described therein which are payable to the City from and after such effective date.
___________________________
Cliff Lentz, Mayor
I hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 2025- was duly and regularly adopted at a regular meeting of the Brisbane City Council on May 15, 2025 by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
ABSENT:
__________________________________
Ingrid Padilla, City Clerk
ATTACHMENT 1
267
P.
Reso. 2025-
EXHIBIT A
The following fees are added to the Master Fee Schedule under “Planning Fees”:
Fee Fee Sub-Type Fee Amount Basis
Inclusionary In-Lieu Fee Rental, 5 or more
units
$378,346 per unit or
fraction thereof*
Subject to
adjustments
according to
increase in the
California
Construction Cost
Index (CCCI)
For Sale, 5-10 units or
lots
$236,558 per unit/lot
or fraction thereof*
Subject to
adjustments
according to
increase in the
CCCI
For Sale, 11 or more
units or lots
$265,717 per unit/lot
or fraction thereof*
Subject to
adjustments
according to
increase in the
CCCI
Below Market Rate Unit
Applicant Eligibility Review
Rental and for-sale $125 per application Charged to the owner/developer
per application
Below Market Rate Unit
Monitoring Fee
Rental $150 per unit Charged annually
to the
owner/property
management
company
Below Market Rate
Homeowner Monitoring
Noncompliance Fine
For-Sale $1,000 (after 90 days)
$1,000 additional
every subsequent 30
days
Charged to the
homeowner
Below Market Rate
Homeowner Subordination
Request
For-Sale $125 per request Charged to the
homeowner
* For projects for which application of the inclusionary requirement results in a fractional unit less than
0.5, an in-lieu fee shall be assessed as an equivalent fraction of the fee charged for a whole unit.
ATTACHMENT 1
268
P.
Density Bonus and Inclusionary Housing Ordinance Updates Page 1 of 6
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
Meeting Date: April 17, 2025
From: John Swiecki, Community Development Director
Subject: Zoning Text Amendment 2025-RZ-01; Introduction and First Reading of Draft Ordinance to Update the City’s Density Bonus and Inclusionary Housing Ordinance
Adoption of the draft ordinance is exempt from CEQA pursuant to CEQA Guidelines §15061(b)(3) because it involves adoption of policies and programs that would not cause a significant effect on the environment.
Community Goal/Result
Community Building; Fiscally Prudent
Purpose
To amend the zoning ordinance’s inclusionary housing and density bonus regulations to comply with current State law and implement the Housing Element.
Recommendation
Introduce the ordinance amending the zoning text to update the inclusionary housing and density bonus regulations currently located in BMC Ch. 17.31, as provided in Attachment 1.
Background
2009 Ordinance
The City Council adopted an inclusionary housing and density bonus ordinance in 2009 (BMC Chapter 17.31; Attachment 4). The inclusionary provisions require rental and for-sale housing developments of six or more units or lots to provide a certain number of housing units that are affordable to and occupied by low income and/or moderate-income households. The ordinance also contains the City’s procedures to implement the State density bonus program, which is available for housing projects of at least five units.
2019 Draft Ordinance
In 2018, the Planning Commission studied updates to the 2009 ordinance to implement programs in the 2015 Housing Element and bring the ordinance into compliance with State laws impacting the ordinance. In April 2019 the Commission recommended Council approval of a draft ordinance (“the 2019 draft ordinance”) addressing State law requirements in effect at the time and the 2015 Housing Element policies.
City Council consideration of the 2019 draft ordinance was delayed due to an evolving regulatory environment at the State level, the 2023-2031 Housing Element process, and efforts to create an Affordable Housing Strategic Plan which included an evaluation of the draft 2019 ordinance’s inclusionary housing provisions.
ATTACHMENT 2
269
P.
Density Bonus and Inclusionary Housing Ordinance Updates Page 2 of 6 2025 Draft Ordinance
In 2024, staff revisited the draft ordinance to address programs in the new 2023-2031 Housing Element, strategies in the 2024 Affordable Housing Strategic Plan, and current State law.
Recommended revisions to the 2019 ordinance were reviewed at Planning Commission workshops in the fall of 2024.
