call $ 610,592 $ 610,592 $ 610,592 $ - 0.0% $ 553,718 $ 56,874 10.3% Other Investments
Sub-total BNY Mellon $ 22,020,267 $21,934,277 $ 18,899,944 $3,120,324 16.5% $ 22,974,043 $ (953,776) -4.2% Sub-total Cash with Fiscal Agents $ 7,793,170 $ 7,939,646 $ (146,476) -1.8% $ 11,089,460 $ (3,296,290) -29.7% Total other investments $ 29,813,437 $ 26,839,590 $2,973,847 $ 34,063,503 $ (4,250,066) TOTAL INVESTMENTS & CASH BALANCES $ 38,879,731 $31,000,572 $ 33,212,380 $5,667,352 17.1% $ 42,825,682 $ (3,945,951) -9.2% -
CITY OF BRISBANE
CASH BALANCES & INVESTMENTS
Comparative Review
December 31, 2024
Change in Face Value
Previous Month Previous Year
Change in Face Value
2.50%
3.00%
3.50%
4.00%
4.50%
5.00%
5.50%
Dec-23 Jan-24 Feb-24 Mar-24 Apr-24 May-24 Jun-24 Jul-24 Aug-24 Sep-24 Oct-24 Nov-24 Dec-24 Interest Rates
2-year Treasury
LAIF
BNY Money Market
City's Portfolio Weighted Interest
21 G.
File Attachments for Item:
H. Adopt Resolution Outlining City Councilmembers’ Membership in County Assignments and Subcommittees
22 Council Assignments Page 1 of 1
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
Meeting Date: March 6, 2025
From: City Manager Jeremy Dennis and City Clerk Ingrid Padilla Subject: Confirmation of City Council Appointments to County Organizations, Joint Powers Authorities, City Council Subcommittees (Standing and Ad-Hoc) and City Liaisons Update Regarding the Creation of Potential Council Election Districts Community Goal/Result
Community Building - Brisbane will honor the rich diversity of our city (residents, organizations, businesses) through community engagement and participation Recommendation:
Adopt a resolution confirming City Council appointments for 2025 to County Organizations, Joint Powers Authorities, City Council Subcommittees (standing and ad-hoc) and City Liaisons Background:
Annually, City Council collectively selects representative from the Council to serve on numerous County organizations, such as the City/County Associations of Governments (C/CAG) and the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG), various Joint Powers Authorities, such as the Peninsula Clean Energy Joint Powers Authority, numerous standing City Council subcommittees, such as Fiscal Policies and Infrastructure, Utilities and Franchise, several ad- hoc subcommittees, such Elections Issues, and Council liaisons, such as to the Complete Streets Safety Committee and Open Space and Ecology Committee.
Discussion
Council made these selections earlier this year. The complete list of these organizations, joint powers authorities, Council subcommittees, and Council liaisons and the Council members who will serve in 2025 is attached to the attached Resolution.
Fiscal Impact
There is no fiscal impact from adopting the attached resolution.
Attachments
1. Resolution with Exhibit
___________________________________ ___________________________________ Ingrid Padilla, City Clerk Jeremy Dennis, City Manager
23 H.
RESOLUTION NO. 2025-XX
A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Brisbane Making Appointments for 2025 to County Organizations, Joint Powers Authorities, Council Sub-Committees and Council Liaisons
WHEREAS, annually, City Council collectively selects representative from the Council to serve on numerous County organizations, such as the City/County Associations of Governments (C/CAG) and the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG), various Joint Powers Authorities, such as the Peninsula Clean Energy Joint Powers Authority, numerous standing City Council subcommittees, such as Fiscal Policies and Infrastructure, Utilities and Franchise, several ad- hoc subcommittees, such Elections Issues, and Council liaisons, such as to the Complete Streets Safety Committee and Open Space and Ecology Committee; and
WHEREAS, on January 16, 2025 and February 6, 2025, City Council discussed which Council members should serve on these organizations, JPA’s, sub-committees and liaisons, and selected which members should be appointed for 2025; and WHEREAS, the Council members so selected have agreed to serve.
NOW, THEREFORE, be it resolved by the City Council of the City of Brisbane as follows:
Section 1. The 2025 City of Brisbane City Council Assignments as set forth on the attached Exhibit 1 is approved.
Section 2. This Resolution is effective immediately upon its adoption.
This Resolution was adopted at a regular meeting of the Brisbane City Council on March 6, 2025 by the following vote:
AYES;
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
Mayor of the City of Brisbane
Approved as to form:
Thomas R. McMorrow, City Attorney
24 H.
Updated 2/13/2025
2025
CITY OF BRISBANE - CITY COUNCIL ASSIGNMENTS
The following is a list of Commissions, Subcommittees, Boards, Councils and Associations for which the Council selects a representative(s).
County/Other JPA Assignments Representative/Alternate Mtg Sched.
Airport Community Roundtable Terry O’Connell 1st Wed/mo http://sforoundtable.org Madison Davis, Alt 7 pm
Airport Land Use Committee Terry O’Connell, Rep. 4th Thurs/mo http://ccag.ca.gov/committees/ Cliff Lentz, Alt 4-6 pm
Association of Bay Area Governments Mayor/Mayor Pro Tem Annually/April http://www.abag.ca.gov/
Brisbane Baylands Community Madison Davis As Needed
Advisory Group (BBCAG) Terry O’Connell 7-9 pm
Brisbane Emergency Services Council Cliff Lentz, Rep
(Mayor & SMC Emergency Services Council Rep) Terry O’Connell Caltrain Local Policy Makers Group Frank Kern 4th Thursday every www.caltrain.com/calmod Cliff Lentz, Alt other month 5:30 City/County Association of Governments Coleen Mackin, Rep 2nd Thurs/mo http://ccag.ca.gov/committees/board-of-directors/ Cliff Lentz, Alt. 6:30-9:30pm County Library JPA Frank Kern 2nd Mon/bi-month
Liaison with Friends of Brisbane Library Cliff Lentz, Alt 8:15 am http://www.smcl.org/en/node/11
Housing Endowment & Regional Trust (HEART) Cliff Lentz Annually (May) of SMC’s Committee Frank Kern
League of California Cities Mayor/Mayor Pro Tem Conferences http://www.cacities.org
North County Fire Authority Board Madison Davis Once a year of Directors/Fire Services (JPA Board) Terry O’Connell in June/July Peninsula Clean Energy JPA Coleen Mackin 4th Thurs/mo
www.peninsulacleanenergy.com Madison Davis, Alt 7-9 pm
Peninsula Traffic Congestion Relief Alliance Cliff Lentz 3rd Thurs/bi-month http://commute.org/ Frank Kern, Alt 8 – 9:30 am
San Mateo County Emergency Mayor 3rd Thurs/mo/Quart
Services Council Mayor Pro-tem 5:30 pm
http://hsd.smcsheriff.com/
Exhibit 1
25 H.
Updated 2/13/2025
SMC Pre-Hospital EMS Group Frank Kern 3rd Wed Jan/May/Sept Board of Directors (JPA-ALS Paramedic) Terry O’Connell, Alt 6 pm City Council Subcommittees Representative/Alternate
Age Friendly Subcommittee Frank Kern
(created Nov 2021) Cliff Lentz
Baylands Cliff Lentz
(All things Baylands, BSP - UPC application and is Terry O’Connell various studies, i.e., financial, survey, sustainability, + 1 PC, + 1 CSSC, +1 P&R HSR, Soil Processing, Recology) + 1 OSEC, + 1 PAAC
Beautification on City Owned Property Frank Kern
Subcommittee (created Jan 2025) Madison Davis
+ 1 P&R , + 1 OSEC, + 1 CSSC
City Facilities Subcommittee Madison Davis
(created Jan 2025) Coleen Mackin
Communication, Outreach & Engagement Frank Kern
Subcommittee Coleen Mackin (+ Caroline)
Crocker Park Subcommittee Cliff Lentz
Coleen Mackin
Economic Development Subcommittee Frank Kern
Cliff Lentz (+ Mitch)
Emergency Preparedness Subcommittee Madison Davis
(created Jan 2025) Frank Kern
Fiscal Policies Subcommittee Coleen Mackin
(Review of Fiscal policies, such as OPEB, Terry O’Connell Fund Balances Policies, unfunded liabilities)
History Subcommittee Madison Davis
Coleen Mackin
Housing Subcommittee Madison Davis
Cliff Lentz
Infrastructure, Utilities & Franchise Subcommittee Cliff Lentz (Water & Sewer, rates & plans, Franchise agreements, Terry O’Connell Infrastructure plans, Storm drains, streets, marina)
Planning Issues Subcommittee Frank Kern
Coleen Mackin
26 H.
Updated 2/13/2025
Public Art Advisory Committee & Madison Davis
Public Art Selection Committee Terry O’Connell
+ 2 P&R, + 1 Business owner
+ 1 Artist, + 1 Community member
Quarry Subcommittee Cliff Lentz
(created Jan 2025) Terry O’Connell
School/City Subcommittee 2x2 Madison Davis
Cliff Lentz
Sea Level Rise Subcommittee Cliff Lentz
(created Jan 2025) Coleen Mackin
Sierra Point Parkway & Marina Subcommittee Cliff Lentz
Terry O’Connell
Sierra Point Parkway Park & Open Space Frank Kern
(For parks and open space projects at SPP) Cliff Lentz
(Created 1/7/21) + 1 P&R, + 1 OSEC, + 1 PAAC
Ad hoc Subcommittees Representative/Alternate
City Attorney Recruitment Ad hoc Cliff Lentz
Terry O’Connell
Elections Issues Ad hoc Madison Davis
(created Feb 2024) Cliff Lentz
Succession Planning Ad hoc Madison Davis
(Support CM as staff retire) created Jan 2025 Frank Kern Council Liaisons Representative/Alternate
** Meet with two representatives from each Commission for Liaison meetings: involves discussion around the Commission’s achievements, goals and their upcoming workplan.
Liaison to Complete Streets Safety Committee Frank Kern Coleen Mackin
Liaison to Inclusion, Diversity Equity & Accountability (IDEA) Madison Davis Cliff Lentz
Liaison to Open Space & Ecology Committee Coleen Mackin Terry O’Connell
Liaison to Parks & Recreation Commission Madison Davis
Frank Kern
Liaison to Planning Commission Cliff Lentz
Coleen Mackin
27 H.
File Attachments for Item:
I. Approve Co-sponsorship of Brisbane Dance Workshop Spring Performance 28 BDW Spring Performance Application for event cosponsorship Page 1 of 2
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
Meeting Date: 3/6/2025
From: Jeff Franco, Recreation Coordinator
Noreen Leek, Parks & Recreation Director
Subject: Approve the BDW Spring Performance for Event
Cosponsorship
Community Goal/Result
Community Building & Fundraising
Purpose
Promote cultural and social events that encourage community engagement and provide assistance to local non-profit organizations.
Recommendation
Approve the Brisbane Dance Workshop’s Annual Spring Performance as a cosponsored event.
Background
Founded in 1982, Brisbane Dance Workshop (BDW) is a non-profit organization established to provide creative and skill based performing arts learning to children 3 and older. BDW embraces a real challenge in teaching dance: to preserve the innocence, playfulness and creativity in a child while developing the more demanding technical and aesthetic aspect of the performing arts. BDW has staged over thirty original performances involving children and adults and offers a wide range of classes such as: Ballet, Modern, Hip Hop, Composition, Creative Movement, Irish, Acting, Voice, and Improvisation. BDW offers scholarships to students who participate in BDW classes as well as scholarships for students who have a proven record of dedication and wish to expand their learning experience outside Brisbane.
