Foster City City Council
May 16, 2022

Attachment 4

NOVEL CORONAVIRUS (COVID-19) RESPONSE PLAN SUMMARY
Last Update d: Wednes day, May 4 , 2022

OVERALL OBJECTIVE: To keep the community safe, reduce the risk of transmission, and help slow the spread novel Coronavirus (COVID -19)

OBJECTIVE ACTION ITEMS STATUS

TO MAINTAIN COMPLIANCE WITH PUBLIC

HEALTH ORDERS FROM THE COUNTY AND

STATE (SHELTER IN PLACE/STAY AT HOME)
Monitor the evolving COVID -19 situation and work closely with the County and neighboring jurisdictions
• Update Countywide Matrix with operational changes (Last Updated 03/18/20) • Participate in conference calls which includes Elected Officials, City Managers, City Attorneys, Public Safety (Daily Until 03/25/20; Monday, Wednesday, Friday Until 05/18/20; Wednesday & Friday Until 06/24 /20; Wednesday Until 10/21/20; Transitioned to Every 2 Wednesdays Until 06/09/21, Ending Thereafter) • Participate in Special Briefings which includes Elected Officials, City Managers, and Public Safety as needed (01/13/22)
• Nexus with City Attorney/County Counsel for Guidance (As Needed) • Update 211 Bay Area (a program of United Way Bay Area) with City Updates Ongoing
Work in alignment with SMC Fire (Member Agencies) to coordinate response • Proclamation of Local Emergency (City Manager/Director of Emergency Services Proclaimed on 03/16/20; City Council Ratified on 03/18/20 ; Extended on 04/06/20 , 06/01/20, 07/20/20, 09/08/20, 11/02/20, 01/04/21, 03/01/21, 05/17/21, 07/19/21 , 09/20/21, 11/15/21, 12/13/21, 01/18/22, 2/22/22, 3/21/22, and 4/18/22 • Joint, Multiagency Emergency Operation Center (Activated on 03/16/20; Transitioned from Assigned Foster City Liaison to Multiple Staffed Positions; Transitioned to Virtual EOC on 05/11/20; Closed EOC on 05/29/20)
o Daily Emergency Action Plan (EAP) prepared and distributed by EOC o Daily Situation Status Report (SIT STAT) created and distributed by EOC Ongoing
Implement adjustments to City services and operations in response to Public Health Orders Ongoing 181

• Order No. c19-2, dated March 12, 2020
o Cancelled all non-essential meetings, events, and large gatherings through month of March
o Issued refunds for voluntary cancellations
o No longer accepted new facility reservation requests
o Implemented social distancin g measures for any upcoming, essential meetings
o Restricted non-essential travel for all employees
o Encouraged public to utilize City services available online, over-the -phone, and/or email
• Order No. c19-5, dated March 16, 2020
o City Facilities Closure through April 7, 2020, including park amenities such a playgrounds, restrooms, fenced/gated facilities
o Transitioned all future City Council and Planning Commission meetings to be conducted via teleconference/video conference
o Cancelled all classes and programs through April 7, 2020 o Transitioned employees to telework/remote
• Order No. c19-5b (Revised), dated March 31, 2020
o City Facilities Closure through May 3, 2020, including park amenities such a playgrounds, restrooms, fenced/gated facilities
o Extended limitations to recreational activity spaces, with only park pathways and open green space (nonathletic fields) remaining opening o Cancelled all non-essential meetings and events through May 3, 2020 o Issued stop work orders to cease all non -essential construction activity immediately
o Posted required Social Distancing Protocol and Signage • Health Recommendation (to Cover Face), dated April 2, 2020 o All essential workers on-site, in-field to follow same recommendations and be an example to the community by wearing appropriate coverings at all times • Order No. c19-8, dated April 17, 2020
o All employees to have face coverings at all times, when working with others and in are as that are frequented by your co -workers, including hallways, restrooms, stairways, lunch and break rooms, and other shared spaces. • Order No. c19-5c (Revised), dated April 29, 2020
o City Facilities Closure through May 31, 2020, including park amenities such a playgrounds, restrooms, fenced/gated facilities
o Cancelled all non-essential meetings and events through May 31, 2020 o Construction, landscaping and gardening work allowed to resume 182

o Posted required, updated Social Distancing Protocol and Signage o Developing phased reopening of City facilities based on evaluation of easing of restrictions within Order
• Order No. c19-5d (Revised), dated May 15, 2020
o Developed phased reopening of City facilities based on evaluation of easing of restrictions within Order , with outlined protocols and best practices on preventative measures, site- specific changes, reconfigurations, screening, cleaning/disinfecting, communication & posting, etc.
o Outdoor facilities with high -touch equipment or that en courage gathering must remain closed to public access. Such facilities include playgrounds, gym equipment, climbing walls, picnic areas, dog parks, spas, and barbecue areas. o Removal of previous order’s limit on travel for recreational activities to within 10 miles from home
• Order No. c19-8b (Revised), dated May 19, 2020
o All members of the public and workers to wear face coverings at all times • Order No. c19-5e (Revised), dated May 28, 2020
o Additional activities allowed, including places of worship, retail, car parades, and protests
o Reopened four (4) pickleball and two (9) tennis courts; implementing reservation system and active monitoring by City staff
o Cancelled all non-essential meetings and events through June 30, 2020 o Reevaluated all major City special events (s uch as Fourth of July, Summer Concerts, and Summer Days) and proposed plans for events in virtual, modified formats
• Order No. c19-5f (Revised), dated June 4, 2020
o Additional activities allowed, including outdoor dining, charter boat operations, and funerals
o Reopened beach parks, boat docks, two (2) walking tracks, and parking lots of all (except one) park sites
o Developed visitor protocols to provide guidance on requirements and expectations of those seeking in-person services, with outlined protocols and best practices on preventative measures, self -health assessments, face covering and social distance requirements, capacity levels, etc. o More employees reintroduced into the workplace; implementation of appointment scheduling software to allow in- person services beginning June 15, 2020
• Order No. c19-11, dated June 17, 2020
183

o Limits gatherings to no more than 50 people, outlines social distancing and face covering requirements, allows for social bubbles of no more than 12, and requires businesses to imp lement a social distancing protocol and written health and safety plans
o Reopened all pickleball and tennis courts, as well as removed reservation system and active monitoring by City staff
o Reopened bocce ball courts and volleyball courts
o Reopened park restrooms at five (5) locations
o More employees to be reintroduced into the workplace; however reopening of all City facilities postponed until further notice
• County Added to State Monitoring List, July 29, 2020
o Shut down of certain industries or activities, unless modified to operate outside
o City temporarily suspends code enforcement actions against businesses such as salons/barbers, personal care services, gyms/fitness centers, and offices that are not currently permitted to provide outdoor operations o Skate park reopened on August 14, 2020
• County Ranked Purple in State’s New Color-Coded Reopening System, August 28, 2020 o Effective August 31, all retail and shopping centers can open at 25% capacity, and all hair salons and barbershops can resume indoor operations • County Ranked Red in State’s New Color -Coded Reopening System, September 22, 2020
o Restaurants indoors (max 25% capacity or 100 people, whichever is fewer) o All retail indoors (max 50% capacity)
o Shopping centers, swap meets indoors (max 50% capacity, closed common areas)
o Personal care services – hair and nail salons, barbershops (open with modifications)
o Museums, zoos and aquariums (max 25% capacity)
o Places of worship (max 25% capacity or 100 people, whichever is fewer) o Movie theaters in doors (max 25% capacity or 100 people) o Schools one step closer to reopening (only after two weeks in Tier 2/Red) • CA Department of Public Health New Guidance on Playgrounds and Outdoor Recreational Facilities, September 28, 2020
o Playgrounds, basketball courts, all park bathrooms, the Fitness Court, and the Skate Park to reopen, with restrictions, on October 8
o Parks staff preparing for reopening of amenities by sanitizing all playgrounds and removing fencing
184