Following those workshops, on February 27, 2025, the Commission considered a revised draft ordinance at a public hearing and voted unanimously to recommend City Council approval of the ordinance. This revised draft ordinance (“2025 draft ordinance”) is included as Attachment 1, and the February 27, 2025 Planning Commission agenda report is attached as Attachment 5.
Staff has not provided a redlined version of the 2009 ordinance showing changes proposed by the 2025 draft ordinance because of the significant structural changes proposed. Tables summarizing substantive revisions proposed to the 2009 ordinance are provided in the Discussion section below.
Housing Subcommittee Review
The City Council housing subcommittee met to review the draft 2025 ordinance on March 13, 2025. The subcommittee’s recommendations are summarized in the Discussion section below.
Discussion
The 2025 draft ordinance (Attachment 1) extracts the density bonus regulations into a standalone chapter (new chapter 17.29). Inclusionary housing regulations remain in Chapter
17.31. Beyond this structural change, the 2025 draft ordinance proposes the following substantive revisions to the density bonus and inclusionary housing ordinance:
Density Bonus Provisions
Updated Provision State Law or Policy Requirement
Eliminate State density bonus tables from implementing
ordinance and replace with reference to State law
Government Code Sections 65915-65918
Create a density bonus for small projects under 5 units 2015 Housing Element Program H.B.5.a Grant additional concessions or incentives than required by State law for projects that exceed the density bonus qualifications
2023 Housing Element Program 2.C.1
Extend rental target unit affordability term from 55 years to in perpetuity
No State Law or other Policy; Planning
Commission recommendation
Require one-to-one replacement of lost units 2023 Housing Element Program 3.A.5 Allow one additional incentive or concession if the
density bonus project includes family-sized target units (units with three or more bedrooms) affordable to lowto extremely low-income households 2023 Housing Element Program 2.C.1
Affordability in perpetuity for both rental and for-sale 2023 Housing Element Program 4.A.11 Direct staff to prepare implementation guidelines that
address topics including income verification and
household qualification procedures, procedures for
No State Law or other Policy; Planning
Commission recommendation
ATTACHMENT 2
270
P.
Density Bonus and Inclusionary Housing Ordinance Updates Page 3 of 6 successors in interest, and other implementation
provisions, and extracting such provisions from the
ordinance
Inclusionary Housing Ordinance (BMC Ch. 17.31)
Updated Provision State Law or Policy Requirement
Reduce project size threshold from 6 or more units/lots to 5 or more units/lots
No State Law or other Policy; Planning
Commission recommendation
15% inclusionary requirement instead of the current
sliding scale
Rental: Government Code Section
65850.01
For-sale: No State Law or other Policy;
Planning Commission recommendation
Affordable rental units must be affordable to very low
income households (rather than a mix of low and very
low income households)
No State Law or other Policy; Planning
Commission recommendation
Provide alternatives to on-site construction of affordable units, including:
Any rental project can choose to pay an in-lieu
fee
Government Code Section 65850
Any for-sale project of 15 or fewer units/lots can
choose to pay an in-lieu fee
2023 Housing Element Program 2.E.4,
Affordable Housing Strategic Plan
Strategy A-5
City Council may approve other alternatives for
for-sale or rental projects, including off-site
construction, land donation, conversion of
market-rate units, funding affordable or special
needs housing project, or in-lieu fee for for-sale
projects of more than 15 units/lots
2023 Housing Element Program 2.E.4,
Affordable Housing Strategic Plan
Strategy A-5
Affordability in perpetuity for both rental and for-sale 2023 Housing Element Program 4.A.11 Require an in-lieu fee for fractional inclusionary
requirements that cannot be rounded up to the nearest
whole integer
No State Law or other Policy; Planning
Commission recommendation
Modify incentives to:
Continue to allow affordable units to be smaller
than market-rate units, but require comparable
total square footage
No State Law or other Policy; Planning
Commission recommendation
Acknowledge that ADUs provided by for-sale
developments may be able to be sold IF the City
amends its ADU regulations to allow ADUs to be
sold. (Separate ordinance would be required, not
proposed in this ordinance.)
No State Law or other Policy; Planning
Commission recommendation
Direct staff to prepare implementation guidelines that
address topics including income verification and
household qualification procedures, procedures for
successors in interest, and other implementation
No State Law or other Policy; Planning
Commission recommendation
ATTACHMENT 2
271
P.
