AGENDA
REGULAR MEETING
CITY COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF COLMA
Wednesday, March 9, 2022
7:00 PM
The City Council meeting will be conducted virtually pursuant to the provisions of Assembly Bill 361 amending the Ralph M. Brown Act and Government Code Section 54953(e) (and without compliance with section 54953(b)(3)) related to conducting public meetings during the COVID-19 pandemic based on the current State of Emergency and the existing State recommendations on social distancing. The Council Chambers will not be open to the public for this City Council meeting.
Members of the public may view the meeting by attending, via telephone or computer, the Zoom Meeting listed below:
Join Zoom Meeting: https://us02web.zoom.us/j/81289976261 Passcode: 074407
Meeting ID: 812 8997 6261
Passcode: 074407
One tap mobile
+16699006833,,81289976261#,,,,,,0#,,074407# US (San Jose) +13462487799,,81289976261#,,,,,,0#,,074407# US (Houston)
Dial by your location
+1 669 900 6833 US (San Jose)
+1 346 248 7799 US (Houston)
+1 253 215 8782 US (Tacoma)
+1 312 626 6799 US (Chicago)
+1 929 205 6099 US (New York)
+1 301 715 8592 US (Germantown)
Meeting ID: 812 8997 6261
Passcode: 074407
Find your local number: https://us02web.zoom.us/u/kco5bgxkcc
Members of the public may provide written comments by email to the City Clerk at [email protected] before or during the meeting. Emailed comments should include the specific agenda item on which you are commenting or note that your comment concerns an item that is not on the agenda. The length of the emailed comment should be commensurate with the three minutes customarily allowed for verbal comments, which is approximately 250-300 words. Verbal comments will also be accepted during the meeting.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE AND ROLL CALL
ADOPTION OF AGENDA
PRESENTATION
• Introduction of New Police Officer Brian Nagata
• Introduction of New Assistant Planner Alvin Jen
• Proclamation in honor of Women’s History Month
PUBLIC COMMENTS
Comments on the Consent Calendar and Non-Agenda Items will be heard at this time. Comments on Agenda Items will be heard when the item is called.
CONSENT CALENDAR
1. Motion to Accept the Minutes from the February 23, 2022 Regular Meeting.
2. Motion to Approve Report of Checks Paid for February 2021.
3. Motion to Reconfirm Findings and Determinations Under Resolution No. 2021-33 and Assembly Bill 361 for the Continuation of Virtual Meetings.
4. Motion to Adopt a Resolution Approving and Authorizing the City Manager to Execute a Legal Services Agreement with Sher Edling LLP to Explore Litigation Options on a Contingency Fee Basis for Representation in PCB Litigation.
5. Motion to Adopt a Resolution of the Town of Colma Approving Application(s) for Per Capita Grant Funds.
STUDY SESSION
6. SANITARY SEWER ENTERPRISE FUND
This item is for discussion only; no action will be taken at this meeting.
REPORTS
Mayor/City Council
City Manager
ADJOURNMENT
The City Council Meeting Agenda Packet and supporting documents are available for review on the Town’s website www.colma.ca.gov or at Colma Town Hall, 1198 El Camino Real, Colma, CA. Persons interested in obtaining an agenda via e-mail should call Caitlin Corley, City Clerk at 650-997-8300 or email a request to [email protected].
Reasonable Accommodation
Upon request, this publication will be made available in appropriate alternative formats to persons with disabilities, as required by the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990. Any person with a disability, who requires a modification or accommodation to view the agenda, should direct such a request to Pak Lin, ADA Coordinator, at 650-997-8300 or [email protected]. Please allow two business days for your request to be processed.
Minutes – Regular Meeting 02.26.22 Page 1 of 4
MINUTES
REGULAR MEETING
City Council of the Town of Colma
Meeting Held Remotely via Zoom.us
Wednesday, February 23, 2022
7:00 PM
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE AND ROLL CALL
Mayor Helen Fisicaro called the meeting to order at 7:02 p.m.
Council Present –Mayor Helen Fisicaro, Vice Mayor Raquel Gonzalez, Council Members Joanne F. del Rosario, John Irish Goodwin and Diana Colvin were all present.
Staff Present – City Manager Brian Dossey, City Attorney Christopher Diaz, Administrative Services Director Pak Lin, Chief of Police John Munsey, Director of Public Works Brad Donohue, City Planner Farhad Mortazavi, Associate Planner Laurel Mathews, and City Clerk Caitlin Corley were in attendance.