• County Ranked Orange in State’s Color-Coded Reopening System, October 27, 2020 o Indoor family entertainment centers, outdoor bars and breweries not o serving food, indoor climbing walls and certain other businesses and activities to open with capacity restrictions
o Dine-in restaurants, movie theaters, places of worship and additional businesses can boost their indoor capacities as well
• Order No. c19-7c (Revised), dated October 29, 2020
o Updated orders for individuals who are close contacts of a positive case (for quarantine) or who have tested positive for COVID -19 (for isolation), along with instructions for home quarantine and home isolation o Specific rules applicable to health care workers and first responders • County Ranked Red in State’s Color-Coded Reopening System, November 17, 2020 o Restaurants indoors (max 25% capacity or 100 people, whichever is fewer) o All retail indoors (max 50% capacity)
o Shopping centers, swap meets indoors (max 50% capacity, closed common areas)
o Personal care services – hair and nail salons, barbershops (open with modifications)
o Museums, zoos and aquariums (max 25% capacity)
o Places of worship (max 25% capacity or 100 people, whichever is fewer) o Movie theaters in doors (max 25% capacity or 100 people, whichever is fewer) o Gyms and fitness centers indoors (max 10% capacity)
• County Ranked Purple in State’s Color-Coded Reopening System, November 29, 2020 and Limited Stay at Home Order, starting November 30, 2020 o Businesses and activities that may have been operating indoors – including places of worship, movie theaters, gyms and museums – must move outdoors or close.
o Shopping malls and all retail must operate at no more than 25 percent capacity.
o Prohibited resid ents from leaving their homes to gather with other households from 10 p.m. to 5 a.m.
• Regional Stay at Home Order, starting December 17, 2020 o Prohibits private gatherings of any size, except for outdoor church services and political demonstrations.
o Restaurants must stop offering in -person dining and can offer only take -out and delivery.
o Many businesses and activities must close, including salons and barbershops. o Retail can remain open at 20 percent capacity.
185

o Nonessential travel and the use of hotels or short -term rentals for leisure is banned.
• County Ranked Purple in State’s Color-Coded Reopening System, January 25, 2021 o Businesses and activities that may have been operating indoors – including places of worship, movie theaters, gyms and museums – must move outdoors or close.
o Shopping malls and all retail must operate at no more than 25 percent capacity.
• County Ranked Red in State’s Color-Coded Reopening System, February 24, 2021 o Restaurants indoors (max 25% capacity or 100 people, whichever is fewer) o All retail indoors (max 50% capacity)
o Shopping centers, swap meets indoors (max 50% capacity, closed common areas)
o Personal care services – hair and nail salons, barbershops (open with modifications)
o Museums, zoos and aquariums (max 25% capacity)
o Places of worship (max 25% capacity or 100 people, whichever is fewer) o Movie theaters in doors (max 25% capacity or 100 people, whichever is fewer) o Gyms and fitness centers indoors (max 10% capacity)
• County Ranked Orange in State’s Color-Coded Reopening System, March 17, 2021 o Restaurants indoors (max 50% capacity or 200 people, whichever is fewer) o All retail/shopping indoors (open with modifications, closed common areas and reduced capacity in food courts)
o Museums, zoos and aquariums (max 50% capacity)
o Places of worship (max 50% capacity or 200 people, whichever is fewer) o Movie theaters indoors (open with modifications)
o Gyms and fitness centers indoors (max 25% capacity, indoor pools and climbing walls open)
• CA Department of Public Health New Guidance on Travel, April 2, 2021 o CDPH and the CDC recommend delaying travel until persons are fully vaccinated. Fully vaccinated travelers should follow CDC travel guidance and are not required to test or quarantine before or after travel unless they have symptoms concerning for COVID-19 disease.
• Governor Gavin Newsom outlines the State’s next step in the COVID- 19 pandemic recovery, moving beyond the Blueprint for a Safer Economy, and announces that on June 15, California will fully reopen if criteria are met. • CA Department of Public Health New Guidance on Gatherings and Live Events, April 15, 2021
186

o For the Orange Tier starting on April 15, outdoor gathering size increases to 50 people.
o For private events or meetings such as receptions or conferences, outdoor gatherings are limited to 100 people.
o Indoor live events or performances are allowed with capacity limits and modifications including physical distancing, advance ticket purchases, designated areas for eating and drinking, and attendance limited to in -state visitors.
• CA Department of Public Health New Guidance on Use of Face Coverings, May 3, 2021 o For fully vaccinated persons, face coverings are not required outdoors except when attending crowded outdoor events, such as live performances, parades, fairs, festivals, sports events, or other similar settings. o For unvaccinated persons, face coverings are required outdoors any time physical distancing cannot be maintained, including when attending crowded outdoor events, such as live performances, parades, fairs, festivals, sports events, or other similar settings.
o In indoor settings outside of one's home, including public transportation, face coverings continue to be required regardless of vaccination status, except as outlined below.
• County Ranked Yellow in State’s Color-Coded Reopening System, May 12, 2021 o Allows expanded capacity at restaurants, gyms, movie theaters, indoor businesses and a host of other operations.
o Bars that do not serve food can reopen indoors with a maximum capacity of 25 percent or 100 people, whichever is fewer.
• California officially reopens and moves “ Beyond the Bluep rint,” which ends the the color-coded reopening tier systems and lifts most restrictions on businesses. The County of San Mateo fully aligns with all state COVID -19 health and safety guidelines and has no plans to impose separate guidance.
o Most County of San Mateo offices opened to the public on June 15, 2021. o City of Foster City reopens Council Chambers and begins hybrid in-person and virtual City Council meetings on July 19, 2021.
o City of Foster City reopens City Hall to general public for walk -ins during regular business hours from 8:00 AM-5:00 PM, Monday to Friday, on July 26, 2021.
o City of Foster City reopens Recreation Center and begins offering indoor programs again on August 9, 2021.
• Order No. c19-12, dated August 3, 2021
187

o Directs that face coverings shall be worn, regardless of vaccination status, over the mouth and nose, in all indoor public settings, venues, gatherings, and workplaces, such as, but not limited to: offices, retail stores, restaurants and bars, theaters, family entertainment centers, conference centers and government offices serving the public.
• Governor Gavin Newsom signs Assembly Bill 361 on September 16, 2021, as the provisions of Executive Order No. N- 29-20 (as revised by Executive Order No. N -08- 21), which modifies the requirements for conduct ing meetings via teleconference during the COVID-19 pandemic, expires on September 30, 2021. • County Health issues criteria for lifting COVID -19 indoor masking requirements to allow organizations to set those requirements independently , when all of the following are achieved, October 7, 2021:
o The rate of COVID-19 transmission reaches the “moderate” or yellow tier and remains there for at least three weeks; AND
o The number of people hospitalized for COVID -19 is low and stable in the judgement of local health officials; AND
o The percent of the total population that is fully vaccinated – two doses of Pfizer or Moderna or one dose of Johnson & Johnson – reaches 80 percent OR eight weeks have passed since a COVID -19 vaccine has been authorized for emergency use by federal and state authorities for 5- to 11-year-olds. • CA Department of Public Health Statewide Mandate on Masks, December 15, 2021 o Requiring masks to be worn in all indoor public settings, irrespective of vaccine status, until February 15, 2022
• In alignment with the State, San Mateo County will rescind indoor mask requirements effective February 16, 2022 . Unvaccinated individuals will still be required to mask indoors. Everyone, regardless of vaccination status, will be required to mask indoors in high-risk settings, including public transportation, health care settings, congregate settings like correctional facilities and homeless shelters, long-term care facilities, and in K-12 schools and childcare settings.
o City of Foster City reopens Council Chambers and returns to hybrid in-person and virtual City Council meetings on March 7, 2022.
o Indoor masking, though strongly encouraged, is no longer required at City facilities effective March 14, 2022.
• On April 6, 2022, the C alifornia Department of Public Health updated i ts guidance so that masking is no longer required in schools, though strongly encouraged. • On April 18, Federal judge issues ruling that masks are no longer re quired on transportation conveyances and at transportation hubs.

188

OBJECTIVE ACTION ITEMS STATUS

TO P ROVIDE ESSENTIAL SERVICES AND

CONTINUITY OF CITY OPERATIONS WITH

MINIMAL DISRUPTION (TO EXTENT

POSSIBLE)
Implement Continuity of Operations/Government (COOP/COG) Plans • Identify essential services; includes public safety, water and wastewater, critical infrastructure maintenance, etc. (Detailed by Department in Separate Document) • Identify essential workers and establish staffing levels necessary to carry out essential functions (Detailed by Department in Separate Document) Ongoing; Changes
with Progress
Establish and coordinate COVID-19 Response Team
• Includes Department Heads and 1-2 Essential Employees from Each Department • Centralized Point of Contact with Joint, Multiagency Emergency Operations Center • Check-In Meetings (Transitioned from Weekly, to Biweekly, and to As Needed) • After Action Debrief Meeting on 06/24/20
Ongoing
Establish and coordinate COVID-19 Return to Work Taskforce • Organized by City Manager and Human Resources Departments, and Includes 1 -2 Employees from Each Department
• Developed ‘Employee Return to Work’ Policy as well as Visitor Policy & Protocols • Developed ‘Adaptable Work Schedule Program’
Ongoing

OBJECTIVE ACTION ITEMS STATUS

TO EFFECTIVELY COMMUNICATE,

EDUCATE, AND INFORM THE COMMUNITY
Provide reliable information to the community that is uniform and consistent with the County & State guidelines
• Participate in PIO conference calls
• Share information as released by County in an effort to centralize resources • Coordinate messaging with SMC Fire (Member Agencies) for consistency • Create landing page of COVID -19 general information on City website – https://www.fostercity.org/covid19
• Create landing page of COVID-19 available City services online and by appointment on City website – https://www.fostercity.org/citymanager/page/citywide-services • Create landing page of COVID -19 response/programs on City website – https://www.fostercity.org/citymanager/page/foster-city-covid-19-response • Create landing page of CO VID-19 business resources on City website – https://www.fostercity.org/citymanager/page/covid-19-business-resources • Enable alert on top header of City website with latest City update on COVID-19 • Enable spotlight on City website main page directing to COVID-19 landing page Ongoing
Provide messaging that increases public awareness of mandatory precautionary measures and available resources for the community
• Signage –
o City Facilities Closures – Posted at Building Entrances, Gated Park Facilities, Playgrounds, Bathrooms, etc.