Density Bonus and Inclusionary Housing Ordinance Updates Page 4 of 6 provisions, and extracting such provisions from the
ordinance
Draft Implementation Guidelines
HEART of San Mateo County provides housing policy consulting services to the City. HEART staff is preparing an implementing guidelines document containing detailed procedures for administering the density bonus and inclusionary housing ordinances, as referenced in the draft ordinance. This document would be maintained and updated by City staff.
Housing Subcommittee Recommendations
The Housing Subcommittee (Mayor Lentz, Councilmember Davis) met on March 13, 2025 to review the draft ordinance. The subcommittee made the following recommendation for the full Council’s consideration:
- Eliminate incentive for for-sale inclusionary housing developments to meet inclusionary requirements by providing affordable accessory dwelling units (Section 17.31.040.D of the draft ordinance). The subcommittee considered this option problematic in terms of on-going management, monitoring, and tracking. If this incentive would be eliminated, for-sale developments would need to construct affordable units as for-sale single-family dwellings, unless they opted to pay an in-lieu fee (projects of 15 or fewer units) or requested Council approval of another alternative means of compliance.
The draft ordinance in Attachment 1 has been modified to eliminate this incentive, shown in tracked changes on page 13 of the ordinance, for the Council’s consideration.
Inclusionary In-Lieu Fee: Setting the Fee Amounts
Implementation of the draft ordinance would require the City to adopt in-lieu fees for inclusionary housing, as well as new fees for administration of the ordinance’s requirements.
In-lieu fees would be maintained in the City’s low and moderate income housing fund to fund a variety of the City’s programs related to preserving existing affordable housing stock, creating new affordable housing, or assisting low-income households. Staff has provided recommended in-lieu fees in Attachment 3. Should the Council move to introduce the draft ordinance, a Resolution will be prepared amending the Master Fee Schedule to adopt the proposed fees at the next City Council meeting.
Adopting an in-lieu fee for rental inclusionary housing developments is proposed to meet the State-required opt-in alternative for rental projects in the inclusionary policy. While not required by State law, an in-lieu fee is also proposed for opt-in payment by small for-sale projects (15 or fewer units/lots), or for discretionary approval by the City Council for larger forsale projects, which is consistent with the City’s Housing Element policy to provide more alternatives for compliance with the inclusionary housing ordinance.
ATTACHMENT 2
272
P.
Density Bonus and Inclusionary Housing Ordinance Updates Page 5 of 6 In-lieu fees are not development impact or mitigation fees and are therefore not subject to the Mitigation Fee Act. The proposed in-lieu fees shown in Attachment 3 are based on the “affordability gap” between market-rate housing prices and the maximum affordable purchase price for low and moderate-income households. The affordability gap is a helpful tool for targeting appropriate in-lieu fees because it represents the cost the developer incurs for providing the unit. The proposed in-lieu fees are similar to those of neighboring jurisdictions, shown in the benchmarking analysis provided in Attachment 6. As this fee is set independently from the cost of an individual development, for some developers, paying the fee will be preferable to providing the unit on-site. For some developments, the opposite may be the case. The City Council may also adjust these fees to incentivize a particular outcome. For example, if the City Council wished to incentivize building units on-site, the City Council could consider increasing the in-lieu fees.
Local Preferences
“Local preferences” are requirements that affordable units provided to comply with City regulations or 100% affordable housing developments have “preferences” to serve or market the affordable housing units to certain target populations. For example, a requirement that current or former Brisbane residents be given priority in leasing or selling affordable units would be considered a local preference. Local preferences are not established in the draft ordinance. Should the Council wish to consider local preferences, staff can prepare some background information on the legal requirements for studying and establishing such preferences in compliance with State and Federal fair housing laws.
Fiscal Impact
None at this time. Adoption of an inclusionary in-lieu fee will generate affordable housing revenues, but it is difficult to forecast potential revenue as it depends on project size and type, and whether in-lieu fee payments are proposed at all by a project developer as opposed to onsite construction or other compliance alternatives.
Environmental Review
Adoption of the draft ordinance is exempt from CEQA pursuant to CEQA Guidelines §15061(b)(3) because it involves adoption of policies and programs that would not cause a significant effect on the environment.