BDW strives to create entertainment for the community by hosting their annual Spring Performance of ‘‘Where the Wild Things Are’ at the Mission Blue Center. This event is open to people of all ages and helps to support the mission of the Brisbane Dance Workshop. Tickets will be sold at $10 for adults, and $7 for youth and seniors. Evening performance gala event tickets will be available for $35/person. They kindly request continued support from the City for the compensated use of Mission Blue, waiver of insurance requirement, facility staff time, and assistance promoting the event to the community.
Discussion
Brisbane Dance Workshop will hold their annual Spring Performance at the Mission Blue Center on Saturday & Sunday, May 17
th & 18th, 2025. Brisbane Dance Workshop qualifies under the Group II category for recreation facilities indoor use permits as a non-profit group serving the Brisbane community. Meeting the Group II requirements with the events open to the general public qualifies them for free use of the facility and waives the deposit requirement. 29 I.
BDW Spring Performance Application for event cosponsorship Page 2 of 2 Fiscal Impact
Brisbane Dance Workshop is requesting support from the City as summarized in the table below. They have requested use of the Mission Blue Center for the event. Use of the facility and the deposit are waived as part of their Group II designation.
FINANCIAL IMPACT SUMMARY BASED ON APPLICATION
Hourly Rental of Mission Blue
Center
Approximately 55 hours @ $371/hour
= $20,405
(including set up/clean up)
Waived per City policy for Nonprofit use
Mission Blue Rental Deposit $500
(Typically refundable absent damages)
Waived per City policy for Nonprofit use
Staff time to up and break
down theatre risers
Approximately 10 staff labor hours @
$40/hour = $400 Requesting to be waived
Indoor Event Insurance
Approximately $100-$250/event.
(Renters are typically required to procure
insurance on their own and provide a
copy to the city.)
Requesting requirement be
waived
Use of existing theatre lighting
at Mission Blue Waived
Lighting Technician
The City does not traditionally cover this cost and therefore it is the responsibility of the Non-profit organization to hire and pay a lighting technician.
Promotional and Marketing
Support Waived
Attachments
1. Cosponsorship application
Jeff Franco
Jeff Franco, Recreation Coordinator
___________________________________ ___________________________________ Noreen Leek, Parks & Recreation Director Jeremy Dennis, City Manager 30 I.
31 I.
32 I.
33 I.
File Attachments for Item:
J. Approve Co-Sponsorship of the Brisbane Chamber of Commerce’s and the Brisbane Lions Club’s A Night in Little Reno Event
34 Brisbane Chamber of Commerce & Lions Club Application for cosponsorship Page 1 of 2
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
Meeting Date: 3/6/2025
From: Jeff Franco, Recreation Coordinator
Noreen Leek, Parks & Recreation Director
Subject: Approve the Chamber of Commerce & Brisbane Lions Club “A Little Night in Reno” Application for Event Cosponsorship
Community Goal/Result
Community Building & Fundraising
Purpose
Promote cultural and social events that encourage community engagement and provide assistance to local non-profit organizations.
Recommendation
Approve the Brisbane Chamber of Commerce & Brisbane Lions Club "A Night in Little Reno” as a cosponsored event.
Background
The Brisbane Chamber of Commerce is Non-profit 501(c)(6) organization created through a partnership of businesses, civic leaders, and residents working together to enhance Brisbane’s economic landscape.
The Chamber assisted small businesses throughout the COVID-19 pandemic with critical information about protocols and funding opportunities, and partnered with the City of Brisbane to distribute grants.
The Chamber continues to print The Luminary (Brisbane’s only newspaper), offer scholarships to college students, partner with Lipman Middle School on a job shadowing day, create wooden holiday stars for residents, and sponsor the Brisbane Garden Show.
The Brisbane Lions Club is a 501(c)(3) committed to serving the community. The Lions Clubs are places where individuals join together to give their time and effort to improving their communities, and the world. They help the community get vision and hearing care and equipment. They support the students in our community through the scholarship program.
Discussion
The event, “A Night in Little Reno”, will be held on Saturday, June 7th, 2025, from 6:00-11:00pm at the Mission Blue Center. The event will include casino games (not actual gambling), live music, food, a raffle, and more. The Chamber of Commerce qualifies under the Group II category for recreation facilities indoor use permits as a non-profit group serving the Brisbane community. Meeting the Group II requirements with the event open to the general public qualifies them for free use of the facility and waives the deposit requirement.
35 J.
Brisbane Chamber of Commerce & Lions Club Application for cosponsorship Page 2 of 2 Fiscal Impact
The Brisbane Chamber of Commerce is requesting support from the City as summarized in the table below. They have requested use of the Mission Blue Center for the event. Use of the facility and the deposit are waived as part of their Group III designation.
FINANCIAL IMPACT SUMMARY BASED ON APPLICATION
Hourly Rental of Mission Blue
Center
Approximately 15 hours @
$371/hour = $5,565
(including set up)
Waived per City policy for Nonprofit use
Rental Deposit
$500
(Typically refundable absent
damages)
Waived per City policy for Nonprofit use
Event Insurance
Approximately $100-
$250/event. (Renters are typically
required to procure insurance on
their own and provide a copy to the
city.)
Requesting requirement be
waived
Use of existing theatre lighting
at Mission Blue Waived
Lighting Technician
The City does not traditionally cover this cost and therefore it is the responsibility of the Non-profit organization to hire and pay a lighting technician.
Promotional and Marketing
Support
Waived
ABC License for alcoholic
beverage sales
The City does not traditionally cover this cost and therefore it is the responsibility of the Non-profit organization to pay associated fees.
Attachments
1. Cosponsorship application
___________________________________ ___________________________________ Jeff Franco, Recreation Coordinator Noreen Leek, Parks & Recreation Director _______________________
Jeremy Dennis, City Manager
36 J.
This application must be submitted to the Parks & Recreation Department at least (90) working days prior to the requested event.
City ofBrisbane
COSPONSORSHIP APPLICATION
Name of Event: _______________________________________________ Event Set-up Start Time: _______________ Event Day of Week: ____________________________________________ Event End Time: ________________ Event Location: _______________________________________________ Describe what can be expected at this event? (ex. Performance, Dinner, Activities, etc.) _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Will there be any fundraising at this event? ______ If yes, what will the funds raised be used for? ______________________________ Are there any admission fees for this event? ______ If yes, please list them here: ____________________________________________ If this event is NOT open to the general public, what are the restrictions for who may attend? (ex. age, membership, residency, etc.) a. Brisbane Non-Profit Organization
b. Non-resident, Non-Profit Organization (Outside of Brisbane) c. School District, School, or School Affiliated Group (ex. PTO) d. Private Group, Club, or Organization
What year did your organization begin serving the Brisbane community? _________________ How has your organization added value to the Brisbane community in the past? _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Name of Contact Person: __________________________________ Phone: ___________________________________ Email: ____________________________________________________________________ Name of Organization: ___________________________________ Organization Website: ___________________________________ Organization Address or P.O. Box: ________________________________________________________________________
What is your organization’s mission and/or purpose?
Event Date (mm/dd/yy): ________________________________________ Circle ONE of the following descriptions below that best describes your organization:
Event Start Time: ________________
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Phone: (415) 508-2140 | Email: [email protected] | Office: 50 Park Place, Brisbane, CA 94005
EVENT DETAILS
APPLICANT INFORMATION
(If you are requesting multiple days & times, please attach those details on a separate sheet of paper.) 37 J.
To request promotional support, please circle the specific areas you would like support with. (Please note: promotional support is not guaranteed. Any graphics or content for your event are expected to be provided by the applicant.) If you would like to request any equipment for an outdoor event, please include those details below. (If your event is at one of our indoor facilities, you my indicate your
equipment needs on the rental layout.) Bluetooth Speaker? ______ with Microphone? ______ Projector & Screen? ______
*Theatrical Lighting? ______ with *Lighting Technician? _____ *Theater Risers? ______
Will this event require any street or parking closures? _____ If yes, you must obtain a Brisbane Encroachment Permit Do you wish to use amplified sound at this event? _____ If yes, you must submit an Brisbane Amplified Sound Permit Application To the fullest extent allowed by law, I agree to indemnify and defend the City of Brisbane, its directors, officers, agents, employees and volunteers and hold them harmless from and against any and all loss, liability, expense, claims, costs, suits, and damages, including attorneys’ fees, arising out of the use or occupancy described in this application. I agree to waive all rights of subrogation against the City, its elected or appointed officers, officials, agents and employees for losses paid under the terms of any policy which arise from the use or occupancy described in this application.
Quantity: Item:
____________ 6ft Long Rectangle Tables
____________ Chairs
____________ 10ft x 10ft Canopy/Pop-up Tent
____________ Weighted Sandbags
Will alcoholic beverages (beer/wine) be sold at your event? _____ If yes, you must attach a copy of an Alcoholic Beverage Permit *Full Liquor Liability: If beer or wine is available for consumption and money is transacted in any form (i.e. for donation, for a ticket, for a meal, for entry to the event, for the beverage) then full liquor liability premiums are necessary.
Will any food or non-alcoholic beverages be sold at your event? _____ If yes, this permit is required smchealth.org/food-program City Staff must be present to accommodate the use of any indoor facilities. The below requested times will be used to ensure staff will be available when you need to access the facility. (If you are not requesting indoor facility use, you may skip to the next section.) Date of Facility Access (mm/dd/yy):___________________________ Opening Time: ______________ Closing Time: ______________ Date of Facility Access (mm/dd/yy):___________________________ Opening Time: ______________ Closing Time: ______________ Date of Facility Access (mm/dd/yy):___________________________ Opening Time: ______________ Closing Time: ______________
PERMITS
ADDITIONAL SUPPORT
EQUIPMENT USE REQUEST
INDOOR FACILITY ACCESS REQUEST
USE AGREEMENT & LIABILITY RELEASE
Traffic Permits
Amplified Sound Permits - Outdoor Events Only
Food & Beverage Permits - Outdoor Events Only
a. Brisbane Signboards b. Social Media c. City Website d. City Publications Other: ____________________________ Applicant Signature______________________________________ Date________________ Mission Blue Center ONLY
If your event will be at the Mission Blue Center, please indicate if you wish to request any of the equipment listed below.
*Any additional fees associated with reservation of special equipment will be the responsibility of the applicant, and may require additional planning time.
Alcoholic Beverage Permit
ADMINISTRATIVE SECTION
Facility Application? _____ Permit # ______________ CC Report Due _________ CC Meeting Date: ____________ Do you intend to sell goods of any kind at your event? _____ If yes, you must have a valid Brisbane Business License Brisbane Business License
38 J.
File Attachments for Item:
K. Discuss Fiscal Year 2026 Congressional Appropriation Requests (Staff is recommending to provide direction to staff on projects suggested for support by Congressman Mullin’s office for the Community Project Funding requests to the FY26 annual federal budget process. The following three potential projects’ design level estimates range between $2.5 million and $5.5 million and the Community Project Funding projects typically require a 20% match from the applicant. The source of that match will depend on the selected project.)