Ongoing
189

o Electronic Board (for Social Distancing) – Placed on Levee Pedway o Chalk Markings (for Social Distancing) – 6 Feet Markers on Levee Pedway o Metal Signage (for Social Distancing) – Posted Along Levee Pedway o City Facilities Requirements – Face Coverings, Social Distancing Guidelines/Floor Markers, Limited Capacity in Common Spaces, etc. • FCTV Bulletin – Updated with COVID-19 Information
• Electronic Marquee – Updated with COVID-19 Information • Press Releases –
o March 11, 2020
o March 13, 2020
o March 15, 2020
o March 16, 2020
o April 3, 2020
o April 8, 2020
o April 22, 2020
o April 23, 2020
o April 30, 2020
o May 27, 2020
o June 3, 2020
o October 7, 2020
o June 2, 2021
o June 17, 2021
o July 16, 2021
o July 28, 2021
o October 28, 2021
o January 5, 2022
o February 18, 2022
o March 8, 2022
• Videos/Public Service Announcements –
o Letter from Mayor (Released 03/18/20)
o Video from Mayor (Released 03/26/20)
o Letter from Mayor (Released 03/31/20)
o Joint PSA with SMC Fire Member Agencies (Released on 04/10/20) o COVID-19 Relief Program (Released 05/14/20)
o Summer Safety Message from City Council (Released 06/04/20) o Congratulations to Class of 2020 (Released on 06/09/20) o Visit City Hall Online (Released 07/01/20)
o Submit Permits Online (Released 07/01/20)
190

o Wear a Mask (Released 08/11/20)
• E-Newsletter/Weekly City Update –
o March 26, 2020
o April 1, 2020
o April 10, 2020
o April 16, 2020
o April 23, 2020
o May 1, 2020
o May 7, 2020
o May 14, 2020
o May 21, 2020
o May 28, 2020
o June 4, 2020
o June 11, 2020
o June 18, 2020
o June 25, 2020
o July 1, 2020
o July 9, 2020
o July 16, 2020
o July 23, 2020
o July 30, 2020
o August 6, 2020
o August 13, 2020
o August 20, 2020
o August 27, 2020
o September 3, 2020
o September 10, 2020
o September 17, 2020
o September 24, 2020
o October 1, 2020
o October 8, 2020
o October 15, 2020
o October 22, 2020
o October 29, 2020
o November 5, 2020
o November 12, 2020
o November 19, 2020
o November 26, 2020
191

o December 3, 2020
o December 10, 2020
o December 16, 2020
o December 31, 2020
o January 7, 2021
o January 15, 2021
o January 21, 2021
o January 28, 2021
o February 4, 2021
o February 11, 2021
o February 18, 2021
o February 25, 2021
o March 4, 2021
o March 11, 2021
o March 18, 2021
o March 25, 2021
o April 1, 2021
o April 8, 2021
o April 15, 2021
o April 22, 2021
o April 29, 2021
o May 6, 2021
o May 13, 2021
o May 20, 2021
o May 27, 2021
o June 3, 2021
o June 10, 2021
o June 17, 2021
o June 24, 2021
o July 1, 2021
o July 8, 2021
o July 15, 2021
o July 22, 2021
o July 29, 2021
o August 5, 2021
o August 12, 2021
o August 19, 2021
o August 26, 2021
192

o September 2, 2021
o September 9, 2021
o September 16, 2021
o September 23, 2021
o September 30, 2021
o October 7, 2021
o October 14, 2021
o October 21, 2021
o October 28, 2021
o November 4, 2021
o November 10, 2021
o November 18, 2021
o November 24, 2021
o December 2, 2021
o December 9, 2021
o December 16, 2021
o December 22, 2021
o December 29, 2021
o January 13, 2022
o January 27, 2022
o February 10, 2022
o February 24, 2022
o March 10, 2022
o March 24, 2022
o April 14, 2022
o April 28, 2022
• Recology Billing Mailer –
o June: “We’re in this together, Foster City! Thank you for helping slow the spread of COVID-19. Practice social distancing of at least 6 feet, wear a face covering, and wash your hands frequently. Follow Foster City news and updates at www.fostercity.org/covid19.”
o August: Flyer – “It’s up to all of us, Foster City”
Participate in opportunities for community education whenever possible • City Manager provided COVID-19 update to Rotary Club on 03/25/20 (via Zoom) • Patrol Officers to educate public whenever responding to/enforcing violation reports • Police Chief to host Community Connect/FCPD Virtual Station Tour/Live Q&A event on 04/16/20 (via Facebook Live)
Ongoing
193

• City Manager and Mayor provided update to Foster City Village on 03/23/21 (via Zoom)
• Partnered with Congresswoman Speier to host a week-long “In America: Remember” exhibit honoring San Mateo County residents who died of COVID-19 from 11/07/21 to 11/14/21

OBJECTIVE ACTION ITEMS STATUS

TO SUPPORT NEEDS OF VULNERABLE/AT-

RISK POPULATIONS, MOBILIZING

COMMUNITY-BASED ORGANIZATIONS,

NON-PROFITS, AND PRIVATE SECTOR
Work in partnership with community-based organizations and/or non-profits to help support needs of at-risk populations
• Volunteers at-Large: Direct all volunteer inquiries to County for centralized deployment system – https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/WSXH6PZ • Senior Services:
o Rotary Club Senior Meals Program – Generally, first and third Tuesday of the month; however, suspended until further notice as they have a highly social aspect to them.
o Foster City Village – A ctively conducting Meals on Wheels (Mon day-Friday), providing transportation to urgent medical appointments, picking up prescriptions, and conducting their “We Care” program where FCV volunteers make phone calls to their members as a friendly, supportive check in o Foster City Village – City Council allocated $5,000 on 04/06/20 to help provide protective supply purchases, grocery b ag deliveries, food distributions, and gasoline cards for volunteer drivers. These measures will help with additional expenses incurred by the Village as they continue operations while protecting our seniors during the pandemic.
o Senior Shopping Hours – Foster City Safeway (Tuesdays and Thursdays from 6:00 AM-9:00 AM), Target at Bridgepointe (Tuesdays and Wednesdays from 8:00 AM-9:00 AM), Lucky Supermarkets (Tuesdays and Thursdays from 6:00 AM-9:00 AM), Costco (Tuesdays and Thursdays from 8:00 AM-9:00 AM), Ranch 99 (every weekday from 8:00 AM-9:00 AM), and Trader Joe's (daily from 9:00 AM-10:00 AM)
o Foster City Village – Comfort Care Meal Delivery Program for 20 Weeks (01/28/21 to 06/10/21) includes one weekly meal prepared by rotating Foster City restaurants and hand-delivered by volunteer cadre (including Foster City staff)
• Food Distribution:
o Second Harvest Food Bank – Pre-boxed meals distribution to take place the first and third Friday at 9:00 AM/9:30 AM at the Recreation Center parking lot, in a drive-up fashion
Ongoing
194

o SMFC School District Food Program – Free meal program, grab and go style breakfast and lunch meals, available for all kids and teens 18 and under at Foster City Elementary School. City Council approved allocation of $10,000 on 05/11/20 to help costs of expanding this program. [ENDED] o Great Plates Program – Delivering meals to older adults who are at heightened risk and are unable to obtain or prepare meals on their own while sheltering in place [ENDED]
o Impossible Market pilot program, not to exceed $5,000, to introduce food & grocery subscription subsidy for 100 financially-impacted Foster City families approved by City Council on 11/02/20 [DISCONTINUED]
• Students/Distance Learning:
o SMFC Education Foundation – City Council approved allocation of $10,000 to help supplement costs of hot spots and internet access to carry out distance learning programs.