Measure of Success
Inclusionary housing and density bonus regulations that comply with State law and implement the City’s Housing Element policies to encourage and facilitate development of affordable housing in Brisbane.
Attachments
1. Draft Ordinance
ATTACHMENT 2
273
P.
Density Bonus and Inclusionary Housing Ordinance Updates Page 6 of 6
2. Resolution 2025-RZ-01
3. Proposed In-Lieu Fees and other Administrative Fees
4. BMC Chapter 17.31, Inclusionary Housing And Density Bonuses (hyperlink)
5. February 27, 2025 Planning Commission agenda report and attachments
6. San Mateo County benchmarking analysis of inclusionary housing regulations ___________________________________ ___________________________________ John Swiecki, Community Development Director Jeremy Dennis, City Manager ATTACHMENT 2
274
P.
4/17/2025 City Council Meeting
ATTACHMENT 3
Proposed Fees: Inclusionary Housing and Density Bonus Ordinance Update Fee Land Use Type Amount
In-Lieu Fee Rental 5+ units $378,346 per unit or fraction thereof*
For Sale, 5-10 units $236,558 per unit/lot or
fraction thereof*
For Sale, 11 + units $265,717 per unit/lot or
fraction thereof*
Administrative Fees
Review of Eligibility for
BMR Unit applicant
(Developer)
Rental $125 per application
Annual monitoring fee
(Developer/Property
Management)
Rental $150 per unit
Fine for failure to provide
documentation for
homeowner monitoring
(Homeowner)
For-Sale; any size $1000 (after 90 days)
$1000 additional for every
30 days
BMR Homeowner
Subordination Request
(Homeowner)
For-Sale; any size $125 per request
* For projects for which application of the inclusionary requirement results in a fractional unit less than 0.5, an in-lieu fee shall be assessed as an equivalent fraction of the fee charged for a whole unit.
ATTACHMENT 2
275
P.
Jurisdiction Project Size Threshold Rental
On-site Income Requirements
Ownership
On-site Income Requirements Alternatives In-Lieu Fee Levels When are in lieu fees required? Term of Affordability Links Atherton N/a N/a N/a N/a N/a N/a N/a
Belmont 25 units
>25 units:
Housing impact fees
25+ units:
15% @ 80% AMI
>25 units:
Pay housing impact fees
25+ units:
15% @ 120% AMI
Off-site
For-sale:
>24 units, 15% @ 80-120% AMI
For-rent:
>24 units: 15% @ 50-80% AMI
Brisbane: Proposed
Draft Ordinance 5 units 15% @ 50% AMI
5-10 Units: 15% @ 120% AMI
11+ Units: 10% @ 120% AMI; 5% @
80% AMI
In-Lieu Fee: Rental (any size); for-sale
15 or fewer lots/units
Land Donation, Off-Site Construction,
Conversion, Special Needs Project
Funding: Rental or For-Sale with City
Council approval
In-Lieu Fee: For-Sale 16+ units/lots
with City Council approval
For-Sale 5-10 Units: $236,558
For-Sale 11+ Units: $265,717
Rental: $378,346
N/A Perpetuity (all)
Colma 5 units Housing Impact Fee 20% @ 50-120% AMI
Combination
Land-donation
Off site
Make up the gap between the amount of
development capital typically expected to be
available based on the amount to be received
by a Developer or owner from Affordable Sales
Price or Affordable Rent and anticipated cost
of constructing the Inclusionary Units
Inclusionary Housing Ordinance
Daly City 20 units for rental;
15 units for ownership 10% @ 80% AMI 20% @ 120% AMI In-lieu fee Alternative for rental only: $48/s.f. ; required
for rental: $35sf; required for ownership:
$45/sf
Rental: 5-20 units,
Ownership: 5-14 units 55 years Inclusionary Housing Ordinance East Palo Alto 5 units
5+ units: 20% of net new
5% @ 35% AMI &
10% @ 50% AMI &
5% @ 60% AMI
5+ units: 20% of net new
10% @ 80% AMI &
10% @ 120% AMI
In-lieu fee
Off site
Other
Rental: $273,400 (per affordable unit)
Ownership: $259,600 (per affordable unit) Perpetuity Inclusionary Housing Ordinance Foster City 5 units
10% @50% AMI
5% @ 80% AMI
5% @ 120% AMI
20% @ 120% AMI In-lieu fee
Rental: $75.32/sq ft ;
Sale: $48.21/sq ft
There are some other disclaimers in the fee
schedule
9 units and lower
Fractional units