The Mayor announced, “Welcome to another of our completely remote Council Meeting. As always, we are accepting public comments through email or the zoom chat function— you can email our City Clerk at [email protected] or use the chat function to let her know which item you would like to speak on. Please keep your comments to 3 minutes or less.
Thank you.”
ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA
Mayor Fisicaro asked if there were any changes to the agenda; none were requested. She asked for a motion to adopt the agenda.
A
ction: Council Member Goodwin moved to adopt the agenda; the motion was seconded by Vice Mayor Gonzalez and carried by the following vote:
Name Voting Present, Not Voting Absent
Aye No Abstain Not Participating
Helen Fisicaro, Mayor
Raquel Gonzalez
Joanne F. del Rosario
John Irish Goodwin
Diana Colvin
5 0
PRESENTATION
• The Mayor presented a Proclamation in Honor of Black History Month highlighting the Domini Hoskins Black History Museum & Learning Center, a mobile museum hosted in Redwood City for the month of February.
Item #1
Minutes – Regular Meeting 02.26.22 Page 2 of 4
PUBLIC COMMENTS
Mayor Fisicaro opened the public comment period at 7:07 p.m. and seeing no one come forward to speak, she closed the public comment period.
CONSENT CALENDAR
1. Motion to Accept the Minutes from the February 9, 2022 Special Meeting.
2. Motion to Adopt a Resolution Authorizing Closing Out Mission Road Bicycle & Pedestrian Improvement Project (CIP #903) and Adding Mission Road Landscaping Enhancements Project (CIP #908) and Mission Road Crosswalk Project (CIP #909) to the FY 2021-22 Capital Improvement Program.
Action: Council Member Colvin moved to approve the consent calendar items #1 and 2; the motion was seconded by Council Member del Rosario and carried by the following vote:
Name Voting Present, Not Voting Absent
Aye No Abstain Not Participating
Helen Fisicaro, Mayor
Raquel Gonzalez
Joanne F. del Rosario
John Irish Goodwin Item #2 only
Diana Colvin
5 0
NEW BUSINESS
3. FY 2020-21 AUDITED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND REPORTS
Administrative Services Director Pak Lin and Auditor Michael O’Connor presented the staff report. Mayor Fisicaro opened the public comment period at 7:14 p.m. and seeing no one request to speak she closed the public comment period. Council discussion followed.
Action: Council Member Goodwin moved to Adopt a Resolution Accepting Auditor’s Reports and Financial Statements for the Fiscal Year Ending June 30, 2021; the motion was seconded by Council Member del Rosario and carried by the following vote:
Name Voting Present, Not Voting Absent
Aye No Abstain Not Participating
Helen Fisicaro, Mayor
Raquel Gonzalez
Joanne F. del Rosario
John Irish Goodwin
Diana Colvin
5 0
Minutes – Regular Meeting 02.26.22 Page 3 of 4
4. FY 2021-22 MID-YEAR FINANCIAL UPDATE & BUDGET AMENDMENT Administrative Services Director Pak Lin presented the staff report. Mayor Fisicaro opened the public comment period at 7:27 p.m. and seeing no one come forward to speak, she closed the public comment period. Council discussion followed.
Action: Council Member del Rosario moved to Accept the Fiscal Year 2021-22 Mid-Year Financial Report Through December 31, 2021 and Authorizing a Copy to be Posted on the Town’s Website; the motion was seconded by Vice Mayor Gonzalez and carried by the following vote:
Name Voting Present, Not Voting Absent
Aye No Abstain Not Participating
Helen Fisicaro, Mayor
Raquel Gonzalez
Joanne F. del Rosario
John Irish Goodwin
Diana Colvin
3 0
STUDY SESSION
5. PUBLIC ART IN COLMA
Associate Planner Laurel Mathews presented the staff report. Mayor Fisicaro opened the public comment period at 7:45 p.m. and seeing no one come forward to speak, she closed the public comment period. Council discussion followed.
This item was for discussion only; no action was taken at this meeting.
6. NEW LAWS IN 2022
City Attorney Christopher Diaz presented the staff report. Mayor Fisicaro opened the public comment period at 8:33 p.m. and seeing no one come forward to speak, she closed the public comment period. Council discussion followed.
This item was for discussion only; no action was taken at this meeting.
COUNCIL CALENDARING
The next City Council Meeting will be on Wednesday, March 9, 2022 at 7:00 p.m.