Collaborate with the County, SAMCEDA, and Foster City Chamber of Commerce to understand impacts of COVID-19 on businesses and develop financial assistance programs that can offer immediate relief as needed
• Issued survey to businesses to better understand e conomic impacts of COVID -19 – https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/BXH6H86
• Built Business Resources Page on City website that includes latest updates – https://www.fostercity.org/citymanager/page/covid-19-business-resources • Built directory of businesses open/available for delivery or pick -up – https://local.fostercity.org/
• Help promote San Mateo County Strong Fund, donation f und to help residents, nonprofit organizations and small businesses – https://www.smcstrong.org/ • Evaluated U.S. Senate Bill S.3548 - Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act (CARES Act) and an informational report was provided to the City Council on 04/06/20. • Developed Small Businesses Resiliency Grant Program to support operations and help avert layoffs during the COVID-19 public health emergency. $500,000 (allocated for a grant of $10,000 per business for up to 50 businesses ) approved by City Council on 04/06/20.
• Expanded Support Local Foster City Campaign to provide vouchers through the Support Local Stamp Me app, allowing customers to get take-out during the shelter in place order. $25,000 (allocated for $10 vouchers to be offered to all Stamp Me users) approved by City Council on 04/06/20.
• Consider options for Moratorium on Commercial Evictions (TBD; County covers unincorporated areas only)
Ongoing
195

• Participated in Chamber of Commerce “Chamber Cares Initiative” Weekly Meeting re:

COVID-19 Impacts on Non-Profits 06/16/20
• Outdoor dining temporarily allowed for restaurants looking to provide outdoor dining service and suspend ed Code Enforcement a ctions approved by City Council on 07/06/20
• Prepared and distributed approximately (100) Rethink, Reopen, Restart Kits to storefront businesses in shopping centers to support reopening efforts • Outdoor services temporarily allowed for businesses such as salons/barbers, personal care services, gyms/fitness centers, and offices , and suspended Code Enforcement actions approved by City Council on 07/31/20
• Terms of a Revolving Business Loan Program (Approved by City Council on 09/28/20); Establishment of RBLP (Approved by City Council on 11/02/20, then decision to defer thereafter on 03/15/21)
• Analysis of waiving or deferring permit fees and business license fees for one year to prioritize commercial spaces for waiving of permit fees (Direction initially provided by City Council on 11/02/20, then decision to not pursue further thereafter on 03/15/21) • Expanded Support Local Foster City Campaign to provide vouchers through the Support Local Stamp Me app, allowing customers to get take-out during the shelter in place order. Additional $25,000 (allocated for $10 vouchers to be offered to all Stamp Me users) approved by City Council on 11/16/20.
• Helped promote Restaurant, Brewery & Winery Relief, relief f und to help small business impacted by the pandemic – https://www.smcstrong.org/restaurantrelief • Partnered with the Chamber of Commerce to distribute two surveys – Business Needs and Shopper Preferences, which was open between 03/11/21 -03/11/21; findings received and accepted by City Council on 04/19/21
• Small Business Assistance Plan presented to City Council on 05/17/21 and on 06/21/21 • Helped promote living!LOCAL Holiday Marketplace by Chamber of Commerce to highlight local goods and services, and benefitting both shoppers and family -run businesses – https://www.whimlocal.com/event/livinglocal/feed • Helped promote Microfood Business Grant Program to help microfood businesses that have not received assistance from the County COVID -19-relief programs in the past 12 months – https://www.smcstrong.org/archivedapplyforfunding Continue dialogue with hotels to understand impacts of COVID-19 on occupancy and consider use of hotels as alternative care facilities
• Connected Nathan Tsai (owner of Crowne Plaza and Towne Place Suites) with County Manager Mike Callagy regarding 650 rooms available
Ongoing
Address risks of homelessness and/or displacement Passed on 03/24/20;
196

• Countywide eviction moratorium ordinance; resolution adopting an Emergency Regulation, Pursuant to Section 8634 of the Government Code and Chapter 2.46 of the San Mateo County Ordinance Code, establishing a temporary, countywide moratorium on eviction for non -payment of rent by residential tenants directly impacted by the COVID -19 pandemic; extended through July 28 , 2020 by Board of Supervisors on 06/23/20
• Temporary countywide eviction moratorium for non-payment of rent by residential tenants directly impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic through August 31 and extended the time period in which delayed payments shall be made; amendment to Emergency Regulation approved by Board of Supervisors on 08/04/20 • Allocation of $1 million to the San Mateo County Emergency Financial Assistance Program (ERAP) and continued outreach for the state Emergency Rental Assistance Program to help residents impacted by COVID -19. Eligible applicants include renters/tenants those who have experienced financial hardship due to COVID -19, have past due rent or utilities, and have a household income that is not more than 80% of the area median income, as well as property owners/landlords with income - eligible renters. Approved by Board of Supervisors on 06/29/21 06/23/20;
08/04/20
Support mental wellness/wellbeing of the Foster City Community • Promote and expand on Virtual Recreation and Resource Center to keep community engaged and active – https://www.fostercity.org/parksrec/page/virtual-r ecreation- and-resource-center
• Promoted San Mateo County Psychological Association (SMCPA) Virtual Town Halls (04/05/20 and 04/09/20)
• Participated in ‘Thank You Event’ at San Mateo Medical Center with SMC Fire Member Agencies, Public Safety Personnel, City Staff, and Legislative Officials (05/04/20) Ongoing
Build out database for Countywide Community Evacuation Interface to support mass shelter in place and assist with information sharing – https://community.zonehaven.com/ • Assigned liaison to support data needs, provide resources, and update map Ongoing

OBJECTIVE ACTION ITEMS STATUS

TO FOSTER A SAFE WORKPLACE AND

ENABLE THE EMPLOYEE BASE TO

PERFORM
Scale workforce to essential functions only and transition employees to telework/remote to extent possible
• Distributed Teleworking Policy and Form to all employees (March 2020 and December 2020)
• Staffing levels/schedule established on a weekly/monthly basis (dependent on department)
Ongoing
197

• Provided regular updates to all employees via City Manager and Human Resources (issued 11 internal memos to -date) and Management Team Meeting (on 05/27/20) and All-Hands Meeting (on 05/28/20, 07/29/20, and 12/15/20) • Provided regular updates to City staff via bimont hly City Manager update “The Bulletin” (First and Third Fridays of Each Month); transitioning to monthly updates in 2021
• Shared information on Families First Coronavirus Response Act • Provided tools for all employees to effectively work remotely (with IT A ssistance); includes equipment issuance, tele/video conferencing tools such as Microsoft Teams and Zoom, and web -based Employee Resource Page –
https://www.fostercity.org/employees
• Established ‘Return t o Work Taskforce ’ and Developed ‘Employee Return to Work’ Policy
• Developed ‘Adaptable Work Schedule Program’
Ensure safety of front-line/essential personnel, i.e. first responders • Ensure personnel are equipped with PPE and are able to minimize in -person interactions whenever possible (reduced access to Police & Fire Departments, alternate teams/shifts, etc.)
• Provide accommodations for quarantining/isolation by coordinating with County EOC • Provide resources to COVID -19 testing if needed through https://verily.com/ or https://www.projectbaseline.com/study/covid-19/
• Provide childcare options for front -line/essential personnel, i.e. first res ponders – https://sanmateo4cs.org/
o Shared survey to gather information and better assess needs jurisdiction – https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/SMC_COVID19_childcare
• Implemented self-health assessment/screening requirement at entry points; including installation of thermal scanners at City Hall and Police Department • Posted required Social Distancing Protocol and Signage at City facility entrances and share information with all employees
• Informed all employees of Face Covering Requirement; providing supply of masks if necessary
• Departments coordinatin g with ‘Return to Work Taskforce’ for site- specific modifications/adaptations (including spacing and health/sneeze guards) ; as well as visitor safety protocols
• Acquired donation of ~5,000 cloth face coverings through U.S. Conference of Mayors ‘Masks for Mayors Initiative’
• Sanitation station/supplies set up in various locations throughout City facilities • Acquiring COVID-19 at-home/self-test kits through County for public safety personnel Ongoing
198

OBJECTIVE ACTION ITEMS STATUS

TO PROVIDE LONG -TERM STRATEGIC
PLANNING IN RESPONSE TO COVID -19

AND POTENTIAL IMPACTS TO CITY

OPERATIONS
Continue to monitor and work with the County to understand trajectory of COVID-19 and how it may impact City operations and needs of the community • Modeling data will be used a basis to prepare for contingencies where needed and to prepare for reopening of economy/transition to normal operations through phased approach
• Assigned representative to County’s Long-Term Strategic Planning Taskforce • Created ‘Return to Work Taskforce’ to develop policy/strategy for reopening City facilities; as well as policy/safety protocols for visitors & members of the public • Created ‘Parks Reopening Taskforce’ to develop policy/strategy for reopening park facilities
• Overview of San Mateo County Recovery Initiative presented to City Council on 10/05/20 and report accepted by Board of Supervisors on 10/06/20 Ongoing
Evaluate and consider additional actions that are recommended or may be required dependent on outcome/progression of COVID-19 situation; including (but not limited to):
• Extension of City Facilities Closure (TBD; Based on Public Health Order and Until Further Notice)
• Suspend or Freeze Shut -Offs/Disconnection of Water Service for Non -Payment (Currently in Effect)
• Waiver of Credit Card Fees for Online Payment of Utilities Through June 30, 2020 (Approved by City Council on 04/06/20)
• Explore Feasibility of Charging Tier 1 Rates for Water Service (No Longer Pursuing Due to Minor Cost Difference)
• Developed Small Businesses Resiliency Grant Program to support operations and help avert layoffs during the COVID-19 public health emergency. $500,000 (allocated for a grant of $10,000 per business for up to 50 businesses) approved by City Council on 04/06/20.
• Expanded Support Local Foster City Campaign to provide vouchers through the Support Local Stamp Me app, allowing customers to get take-out during the shelter in place order. $25,000 (allocated for $10 vouchers to be offered to all Stamp Me users) approved by City Council on 04/06/20.
• Consider Options for Moratorium on Commercial E victions (TBD; County covers unincorporated areas only)
• Freeze Hiring/New Recruitments and Filling of Vacant Positions (Currently in Effect) • Initiated Friendly Streets, Foster City Initiative, dedicating approximately a 1.75 mile stretch of road on northbound Beach Park Boulevard for bicyclists and runners. One lane will be barricaded off from cars to allow bicyclists and runners to safely use the Ongoing
199