Below Market Rate Inclusionary Housing
Program
Half Moon Bay 10 units
25% of all units:
6% @ 50% AMI &
7% @ 80% AMI &
7% @ 120% AMI
20% of building permit valuation for the
market rate units
Inclusionary Housing Ordinance
Hillsborough N/a N/a N/a N/a N/a N/a N/a
Menlo Park 1 unit
1-20 units:
10% @ 50-120% AMI
20 or more units:
15% @ 50-120% AMI
Acquisition and rehabilitation of
existing units
In-lieu fees
Land dedication
Off-site
55 years for rental Below Market Rate Housing Program
Millbrae 10 units
5% @ 50% AMI
10% @ 80% AMI
15% @ 120% AMI
As an alternative to the fee payment,
may be able to provide an additional
on-site inclusionary unit
May be allowed for fractional units less than
0.5 or residential developments four to nine
units
Residential developments with 4 to 9
units
55 years rental,
45 years ownership
4/17/2025 City Council Meeting ATTACHMENT 6 ATTACHMENT 2 276
P.
Pacifica 8 units
15% of all units:
(In redevelopment area)
30% @ 50% AMI
40% @ 80% AMI
(Outside redevelopment area)
50% @ 80% AMI
50% @ 120% AMI
Each subsequent purchaser shall be
limited to the lesser of:
Original purchase price, plus the
percentage increase AMI from date
of original purchase, plus cost of any
capital improvement expenditures
greater than 1% of original purchase
price, minus costs necessary to bring
unit up to code;
Fair market value
Combination of below
In-lieu
Land dedication
Off-site
Reflect the estimated cost to provide the BMR
unit
55 years rental;
45 years ownerships
Inclusionary Housing Ordinance
Portola Valley Subdivision developments 15% of lots In-lieu fees required for fractional lots, if the developer does not wish
Inclusionary Lot Requirements in
Municipal Code
Redwood City 20 units 5% @ 50% AMI
10% @ 120% AMI
15% @ 80-120% AMI
In lieu
Unit size (affordable units may be
20% smaller than MR units)
Other
Payment for fractional units 55 years rental,
30 years ownership
Affordable Housing Programs
San Bruno 5 units
15% of units:
10% @ 50% AMI
5% @ 50% AMI
5+ units:
15% of units:
20% @ 80% AMI
10% @ 120% AMI
In lieu
Off-site
Convert owner units to rentals:
5% @ 50% AMI
5% @ 80% AMI
5% @ 120% AMI
In-lieu fee will provide at least an
equivalent number of affordable units at
the same or lower income levels as
required
55 years rental,
45 years ownership
Inclusionary Housing Ordinance
San Carlos 5 units
15% of units:
10% @ 50% AMI
5% @ 80% AMI
5-7 units:
20% @ 80% AMI
7+ units:
15% @ 80% AMI
Land dedication
Off-site
Difference between affordable sales price or
rent and the fair market value for the unit: no
event shall the in lieu fee exceed cost of
mitigating the impact of market-rate units
Perpetuity;
Perpetuity renewal at resale for
ownership
Inclusionary Housing Ordinance
San Mateo 11 units 15% @ 80% AMI 15% @ 120% AMI
Rental:
(.1-.4) units: 33,452 - $133,807
(5-10) units: 167,259 - $334,517
Owner:
(.1-.4) units: 30,701 - $122,802
(5-10) units: 153,503 - $307,005
5-10 units Inclusionary Housing Ordinance
San Francisco 10 units
15% @ 80% AMI,
5% @ 120% AMI,
5% @ middle-income
6% @ 80% AMI,
6% @ middle-income
Combination
Off-site units
On-site units
Small sites
$199.5/s.f. gross (per s.f. of affordable housing
that would've been provided on site)
Inclusionary Affordable Housing
Program
San Mateo County 5 20%; all low, very low, extremely low 20%; half may be moderate, the rest
any combo of low/very low/extemely
low
In-lieu, land dedication, offsite units;
may substitute disabled or large
family units
Based on an established portion of
construction cost, for a comparable unit;
differs from County impact fee
55 years
South San Francisco 5 units
15% of units:
5% @ 50% AMI
9% @ 80% AMI
15% of units:
7.5% @ 80% AMI
7.5% @ 120% AMI
In-lieu fee Determined by City Council
55 years for rental,
55 years for renew at resale for
ownership
Inclusionary Housing Ordinance
Woodside N/a N/a N/a N/a N/a N/a N/a
4/17/2025 City Council Meeting ATTACHMENT 5 ATTACHMENT 2 277
P.