REPORTS
City Manager Brian Dossey gave an update on the following topics:
There will be AB 1234 Conflict of Interest training on April 21, 2022 from 3:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m.
The Mayor Chamber Walk will take place on Thursday, March 3; the Mayor and staff, along with representatives from the Chamber of Commerce, will visit businesses along Mission Road.
Minutes – Regular Meeting 02.26.22 Page 4 of 4
The new Business Directory is live on the Town’s website and a new issue of the business newsletter Colma Works has been published.
ADJOURNMENT
Before closing the meeting, Mayor Fisicaro expressed concern and empathy for the people of Ukraine and the hope of a quick and peaceful resolution to the current conflict. Mayor Fisicaro adjourned the meeting at 8:39 p.m. in memory of Aubrey Phillips, Dublin Police Deputy who suffered a medical emergency while on patrol; Nicholas Vella, Huntington Beach Police Officer who died in a helicopter crash while responding to a call for service; and Dolores Foppiano, cousin of Former Mayor Dennis Fisicaro, member of the Holy Angels Golden Years Club and great supporter of the Colma Historical Museum.
Respectfully submitted,
Caitlin Corley
City Clerk
Item #2
Staff Report Motion to Reconfirm Findings Under Resolution No. 2021-33 and AB 361 Page 1 of 3
STAFF REPORT
T
O: Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Christopher J. Diaz, City Attorney
VIA: Brian Dossey, City Manager
MEETING DATE: March 9, 2022
SUBJECT: Motion to Reconfirm Findings and Determinations Under Resolution No. 2021-33 and Assembly Bill 361 for the Continuation of Virtual Meetings
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the City Council make the following motion:
MOTION TO RECONFIRM FINDINGS AND DETERMINATIONS UNDER RESOLUTION NO. 2021-33 AND ASSEMBLY BILL 361 FOR THE CONTINUATION OF VIRTUAL MEETINGS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
On March 17, 2020, in the face of the COVID -19 pandemic, Governor Gavin Newsom issued Executive Order N -29-20 suspending certain provisions of the Ralph M. Brown Act in order to allow for local legislative bodies to conduct their meetings completely teleph onically or by other electronic means.
The provisions in the Brown Act that were suspended by the Governor’s Executive Order are contained at Government Code Section 54953(b)(3) and require that when teleconferencing is used, outside of a statewide emergency, that the following occur:
• An agenda is required to be posted at all locations, including any teleconference locations • Each teleconference location must be identified on the actual agenda • Each teleconference location shall be accessible to the public • A quorum of the legislative body must be in the jurisdiction With the Governor’s Executive Order, the four above requirements were suspended allowing councilmembers to not have to post an agenda at their teleconference location, not have to identify their location on the meeting agenda, not have to ensure public accessibility at the teleconference location, and the legislative body did not need a quorum in the jurisdiction. As the Item #3
Staff Report Motion to Reconfirm Findings Under Resolution No. 2021-33 and AB 361 Page 2 of 3 City Council is well aware, this allowed City Council meetings to be conducted by Zoom with councilmembers, staff, and the public, all joining from remote virtual locations.
The suspension of certain provisions of the Brown Act was further extended by the Governor on June 11, 2021 by the issuance of Executive Order N-08-21 which continued to allow for complete virtual meetings until September 30, 2021.
With the expiration of the Governor’s Executive Order along with the uncertainty that surrounded the Governor’s potential recall, the State Legislature also took the remote meeting issue into its own hands through the adoption of Assembly Bill 361, which is explained more in depth in the Analysis section below.
On October 13, 2021 the City Council adopted Resolution No.2021-33 making findings under AB 361 that state or local officials continue to recommend social distancing measures to prevent the spread of COVID -19 and including reference in particular to Cal -OSHA regulation 3205, which recommends physical distancing in the workplace. By motion and majority vote, the City Council may renew the findings of Resolution No. 2021-33 to continue to hold virtual meetings pursuant to AB 361.
ANALYSIS
On September 16, 2021, the Governor signed AB 361, which allows legislative bodies to meet virtually provided there is a state of emergency declared by the Governor, and either:
(1) state or local officials have imposed or recommended measures to promote social distancing; or
(2) the legislative body determines by majority vote that meeting in person would present imminent risks to the health and safety of attendees.
The Governor by executive order signed on September 20, 2021, suspended the effective date of AB 361 to October 1, 2021. As a result, if the City desires to have virtual meetings on or after October 1, 2021, it must do so consistent with the requirements of AB 361.