designated detour. In parallel with the detour, this stretch of Levee Pedway is reserved for walking only. (Approved by City Council on 04/06/20) [DISCONTINUED] • Expanded Friendly Streets, Foster City Initiative to extend lane closure on Beach Park Boulevard from Teal Street to Gull Avenue ( Approved by City Council on 05/11/20) [DISCONTINUED]
• Allocated $20,000 total ($10,000 each) to the San Mateo- Foster City Elementary School District /Community Education Foundation for its Free Meal Program and Mobile Hotspot/Wi-Fi for Distance Learning (Approved by City Council on 05/11/20) • COVID-19 Recovery Planning Update provided at City Council Vision & Policy Summit (on 06/04/20)
• Outdoor Dining Temporarily Allowed for Restaurants Looking to Provide Outdoor Dining Service and Suspen ded Code Enforcement Actions (Approved by City Council on 07/06/20)
• Prepared and distributed approximately (100) Rethink, Reopen, Restart Kits to storefront businesses in shopping centers to support reopening efforts • Outdoor Services Temporarily Allowed for Businesses (such as salons/barbers, personal care services, gyms/fitness centers, and offices) and Suspended Code Enforcement Actions (Approved by City Council on 07/31/20) • Terms of a Revolving Business Loan Program (Approved by City Council on 09/28/20); Establishment of RBLP (Approved by City Council on 11/02/20, then decision to defer thereafter on 03/15/21)
• Analysis of waiving or deferring permit fees and business license fees for one year to prioritize commercial spaces for waiving of permit fees (Direction initially provided by City Council on 11/02/20, then decision to not pursue further thereafter on 03/15/21) • Impossible Market pilot program, not to exceed $5,000, to introduce food & grocery subscription subsidy for 100 financially-impacted Foster City families approved by City Council on 11/02/20 [DISCONTINUED]
• Expanded Support L ocal Foster City Campaign to provide vouchers through the Support Local Stamp Me app, allowing customers to get take-out during the shelter in place order. Additional $25,000 (allocated for $10 vouchers to be offered to all Stamp Me users) approved by City Council on 11/16/20.
• Helped promote Restaurant, Brewery & Winery Relief, relief fund to help small business impacted by the pandemic – https://www.smcstrong.org/restaurantrelief

• Partnered with the Chamber of Commerce to distribute two surveys – Business Needs and Shopper Preferences, which was open between 03/11/21 -03/11/21; findings received and accepted by City Council on 04/19/21
• Small Business Assistance Plan presented to City Council on 05/17/21 and on 06/21/21 200

Monitor revenue impacts , e xplore options for expenditure reductions , and seek financial assistance/opportunities for cost recovery of funds
• Track damage estimates and expenditures related to COVID-19 • Log personnel time on Form 214s in relation to COVID-19 incident response • Submit “Request for Public Assistance” through California Governor's Office of Emergency Services (Cal OES) Recovery Section for F ederal Emergency Management Agency’s (FEMA's) Public Assistance Program (Submitted on 04/02/20) • Seek approval of the “Designation of Applicant's Agent Resolution for Non -State Agencies” for the Purpose of Cost Recovery Eligibility (Approved by City Council on 04/06/20)
• Discussed City financial impacts related to COVID-19 (04/20/20 City Council Meeting) • Discussed p rojected financial impacts of COVID -19 beyond the current fiscal year (05/11/20 Budget Study Session)
• Hired MGT Consulting for consultant services for COVID-19 CARES/FEMA Disaster Cost Recovery (08/24/20)
• Quarterly updates on City’s economic performance and impacts related to COVID-19, including strategies to close long- term structural deficit (09/08/20 City Council Meeting)
Ongoing

201
DATE: May 16, 2022

TO: President and Members of the Estero Municipal Improvement District (EMID) Board of Directors

VIA: Edmund Suen, Interim District Manager

FROM: Louis Sun, Public Works Director
Allen Smith, Public Works Maintenance Manager
Zaheed Danish, Public Works Superintendent

SUBJECT: PURCHASE OF SENSUS LARGE WATER METERS FROM

THIRKETTLE CORPORATION, DBA AQUA-METRIC SALES
COMPANY, IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $150,000

RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the Board of Directors approve the sole source purchase of approximately twenty-five (25) large water meters for an amount not to exceed $150,000 from Thirkettle Corporation (dba Aqua-Metric Sales Company).

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
During this time of water conservation consciousness and revenue instability, a proactive measure to guarantee that unaccounted water loss is kept to a minimum is to ensure that water meters are functioning properly and replacing them at the end of their useful life. This is typically done by monitoring the age of the meters, testing for accuracy, and then replacing meters when inaccurate or in danger of possible failure due to age.

Staff’s recommendation of the purchase and replacement of approximately twenty-five (25) large water meters will also enable Foster City/EMID to 202
recover costs due to inaccurate meters and recapture water loss.

BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS
The Maintenance Division schedules the replacement of water meters to coincide with the end of the meter’s useful life and prior to it actually failing. On average, the useful life of a Sensus meter is approximately 20 years.

Purchasing and replacing aging water meters leads to recovery of revenue that would be lost to water meter inaccuracy and also minimizes water loss through detection of unaddressed leaks. This purchase will be comprised of meters planned for immediate installation as well as reserved meter inventory for planned future replacements.

The Water Distribution System uses various sizes of meters depending upon the needs of the location. The largest meters range in size from four (4) to ten (10) inches. This order will include 4 inch, 6 inch, and 8 inch meters.

The District’s water distribution system exclusively utilizes Sensus water meters. These types of meters are designed to be more efficient and are compatible with the District’s Advanced Metering Infrastructure (AMI) system.

A substitute product does not exist.

Sensus meters can only be ordered from Thirkettle Corporation, dba Aqua- metric Sales Company, a sole distributor for the Northern California region, with offices located in Sacramento, California.

The EMID Purchasing Policy requires that purchases over $50,000 be approved by the District’s Board. Staff recommends that the District’s Board authorize the sole source purchase of approximately twenty-five (25) large water meters from Aqua-Metric Sales Company for an amount not to exceed $150,000.

FISCAL IMPACT
Funding in the amount of $150,000 is allocated and available for this purchase in the FY 2021-2022 Equipment Replacement Fund budget (Account No. 408-0110-413-4385).
203

DISTRICT BOARD VISION, MISSION, AND VALUE/PRIORITY AREAS Purchase of replacement water meters is in alignment with the District Board’s adopted Vision and Mission statements. This item is related to the “Facilities and Infrastructure” Value/Priority Area as the key outcome is to maintain essential water infrastructure as well as the “Innovation and Sustainability” Value/Priority Area as another significant outcome is to conserve water.

Attachment:
Attachment 1 - Resolution
Attachment 2 - Sole Source Letter
Attachment 3 - Estimate
204
RESOLUTION NO.

A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE ESTERO MUNICIPAL

IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT AUTHORIZING THE SOLE SOURCE PURCHASE OF SENSUS LARGE WATER METERS FROM THIRKETTLE CORPORATION, (dba AQUA- METRIC SALES COMPANY) IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $150,000.00

ESTERO MUNICIPAL IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT
WHEREAS, many of the large water meters in the city have reached their useful life and are due for replacement; and
WHEREAS, replacement of large aging meters will allow Foster City/EMID to recover costs due to inaccurate meters and recapture water loss.; and WHEREAS, during this time of heightened water conservation consciousness, replacement of the old meters is a proactive measure to guarantee there will be minimal unaccounted water loss; and
WHEREAS, the City’s entire water system exclusively utilizes Sensus water meters for compatibility with its Advanced Metering Infrastructure (AMI) system; and WHEREAS, Sensus water meters can only be ordered from Aqua-metric Sales Company, a sole distributor for the Northern California region, with offices located in Sacramento, California; and
WHEREAS, Funding is available and has been appropriated in the FY 2021/2022 Equipment Replacement Fund (ERF) budget, Account No. 408-0110-413-4385.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of Directors of the Estero Municipal Improvement District does hereby authorize the sole source purchase of Sensus water meters from Thirkettle Corporation, dba Aqua-Metric Sales Company, in an amount not to exceed $150,000 from Account No. 408-0110-413-4385. 205
PASSED AND ADOPTED as a resolution of the Board of Directors of the Estero Municipal Improvement District at the regular meeting held on the 16th day of May, 2021, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:
________________________________

RICHA AWASTHI, PRESIDENT
ATTEST:
_____________________________________

PRISCILLA SCHAUS, DISTRICT SECRETARY
206
Re: Sole Source
To Whom It May Concern:

Sensus, a Xylem brand recognizes Aqua-Metric Sales Company as an Authorized Distributor of Sensus products for the state of California through 2022. Purchasing Sensus products from an authorized distributor in your area ensures that your products will be properly supported and warranted. Please contact Aqua-Metric Sales Company for all of your Sensus needs.

We look forward to providing your business with quality water products and service in the near future. Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions.