File Attachments for Item:
Q. Receive an Update from the Economic Development Department- “Economic Vitality” 278
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
Meeting Date: May 15, 2025
From: Mitch Bull – Economic Development Director
City Manager Jeremy Dennis
Subject:Economic Development Department Update
-Economic Vitality
Recommendation:
Staff recommend that the City Council accept this report on an update regarding the Economic Development Department, as presented and forwarded by the Economic Development Subcommittee, for review and discussion.
Background:
As part of the goal setting of the City Council in 2016, Economic Development was highlighted as one of the major areas for improvement. The Economic Development Department was created in a more formal way, expanding the part-time hours that I was working (in tandem with my duties as the President/CEO Brisbane Chamber of the of Commerce). Upon my “retirement” from the Chamber in 2019, the hours were expanded to create the stand-alone department that currently exists.
Over the years, the department has been actively involved with Economic Development, real estate procurement and liquidation, and the initial point of contact for anyone who wishes to conduct business within the City of Brisbane. Staff have represented the city throughout the region and state through attendance at numerous Progress Seminars, visits to legislative days in Sacramento, and as representatives to SAMCEDA and the California Economic Development Association (CALED).
With the changing of the City Manager’s office the Economic Development department has also been more cohesively involved with other city initiatives such as emergency planning, community development planning and sustainability. While staff have had some success, such as the ATM installation at City Hall, staff are involved but ultimately failing to secure (currently) as replacement banking tenant for the former Bank of America site. Staff have also assisted the City Manager’s office in securing the lease for 25 Park Place and the sale of excess parcels on McClain St.
The Economic Development Committee met in April and recommended supporting the suggestions related below. Staff also met with Brisbane Chamber of Commerce representatives to ensure no overlap of responsibilities and duties and also discussed ways the City could partner together. 279
Q.
Discussion:
Economic and Business Development has long had connotations of just filling buildings with tenants or building new structures on vacant or stressed properties. When one says the word “development” the immediate response is that a “developer” is going to do something; and the connotation is usually negative.
Economic Vitality is a concept that goes beyond signing leases and filling buildings but is a collaboration between city staff, community members, and business partners to enhance the economic stability of the city and improve the quality of life. It is more of a holistic concept that encompasses the integration of economics, environmental stewardship, sustainability, planning and communication as a total package. The Economic Vitality Office (EVO) will also be involved in promoting workforce development and be an advocate for economic opportunity options available at a local, state and federal level.
The goal is a more engaged and complimentary solution that will result in economic growth, a continued strengthening of the city/business/citizen dynamic and better marketing of the city in the regional outlook for potential businesses that are looking to locate to the SF Bay Area. entrepreneurship and sustainability.
The recommendation is to approve a rebranding of the current Economic Development Department into the Economic Vitality Office (EVO). The EVO will continue to be the primary point of contact for businesses and entrepreneurs looking to do business in the city. Staff will continue to provide the necessary information and connections to city staff and resources throughout the county and state.
Major Programs and Initiatives
• Employer Interviews: staff have started to conduct employer interviews with some of our major businesses and have gained valuable feedback on city services, business needs and concerns.
o Staff will be continuing this effort and expanding the reach. • Continue to monitor business and industry trends
• Program recommendations, as fiscally appropriate, to enhance the environments of Visitacion Avenue, Brisbane Village, Shopping Center, Crocker Park, Sierra Point and the Brisbane Technology Park. From lighting, parking, zoning and land use the aforementioned business areas are critical to Brisbane’s economic fortunes. They may require different solutions, in order to maximize the impact on the revenue that each sector can potentially generate.