39 CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
Suggested Projects for FY26 Community Project Funding Page 1 of 3 Meeting Date: March 6, 2025
From: Director of Public Works/City Engineer
Subject: Suggested Projects for FY26 Community Project Funding Recommendation
Provide direction to staff on projects suggested for support by Congressman Mullin’s office for the Community Project Funding (“CPF”, also known as “earmark”) requests to the FY26 annual federal budget process.
Staff recommends the Council choose 1-2 projects from those described below for submittal to the Congressman’s office.
Background
As discussed at your February 6th meeting, Congressman Kevin Mullin’s office provides, on an annual basis, for communities to submit high-priority municipal projects for federal funding. It is anticipated that the portal for submitting such materials will be opened in March 2025. That staff report is attached for reference.
The Council discussed ideas for funding, and also accepted staff’s suggestions. Ultimately, the Council directed staff to provide additional information on the projects listed below in the discussion.
Discussion
The following potential projects with design level estimates are listed solely in alphabetical order, with general descriptions following.
Bayshore Boulevard Safety Improvements $2.5M
Community Center Remodel $3.4M
Sierra Point Storm Drain Adaptation to SLR $5.5M
Bayshore Boulevard Safety Improvements
This project would create a sidewalk to serve the residents and businesses on the 0.6 mile stretch of Bayshore Boulevard between San Bruno Avenue and Old County Road. Bayshore Boulevard is a principal arterial 4-lane highway currently signed at 45 MPH. The shoulders include a 5’ wide Class II bikeway protected by rumble strips but does not include any pedestrian accommodations. The roadway is frequently used as an alternative to US 101, particularly when that roadway is clogged/closed due to accidents. The southern portion of the 1 of 11
40 K.
Suggested Projects for FY26 Community Project Funding Page 2 of 3 identified section includes approximately 70 residences and 6 businesses on the west side of the road.
With the west side of the existing right-of-way abutting mountainous topography, the most cost-effective means of creating space for a new 5’ wide sidewalk on the west side of the roadway is to narrow existing medians (including the demolition and reconstruction of several concrete medians), relocate the south bound lanes easterly, and place the new sidewalk adjacent to the existing bikeway. As this installation will create sight distance issues from the driveways on the west, only right hand turns in/out of these driveways will be allowed. To accommodate drivers needing to travel north, a new queue lane for U-turns will be created as part of a signalized intersection at San Bruno Avenue/Bayshore Boulevard.
Community Center Remodel
This project will provide tenant improvements (TI) to the existing two-story building at 250 Visitacion Avenue, which previously provided space for the Brisbane Library on its second floor.
The final details necessary before designing the TI project will be based on Council’s direction, presumably with significant community input. For development of planning level estimates, staff has assumed the following project components:
• A TI of both floors of the building, using the square footage low bid price from the 25 Park Place remodel (this does anticipate a remodel of the kitchen and bathrooms on the ground floor).
• Estimated cost for a new 2-story elevator
• New roof
• 10% contingency to comply with city’s commitment to correct deficiencies identified in our 2021 ADA Self-Evaluation and Transition Plan
Sierra Point Storm Drain Adaptation to SLR
As identified in the August 27, 2024 technical memorandum prepared by EKI to analyze sea level rise assessment on wet utilities at Serra Point, the anticipated sea level rise at Sierra Point will impact the 11,310 linear feet of storm drain pipes and 117 catch basins that serve this land area. Failure to adapt to this increase in sea level could result in substantial flooding issues for local businesses.
This project proposes to create a partial pressurized system with new stormwater pump stations that will capture rising bay levels before they impact the developed areas west of the marina, and then discharge that incoming water back into the bay.
In detail, the project will:
• Abandon existing reinforced concrete pipe (RCP) storm drain pipes, outfalls, manholes, and catch basins in the Marina area in the vicinity of the revetment; 2 of 11
41 K.
Suggested Projects for FY26 Community Project Funding Page 3 of 3 • Install new RCP storm drain pipes, outfalls, manholes, and catch basins by open trenching in the Marina area between Dock 2 and Dock 3. This will maintain gravity-based discharge to the bay through the new outfalls in this sub-drainage area ; • Install 3 new stormwater pump stations (PSs), new catch basins, and new RCP storm drain pipes to direct flows towards new PSs; and
• Install new RCP storm drain pipes and outfalls downstream from the new PSs to convey water from the PSs and discharge into the bay.
Fiscal Impact
CPF projects typically require a 20% match from the applicant. The source of that match will depend on the selected project, and will be provided at Council’s direction.
Attachments
1. February 6, 2025 staff report on Congressional Appropriation Discussion ___________________________________ ___________________________________ Randy Breault, Public Works Director Jeremy Dennis, City Manager 3 of 11
42 K.
Appropriations Discussion Page 1 of 2
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
Meeting Date: Feb 6, 2025
From: Jeremy Dennis, City Manager
Subject: Congressional Appropriation Discussion
Recommendation
Staff recommend that the City Council discuss and recommend potential projects for support by Congressman Kevin Mullin’s office through the annual appropriations process.
Background
In March of every year, the Congressman Kevin Mullin’s office opens a portal for use by municipalities and other eligible partners to submit their project for inclusion in the congressional appropriations process. Requests submitted are publicly viewable once requested.
Brisbane has submitted and received funds through this appropriation process, most recently in FY 2025 with an award of $1,494,260 for the Glen Park Pump Station Replacement.
Discussion
According to Congressman Mullin’s webpage on this matter, the Appropriations Committee has not released guidance or deadlines in advance of the FY 26 “asks” and instead refers potential submitters to FY 25 guidance. While the guidance is likely to change, the project list from FY 25 is illustrative of the types of projects that may be supported:
• Community Centers
• Sewer and drainage projects
• Street and highway safety improvements
• Trail support
The full list is attached to this staff report at Attachment 1.
Given that FY 26 guidance has not been released, staff recommend that the Council discuss issue areas that they would like to see support through the appropriations process. Staff can take that guidance and provide a staff report at an upcoming meeting seeking authorization for submittal of the final project.
Fiscal Impact
None at this time. Appropriation requests typically require a 20% match that can be allocated at a future date.
4 of 11
43 K.
Appropriations Discussion Page 2 of 2
Attachment
1.FY 25 Project List
___________________________________
Jeremy Dennis, City Manager
5 of 11
44 K.
FY25 APPROPRIATIONS REQUESTS
HHOME OME / CCONTACT ONTACT / FFY25 APPROPRIATIONS REQUESTS Y25 APPROPRIATIONS REQUESTS Appropriations requests from other years:
FY24 Appropriations requests
FY26 Appropriations requests
In FY25, Congress will allocate some of the federal budget for Community Project Funding (CPF, also known as an “earmark”), which is for one-off nonprofit, state or local government, or tribal projects.
Please note that while there are many worthy organizations and projects, not every project will be funded and most projects will not be funded at the level requested below. No funding will be made available until and if the FY25 Appropriations bill(s) are passed by both the House and Senate and signed by the President.
Rep. Mullin submitted the following Community Project Funding requests to the Appropriations Committee for FY25:
Belmont – Twin Pines Park Stormwater Capture Project – $4,000,000 The funding would be used to construct a new stormwater capture facility beneath the parking lot in the park to increase the creek’s capacity and reduce downstream flooding risk. This Project is an effort to follow the City’s Twin Pines Park Master Plan and Belmont Creek Watershed Management Plan to reduce flooding within the Belmont Creek Watershed, specifically within the Harbor Industrial Area, and provide an active creek corridor for the public. The project is an appropriate use of taxpayer funds because the Belmont Creek Harbor Industrial Area floodplain has a 0.2% chance annually of flooding. This means that the area should anticipate significant flood damages at least once every 50 years, which is a disproportionate level of risk given the close proximity of the creek to industrially zoned property.
Financial disclosure certification and federal nexus letter.
Brisbane – Glen Park Pump Station Replacement – $1,494,260 The funding would be used to replace the Glen Park Pump Station by rehabilitating and upgrading the facility to correct existing and future capacity issues and to ensure functionality, resiliency, and reliability of the City’s water distribution system. The project is an appropriate use of taxpayer funds because the Glen Park Pump Station is an integral part of Brisbane’s municipal water system, which provides the community with sufficient fire flow capacity during an emergency. If the pumping station were to fail, the Privacy - Terms ABOUT CONTACT MEDIA ISSUES SERVICES פ
Select Language ▼
6 of 11
45 K.
City would lose the ability to pump water to the reservoirs that provide fire flow to the main residential part of Brisbane. This pump station is more than 50 years old and no longer meets the operational needs of the community.
Financial disclosure certification and federal nexus letter.
Burlingame/Caltrain – Broadway Grade Separation Project – $5,000,000 The funding would be used to separate the train tracks from the road at Broadway in the City of Burlingame. It will address numerous safety and congestion challenges directly attributable to this atgrade crossing, including 12 train-vehicle crashes, involving serious injuries and a fatality in the last 10 years. Project benefits include elimination of train-vehicle collisions, increased safety for all modes of transportation, decreased traffic congestion, and improved access and connectivity for transit, pedestrians, and motorists. The project is an appropriate use of taxpayer funds because it will deliver benefits to the local community and to the State of California including increased safety for pedestrians and motorists, reduced emissions via decreased vehicle idling and congestion, and increased multimodal transportation connectivity.
Financial disclosure certification and federal nexus letter.
Daly City – Vista Grande Drainage Basin Improvement Project – $2,500,000 The funding would be used for managing, treating, and reusing stormwater in the Vista Grande Drainage Basin, located in my district, while also providing regional water supply and recreational benefits. The project is an appropriate use of taxpayer funds because the Vista Grande Drainage Basin Improvement Project was designed to have both local and regional benefits, including numerous communities in my district, namely Daly City, the City and County of San Francisco, and San Mateo County. Constructing this project is a priority to both Daly City and the region because it addresses several major problems in the Vista Grande Watershed, including stormwater management, water supply, and water quality issues that have challenged the region for years. Daly City and the National Park Service, as Lead Agency under the National Environmental Policy Act, have already prepared a joint Final Environmental Impact Report and Environmental Impact Statement, and are ready to begin construction.
Financial disclosure certification and federal nexus letter.
East Palo Alto – Woodland Avenue Safety Improvements – $2,400,000 The funding would be used for the design and construction of safety improvements along a dangerous stretch of Woodland Avenue between University Avenue and Newell Road. This project will provide essential infrastructure and safety improvements for the section of East Palo Alto with the largest number of low and moderate income residents. The project is an appropriate use of taxpayer funds because The Woodland Avenue Safety Improvements Project will rehabilitate the deteriorated pavement, install sidewalks, provide ADA accessibility, construct bulb-outs, provide stormwater management improvements, include new signage and striping and utilize other traffic calming measures.
Financial disclosure certification and federal nexus letter.
Millbrae – Trail to Bay Connections – $4,000,000
The funding would be used for the design and construction of safe connections from the regional Sawyer Camp Trail to the Bay Trail and other regional destinations, such as regional parks, commercial areas, medical centers, and transit hubs. In addition, the project would look at closing the Bay Trail gap within Millbrae. The project is an appropriate use of taxpayer funds because the project would provide a muchneeded safe connection for bicyclists and pedestrians between trails to get to regional destinations. It 7 of 11
46 K.
would make long-overdue safety improvements to existing streets and would lay the groundwork for other future trail safety improvements.