Sincerely,
Trena S
immons
Channel Marketing Specialist, Sales Enablement
Sensus, Xylem Brand
Trena Simmons
637 Davis Drive
Morrisville, NC 27560 USA
T: 919.424.8959
[email protected]
sensus.com
207
Sales Quote QT00004134
Aqua-Metric Sales Company
February 09, 2022
Lisa Centers
1060 National Dr Ste 5 | Sacramento, CA 95834-2972
Phone: | Facsimile:

Quote for:

Attention:

Address:

Phone:

Email:

City, State, Zip: FOSTER CITY, CA 94404-1149
100 Lincoln Centre Dr

CITY OF FOSTER CITY
Line TotalUnit PriceQuantity Description
2 EA 3,220.00 6,440.00OMNIC4 4" OMNI C2 8WH CF
2 EA 10,194.00 20,388.00OMNIF6 6" OMNI F2 8WH CF
1 EA 15,238.00 15,238.00OMNIF8 8" OMNI F2 8WH CF
FY 2021-2022 LARGE METER REPLACEMENT PROGRAM
3,943.70Sales Tax
42,066.00Subtotal
46,009.70
This quote for the product and services named above is subject to the following terms:

1. All quotes are subject to the Aqua-Metric Terms of Sales.

2. Quote is valid for thirty days.

3. Freight allowed on single orders exceeding $10,000.00.

4. Net Thirty Days to Pay.

5. Returned production may be subject to a 25% restocking fee.

6. Sales Tax and/or Freight charges are approximated and may vary on final invoice.

Total

208
Sales Quote QT00004508
Aqua-Metric Sales Company
April 28, 2022
Lisa Centers
1060 National Dr Ste 5 | Sacramento, CA 95834-2972
Phone: | Facsimile:

Quote for:

Attention:

Address:

Phone:

Email:

City, State, Zip: FOSTER CITY, CA 94404-1149
100 Lincoln Centre Dr
City of Foster City
Line TotalUnit PriceQuantity Description
16 EA 3,220.00 51,520.00OMNIC4 4" OMNI C2 8WHL CF
4 EA 10,194.00 40,776.00OMNIF6 6" OMNI F2 8WHL CF
FY 2021-2022 LARGE METER REPLACEMENT PROGRAM
8,652.75Sales Tax
92,296.00Subtotal
100,948.75
This quote for the product and services named above is subject to the following terms:

1. All quotes are subject to the Aqua-Metric Terms of Sales.

2. Quote is valid for thirty days.

3. Freight allowed on single orders exceeding $10,000.00.

4. Net Thirty Days to Pay.

5. Returned production may be subject to a 25% restocking fee.

6. Sales Tax and/or Freight charges are approximated and may vary on final invoice.

Total

209
DATE: May 16, 2022

TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council

FROM: Edmund Suen, Interim City Manager

SUBJECT: RECEIVE AND ACCEPT A REPORT ON THE 3RD QUARTER FISCAL YEAR 2021-2022 FINANCIAL UPDATE

RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the City Council, by Minute Order, receive and accept the report for the FY 2021-2022 3rd Quarter Financial Update.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
City staff has prepared the FY 2021-2022 3rd Quarter Financial Report (Attachment 1). General Fund revenues (Funds 001 to 003), excluding American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) relief funds, for the nine-month period were $32.58 million. Full year revenues and expenditures are projected to reach $49.10 million and $51.53 million, inclusive of Net Transfers Out of $1.55 million, for a projected operating deficit of $2.43 million. However, the 1st tranche of ARPA relief funds of $4.05 million for lost revenues as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic that the City received in July 2021 is anticipated to help turn the operating deficit to a projected net surplus of $1.62 million. In looking at full-year projections, property tax revenues, including excess ERAF refund, are $32.77 million while property tax in lieu of vehicle license fees (VLF) is $3.61 million. San Mateo County is hopeful that the State will approve a future appropriation (in FY 2023-2024) to cover the estimated FY 2021-2022 countywide VLF shortfall total of $56.78 million (of which, Foster City's share of the shortfall is $1.17 million) despite disturbing news that the State is now attempting to take the County's Excess ERAF funds (which are 210
in turn distributed to each city) to backfill the VLF shortfall. Although transient occupancy tax (TOT) has improved from last fiscal year, it is anticipated to fall $0.64 million short of the $2.36 million original FY 2021-2022 budget estimate. Projected sales tax revenues are expected to meet estimates at $3.08 million. Investment income for the General Fund as well as other City Funds has been reduced due to the extremely low interest rate environment in the first 6 months of the year, but is anticipated to improve over the course of the next 12 months as the Federal Reserve has begun raising the discount rate to temper the nation's high inflation.

At the 9-month mark, General Fund (Funds 001 to 003) operating expenditures were $37.84 million, or 75.7% of the total FY 2021-2022 operating budget. As is historically the case, City staff exercised an option to make a $6.79 million prepayment in July 2021 to CalPERS for this year’s annually required unfunded pension liability obligation in lieu of monthly payments. The prepayment resulted in a cash savings of $233,000. The City also contributed a full 12 months of funding to San Mateo Consolidated Fire for its shared costs for fire protection and prevention services. This is essentially a 3 month "prepayment" of $2.1 million and is among the reasons why expenditures are at the 75.7% mark through 9 months. Notwithstanding, City staff expects full year General Fund operating expenditures will be within the City’s amended operating budget (before Transfers Out) of $49.98 million. Overall, the City’s other Governmental Funds, Internal Service Funds, and the District’s Water and Wastewater Funds are performing generally as expected.

BACKGROUND AND ANALYSIS
The City Council and City staff have committed to providing quarterly financial updates at City Council meetings to review quarterly financial performance and identify general economic trends and specific issues that may affect, positively and negatively, the City’s financial condition.

The report is intended to provide high-level financial information for the City Council, City Departments, and the community as a whole. Supplemental revenue and expenditure analyses are also provided for those readers desiring more detailed financial information.

FISCAL IMPACT
There is no fiscal impact associated with this report.
211

CITY COUNCIL VISION, MISSION, AND VALUE/PRIORITY AREA
This item is in alignment with the City Council's Vision Statement for a "Sustainable Foster City" under the economic sustainability framework. This is a carry over project from last year and is not directly aligned with our Value/Priority Areas. It indirectly aligns to delivering a balanced budget and promotes transparency.

Attachments:
Attachment 1 - Foster City Financial Update FY 2021-2022 Q3 (for the Nine Months Ending March 31, 2022)
Attachment 2 - Third Quarter Projections (for the full Fiscal Year Ending June 30, 2022)
Attachment 3 - Comparison of Budget vs. Actual and Prior Year's Revenues (for the Nine Months Ending March 31, 2022)
Attachment 4 - Comparison of Budget vs. Actual and Prior Year's Expenditures (for the Nine Months Ending March 31, 2022) 212
Live, Work & Play
in Foster City
City of Foster City
Financial Services Dept.

The City’s General Fund is projected to end the fiscal year with a $1.62 million surplus as a result of $4.05 million in American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) relief funds received in July, which helped negate an otherwise projected General Fund Deficit of $2.43 million
While some green shoots are now emerging, the
adverse impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic con-
tinued through the 3rd quarter of the fiscal year.

General Fund revenues, especially from our local
hotels are still challenged and are only at 36% com-
pared to the 9 month period of FY 2019-20. The
unfavorable conditions were muted as the Federal
Government provided m unicipalities with Ameri-
can Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) relief monies (for the
recovery of lost revenues from the pandemic). In
July, the City received the 1st tranche of funding
for $4.05 million. The 2nd and final tranche is ex-
pected in July 2022.

Total General Fund Revenues (Funds 001 to 003),
excluding ARPA relief funds for the nine month
period were $32.6 million or $2.9 million higher
than the same period last year. There were year–
over-year revenue improvements in property tax,
property tax in lieu of vehicle license fees, sales
tax, transient occupancy tax (TOT), building per-
mits, recreation program fees, and rental of $0.2
million $0.3 million, $0.2 million, $0.2 million, $0.6
million, $0.4 million, $0.4 million, and $0.4 million
respectively. Interest Income for the period sank
by 51.4% to $120,000 as interest rates sank for
much of the 1st 6 months of the fiscal year before
improving in Q3 as the Federal Reserve has since
increased the discount rate due the rapid rise in
U.S. inflation.

General Fund expenditures (Funds 001 to 003) to-
taled $37.8 million or 75.7% of the annual budget
as the City made a $6.79 million prepayment on its
annually required unfunded accrued liability pay-
ment to CalPERS. The lump sum payment option
represents a $233,000 citywide savings compared
to making monthly payments. The City also con-
tributed 12 months of funding obligation to San
Mateo Consolidated Fire for its portion of share
costs for fire protection and prevention services to
the City, which equates to a fourth quarter prepay-
ment of $2.1 million. The City agreed to two-year
agreements with its AFSCME and POA labor units
as well as its unrepresented management unit. The
wage and benefit adjustments took into consideration
the current retention and recruitment challenges As
a deficit reduction action, the City pared down its
normal $3.5 million transfer to the City Capital Pro-
jects Fund to $1.5 million. The City County also au-
thorized the funding of a $55 million built-to-budget
of the Recreation Center utilizing 19 million of Gen-
eral Fund Reserves and $36 million for the Capital
Asset Acquisition and Replacement Fund.