• Develop and implement a business retention / business excellence and incubator strategy to link our citizens with business that support the economy • Recruitment of Businesses and Sectors – Light Industrial / manufacturing / outreach to brokers and developers – through interviews / business roundtables and partnership advertising with our business and development partners
280
Q.
• Workforce Development – Explore job creation opportunities, affordable housing, workplace amenities such as maker space, incubator space, etc.
Future Initiatives
• Revamped “Business of the Year” award programs – highlight large businesses/ small businesses / home-based businesses - develop methodology for selection. Awards can be plaques / cash grants. Announce winners in a “business celebration” held at the Doubletree Hotel with participation from the business community and general population.
• Develop small business grant program $ TBD to encourage and help to launch start-up businesses. Possible future small grants to entrepreneurs and start-ups. (e.g. 5 grants/year at a future determined dollar amount)
Strategic Partnerships for the Economic Vitality Office • SAMCEDA
• State of California – GOBiz
• Community Resources – Commissions and Subcommittees
• Brisbane Chamber of Commerce
• CALED (California Economic Development Association)
• Local groups such as MOB, Brisbane Makers, etc.
Measures of Success
Staff will base the success of the Economic Vitality Office (EVO) rollout (in part) on the following:
Number of clicks on our webpage, Surveys that staff will conduct to gauge client and citizen recognition of the EVO office and programs, increase on business activity in leasing and interactions with our partners in real estate, site development and leasing, and other interactions with our commissions, committees, and citizen groups.
Expected Results and Measurements
• Visibility – Website Traffic results / Business Journal adv response • Room Night uptick within Brisbane hotels
• Retention of Businesses / New Businesses
• Surveys of Business and Citizens on EVO efforts
1. How is the EVO different than the Brisbane Chamber?
The Brisbane Chamber is a 501c6 trade organization that focuses on enhancing and improving the economy of Brisbane and their member businesses and organizations. The Economic Vitality Office is a city staff department that will continue to work hand in hand with the Chamber but 281
Q.
will have a broader action plan and reach, as the department will focus on larger city and regional issues, trends and policy solutions. Both organizations will continue to promote the City of Brisbane, and the efforts of both organizations will continue to create an environment where the businesses, the citizens and the community thrive.
2. Does this rebranding constitute a change in the focus of what the Economic Development Department has been doing over the past 7 years?
The rebrand, while adding additional components, is a way to better explain and market the efforts and goals of the department. The goal is not just about filling spaces, but a mindful, planned response to strengthen and expand the economic vitality of the city. It will also provide a clear pathway for sharing communications and resources in areas such as marketing, communications, sustainability, emergency planning, city planning and other resources.
3. Have any materials been produced recently to support economic vitality in the City? Yes – staff will share a video recently produced by staff intended to provide businesses with key information about why Brisbane is an ideal location to locate their activities.
Fiscal Impact:
Minimal at this time, (reprinting of business cards / website update). Future programs may involve “Businesses of the Year “awards, joint advertising campaigns with developers and media (e.g. San Francisco Business Times; Site Selector) to promote our city and highlight available business opportunities.
• Small Business Grants $ Future TBD
• Advertising in trade journals / websites $. TBD
• Webpage Development $ TBD (in house)
• Business of the Year awards: Home Business, Small Business, Large Business, Restaurant/Retail Business
Mitch Bull
Mitch Bull Jeremy Dennis
Economic Development Director City Manager
282
Q.
File Attachments for Item:
R. City Attorney Recruitment Discussion
283
City Attorney Recruitment Discussion Page 1 of 2
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
Meeting Date: May 15, 2025
From: Jeremy Dennis, City Manager
Subject: City Attorney Recruitment Discussion
Recommendation
Staff recommend that the City Council:
1. Receive an update from the ad hoc City Attorney Subcommittee on its discussions regarding the use of a consultant for the recruitment or to use in-house support
2. Discuss the contents of draft recruitment materials.
Background
For the past decade, the City has been served by two City Attorneys. Michael was City Attorney until 2019 while Tom was the City’s lead counsel on certain state and federal issues. Tom became City Attorney in 2019, and Michael continued as the City’s lead counsel on day-to-day matters.
Early this year, both indicated their interest in stepping down as primary legal counsel to the City in favor of the City hiring a new City Attorney to assume the traditional role of a City Attorney.