AB 361 preserves many of the provisions of the earlier executive orders, including the suspension of the four teleconferencing requirements noted above, while also adding new requirements to the management of rem ote and teleconference public meetings in order to better achieve the levels of transparency that the Brown Act demands. Specifically, AB 361 imposes two new rules on remote public meetings:
1. Local governments and agencies hosting teleconference meetings in lieu of traditional in- person public meetings must permit direct public comment during the teleconference, and must leave open the opportunity for public comment until the comment period for a given item is closed during the ordinary course of the meeting. The opportunity to make public comment must be of a sufficient duration so as to allow actual public participation.
2. Any action by the governing body during a public teleconference meeting must occur while the agency is actively and successfully broadcasting to members of the public through a call-in option or an internet -based service option. If a technical disruption within the Staff Report Motion to Reconfirm Findings Under Resolution No. 2021-33 and AB 361 Page 3 of 3 agency’s control prevents members of the public from either viewing the meeting of the public agency, or prevents members of the public from offering public comment, the agency must cease all action on the meeting agenda until the disruption ends and the broadcast is restored. Action taken during an agency-caused disruption may be challenged as a violation of the Brown Act.
In order to continue to qualify for AB 361’s waiver of in-person meeting requirements, the City Council must, within thirty (30) days of its first meeting under AB 361, and every thirty (30) days thereafter, make findings that (a) state or local officials continue to recommend measures to promote social distancing, or that (b) an in-person meeting would constitute an imminent risk to the safety of attendees.
The above conditions continue to exist at this time, and staff recommends the City Council by motion reconfirm the findings and determinations made in Resolution No. 2021-33 so that the City Council may continue to meet virtually under AB 361.
Lastly, it is important to note that AB 361 is option al. If the City Council wishes, it may meet in person. In addition, hybrid meetings are permissible where Council attends in person and the public attends remotely via Zoom.
FISCAL IMPACT
The City Council’s motion to continue with virtual meetings will maintain the status quo and no financial impact is anticipated.
ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES
The City Council’s approval of a motion to reconfirm findings does not constitute a project under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guideline 15378(b)(5) as it constitutes an organizational or administrative activity of the government that will not result in direct or indirect physical changes in the environment. Further, virtual meetings are likely to reduce certain impacts associated with vehicular travel related to in-person public meetings.
ATTACHMENTS:
None
RECOMMENDATION
Move to reconfirm the findings and determinations made in Resolution No. 2021- 33 and under Assembly Bill 361 for the continuation of virtual meetings.
25977.00100\34888557.1
Staff Report – Sher Edling LLP Legal Services Agreement Page 1 of 2
STAFF REPORT
T
O: Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Christopher J. Diaz, City Attorney
VIA: Brian Dossey, City Manager
MEETING DATE: March 9, 2022
SUBJECT: Approval of Legal Services Agreement For Potential Representation in PCB Litigation
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the City Council adopt the following:
RESOLUTION APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE A
LEGAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH SHER EDLING LLP TO EXPLORE LITIGATION
OPTIONS ON A CONTINGENCY FEE BASIS FOR REPRESENTATION IN PCB LITIGATION
ANALYSIS
Under the Clean Water Act and related regulations, municipalities in San Mateo County are required to remove PCBs from storm water discharged into the San Francisco Bay. PCB removal is costly. Based on the 2019 -2020 annual report submitted by the City/County Association of Governments (C/CAG), the total cost for PCB compliance over the next 60 years is approximately $2,111,625,935. The county and all cities and towns share that cost, with the exception of Pacifica and Half Moon Bay, which do not drain to the Bay.
T
here is currently a class set tlement pending which would provide $ 100,008 to the Town in exchange for a waiver of all PCB -related storm water claims. At this time, we are asking the City Council to approve and authorize a legal services agreement with Sher Edling LLP on a contingency fee basis to explore litigation options related to the pending class settlement.
FISCAL IMPACT
The City Council’s approval and authorization for the City Manager to enter into a legal services agreement is not anticipated to cause any financial impact on the Town as the arrangement will be on a contingency fee basis. Thus, if the City Council files any litigation and monetarily recovers, the law firm of Sher Edling LLP will be paid on that basis. Otherwise, no Town funds will be expended other than staff time in working with Sher Edling LLP.
ENVIRONMENTAL
The City Council’s action to adopt a resolution to approve and authorize the City Manager to enter into a legal services agreement is not a project subject to the California Environmental Item #4
25977.00100\34888557.1
Staff Report – Sher Edling LLP Legal Services Agreement Page 2 of 2
Quality Act as it can be seen with certainty that the action will not have a significant effect on the environment pursuant to CEQA Guideline 15061(b)(3).