Water Enterprise Fund operating revenues and ex-
penditures were $10.19 million and $9.35 million
respectively. Wastewater Enterprise operating reve-
nues totaled $11.12 million or $981,000 higher than
the same period in the prior year as base rates were
increased by 14.25% effecti ve July 1, 2021, primarily
to fund debt service costs associated with the Dis-
trict’s current and projected debt service for the fi-
nancing of its $153.6 million share of the Wastewater
Treatment Plant Master Improvements (WWTP)
project with the City of San Mateo. Operating ex-
penditures were $4.9 million and within expectations.

On July 1, the District closed the sale on $62.76 mil-
lion of wastewater revenue notes to attain a $1.1
million financing savings before drawing on its WIFIA
loan to pay off the notes in 2025.

As reported at the November 1 City Council meet-
ing, the City closed out FY 2020-21 with a $4.3 mil-
lion rollover surplus. The surplus may help address
one-time needs including, but not limited to unfunded
pension liability, CIP projects, and the strengthening
of other City reserves (e .g. Facilities Replacement
Fund). City staff will be seeking City Council direc-
tion on a pension liability reduction policy. As of this writing, on May 9, the City Council will review the
City’s preliminary budget and 5-year financial plan
which identifies a multi-year structural deficit. This rollover surplus may be simply held in General Fund
reserves while the City Council considers a possible
Business License revenue measure to address the
General Fund structural deficit.

Foster City Financial
Update FY 21/22 Q3
Attachment 1
213
ATTACHMENT 2

CITY OF FOSTER CITY / EMID
Summary of Resources and Requirements by Funds
For the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2022
THIRD QUARTER PROJECTIONS THROUGH JUNE 30, 2022
Available
July 1, 2021
Estimated
Revenues Transfers In Transfers OutTotal Available
Operating
Expenditures
Capital
Expenditures
Total
Requirements
Net Increase
(Decrease) in
Reserves
Available
June 30, 2022
General Funds
001 General Fund Reserve 50,634,736$ 18,209,007$ 35,553,271$ 20,996,216$ 83,400,798$ 47,796,235$ - $ 47,796,235$ (15,030,173)$ 35,604,563$ 002 General Fund-District 2,344,981$ 33,514,290$ - $ 35,553,271$ 306,000$ 306,000$ - $ 306,000$ (2,344,981)$ - $ 003 General Fund-Special Recreation -$ 1,430,120$ 443,537$ - $ 1,873,657$ 1,873,657$ - $ 1,873,657$ - $ -$ 005 Community Benefits Program Fund 1,412,825$ 64,600$ - $ -$ 1,477,425$ 883,320$ - $ 883,320$ (818,720)$ 594,105$ 006 DARE 2,810$ 10$ -$ -$ 2,820$ 600$ - $ 600$ (590)$ 2,220$ 007 Solar Incentive Grant Program 87,458$ 200$ - $ -$ 87,658$ 25,000$ - $ 25,000$ (24,800)$ 62,658$ 008 Employee Rental Assistance Program 59,791$ 200$ - $ -$ 59,991$ -$ -$ -$ 200$ 59,991$ 009 Asset Seizure 22,013$ 1,100$ - $ -$ 23,113$ 1,000$ - $ 1,000$ 100$ 22,113$ 010 Discretionary Pension Liability Stabilization Fund 91,353$ 250$ - $ -$ 91,603$ -$ -$ -$ 250$ 91,603$ 011 Facilities Replacement Fund 2,392,110$ 8,600$ - $ -$ 2,400,710$ -$ -$ -$ 8,600$ 2,400,710$ 012 Sustainable Foster City 208,922$ 800$ 50,000$ - $ 259,722$ 94,960$ - $ 94,960$ (44,160)$ 164,762$ Subtotal General Funds 57,256,999 $ 53,229,177$ 36,046,808$ 56,549,487$ 89,983,497$ 50,980,772$ - $ 50,980,772$ (18,254,274)$ 39,002,725$ Special Revenue Funds
101 Traffic Safety 11,576$ 60,000$ - $ -$ 71,576$ 60,000$ - $ 60,000$ - $ 11,576$ 102 Measure A 3,252,147$ 720,040$ - $ -$ 3,972,187$ -$ 2,113,596$ 2,113,596$ (1,393,556)$ 1,858,591$ 103 Gas Tax (2103, 2105-2107.5) 615,535$ 854,100$ - $ -$ 1,469,635$ 554,500$ 919,066$ 1,473,566$ (619,466)$ (3,931)$ 104 Park In-Lieu Fees 2,805,866$ 8,400$ - $ -$ 2,814,266$ -$ 745,435$ 745,435$ (737,035)$ 2,068,831$ 105 Measure M (1,908)$ 107,370$ - $ -$ 105,462$ -$ 219,300$ 219,300$ (111,930)$ (113,838)$ 108 SLESF/COPS Grant -$ 100,000$ - $ -$ 100,000$ 100,000$ - $ 100,000$ - $ -$ 114 CalOpps.org 317,165$ 441,400$ - $ -$ 758,565$ 534,467$ - $ 534,467$ (93,067)$ 224,098$ 116 Foster City Foundation 381,801$ 34,255$ - $ -$ 416,056$ 112,027$ - $ 112,027$ (77,772)$ 304,029$ 119 SB1 Road Maintenance and Rehabilitation 972,665$ 627,032$ - $ -$ 1,599,697$ -$ 1,592,850$ 1,592,850$ (965,818)$ 6,847 $ 122 Low- and Moderate-Income Housing Fund 2,032,197$ 219,800$ 52,679$ - $ 2,304,676$ 134,760$ - $ 134,760$ 137,719$ 2,169,916$ 124 City Affordable Housing Fund 828,256$ 677,836$ - $ -$ 1,506,092$ 1,043,636$ - $ 1,043,636$ (365,800)$ 462,456$ 125 Sustainable Foster City Fund (Discontinued) -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 127 BAERS (Discontinued) -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 128 General Plan Maintenance Fund 1,790,760$ 197,141$ - $ -$ 1,987,901$ 915,763$ - $ 915,763$ (718,622)$ 1,072,138$ 129 Construction & Demolition Recycling Fund 742,217$ 53,300$ - $ 50,000$ 745,517$ 331,750$ - $ 331,750$ (328,450)$ 413,767$ 130 Technology Maintenance Fund 183,472$ 108,678$ - $ -$ 292,150$ 124,418$ - $ 124,418$ (15,740)$ 167,732$ 131 SB 1186 Fund 25,612$ 4,100$ - $ -$ 29,712$ 1,300$ - $ 1,300$ 2,800$ 28,412$ 132 SMIP Fee Fund 4,717$ 1,110$ - $ -$ 5,827$ 500$ - $ 500$ 610$ 5,327$ 133 CRV Grant Fund 12,251$ 8,540$ - $ -$ 20,791$ 13,000$ - $ 13,000$ (4,460)$ 7,791$ 134 Curbside Recycling Fee Fund 202,376$ 20,500$ - $ -$ 222,876$ 25,000$ - $ 25,000$ (4,500)$ 197,876$ 135 Green Building Fee Fund 5,246$ 720$ - $ -$ 5,966$ 500$ - $ 500$ 220$ 5,466$ 136 Measure W 679,090$ 318,010$ - $ -$ 997,100$ 500,000$ - $ 500,000$ (181,990)$ 497,100$ 137 Commercial Linkage Fee 568,914$ 1,500$ 570,414$ -$ -$ -$ 1,500$ 570,414$ 138 Tenant Relocation Assistance 95,913$ 120,650$ - $ -$ 216,563$ 164,000$ - $ 164,000$ (43,350)$ 52,563$ 139 Workforce Housing -$ 117,886$ - $ -$ 117,886$ 108,656$ - $ 108,656$ 9,230$ 9,230$ 140 Equipment Replacement-Workforce Housing -$ 20,000$ - $ -$ 20,000$ -$ -$ -$ 20,000$ 20,000$ Subtotal Special Revenue Funds 15,525,868 $ 4,822,368$ 52,679 $ 50,000$ 20,350,915$ 4,724,277$ 5,590,247$ 10,314,524$ (5,489,477)$ 10,036,391$ (Continued on next page)
Fund
214
ATTACHMENT 2