The City Council created an ad hoc subcommittee to provide recommendations on recruiting a new City Attorney. That body met in March and provided initial direction to the subcommittee.
Discussion
This section provides greater detail on the subcommittee’s recommendations.
1. Subcommittee Discussion/Recommendation
The Subcommittee primarily discussed whether it was advantageous to the City to utilize a third-party recruiter/consultant to recruit a new City Attorney, or whether an initial search carried out by in-house HR services would be more appropriate given budget considerations. 284
R.
City Attorney Recruitment Discussion Page 2 of 2
The Subcommittee recommends that in-house support be utilized for an initial recruitment.
Should the in-house process not result in the Council’s selection of a new City Attorney, the Subcommittee recommends reconsidering retaining a professional recruiter.1 The Subcommitee also recommends that consideration be given first to firms that are regionally located that can provide their services in person, when appropriate.
The Subcommittee requested that we share materials used during the most recent recruitment of a City Attorney in 2012 with the Council. The available materials from the previous recruitment are attached (unfortunately, not all materials were available.
2. Discussion of Recruitment Material Content
Staff recommends that the City Council accept the Subcommittee’s recommendations.
Staff recommends that the Council discuss the attributes, qualities, qualifications and other such topics so that staff can draft materials for the recruitment.
Fiscal Impact
None.
Attachments
1. Previous recruitment materials
2. Recent sample recruitment materials from local cities ___________________________________
Jeremy Dennis, City Manager
1 The Subcommittee recognized that its approach may extend the process for selecting a new City Attorney by a couple months and asked the City’s current attorneys whether such a delay would pose a problem for either of them. It does not.
285
R.
Attachment 1
286
R.
287
R.
Attachment 2
288
R.
289
R.
290
R.
291
R.
292
R.
293
R.
294
R.
295
R.
296
R.
297
R.
298
R.
299
R.
300
R.
301
R.
302
R.
303
R.
304
R.
305
R.
306
R.
307
R.
308
R.
309
R.
310
R.
311
R.
312
R.
313
R.
314
R.
315
R.
316
R.
317
R.
318
R.
319
R.
320
R.
321
R.
322
R.
323
R.
324
R.
325
R.
326
R.
327
R.
328
R.
329
R.
330
R.
331
R.
332
R.
333
R.
334
R.
335
R.
336
R.
337
R.
338
R.
339
R.
340
R.
341
R.
342
R.
343
R.
344
R.
345
R.
346
R.
347
R.
348
R.
349
R.
350
R.
351
R.
352
R.
353
R.
354
R.
355
R.
356
R.
357
R.
358
R.
359
R.
File Attachments for Item:
U. Countywide Assignments and Subcommittee Reports
i. Report Out on Subcommittee Meetings
ii. Upcoming Subcommittee Meetings
360
CITY of BRISBANE
Council Subcommittee Update
From April 26th, 2025 to May 9th, 2025
1. Report Out on Subcommittees/Committees
A. Public Art Advisory Committee 4/28 Davis, O’Connell
The committee thanked Park & Recreation Commissioner Greenlee for her years of service on the Public Art Advisory Committee. The committee received an update of the public art fund balance which is currently $2.6M.
The committee reviewed the existing Public Art Ordinance and Implementation Guidelines to ensure that they are consistent with the newly adopted Public Art Master Plan.
Next Steps #1: Staff will redline for the committee for approval and then it will be brought to Council for review.
The committee then reviewed and considered the list of priorities from the Public Art Master Plan and identified short-term projects and initiatives.
Next Steps #2: After reviewing and capturing the committee’s feedback, staff will bring back the priorities to the next meeting for further consideration.
Meeting Packet: https://www.brisbaneca.org/bc-artadvisory/meeting/public-art-advisory-committeemeeting-20
2. Upcoming Subcommittees:
Brisbane School District/City 2x2 Subcommittee 5/13 4pm Davis, Lentz Introduction of School Board Members and consider ways to collaborate.
Public Art Advisory Committee 5/19 5:15pm Davis, O’Connell Review Implementation Guidelines, Art Ordinance, and review Priorities. Standing Meeting.
3. Proposed Subcommittees:
Does any councilmember wish to propose any items for a subcommittee to discuss? 361
U.