Council Adopted Values
The City Council’s adoption of the resolution is visionary as it is looking to the future in terms of anticipated PCB clean-up costs and it will allow for the Town to explore legal options in meeting those future costs.
Sustainability Impact
The City Council’s action in adopting the resolution may have a net positive environmental impact as it will ensure the Town can meet future PCB clean-up costs regarding the San Francisco Bay.
Alternatives
The City Council could choose to not adopt the resolution approving and authorizing the City Manager to execute the legal services agreement. Doing so is not recommended, however, as the agreement will allow the law firm of Sher Edling to wor k with the Town to explore options with regard to the class settlement which could have financial advantages for the Town in relation to the amount to be paid in the pending class settlement.
CONCLUSION
Staff recommends that the City Council adopt the resolution to approve and authorize the City Manager to execute a legal services agreement with Sher Edling LLP.
ATTACHMENTS
A. Resolution
25977.00100\34888629.1
Res. 2022-__ - Sher Edling LLP Legal Services Agreement Page 1 of 2
RESOLUTION NO. 2022-__
OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF COLMA
RESOLUTION APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO
EXECUTE A LEGAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH SHER EDLING LLP TO
EXPLORE LITIGATION OPTIONS ON A CONTINGENCY FEE BASIS FOR
REPRESENTATION IN PCB LITIGATION
The City Council of the Town of Colma does hereby resolve:
1. Background.
(a) Under the Clean Water Act and related regulations, municipalities in San Mateo County are required to remove PCBs from storm water discharged into the San Francisco Bay. (b) PCB removal is costly. Based on the 2019- 2020 annual report submitted b y the City/County Association of Governments (C/CAG), the total cost for PCB compliance over the next 60 years is approximately $2,111,625,935.
(c) There is currently a class settlement pending which would provide $100,008 to the Town in exchange for a waiver of all PCB-related storm water claims. (d) At this time, staff is recommending that the City Council approve and authorize the City Manager to execute a legal services agreement with Sher Edling LLP on a contingency fee basis to explore litigation options related to the pending class settlement.
2. Findings. The City Council finds that approval of this legal services agreement:
(a) Constitutes professional services for which competitive bidding is not required pursuant to Colma Municipal Code Section 1.06.200; and/or
(b) Is deemed to be in the best interest of the To wn pursuant to Colma Municipal Code Section 1.06.180(o) based on the fact that Sher Edling LLP is working with the County of San Mateo and others in the County to explore litigation options and it is to the Town’s advantage to work cooperatively with all other entities in the County.
3. Order.
(a) The legal services agreement between the Town of Colma and Sher Edling LLP is approved by the C ity Council of the Town of Colma to be in a form approved by the City Attorney.
(b) The City Manager is authorized to execute s aid agreement on behalf of the Town of Colma, with such technical amendments as may be deemed appropriate by the City Attorney. //
//
Attachment A
25977.00100\34888629.1
Res. 2022-__ - Sher Edling LLP Legal Services Agreement Page 2 of 2
Certification of Adoption
I certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 2022- __ was duly adopted at a regular meeting of said City Council held on March 9, 2022 by the following vote:
Name Voting Present, Not Voting Absent
Ay e No Abstain Not Participating
Helen Fisicaro, Mayor
Raquel “Rae” Gonzalez
Diana Colvin
Joanne F. del Rosario
John Irish Goodwin
Voting Tally
D
ated ______________________ ___________________________________ Helen Fisicaro, Mayor
At
test: ____________________________
Caitlin Corley, City Clerk
Staff Report - Prop. 68 Per Capital Grant Program Page 1 of 2
STAFF REPORT
TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Brad Donohue, Director of Public Works
VIA: Brian Dossey, City Manager
MEETING DATE: March 9, 2022
SUBJECT: Proposition 68 Per Capita Grant Program
R
ECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the City Council adopt the following:
RESOLUTION OF THE TOWN OF COLMA APPROVING APPLICATION(S) FOR PER CAPITA
GRANT FUNDS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Proposition 68 was approved by California voters on June 5, 2018. The proposition included funding for local park rehabilitation, creation, and improvement grants for local governments, including California cities and counties, on a per capita basis. The program is administered by the State Department of Parks and Recreation’s Office of Grants and Local Services (OGALS), and $185,000,000 in per capita funding is available. The Town of Colma is eligible for $177,952.00 in General Per Capita allocation and $922.00 in Urban County Per Capita funds for a total Prop 68 allocation of $178,874.00
Staff recommends that City Council adopt a resolution authorizing staff to file an application for the Town’s Per Capita Grant Funds from the State Department of Parks and Recreation and authorize the City Manager as the Town’s designated representative.