Financial disclosure certification and federal nexus letter.
Redwood City – SR 84–US 101 Interchange Reimagined – $3,500,000 The funding would be used to provide roadway safety improvements, improved bicycling and walking facilities, increased efficiency of goods movement, improved air quality and sustainability, and expanded access to the interchange for low-income communities. The project is an appropriate use of taxpayer funds because the proposed project area currently has a high rate of collisions, traffic flow congestion for commuters and the movement of goods to the Port of Redwood City, and results in increased greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. These improvements will reduce travel times for commuters, provide low-cost transportation choices that benefit adjacent low-income residents, and lower GHG emissions to improve public health.
Financial disclosure certification and federal nexus letter.
SamTrans (San Mateo County Transit District) – Bus Stop Amenity Improvements – $2,089,080 The funding would be used to support the SamTrans Bus Stop Improvement Plan (BSIP), which would install over 170 new shelters, 75 new bus bulbs or boarding islands, and nearly 200 digital real-time information signs to over 220 bus stops. The project is an appropriate use of taxpayer funds because it will be used to improve SamTrans’s top 20 priority bus stops, which are located in San Mateo, South San Francisco, San Bruno, Daly City, East Palo Alto, Belmont, and Redwood City, serving a population most in need of affordable, accessible, and high-quality public transit. SamTrans is prioritizing stops that have the highest ridership levels and are in most need of improvement.
Financial disclosure certification and federal nexus letter.
San Bruno – Huntington Ave Bicycle and Pedestrian Improvements – $4,000,000 The funding would be used for construction of a two-way cycle track with concrete barrier and installation of streetscape improvements, including pedestrian-scale lighting, pedestrian signals that will provide added safety for pedestrians and/or bicyclists on Huntington Avenue. Street trees will also be planted for a more pleasant experience. The project is an appropriate use of taxpayer funds because it will provide enhanced bicycle and pedestrian facilities along Huntington Avenue which is a critical arterial road that includes both the regional train stations in San Bruno and serves as a connector to the Centennial Way Trail into South San Francisco. Building pedestrian improvements such as pedestrian scale lighting and pedestrian signals will enhance safety for pedestrians and provide a better environment for walking.
Financial disclosure certification and federal nexus letter.
San Carlos – US 101/Holly Street Interchange & Overcrossing – $2,900,000 The funding would be used to convert the existing US 101/Holly Street Interchange from a Type L-10 fourquadrant cloverleaf to a Type L-9 partial cloverleaf interchange configuration on US 101. In addition, a 12’- wide Pedestrian/Bicycle Overcrossing (POC) over US 101 would be added to the south of the US 101/Holly Street Interchange, providing a connection from East San Carlos Avenue on the west to Monte Vista Drive on the east. The City seeks to update the project design, plan specifications, permits and construction documents in order to renew, update, and implement this project. The project is an appropriate use of taxpayer funds because this project would also make important safety improvements for pedestrians crossing Holly Street by reducing pedestrian and bicycle conflicts with motor vehicles within the interchange area.
8 of 11
47 K.
Financial disclosure certification and federal nexus letter.
San Francisco – Crocker Amazon Playground – Purple Playground Project – $3,500,000 The funding would be used to renovate the playground with improvements such as the Nature Exploration Area, picnic areas, bench seating, trees, and planting. The upgrades to the playground will include swings, slides, climbing structures, and balance beams. The project will also improve 3,500 square feet of walkways within the playground, and 3,000 square feet of concrete sidewalks to be ADA compliant, replace 5,200 square feet of lawn, create gathering areas for park users by adding new benches, picnic tables, and trash receptacles in the park. The project is an appropriate use of taxpayer funds because the improvements to this site would serve over 15,000 residents, particularly underresourced children and seniors, who travel to use the park for sports and other activities.
Financial disclosure certification and federal nexus letter.
San Francisco – Visitacion Valley Family Center Improvements – $959,982 The funding would be used for facility upgrades, including repaving and leveling of the courtyard to better facilitate drainage into an existing storm drain, remodeling the second floor of the Family Center to be used as offices, and installing an elevator to improve the accessibility of the facility. The project is an appropriate use of taxpayer funds because the facility upgrades will allow increased capacity to better assist community members who wish to use the Family Center. Older adults and people with disabilities will also benefit from the building upgrades from having a safer courtyard and an elevator to office rooms on the second floor.
Financial disclosure certification and federal nexus letter.
City of San Mateo – Lakeshore Community Day Care Center – $2,000,000 The funding would be used for planning and design to renovate the Lakeshore Community Center to increase access to affordable full-day preschool in San Mateo for the city’s lowest income families. The Center has not seen significant upgrades since it opened in 1967. The project is an appropriate use of taxpayer funds because the City preschool programs are the most affordable in San Mateo, serving the most economically vulnerable populations in our community. The Center can currently only be utilized for part-time, unlicensed childcare as the facility does not meet code requirements to become a full-day licensed childcare location. It suffers from outdated plumbing and electrical, limited office space, no air conditioning, and is out of compliance with ADA requirements. With the appropriate renovations, the services of the Center could be expanded to support the needs of this growing community.
Financial disclosure certification and federal nexus letter.
City of San Mateo (Army Corps of Engineers) – Marina Lagoon Dredging To Restore Stormwater Retention Capacity – $2,000,000
The funding would be used to develop a project design, secure permits, and address California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requirements (including any additional characterization of sediment), to support a future Marina Lagoon dredging project. The project is an appropriate use of taxpayer funds because performing the dredging would restore 40 acre-feet of stormwater retention capacity and all 77% of lost acreage to summer boating due to shallow depths. Proper functioning of the Lagoon as a stormwater retention facility reduces risk of residual interior flooding which would reduce accessibility of major transportation corridors.
Financial disclosure certification and federal nexus letter.
South San Francisco – Westborough Early Childhood Education Center – $2,000,000 The funding would be used to double the capacity at the existing Westborough Preschool. Currently, 9 of 11
48 K.
10 of 11
49 K.
11 of 11
50 K.
File Attachments for Item:
L. Informational Update Regarding Development Impact Fees (Staff is recommending to review the information provided regarding the four Development Impact Fee reports currently being drafted and provide direction to staff on the process for which the related reports should be brought forward for consideration) 51 Informational Report Regarding Development Impact Fees Page 1 of 4
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
Meeting Date: March 6, 2025
From: City Manager Jeremy Dennis
Subject: Informational Update Regarding Development Impact Fees Community Goal/Result
Fiscally Prudent, Community Building
Purpose
Ensure that new growth is adequately supported, both financially and structurally, while helping to preserve the quality of life for existing residents.
Recommendation
Review the information provided regarding the four Development Impact Fee reports currently being drafted and provide direction to staff on the process for which the related reports should be brought forward for consideration.
Background
Development Impact Fees (DIF) are fees imposed on new development (commercial or residential) to fully or partially offset the costs of public facilities and infrastructure that is needed to serve new demand created by development projects. Laws governing impact fees, including both court decisions and the California Mitigation Fee Act (Govt. Code Sections 66000 et seq.) require that local agencies imposing fees as a condition of development approval demonstrate that there is a reasonable relationship or “nexus” between those fees and the impact of a development project on facilities to be funded by the fees. The required nexus for impact fees, as set forth in relevant court decisions, has three elements:
• Need: The City must show that development creates a need for the improvements funded by impact fees; and
• Benefit: The City must show that development derives a benefit from the provision of improvements funded by impact fees, and:
• Proportionality: The City must show that the fees charged to a development project are proportional to the impact of that project on facilities funded by the impact fees.
Development Impact Fees have proven to be a strategic funding approach for ensuring that new development pays its fair share towards public infrastructure. Because significant new development is anticipated in Brisbane, the City has engaged consultants to analyze the impact 52 L.
Informational Report Regarding Development Impact Fees Page 2 of 4 of the anticipated development on a number of issues including affordable housing, transportation management, and parks and recreational facilities.
Although the City currently imposes fees to support the City’s Public Art Program, these are not considered development impact fees. The four impact fee reports that Council directed for completion (Parks and Park Facilities, Affordable Housing, Traffic and Capital Facilities) are complicated in potential scope and range and are inherently challenging to implement.
In addition to these reports that provide the legal framework for what development impact fees could be imposed, often feasibility studies will also be prepared/included that provide guidance to the Council as to what range of fees, from an economic viewpoint, is “feasible”. That is, when Council reviews the fees, their financial impact on developers, and comparing the fees to neighboring jurisdictions, Council may determine what fees, less than the maximum under law, are feasible in order that development occur in the City.
Previous Council Updates
At the September 7, 2023 City Council meeting, Legal Counsel provided an informational report regarding DIF’s (Attachment 1). The Council directed staff to initiate an additional study examining other public facilities, and that final study is now nearing completion. Council discussion regarding DIF’s resumed on October 19, 2023 (Attachment 2). The direction provided to staff at that meeting was to bring the item back once all reports were completed and the entirety of proposed impact fees could be considered comprehensively. The Council conveyed a desire to ensure that the fees imposed do not render new development in Brisbane financially infeasible.
In the fall of 2024, the City Manager determined that the impact fees reports already completed required additional updating, which is underway. As a result of this determination Council was informed that the reports would likely be brought forward as completed. Staff’s rationale behind the new approach reflects the opportunity to implement some of the fees prior to the FY 2025-26 budget. It is important to note that all funds from impact fees will be placed in restricted (non-General Fund) accounts to be used for future infrastructure improvements; these funds could offset the use of other (particularly General Fund) funds in the future.
Below is a status update on the four reports:
1. Parks and Recreational Facilities – Finalizing study with updated figures; was not budgeted for and does not include a feasibility study.
2. Affordable Housing – Completed, includes feasibility study 53 L.
Informational Report Regarding Development Impact Fees Page 3 of 4
3. Traffic – Expected for completion mid-spring; does not include feasibility study
4. Public Facilities – Expected for completion mid-spring; does not include feasibility study
Discussion
This staff report is intended to provide the following information:
1. An update on progress
2. Information about fees other municipalities have implemented (Attachment 3); Agencies adopt varied approaches to imposing Development Impact Fees, with each municipality implementing its own set of priorities and fee structures. This results in differences in how fees are calculated and applied and is evidenced by the range of fees of the eight agencies examined.
3. An initial estimation of the potential maximum amount of development impact fees that could be assessed to support the variety of public facilities identified in the four impact fee reports. (Attachment 4). These figures do not represent what may be feasible to charge, as described above and in the “Note on Implementation” section below.
Action Item - Staff would also appreciate feedback on whether the Council supports bringing completed impact fee reports forward as completed or would instead prefer to revert to the previous direction and wait until all the reports have been completed. Note, as stated in the Background section, three of the studies do not have an accompanying feasibility study. Staff will return at an upcoming meeting with a budget request to complete the feasibility studies necessary for implementation.
Note on Implementation
Implementation of impact fees can be a challenging endeavor. As the Council reviews the reports, staff suggests the Council consider the following:
• Each report includes a “maximum” dollar amount for each fee, based on the initial analysis. This does not mean the Council is required to adopt at the maximum; it is very typical for Councils to consider adopting fees at less than the maximum for a variety of reasons, including for feasibility reasons (discussed above and in the next bullets)., including the impact on the developers that will be required to pay such fees. 54 L.