F
ISCAL IMPACT
The Town’s Proposition 68 grant allocation amount is $178,874.00. Upon receipt of grant award approval, the funds received from the State will be allocated to the Town’s Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) Fund . As part of the program’s criteria the Town’s commitment is a required 20% funding match.
BA
CKGROUND
The California Department of Parks and Recreation’s Per Capita Program originates from Proposition 68, the California Drought, Water, Parks, Climate, Coastal Protection, and Outdoor Item #5
Staff Report - Prop. 68 Per Capital Grant Program Page 2 of 2 Access for All Act of 2018, placed on the ballot and approved by voters on June 5, 2018. The Per Capita Program provides funds from two programs: the General Per Capita Program and the Urban County Per Capita Program. The Town is eligible to receive funds under both Per Capita Programs.
T
he current round, labelled the General Per Capita Program, makes $185 million in funding available to local municipalities for local park rehabilitation, improvement, and creation. Also, the Town qualifies for additional funds through the Urban County Per Capita fund which is also part or the Proposition Parks and Water Bond of 2018. The Town’s per capita allocation is based on population size, which is an allocation of $178,874.00 . These funds will be made available for the Town’s various recreation improvement or enhancement projects.
AN
ALYSIS
As part of the grant application, the Town is required to submit a Resolution from the City Council (Attachment “A”). In accordance with the Per Capita Program Procedural Guide, the Resolution serves two purposes:
• It is the means by which the City Council agrees to the terms of the contract, including confirmation that the Town has the funding to complete, operate, and maintain projects associated with the contract; and
• It designates a position title , (City Manager) to represent the City Council on all matters regarding projects associated with the contract.
The Town of Colma’s grant application to the California Department of Parks and Recreation will request that the Town’s funding allocation of $178,874.00 is applied toward recreation and park improvements and enhancements . Since the Town is not l ocated in a severely disadvantaged community a 20% funding match will be required as part of the program’s criteria.
Council Adopted Values
The City Council’s action in authorizing staff to file an application to the California Department of Parks and Recreation Office and Local Services for the Town’s share of the Proposition 68 Per Capita Grant Funds is fiscally responsible. The use of these funds will provide needed enhancements to various park projects in Town and will provide relief to the Towns general fund for these expenditures.
CO
NCLUSION
Staff recommends that City Council adopt a resolution approving an application for per capita grant funds from the State Department of Parks and Recreation; and designate authority to the City Manager, or designee to serve as the Town’s authorized representative.
A
TTACHMENTS
A. Re
solution
Reso 2022-___ Per Capita Grant Funds Page 1 of 3
RESOLUTION 2022-____
OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF COLMA
RESOLUTION OF THE TOWN OF COLMA APPROVING APPLICATION(S)
FOR PER CAPITA GRANT FUNDS
The City Council of the Town of Colma does resolve as follows.
1. Background.
(a) The State Department of Parks and Recreation has been delegated the responsibility by the Legislature of the State of California for the administration of the Per Capita Grant Program, setting up necessary procedures governing application(s); and (b) Said procedures est ablished by the State Department of Parks and Recreation require the grantee’s Governing Body to certify by resolution the approval of project application(s) before submission of said applications to the State; and (c) The grantee will enter into a contract(s) with the State of California to complete project(s);
2. Findings and Order
The City Council hereby approves the filing of project application(s) for Per Capita program grant project(s); and
(a) Certifies that said grantee has or will have availab le, prior to commencement of project work utilizing Per Capita funding, sufficient funds to complete the project(s); and (b) Certifies that the grantee has or will have sufficient funds to operate and maintain the project(s), and
(c) Certifies that all projects proposed will be consistent with the Town of Colma General Plan (PRC §80063(a)), and
(d) Certifies that these funds will be used to supplement, not supplant, local revenues in existence as of June 5, 2018 (PRC §80062(d)), and
(e) Certifies that it will comply with the provisions of §1771.5 of the State Labor Code, and
(f) (PRC §80001(b)(8)(A- G)) To the extent practicable, as identified in the “Presidential Memorandum--Promoting Diversity and Inclusion in Our National Parks, National Forests, and Other Public Lands and Waters,” dated January 12, 2017, the Town of Colma will consider a range of actions that include, but are not limited to, the following:
(1) Conducting active outreach to diverse populations, particularly minority, low-income, and disabled populations and tribal communities, to increase awareness within those communities and the public generally about specific programs and opportunities. (2) Mentoring new environmental, outdoor recreation, and conservation leaders to increase diverse representation across these areas.
Attachment A
Reso 2022-___ Per Capita Grant Funds Page 2 of 3
(3) Creating new partnerships with state, local, tribal, private, and nonprofit organizations to expand access for diverse populations. (4) Identifying and implementing improvements to existing programs to increase visitation and access by diverse populations, particularly minority, low- income, and disabled populations and tribal communities.
(5) Expanding the use of multilingual and culturally appropriate materials in public communications and educational strategies, including through social media strategies, as appropriate, that target diverse populations.
(6) Developing or expanding coordinated efforts to promote youth engagement and empowerment, including fostering new partnerships with diversity-serving and youth-serving organizations, urban areas, and programs. (7) Identifying possible staff liaisons to diverse populations. (g) Agrees that to the extent practicable, the project(s) will provide workforce education and training, contractor and job opportunities for disadvantaged communities ( PRC §80001(b)(5)).
(h) Certifies that the grantee shall not reduce the amount of funding otherwise available to be spent on parks or other projects eligible for funds under this division in its jurisdiction. A one -time allocation of other funding that has been expended for parks or other projects, but which is not available on an ongoing basis, shall not be considered when calculating a recipient’s annual expenditures. (PRC §80062(d)).
(i) Certifies that the grantee has reviewed, understands, and agrees to the General Provisions contained in the contract shown in the Procedural Guide; and (j) Delegates the authority to the City Manager, or designee , to conduct all negotiations, sign and submit all documents, including, but not limited to applications, agreements, amendments, and payment requests, which may be necessary for the completion of the grant scope(s); and
(k) Agrees to comply with all applicable federal, state and local laws, ordinances, rules, regulations and guidelines.
//
//
//
//
//
Reso 2022-___ Per Capita Grant Funds Page 3 of 3
Certification of Adoption
I certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 2022- ___ was duly adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the Town of Colma held on March 9, 2022, by the following vote:
N
ame Voting Present, Not Voting Absent
Ay e No Abstain Not Participating
Helen Fisicaro, Mayor
Diana Colvin
John Irish Goodwin
Raquel “Rae” Gonzalez
Joanne F. del Rosario
Voting Tally
D
ated ______________________ ___________________________________ Helen Fisicaro, Mayor
At
test: ____________________________
Caitlin Corley, City Clerk
Sanitary Sewer Enterprise Fund – Study Session 2 Page 1 of 3 March 9, 2022
STAFF REPORT
T
O: Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Brad Donohue, Director of Public Works
Cyrus Kianpour, City Engineer
VIA: Brian Dossey, City Manager
MEETING DATE: March 9, 2022
SUBJECT: Sanitary Sewer Enterprise Fund Rate Study Session #02
RECOMMENDATION
The main purpose of the Study Session is to provide preliminary analysis data and rate scenarios for City Council consideration with regards to shifting the true cost of the maintenance, operation, and capital improvement needs of the Town’s annual sewer system currently funded from the general fund to the rate payers. No City Council action will take place at this meeting; however, Bartle Wells (Consultant) will be presenting regarding questions, comments and concerns that came from the City Council on the Town’s first sanitary sewer rate study. Staff and Consultant will be seeking comments, questions, and feedback from the City Council during the study session for further refinement of the sewer rate scenarios.
E
XECUTIVE SUMMARY
St
aff presented at the January 12th study session with City Council first steps in establishing viable sewer rates for the Town of Colma’s Sewer Enterprise fund. Sewer rate options along with revenue strategies were reviewed and commented on, City Council did request that Staff and Consultant come back at a future meeting to review, viable sewer rate options that reflected what those costs may mean to both residential and commercial communities.
T
he second study session’s focus will be to capsulize what was gone over in the previous study session, it’s outcomes and City Council’s request to have staff and consultant come back with detailed information as it relates to costs on the various sewer rate options.
F
ISCAL IMPACT
None
BACKGROUND
The City Council held its first Sanitary Sewer Enterprise Fund rate study on January 12, 2022.