Informational Report Regarding Development Impact Fees Page 4 of 4 • Each report will also include a feasibility study, which is an examination of the economic reality of whether any one fee should be imposed and, if so, at what amount • Maximum fees are rarely feasible; it is possible that all four reports, once the feasibility studies are completed, will indicate what fees may be imposed without making development infeasible based on current market conditions. • There will be no recommendations from the consultants who completed the reports concerning the amount of the fees to be imposed, given the factors discussed in this section.
• The Council will also consider which “types” of activities should be assessed a new fee.
For example, the Council may determine that only certain kinds of development (such as non-residential) are appropriate for fee assessment
• Given the potential scope and range of such fees, it is anticipated that trade organizations, labor organizations, and other entities will request the Council to adopt fees less than the maximum.
• Council consideration of adopting new impact fees requires a thirty-day public notification to the community.
Fiscal Impact
There is no financial impact associated with accepting this informational report. The adoption of Development Impact Fees is contingent upon Council direction at future public meetings.
Attachments
1. 9/7/2023 Informational report from Legal Counsel to City Council
2. 10/19/2023 Staff report from City Manager to City Council
3. Samples of Development Impact Fees for San Mateo County agencies
4. Draft estimation of the potential maximum amounts that could be assessed for impact fees
________________________
Jeremy Dennis, City Manager
55 L.
Development Impact Fees
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
Meeting Date: September 7, 2023
From: Legal Counsel and City Manager
Subject: Information Report Concerning Development Impact Fees
RECOMMENDATION
Review the Information Report concerning Development Impact Fees and provide direction concerning such Fees, keeping in mind, as will be explained below, that it is not permissible to adopt one development impact fee that would cover a multitude of improvements.
BACKGROUND
The City of Brisbane imposes a number of “fees”. Many of those fees are set forth in the City’s Master Fee Schedule. These fees include fees for processing land use applications (Planning), use of City facilities (Parks and Recreation), water services (Finance), copies of police reports (Police), inspections (Fire) and processing grading permits (Public Works). There are also “property related fees”, as defined in Proposition 218, such as ordinary water and sewer charges. In addition, there are development impact fees (“DIF”) that are fees imposed on new development primarily to alleviate the impact such development has on the community.
Regardless of the type of fee, such fees may not exceed the estimated reasonable cost of providing the service or regulatory act for which the fee is charged. If they do, the fees would be considered a special tax and need voter approval. To adopt or increase such fees, the City must (a) hold at least one public hearing, (b) publish notice of the public hearing, (c) send notice to anyone who requested such notice, and (d) make available to the public data indicating the amount of the estimated cost to provide the service for which the fee is charged and the revenue source anticipated to provide the service.
DISCUSSION
Development Impact Fees and Dedications
Cities and counties throughout California charge development impact fees (“DIF”).
These fees, imposed on new development, are charges for service or to alleviate impacts that will result from new development. Cities and counties may establish DIF for a broad range of projects by legislation of general applicability or impose DIF on specific projects on an ad hoc basis. If local agencies did not impose DIF, the cost to provide services or to improve existing infrastructure and facilities would fall on existing taxpayers, notwithstanding that the need for such services and improvements were the result of new development. The types of DIF vary from community to community but most often local agencies impose DIF to mitigate the impacts that new development has on traffic, affordable housing, parks, and capital facilities.
ATTACHMENT 1
56 L.
Development Impact Fees
Under State law, DIF may include costs attributable to the increased demand for public facilities reasonably related to the development project in order to (1) refurbish existing facilities to maintain the existing level of service or (2) achieve an adopted level of service that is consistent with the General Plan.
In addition to imposing a fee, a city may, as mitigation, require a “dedication” in connection with the development of real property whereby a property owner/developer must transfer ownership of the property, whether in fee or an easement, to the city.
The authority to exact fees and dedications stems from the city’s police powers under the State Constitution. In addition, several state statutes grant authority to local jurisdictions to impose exactions, for example the Mitigation Fee Act (AB 1600), discussed in more detail below.
There are limits, of course, to imposing DIF and/or dedication. If an exaction “goes too far”, it results in a “taking” for which compensation would need to be paid. In order to avoid that, courts have established what is called a “nexus” test to determine whether a DIF or dedication does not constitute an impermissible taking.
To establish nexus, generally three “reasonable relationship” findings must be made:
need, benefit and proportionality.
Concerning need, it must be shown that new development will create a need for the item to be funded by the DIF and without this infusion of fees from new development, the availability of, for example, public facilities throughout the community would be negatively impacted. A DIF, of course, may be imposed only to the extent that new development creates the additional need.
Concerning benefit, it must be shown that new development will benefit from the item to be funded by DIF. To accomplish that, the DIF must be used in a timely manner.
Concerning proportionality, it must be shown that the DIF are proportional to the impact created by a particular development. To make that determination, different methodologies are employed to allocate costs and calculate the fees, depending on the type of infrastructure or facilities at issue. For example, a park improvement fee may be used to upgrade the kitchen facilities at Mission Blue, install a new roof at the Community Center, or replace playground equipment at the Community Park, assuming the nexus study, using an appropriate methodology, determines that the fee is necessary in order to maintain a level of service or achieve a level of service consistent with the General Plan.
The Mitigation Fee Act.
State law—the Mitigation Fee Act—often referred to as AB 1600--provides the procedural and substantive provisions that sets forth the requirements for establishing, increasing and imposing many DIF. The Act does not limit the type of infrastructure or facilities 57 L.
Development Impact Fees
for which DIF may be imposed but broadly defines “public facilities” to include public improvements, public services and community amenities. DIF may not be used, however, for maintenance or operating costs. Moreover, certain fees, such as fees in a development agreement, are not subject to the Act.
For the city to establish, increase or impose DIF under the Act, it must (a) identify the purpose of the fee, (b) identify the use of the fee, and determine issues of reasonable relationship.
As to purpose, imposing DIF is to protect the health, safety and welfare of the community by funding public facilities made necessary by new development and, more specifically, identifying improvements to mitigate the impact of new development.
As to use of the fees, the facilities must be identified in a “capital improvement plan”, for example a General Plan or other public documents, which plan must be updated annually.
As to reasonable relationship, as discussed previously, the use of the DIF and the type of development must be reasonably related; the need for the public facility and the type of development must be reasonably related; and the amount of the DIF and the cost of the public facility attributable to the development must be reasonably related.
Because each type of DIF has its own peculiarities as to purpose, use, reasonable relationship and proportionality, it is not permissible to adopt a one size fits all DIF. Each category of public facilities—park land, park facilities, affordable housing, traffic impacts, etc.— must be evaluated separately in determining what impact new development has on such facilities. Then, as discussed in the next section, the totality of the DIF must be considered in context of how “feasible” such fees are.
Feasibility Studies
In addition to undertaking a nexus study to support imposing DIF, many communities also will undertake a DIF feasibility study to determine whether a DIF, either by itself or in conjunction with other DIF’s, render development within a community “infeasible” for all practical purposes. In other words, even if a nexus study or studies show that a city could impose certain amount of DIF’s, if such DIF’s were imposed, developers would be unlikely to pay such DIF’s.
Under those circumstances, a city may want to consider reducing the amount of permissible DIF in order to encourage development in the community.
Current DIF Within Brisbane
Currently the only DIF that Brisbane imposes on development is the parkland dedication fee on residential development. See Sections 16.24.020 and 16.24.030, Brisbane Municipal Code. 58 L.
Development Impact Fees
Where the residential development is for more than 50 lots and where land within the proposed subdivision will properly accommodate public recreational facilities, the subdivider must dedicate an area for such purposes on the basis of three acres for each 1000 population within the subdivision, assuming 2.35 persons per household. For example if there were a 100 lot subdivision and the property to be subdivided could accommodate a neighborhood park, the subdivider would be required to dedicate .71 acres (100 x 2.35 = 235/1000 = .235 x 3 - .71) Where the residential development is for 50 lots or fewer, the subdivider is to pay a fee based on the following formula: the number of proposed units times 2.35 persons per household, divided by 1000 times three acres times the fair market value of one acre of the subject property as determined by the planning director. For example, if there were a 10 lot subdivision and the fair market value of the land to be divided was $1,000,000 per acre, the fee would be $90,000 (10 x 2.35 = 23.5/1000 = .03 x 3,000,000 = $90,000.
Although not necessarily a DIF, developers of certain residential and commercial property must also contribute to the City’s Public Art Fund. See Section 15.85.050, Brisbane Municipal Code.
For commercial projects that have building development costs between $1 M and $5 M, the developer must contribute one percent of such costs to the public art fund. For commercial projects that have development costs above $5 M, the developer must either contribute one percent of such costs or devote a comparable amount for the acquisition and installation of publicly accessible art.
For residential projects with ten to 20 units, the developer must contribute one half of one percent of building development costs to the fund. For residential projects with more than 20 units, the developer must contribute one percent of the building development costs to the fund. Moreover, regardless of the number of units, if the development costs are above $10 M, the developer must contribute one percent of the development costs or devote a comparable amount for the acquisition and installation of publicly available art. Building developments designated as low or moderate income housing are exempt from these provisions.
DIF in the “Pipeline”
There are currently two DIF in the pipeline: a fee for parks, recreation facilities, open space and trails and an affordable housing fee. The DIF for parks, recreational activities, open space and trails would be applicable to residential and non-residential projects and because it includes a component for parkland, presumably the current provisions in the Municipal Code concerning the dedication of land for parks or payment of an in lieu fee for residential projects would be deleted. The affordable housing fee would be applicable only to non-residential projects in that the City’s existing inclusionary housing ordinance requires including affordable housing in certain residential projects.
Also forthcoming will be a Traffic Demand Management Ordinance. That Ordinance, if adopted, may well lead to consideration of a Traffic DIF that could be used, for example, for 59 L.
Development Impact Fees
intersection improvements, traffic signals, traffic calming devices, etc. Preparation of the study for a Traffic DIF would likely not occur until late this or early next year.
Next steps
As stated above, because the need, benefit and proportionality of any particular DIF must be considered on its own terms, it is not feasible to have an overall DIF that covers a host of public facilities. Accordingly, Staff seeks direction from City Council how it wishes to proceed with DIF in general and, in particular, with the two DIF that are in the pipeline. Concerning the two that are in the pipeline, a feasibility study is underway and staff is prepared to the nexus studies, the feasibility study and proposed DIF to the Council before the end of the year. Unless directed otherwise by Council, staff anticipates preparing additional nexus/feasibility studies for other DIF, such as traffic and capital facilities.
Michael Roush, Legal Counsel Clay Holstine, City Manager 60 L.
Update on Development Impact Fees Page 1 of 2
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
Meeting Date: October 19, 2023
From: Clayton Holstine, City Manager & Michael Roush, Legal Counsel Subject: Update on Development Impact Fees
COMMUNITY GOAL RESULT
Fiscally Prudent
RECOMMENDATION
Review this Update on Development Impact Fees and provide direc�on as necessary.
BACKGROUND
On September 7, 2023, staff presented to City Council an Informa�on Report concerning Development Impact Fees (DIF). The Report discussed the legal authority of the City to impose DIF, explained that certain elements—need, benefit, and propor�onality—must be established in order to impose DIF, set forth the current DIF in Brisbane, iden�fied the DIF that were in the “pipeline”, and sought direc�on from City Council concerning next steps. A copy of that Report is atached for Council’s reference.
Council agreed that it was fair for “new development” to pay its fair share of capital improvements to mi�gate the impacts that such development has on the community and that without imposing DIF the current residents would bear the full cost of such improvements.
Council was concerned, however, that because DIF may not be used for rou�ne maintenance and services, to the extent new or improved facili�es came on line, the cost to maintain those facili�es or provide services would need to be borne by the City’s General Fund. Nevertheless, City Council provided direc�on for staff to con�nue or proceed with any necessary studies for DIF related to traffic and City facili�es. Accordingly, set forth below is the status of the various DIF that staff intends to present to City Council early next year.
1. DIF for Parkland. Park and Recrea�on Facili�es, Open Space and Trails. The nexus study for this DIF has been completed and will be presented to the City Council when the other studies have been completed.
2. DIF for Affordable Housing. The nexus study for this DIF has been completed and will be presented to the City Council when the other studies have been completed.
ATTACHMENT 2
61 L.
Update on Development Impact Fees Page 2 of 2
3. DIF for Traffic. Council will adopt at its October 19 mee�ng the Traffic Demand Management Ordinance that will provide the framework for a Traffic DIF. Prepara�on of the nexus study for this DIF will occur later this year. When the study is completed, the DIF will be presented to City Council along with the other studies.
4. DIF for Capital Facili�es. At the September 7 mee�ng, there was consensus that a DIF for Capital Facili�es, such as major renova�ons of City Hall, a new fire sta�on, etc., should be considered. Accordingly, as with the Traffic DIF, prepara�on of a nexus study for this DIF will occur later this year. Staff is developing a list of poten�al capital facili�es that would be included in the study. When that study is completed, the DIF will be presented to City Council along with the other studies.
In addi�on to discussing these nexus studies, there was also discussion about conduc�ng a feasibility study to determine whether the totality of DIF could render development in the City “infeasible” for all prac�cal purposes. That is, notwithstanding that the nexus studies demonstrate that the City has the legal authority to impose a certain amount of DIF, if such DIF were imposed, developers would be unlikely to pay such DIF. Under those circumstances, City Council would want to dial back some or all of the DIF in order to encourage development.
A feasibility study has been conducted for the affordable housing DIF but because of the cost of conduc�ng addi�onal feasibility studies is significant (around $35,000), staff will undertake a review of what jurisdic�ons in other communi�es (primarily in San Mateo County) are charging for DIF and then make an informed recommenda�on to City Council as to what the City’s DIF should be in order to remain compe��ve.
Unless directed by Council otherwise, all of the nexus studies for these various DIF will be completed in the first quarter of the new year at which �me staff will present to the City Council a complete package of DIF.
Clayton Hols�ne, City Manager Michael Roush, Legal Counsel Atachment: September 7, 2023 Informa�on Report concerning Development Impact Fees 62 L.
City Fee Name Land Use Category Fee Basis Land Use Subtype Fee Notes Burlingame Commercial Development Impact Fees Non-Residential per SF Retail $7 $5 w/ prevailing wages
Hotel $12 $10 w/prevailing wages
Office- 50ksf or less $18 $15 w/ prevailing wages
Office- 50,001+ $25 $20 w/ prevailing wages
Residential Development Impact Fees Residential per SF
Multi-Family Rental 11+ Units
Up to 50 du/ac $17 $14 w/ prevailing wages
51-70 du/ac $20 $17 w/ prevailing wages
71 du/ac + $30 $25 w/ prevailing wages
Multi-family For-Sale (Condominiums)
7+ units $35 $30 w/ prevailing wages
Public Facilities Impact Fees
General Residential per dwelling unit
Single-Family $2,756
Multi-Family $1,636
Commercial per 1,000 SF
Commercial (general) $930
Office $640
Industrial $305
Library Residential per dwelling unit
Single-Family $2,383
Multi-Family $1,415
Police Residential per dwelling unit
Single-Family $437
Multi-Family $259
Commercial per 1,000 SF
Commercial (general) $147
Office $102
Industrial $48
Parks Residential per dwelling unit
Single-Family $590
Multi-Family $350
Commercial per 1,000 SF
Commercial (general) $172
Office $118
Industrial $56
Traffic/Streets Residential per dwelling unit
Single-Family $1,573
Multi-Family $1,105
Commercial per 1,000 SF
Commercial (general) $7,285
Office $1,810
Industrial $1,146
Fire Residential per dwelling unit
Single-Family $642
Multi-Family $381
Commercial per 1,000 SF
Commercial (general) $360
Office $248
Industrial $118
Storm Drainage Residential per dwelling unit
Single-Family $781
Multi-Family $391
Commercial per 1,000 SF
Commercial (general) $717
Office $442
Industrial $628
ATTACHMENT 3
63 L.
City Fee Name Land Use Category Fee Basis Land Use Subtype Fee Notes Millbrae Residential Impact Fee Residential Per Unit
Single-Family $77,887.79
Multi-Family $56,986.01
Commercial Impact Fee Non-residential per 1,000 SF Commercial $10,217.95 per 1,000 SF Office $5,165.56
per 1,000 SF Industrial $1,747.94
Per room Hotel $1,918.87
Commecial Linkage Fee Non-residential
Per room Hotel $4,416.42
per gross SF Retail/Restaurant/Entertainment/personal Service/Pet/Auto $6.62 per gross SF Office $14.68
Includes library, general
government facilities,
recreation services, public
safety, park acquisition and
facilities, mobility
64 L.
City Fee Name Land Use Category Fee Basis Land Use Subtype Fee Notes San Mateo Park In-Lieu/Impact Fee Residential Per Unit Single-Family $25,914.00 Multi-Family
2-4 units $25,474.00
5+ units $18,510.00
Transportation Residential Per Unit Single-Family $7,406.95 Multi-Family $3,740.77
Non-Residential Per 1,000 SF Retail $29,911.98
Office $9,023.33
Industrial $4,949.80
Institution $3,848.53
Per Room Hotel $4,710.60
Child Care Residential Per Unit Single-Family $4,677.29 Multi-Family $3,373.46
Non-Residential Per SF Retail $0.39
Office $0.67
Industrial $0.22
Hotel $0.14
Commercial Linkage Fee Non-Residential Per SF Hotel $13.11 Retail/Rest./Service $6.55
Office/R&D/Medical $32.76
Art in Public Places Non-Residential Percent of valuation Commercial 1.00% $3 million in total building
valuation min.
Residential Percent of valuation Multi-Family 1.00%
$3 million in total building
valuation min.
65 L.
City Fee Name Land Use Category Fee Basis Land Use Subtype Fee Notes South San Francisco Bike/Ped Impact Fee Residential Per Unit Single-Family $243.00
Multi-Family $170.00
Mobilehome $127.00
Non-Residential Per Square Foot
Commercial/Retail $0.36
Office/R&D $0.09
Industrial $0.12
Per Visitor Square Foot
Hotel/Visitor Services $0.24
Childcare Impact Fee Residential Per Unit
Up to 8 du/ac $4,139.91
8.1-18 du/ac $3,625.54
18 + du/ac $3,086.51
Non-Residential Per Gross Square Foot
Commercial/Retail $0.81
Hotel/Visitor Services $0.30
Office/R&D $1.51
Industrial $0.52
Library Impact Fee Residential Per Unit
Up to 8 du/ac $828.68
8.1-18 du/ac $725.39
18 + du/ac $617.30
Non-Residential Per Square Foot
Commercial/Retail $0.08
Hotel/Visitor Services $0.04 Per SF of visitor services Office/R&D $0.14
Industrial $0.05
Park Construction Fee Residential Per Unit
Single-Family $31,254.78
Multi-Family
2-4 $26,997.11
5-19 $22,919.93
20-49 $18,481.77
50+ $16,125.83
Mobilehome $24,007.66
PARK LAND ACQUISITION FEE Residential Per Unit
Single-Family $3,124.80
Multi-Family
2-4 $2,699.55
5-19 $2,292.15
20-49 $1,846.95
50+ $1,611.75
Mobilehome $2,400.30
Non-Residential Per Square Foot
Commercial/Retail $1.51
Hotel/Visitor Services $1.44
Office/R&D $3.54
Industrial $1.68
PUBLIC ARTS IN-LEIU FEE Non-Residential Percent of Construction Cost All 0.50% PUBLIC SAFETY IMPACT FEE Residential Per Unit
Up to 8 du/ac $1,657.88
8.1-18 du/ac $1,451.10
18 + du/ac $1,234.75
Non-Residential Per Square Foot
Commercial/Retail $0.53
Hotel/Visitor Services $0.31 Per SF of visitor services Office/R&D $1.31
Industrial $0.48
TRANSPORTATION IMPACT FEE Residential Per Unit
Single-Family $8,176.98
Multi-Family $4,712.12
Non-Residential Per Square Foot
Commercial/Retail $30.93
Office/R&D $35.46
Industrial $16.00
Per Hotel Room Hotel $2,980.58
Commercial Linkage Per Square Foot Hotel $5.80
Retail $2.90
Office $17.38
66 L.
City Fee Name Land Use Category Fee Basis Land Use Subtype Fee Notes Redwood City AFFORDABLE HOUSING Residential Per Square Foot Apartments & Condos $20.00
SFD/Duplex/Triplex/Townhomes: $25.00
Non-Residential Per Square Foot
Office (Medical, R&D, Admin) $23.62
Retail/Rest/Personal Service/Hotel $5.91
Parks
Residential Per Unit
Single-Family $47,414.00
Multi-Family $40,710.80
Non-Residential Per Square Foot
Office $7.86
Commercial $5.40
Industrial $2.54
Per Room Hotel $3,325.76
TRANSPORTATION IMPACT FEE Residential Per livable square feet Affordable Single-Family $2.00
Market-Rate Single-Family $3.22
Affordable Multi-Family $1.43
Market-Rate Multi-Family $2.31
ADU/Bedroom addition $0.00 Until 2027
Non-Residential Per Gross Square Foot
Office/R&D $6.58
Medical/Dental Office: $21.87
Industrial $2.96
Entertainment Venue $47.43
Religous Facility $2.96
Childcare Facility $0.00 Until 2027
Per leasable SF General Retail $4.50
High-intensity Retail $56.79
Per room Hotel/Lodging $4,853.00
Per student School $1,178.00
Per station
Service Station $41,792.00
Art in Public Places Commercial Percent of valuation Non-Residential 1.00% More than 50,000 sq ft School Impact Fee Per Square Foot Residential $4.79 Applicable to projects adding more than 500 sq. ft Commercial $0.78 Applicable to projects adding more than 500 sq. ft Mini-Storage $0.03 Applicable to projects adding more than 500 sq. ft Applicable to outside 1/2 mi
radius from Caltrain station
platform; inside the radius
receives 38% discount
67 L.
City Fee Name Land Use Category Fee Basis Land Use Subtype Fee Notes Belmont Per Square Foot Retail $5.88
Per Square Foot Hotel $4.71
Per Square Foot Office $14.11
Per Unit Single-Family $25.01
Multi-Family $26.05
Inclusionary Zoning In-Lieu Per Unit Single-Family $25.01 Multi-Family $26.05
Park In-Lieu Fee Residential Per Unit Single-Family $41,043.00 Multi-Family $27,362.00
Park Improvement Impact Fee Residential Per Unit Single-Family $14,242.00 Multi-Family $9,495.00
ADU varies in proportion to size of primary residence.