The study session gave a brief orientation of the two sewer agencies, South San Francisco, Item #6
Sanitary Sewer Enterprise Fund – Study Session 2 Page 2 of 3 March 9, 2022
(SSF) and North San Mateo Sanitation District, (Daly City) that the Town is in contract with to treat the Town’s sewer outflow. The past study session assessed current situations with the agencies, rates and services provided. The bulk of the presentation dissected what was involved with establishing a sewer rate, such as sewer treatment and conveyance costs (typically these are called treatment costs), operation and maintenance (O & M) costs and capital outlay costs, (typically these costs are called Collection costs or charges).
Because this was a first step in establishing what would be a viable sewer rate structure for the Town, staff was only able to give broad interpretation of what those rates would look like. City Council wanted more information, specifically for staff to bring back recommendations for one or more rate structure options to bring to an open public meeting for discussion. Specifically, City Council wanted to see:
• Rate structure options with proposed costs
• A phased in approach for collection costs and how would that work City Council also stated it would be preferable if the charges for sewer treatment for the residential and commercial properties that reside in either the Daly City District or those that reside in the SSF District do not change. In other words, whatever the current charge for treatment is, it would continue to be a pass through of costs to the property owner who is being served by one of two sewer districts. City Council did request that staff and consultant come back to City Council with true costs regarding collection charge for:
• Fixed rate- fixed monthly charges based on each customer’s water meter size with higher charges for larger meters based on meter capacity • Volumetric rate- rates typically vary based on customer type & wastewater strength
ANALYSIS
Tonight’s study session will address:
• Fixed and volumetric collection rate charges and how they relate to both residential and commercial properties.
• Show examples of what the new sewer charges would look like for residential property owner’s annual charges (Attachment A)
• Review various phased in approaches – offsetting the costs to the property owners. (Attachment B)
At the conclusion of the study session staff will ask for direction in regard to the public outreach meeting where staff and consultant will hold a public meeting for both residents and commercial property owners to comment on the proposed sewer rate options. At the conclusion of the public meeting, staff will gather those comments along with a staff recommendation and come back to City Council for an approved sewer rate so that we can engage in the Proposition 218 process to approve the Town’s new sanitary sewer rates.
Sanitary Sewer Enterprise Fund – Study Session 2 Page 3 of 3 March 9, 2022
COUNCIL VALUES
Based on the Town of Colma Code of Conduct, the City Council is conducting the establishing sanitary sewer rate process with honesty and integrity . Though it is difficult to increase rates, the City Council has shown integrity allowing the Town of Colma community an opportunity to participate in how the new sewer rates will be established.
CONCLUSION
Staff is seeking questions, comments, and suggestions regarding the Sewer Rate Study #02 so that staff and consultant can present to the public in an open meeting the various sewer rate options. Because this is a study session, no formal action is needed at this time.
City Council did have a preference that was to have residential properties on a fix collection charge and commercial properties on a collection volumetric rate charge.
ATTACHMENTS
A. Town of Colma Residential Charges Utilizing a Flat Rate for Collection B. Phase in Options for Collection System Rates
TOWN OF COLMA RESIDENTIAL CHARGES UTILIZING A FLAT RATE FOR COLLECTION (A) (B) (C) (D) E)
Water USE Current Current Proposed Current
Annual HCF Monthly Charge Annual Charge Monthly Charge Annual Charge NSMCSD-Daly City
lowest use* 1 4.14$ 91.80$ 19.97$ 205.74$ 25th Percentile 36 24.81$ 297.72$ 36.92$ 443.04$ Median 60 41.35$ 496.20$ 50.48$ 605.76$ Average 70 48.24$ 578.90$ 56.13$ 673.56$ 75th Percentile 93 64.09$ 769.11$ 69.13$ 829.50$ Max. user 522 359.75$ 4,316.94$ 311.51$ 3,738.12$ SSF Residents Flat Rate 61.58$ 738.96$ 78.16$ 937.92$ * NSMCSD has a minimum annual charge of $91.80
Note: 1 HCF is equal to 748 gallons
Attachment A
Phase in Options for
Collection System Rates
Phase-In Period Estimated Cost
Single-Family Home
No Phase In
Approach
$16.58* - $19.38**
per month
2 Year Plan $8.29* - $9.69** per
month each year
3 Year Plan $5.53* - $6.46** per
month each year
4 Year Plan $4.15* - $4.85** per
month each year
5 Year Plan $3.32* - $3.88** per
month each year
* Fl at rate charges
** Volumetric charges
Attachment B