Non-Residential Per Square Foot Retail $2.57
Per Square Foot Office $0.77
Per Square Foot Industrial $1.03
Per room Lodging $463.62
Transportation Impact Fee Residential Per Unit Single-Family $7,697.00 Multi-Family $5,974.00
ADU varies in proportion to size of primary residence.
Non-Residential Per Square Foot Retail $18.00
Per Square Foot Office $12.00
Per Square Foot Industrial $5.00
Per room Lodging $10,531.00
Public Art In-Lieu Non-Residential Percent of valuation Non-Residential 1.00% More than 10,000 sq ft Residential Percent of valuation Residential 1.00% 5 or more new units Housing Mitigation and Inclusionary In-Lieu
Fees
Commercial Development
Mitigation Fee
Residential Development
Mitigation Fee
68 L.
City Fee Name Land Use Category Fee Basis Land Use Subtype Fee Notes San Bruno Affordable Housing Residential Per Square Foot Single-Family $37.85 Condo $35.05
Apartment $35.05
Non-Residential Per Square Foot Hotel $17.52
Retail $8.76
Office $17.52
Community Residential per dwelling unit Single-Family $20,630.79 Multi-Family $19,233.38
Non-Residential Per Square Foot Office $11.55
Industrial $4.59
Retail $7.45
Per Room Hotel $1,890.32
Public Safety Residential per dwelling unit Single-Family $1,531.95 Multi-Family $1,530.68
Non-Residential Per Square Foot Office $0.77
Industrial $0.30
Retail $0.82
Per Room Hotel $127.45
General Government Residential per dwelling unit Single-Family $2,167.94 Multi-Family $2,034.18
Non-Residential Per Square Foot Office $1.25
Industrial $0.49
Retail $0.81
Per Room Hotel $203.17
Transportation Residential per dwelling unit Single-Family $4,512.55 Multi-Family $3,491.67
Non-Residential Per Square Foot Office $9.30
Industrial $3.72
Retail $11.98
Per Room Hotel $2,043.01
Utilities Residential per dwelling unit Single-Family $2,967.99 Multi-Family $2,786.27
Non-Residential Per Square Foot Office $2.30
Industrial $1.44
Retail $14.30
Per Room Hotel $1,635.42
Bayhill Specific Plan Area Non-Residential Per Square Foot Office $6.66 Retail $35.01
Hotel $6,189.78
Multi-Family Residential Per unit less than 407 sq. ft $3,800.80 Per Square Foot Between 407-2,034 sq ft. $9.34
Per unit Greater than 2,034 sq ft. $19,001.82
69 L.
City Fee Name Land Use Category Fee Basis Land Use Subtype Fee Notes San Carlos Traffic Residential Per Unit Single-Family $7,356.00 Apartment $4,161.00
Condo $4,161.00
Non-Residential Per 1,000 Square Ft Office $8,545.00
Lab $3,641.00
Manufacturing $4,978.00
Warehouse $1,412.00
Restaurant $72,591.00
Retail $28,308.00
Per room Hotel $4,458.00
Per 1,000 Square Ft Medical Office $25,708.00
Childcare Development Non-Residential Per Square Foot R&D $5.00 Retail $2.50
Hotel $1.60
Industrial $1.60
Parkland Dedication In-Lieu Residential Per Unit $19,042.32 Park Facility Development Fee Per Bedroom $2,692.00
Commercial Linkage Per Square Foot Retail $5.00
Hotel $10.00
Office $20.00
70 L.
City Fee Name Land Use Category Fee Basis Land Use Subtype Fee Brisbane Commercial Linkage Commercial Per Square Foot Hotel $254.00 Retail $423.00
Office $405.00
R&D $243.00
Warehouse $231.00
Transportation Residential Per dwelling unit Baylands $2,399.14 West Brisbane $7,897.93
Non-Residential Per Square Foot Office - Baylands $4.39 Office - Sierra Point $10.41
Retail - Baylands $43.05
Per room Hotel - Baylands $3,433.56
Per room Hotel - Sierra Point $7,204.58
Per Square Foot Warehouse - West Brisbane $3.41
Per Square Foot Life Science - Sierra Point $10.41
Park Land Acquisition Residential per dwelling unit <800 sq ft. $14,924.00 *Includes 0.55% admin charge 800-1,200 sq ft. $15,564.00 1,200-2,100 sq ft. $16,205.00
>2,100 sq ft. $16,845.00
Non-Residential Per 1,000 sq ft. Commercial $3,203.00
Per room Lodging $560.00
Per 1,000 sq ft. Office $4,804.00
Per 1,000 sq ft. Industrial $1,761.00
Per 1,000 sq ft. Public Facilities $4,804.00
Park Improvements Residential per dwelling unit <800 sq ft. $2,452.00 *Includes 0.55% admin charge 800-1,200 sq ft. $2,557.00 1,200-2,100 sq ft. $2,662.00
>2,100 sq ft. $2,767.00
Non-Residential Per 1,000 sq ft. Commercial $526.00
Per room Lodging $92.00
*Maximum calculations with Candlestick
Interchange Project
ATTACHMENT 4: DRAFT DIF SUMMARY
71 L.
Per 1,000 sq ft. Office $789.00
Per 1,000 sq ft. Industrial $289.00
Per 1,000 sq ft. Public Facilities $789.00
Recreation Facilities Residential per dwelling unit <800 sq ft. $5,124.00 *Includes 0.55% admin charge 800-1,200 sq ft. $5,344.00 1,200-2,100 sq ft. $5,564.00
>2,100 sq ft. $5,784.00
Non-Residential Per 1,000 sq ft. Commercial $440.00
Per room Lodging $77.00
Per 1,000 sq ft. Office $660.00
Per 1,000 sq ft. Industrial $242.00
Per 1,000 sq ft. Public Facilities $660.00
Open Space Land Acquisition Residential per dwelling unit <800 sq ft. $265.91 800-1,200 sq ft. $277.32
1,200-2,100 sq ft. $288.73
>2,100 sq ft. $300.14
Non-Residential Per 1,000 sq ft. Commercial $57.06
Per room Lodging $9.99
Per 1,000 sq ft. Office $85.59
Per 1,000 sq ft. Industrial $31.38
Per 1,000 sq ft. Public Facilities $85.59
Trail Improvements Residential per dwelling unit <800 sq ft. $1,232.89 800-1,200 sq ft. $1,285.80
1,200-2,100 sq ft. $1,338.71
>2,100 sq ft. $1,391.63
Non-Residential Per 1,000 sq ft. Commercial $264.57
Per room Lodging $46.30
Per 1,000 sq ft. Office $396.85
Per 1,000 sq ft. Industrial $145.51
Per 1,000 sq ft. Public Facilities $396.85
Library Faciities Residential per dwelling unit <800 sq ft. $2,151.24 72 L.
800-1,200 sq ft. $4,194.92
1,200-2,100 sq ft. $6,346.16
>2,100 sq ft. $8,497.41
Police Department Faciities Residential per dwelling unit <800 sq ft. $397.09 800-1,200 sq ft. $624.00
1,200-2,100 sq ft. $850.91
>2,100 sq ft. $1,077.81
Non-Residential Per 1,000 sq ft. Commercial $15,480.90
Per room Lodging $2,230.97
Per 1,000 sq ft. Office $187.20
Per 1,000 sq ft. Life Science/R&D $329.02
Per 1,000 sq ft. Industrial $2,825.01
Per 1,000 sq ft. Warehouse $572.94
Per 1,000 sq ft. Public Faciilties $2,453.00
General Government Facilities Residential per dwelling unit <800 sq ft. $9,202.87 800-1,200 sq ft. $17,945.60
1,200-2,100 sq ft. $27,148.48
>2,100 sq ft. $36,351.35
Non-Residential Per 1,000 sq ft. Commercial $9,419.29
Per room Lodging $5,463.19
Per 1,000 sq ft. Office $9,441.00
Per 1,000 sq ft. Life Science/R&D $8,362.03
Per 1,000 sq ft. Industrial $5,853.42
Per 1,000 sq ft. Warehouse $2,926.71
Per 1,000 sq ft. Public Faciilties $8,780.13
Fire Department Facilities Residential per dwelling unit <800 sq ft. $2,565.40 800-1,200 sq ft. $2,992.97
1,200-2,100 sq ft. $3,420.53
>2,100 sq ft. $3,848.10
Non-Residential Per 1,000 sq ft. Commercial $5,468.48
Per room Lodging $2,264.89
Per 1,000 sq ft. Office $470.32
73 L.
Per 1,000 sq ft. Life Science/R&D $1,496.48
Per 1,000 sq ft. Industrial $348.81
Per 1,000 sq ft. Warehouse $726.86
Per 1,000 sq ft. Public Faciilties $2,254.75
74 L.
File Attachments for Item:
M. Discussion on Vehicular Traffic Flow and Parking on Visitacion Avenue during peak traffic times
(Staff is recommending that the City Council hold a discussion on the above topic. There are no action items for Council adoption/approval in item.)
75 Traffic Visitacion Avenue Page 1 of 2
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
Meeting Date: March 6, 2025
From: Jeremy Dennis, City Manager
Lisa Macias, Chief of Police
Randy Breault, Director of Public Works
Subject: Discussion on Vehicular Traffic Flow and Parking on Visitacion Avenue During Peak Traffic Times
Community Goal/Result
Purpose
Recommendation
Staff recommend that the City Council hold a discussion on the above topic. There are no action items for Council adoption/approval in this staff report.
Background
Council members and staff have been contacted by residents, business owners, and other “users” of Visitacion Avenue regarding their concerns about traffic flow and parking during peak use times. Concerns raised during these conversations include:
• Double parking associated with food delivery drivers, library drop offs and pick ups, and quick customer trips to various businesses
• Ignoring stop signs, typically by “rolling through” the intersection • Residential parking on Visitacion during the day
• Lack of resources for a fulltime parking enforcement officer Discussion
This discussion is intended to provide the Council with information about how the City approaches such issues on Visitacion. Per the oral report that will be made at the meeting, staff will:
• Share the City’s current approach to parking enforcement, and the challenges associated with such support as it relates to the size and functionality of the police department
• Provide a venue for residents and business owners to provide their feedback • Allow the Council to discuss ideas/concepts for future research and report back 76 M.
Traffic Vistacion Avenue Page 2 of 2
Staff recommend that, should the Council have ideas they would like further investigated, the Complete Streets Committee be engaged to assist in these efforts. _____________________________ ___________________________________ Lisa Macias, Police Chief Jeremy Dennis, City Manager
Lisa Macias
_____________________________
Randy Breault, Director of Public Works
Randy Breault
77 M.
File Attachments for Item:
N. Receive the Fiscal Year 2024/2025 Budget Review Report (The City expects its budgeted use of fund balance for FY25 will be reduced to $1,380,248. Any savings net of pension transfer allowed by budget policy will be rolled over to be considered for the FY26 budget and be used to pay for the level of services requested by the Council.) 78 FY25 Budget Review Report Page 1 of 4
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
Meeting Date: 3/6/2025
From: Carolina Yuen, Finance Director
Subject: FY25 Budget Review Report
Community Goal/Result
Fiscal Stability
Purpose
Review progress of funding for current approved programs and services in the current fiscal year.
Recommendation
City Council receive report of the FY 2024/25 Budget progress review Background
On June 6, 2024, City Council adopted the FY 2024/25 budget. The budget projected General Fund Revenues at $28,639,787, including Transfers In. General Fund Expenditures were budgeted to exceed revenues and were set at $31,339,180 including Transfers Out. Combined, the City budgeted for a use of funds in the amount of $2,699,392.
Our preliminary actual General Fund non-committed Beginning Balance as of July 1, 2024, was $6,800,572. The FY24 audit is still in progress and this figure can change.
Discussion
Revenues: Attached is a summary showing the FY2022/2023 and FY 2023/24 adopted and amended budgets compared to actuals as well as the 2024/25 adopted budget compared to the Budget review re-projection. Staff is anticipating approximately $658,000 in additional revenues for the 2025 fiscal year, for a total of $29,298,000. The largest increases were due to the increase in Property Taxes, followed by Franchise Fees, then by TOT, and reduced slightly by Sales Taxes and Fees and Charges. However, staff is not requesting budget adjustments to revenue at this time.
Property Tax – Staff budgeted for a 15% increase in Property Tax over the FY24 budget to $6.4 million. Property taxes remain strong and steady, including additional in RDA property taxes expected of $371,000. Also, in the current year we received $350,000 more in ERAF than expected and a catch-up VLF collection payment of $192,000 was announced by the end of the year. Overall, we’re expecting to end the year at $7.2 million, an increase of $784,000.
79 N.
FY25 Budget Review Report Page 2 of 4
Sales Tax – Staff budgeted Sales Taxes of $7.8 million, a 2% decrease from FY24 Budget to account for one-time taxes collected in the previous year. The Bradley-Burns Sales Tax appears on target just shy of $6 million based on two quarters of collections. The City has now collected almost two full years of the Transaction and Use Sales Tax that went into effect in 2023, and although the results are below the original expectation of $2 million, it is still projected to contribute strong revenues of $1.5 million. Overall, we’re projecting Sales Taxes of $7.5 million, short of budget by 4%.
Transient Occupancy Tax (TOT) – Staff budgeted the amount of TOT to remain flat for FY25 over prior year at $1.9 million which appears to be the new baseline. In FY25, we also collected two catch-up payments from the previous year, and we are therefore expected to be above budget by $26,000. So far this year, Short-Term Rental properties have contributed $8,000 to TOT, not including the remainder of the year.
Business License Tax – This budget category was increased 3% over the FY24 budget to $5.4 million. The daily business license tax on hotels and short-term rentals is expected to contribute $236,000, short of the $300,000 target. Based on current collections of business license renewals for FY25, staff projects a total of $481,000, net of transfer to the Capital Project Fund. The recycling business license tax was budgeted prior to the CPI calculation, therefore the actual tax is $150,000 more than budget. Overall, Business License Tax is projected at $5.5 million, an increase over budget of $50,000, or 1%.
Fees and Service Charges – The budget for Building and Planning fees are historically kept rather flat for budgeting purposes. These fees in FY25 are slightly lagging compared to previous year. Although fees for Recreation are trending above target, permitting fees are difficult to project. Therefore, based on activity to date, fees and services have decreased by $200,000 for a total projected total of $1.9 million.
Expenses: In June 2024 when the budget was adopted, Staff was challenged to identify savings that could either be pushed to expend in calendar year 2025 or pushed to fiscal year 2026. At the time, Staff identified a total of $466,000 in potential savings. Although not all of the identified items were able to be held off until FY2026, Staff was still able to manage savings in other areas.
Headcount Savings – The Technology Plan allowed for an Information Technology & Systems Administrator to be hired in FY25. However, the position is not expected to be filled until at least FY26. The City Manager’s division had openings for the Assistant City 80 N.
FY25 Budget Review Report Page 3 of 4
Manager and an Administrative Management Analyst for most of the year. These open positions contributed to additional savings.
American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) – The federal government enacted a federal stimulus bill known as ARPA to aid state and local jurisdiction for economic recovery from the COVID-19 pandemic. The City received a program-to-date total of $1,117,402. After $200,000 was used to assist small businesses impacted by COVID closures, the remaining funds were added to the FY25 Budget as an incoming transfer to replace lost revenues. In a Council Meeting held on December 5, 2024, Council designated $195,000 to be committed in FY25 towards ARPA eligible projects. Therefore, an addition of $195,000 is being made to the budgeted expenses.
The combination of the identified savings at the time of the budget approval and headcount savings, and the addition of the ARPA projects, the City is expecting a net savings of $661,000, lowering projected expenditures to $30,678,147, net of transfers. However, Staff is not recommending adjusting the budget at this time to allow for unexpected costs that may arise.
Following is a summary of the allocation across departments as identified savings in June 2024 when the budget was passed, and savings that each department is expecting.
Category
Targeted Savings
Identified in Jun'24
Projected Savings &
Changes
Total Department Savings $ 466,224 $ 466,224
Headcount Savings $ 389,909
ARPA Additional Commitments ($ 195,000)
Total Savings $ 466,224 $ 661,033
Although Staff is not recommending an adjustment to budgeted expenses, Staff is projecting use of Fund Balance by the end of the year to be reduced from $2.7 million to $1.4 million.
Fund Balance and summary
Ending Fund Balance for FY2024/25 is anticipated to be higher than originally budgeted and projected to now be approximately $15,067,000. Based on fund commitments and the Reserve Policy adopted by Council to set money aside for recessions, unanticipated events and annual fluctuations in the budget, the City will have $568,000 in available reserves. 81 N.
FY25 Budget Review Report Page 4 of 4
Fiscal Impact
The City expects its budgeted use of fund balance for FY25 will be reduced to $1,380,248. Any savings net of pension transfer allowed by budget policy will be rolled over to be considered for the FY26 budget and be used to pay for the level of services requested by the Council.
Measure of Success
The City is able to meet the goals and policies adopted by the City Council.
Attachments
Budget Overview of General Fund 2024/25
Carolina Yuen ___________________________________
Carolina Yuen, Finance Director Jeremy Dennis, City Manager 82 N.
FY22/23 FY23/24 FY24/25
June Adopted Budgeted Revenue 21,816,001 26,695,707 28,639,787 June Adopted Budgeted Expenses, net of transfers 25,013,662 28,599,443 31,339,180 Budgeted Surplus (Use of Fund Balance) (3,197,661) (1,903,736) (2,699,392) Mid-Year Amended Budgeted Revenues 26,244,277 28,891,077 Mid-Year Amended Budgeted Expenses, net of transfers 25,573,882 28,599,443 Amended Surplus (Use of Fund Balance) 670,395 291,634
Actual / Anticipated Revenues 28,562,247 28,891,077 29,297,899 Actual / Anticipated Expenses, net of transfers 28,127,479 28,078,493 30,678,147 Actual / Reprojected Surplus (Use of Fund Balance) 434,768 812,584 (1,380,248) Beginning Fund Balance 15,200,290 15,635,058 16,447,642 Ending Fund Balance 15,635,058 16,447,642 15,067,393
Reserve Policy:
Recession Reserve 2,500,000 2,500,000 2,500,000
Unanticipated Events 3,500,000 3,500,000 3,500,000
Annual Fluctuation (5% Revenues/5% Expenses) 2,834,486 2,848,478 2,998,948 Total Required Reserve 8,834,486 8,848,478 8,998,948
Fund Balance Above Required Balance 6,800,572 7,599,163 6,068,445 Additional Restrictions on Fund Balance 5,810,028 6,500,000 5,500,000 Available Fund Balance 990,544 1,099,163 568,445
General Fund
83 N.
File Attachments for Item:
P. Countywide Assignments and Subcommittee Reports
i. Report Out on Subcommittee Meetings
ii. Upcoming Subcommittee Meetings
84 CITY of BRISBANE
Council Subcommittee Update
From February 15th, 2025 to February 28th, 2025
1. Report Out on Subcommittees/Committees
A. Public Art Advisory Committee 2/18 Davis, O’Connell
The Public Works Deputy Director discussed with the Committee about additional stairway projects for possible art integration– from Tulare Street to Santa Clara Street, from Santa Clara Street to Alvarado Street, and from Old County Road to Bayshore Boulevard.
Next steps: Committee expressed interest to staff that they would like to pursue the possibility, and staff will keep them abreast of the opportunities.
The Committee met with Public Art Master Plan Consultants NINEdotARTS to review the final draft of the Public Art Master Plan. The Committee reviewed and provided final comments to the NINEdotARTS consultant team. Staff will work with the consultant to finalize the Draft.
Committee Recommendation: The Committee made a recommendation that the document (with updated changes) be brought to Council.
The Committee also discussed contributions for a mosaic and possible artist for hydrant painting at the San Benito entrance at the San Benito to Alvarado Stairway Project.
Next steps: Moved to a future meeting for discussion.
https://www.brisbaneca.org/bc-artadvisory/meeting/public-art-advisory-committee-meeting-18 B. Communications, Outreach & Engagement Subcommittee 2/24 Kern, Mackin The Subcommittee discussed the outreach plan for 70 Old County Rd (Bank of America site). This would include an open house (March 8th at the library), survey, Ideas boards during the summer City activities and many others. Visual mock-ups will be shown to the community about potential development opportunities, such as affordable housing, retail/mixed use, and community serving spaces.
The Subcommittee was also briefed on the Communications Retreat and how staff are working on streamlining the Blast, more active planning of Star topics, centralizing communications activities, City’s social media tools, and others.
Subcommittee recommendation: Requested staff to do a legal review of social media policy. 85 P.
The website came up as a discussion as it can be slow or go down, and the search function is static which makes it difficult to use. The City currently subscribes to the lowest tier with the current website provider.
Subcommittee recommendation: Explore the potential for a new website provider/new website frame to improve functionality or potentially upgrade the subscription with the City’s current provider for added features and support.
Staff asked the councilmembers if they had any items they would like to discuss.
Councilmembers would like to know if there are federal grant funds left to upgrade the Community Meeting Room. Staff will follow up on the question. https://www.brisbaneca.org/citycouncil/meeting/communications-outreach-engagementsubcommittee C. Liaison to IDEA Committee Subcommittee 2/27 Davis, Lentz The subcommittee received an update on the San Mateo County’s efforts in advancing equity in government. The IDEA Committee workplan was also reviewed.
Subcommittee recommendation: IDEA Committee members will work with City Manager Dennis and staff to align the IDEA Committee workplan with San Mateo County’s efforts in advancing equity in government and draft a resolution to affirm the City’s commitment to advancing equity, shared prosperity and affirming support and protections for vulnerable communities. https://www.brisbaneca.org/citycouncil/meeting/liaison-idea-committee-subcommitteemeeting
2. Upcoming Subcommittees:
Liaison to CSSC Subcommittee 3/12 4pm Kern, Mackin
To meet with the CSSC liaisons to discuss projects and annual plan. Meeting requested by staff.
Public Art Advisory Committee 3/17 5:15pm Davis, O’Connell To discuss Firth Park projects, Alvarado to San Benito stairway Project, Implementation Guidelines.
Standing meeting.
Planning Issues Subcommittee 3/18 3:30pm Kern, Mackin
To discuss the 2024-RZ-2 ordinance. Meeting requested by staff. ** Note: Quarry Subcommittee has moved to the end of the March.
3. Proposed Subcommittees:
Does any councilmember wish to propose any items for a subcommittee to discuss? 86 P.