CITY OF FOSTER CITY / EMID
Summary of Resources and Requirements by Funds
For the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2022
(Continued from previous page) THIRD QUARTER PROJECTIONS THROUGH JUNE 30, 2022 Available
July 1, 2021
Estimated
Revenues Transfers In Transfers OutTotal Available
Operating
Expenditures
Capital
Expenditures
Total
Requirements
Net Increase
(Decrease) in
Reserves
Available
June 30, 2022
Debt Service Fund
230 Levee Protection Planning's/Improvements 9,937,849$ 3,992,300$ - $ -$ 13,930,149$ -$ 6,492,688$ 6,492,688$ (2,500,388)$ 7,437,461$ Subtotal Capital Projects Funds 9,937,849 $ 3,992,300$ - $ -$ 13,930,149$ -$ 6,492,688$ 6,492,688$ (2,500,388)$ 7,437,461$ Capital Projects Funds
301 Capital Investment - City 21,301,277$ 285,250$ 56,800,000$ - $ 78,386,527$ -$ 5,811,476$ 5,811,476$ 51,273,774$ 72,575,051$ 326 Capital Asset Acquisition and Replacement Fund 43,578,469$ 1,268,000$ - $ 36,000,000$ 8,846,469$ -$ 7,000,000$ 7,000,000$ (41,732,000)$ 1,846,469$ 327 Levee Project Fund 50,162,053$ 90,000$ - $ -$ 50,252,053$ -$ 50,052,978$ 50,052,978$ (49,962,978)$ 199,075 $ Subtotal Capital Projects Funds 115,041,799 $ 1,643,250$ 56,800,000$ 36,000,000$ 137,485,049$ -$ 62,864,454$ 62,864,454$ (40,421,204)$ 74,620,595$ Enterprise Funds
Water Funds
401 Water Revenue 7,293,780$ 17,761,142$ - $ 1,358,698$ 23,696,224$ 15,874,799$ - $ 15,874,799$ 527,645 $ 7,821,425$ 405 Capital Investment - Water 7,657,975$ -$ 680,000$ 8,337,975$ -$ 5,588,571$ 5,588,571$ (4,908,571)$ 2,749,404$ 408 Water Equipment Replacement 3,167,431$ 633,532$ - $ 3,800,963$ 219,500$ - $ 219,500$ 414,032$ 3,581,463$ 409 Water Connection Fee -$ 452,500$ 678,698$ 1,131,198$ -$ 450,000$ 450,000$ 681,198$ 681,198$ Subtotal Water Funds 18,119,186 $ 18,847,174$ 1,358,698$ 1,358,698$ 36,966,360$ 16,094,299$ 5,588,571$ 22,132,870$ (3,285,696)$ 14,833,490$ Wastewater Funds
451 Wastewater Revenue 15,832,252$ 17,635,668$ 13,603 $ 8,109,679$ 25,371,844$ 8,347,922$ - $ 8,347,922$ 1,191,670$ 17,023,922$ 453 Wastewater Rate Stabilization Fund 2,000,000$ -$ 2,087,125$ 2,087,125$ 2,000,000$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 2,000,000$ 454 San Mateo-Foster City Public Financing Authority Loan(37,861,871)$ 100$ 2,087,125$ 2,202,478$ (37,977,124)$ 2,087,125$ - $ 2,087,125$ (2,202,378)$ (40,064,249)$ 455 Capital Investment - Wastewater 4,926,004$ -$ 61,842,828 8,203$ 66,760,629$ -$ 62,240,347$ 62,240,347$ (405,722)$ 4,520,282$ 456 Wastewater Plant Expansion -$ 5,400$ - $ 5,400$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 458 Wastewater Equipment Replacement 3,613,941$ 254,683$ - $ 1,415,000$ 2,453,624$ 179,044$ - $ 179,044$ (1,339,361)$ 2,274,580$ 459 Wastewater Notes/WIFIA Loan Fund -$ 66,860,640$ 3,624,583$ 55,975,350$ 14,509,873$ 2,054,100$ - $ 2,054,100$ 12,455,773$ 12,455,773$ 460 Wastewater Connection Fees -$ 302,000$ 147,971$ - $ 449,971$ -$ 300,000$ 300,000$ 149,971$ 149,971$ 461 State Revolving Loan Fund -$ 33,044,400$ - $ -$ 33,044,400$ -$ -$ -$ 33,044,400$ 33,044,400$ Subtotal Wastewater Funds (11,489,674) $ 118,102,891$ 69,803,235$ 69,803,235$ 106,613,217$ 12,668,191$ 62,240,347$ 75,208,538$ 42,894,353$ 31,404,679$ Subtotal Enterprise Funds 6,629,512 $ 136,950,065$ 71,161,933$ 71,161,933$ 143,579,577$ 28,762,490$ 67,828,918$ 97,341,408$ 39,608,657$ 46,238,169$ Internal Service Funds
501 Vehicle Replacement 4,871,167$ 1,802,082$ - $ -$ 6,673,249$ 2,524,099$ - $ 2,524,099$ (722,017)$ 4,149,150$ 502 Equipment Replacement 6,003,030$ 695,119$ - $ -$ 6,698,149$ 403,700$ - $ 403,700$ 291,419$ 6,294,449$ 503 Self-Insurance 1,293,198$ 584,332$ - $ -$ 1,877,530$ 862,232$ - $ 862,232$ (277,900)$ 1,015,298$ 504 Information Technology 4,484,457$ 2,384,155$ - $ -$ 6,868,612$ 2,541,520$ - $ 2,541,520$ (157,365)$ 4,327,092$ 505 Building Maintenance 6,634,126$ 3,403,877$ - $ 300,000$ 9,738,003$ 3,301,113$ 3,301,113$ (197,236)$ 6,436,890$ 507 Longevity Recognition Benefits 2,492,351$ 239,090$ - $ -$ 2,731,441$ 238,320$ - $ 238,320$ 770 $ 2,493,121$ 508 PEMHCA Benefits Plan 6,027,317$ 229,280$ - $ -$ 6,256,597$ 214,320$ - $ 214,320$ 14,960$ 6,042,277$ 509 Compensated Absences 3,149,376$ 505,923$ - $ -$ 3,655,299$ 474,368$ - $ 474,368$ 31,555$ 3,180,931$ Subtotal Internal Service Funds 34,955,022 $ 9,843,858$ - $ 300,000$ 44,498,880$ 10,559,672$ - $ 10,559,672$ (1,015,814)$ 33,939,208$ Agency Fund
604 Successor Agency of Community Development Agency(815,781)$ 275,745$ - $ -$ (540,036)$ 549,591$ - $ 549,591$ (273,846)$ (1,089,627)$ 607 Tourism Assessment -$ 85,868$ -$ -$ 85,868$ 85,868$ -$ 85,868$ -$ -$ 608 SMC Fire -$ 138,000$ -$ -$ 138,000$ 138,000$ -$ 138,000$ -$ -$ Subtotal Agency Fund (815,781) $ 499,613$ - $ -$ (316,168)$ 773,459$ - $ 773,459$ (273,846)$ (1,089,627)$ Total All Funds 238,531,268 $ 210,980,631$ 164,061,420$ 164,061,420$ 449,511,899$ 95,800,670$ 142,776,307$ 239,326,977$ (28,346,346)$ 210,184,922$ Fund
215
Attachment 3
FY 2021-22 ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL YR OVER YR % OF BUDGET % OF BUDGET ABOVE (BELOW) FY 2021-22 FY 2020-21 FY 2019-20 FAVORABLE % FY 2021-22 FY 2020-21 ADOPTED ANNUAL BUDGET 9 MONTHS 9 MONTHS 9 MONTHS (UNFAVORABLE)INCREASE 9 MONTHS 9 MONTHS Fund BUDGET PROJECTED $ % AS OF 3/31/2022 AS OF 3/31/2021 AS OF 3/31/2020 VARIANCE (DECREASE) AS OF 3/31/2022 AS OF 3/31/2021 GENERAL FUND (FUNDS 001-003)
002PROPERTY TAXES
SECURED 29,181,200 $ 29,181,200$ - $ - 17,043,100$ 16,326,341$ 15,315,113$ 716,759 $ 4.4% 58.4% 59.9% UNSECURED 1,537,000 $ 1,537,000$ - $ - 1,110,211$ 1,243,983$ 1,300,508$ (133,772)$ (10.8%) 72.2% 80.2% SUPPLEMENTAL 385,100 $ 455,400$ 70,300 $ 18.3% 410,312 $ 619,097$ 302,323$ (208,785)$ (33.7%) 106.5% 163.2% ERAF 1,526,800 $ 1,598,000$ 71,200 $ 4.7% 1,597,263 $ 1,723,534$ 1,315,163$ (126,271)$ (7.3%) 104.6% 166.4% 002PROPERTY TAXES (1) 32,630,100$ 32,771,600$ 141,500$ 0.4% 20,160,886$ 19,912,955$ 18,233,107$ 247,931$ 1.2% 61.8% 65.9% 001PROPERTY TAX IN-LIEU OF VEHICLE LICENSE FEE(1) 2,943,400$ 3,612,700$ 669,300$ 22.7% 1,893,422$ 1,644,025$ 1,758,500$ 249,397$ 15.2% 64.3% 43.9% 001OTHER TAXES
SALES AND USE 3,079,800 $ 3,079,800$ - $ - 2,151,469$ 1,957,922$ 2,058,220$ 193,547 $ 9.9% 69.9% 70.0% TRANSIENT OCCUPANCY (2) 2,361,000 $ 1,724,300$ (636,700)$ (27.0%) 1,230,847$ 663,128$ 3,409,620$ 567,719 $ 85.6% 52.1% 27.4% FRANCHISE 1,135,820 $ 1,235,000$ 99,180 $ 8.7% 626,719 $ 602,471$ 626,001$ 24,248$ 4.0% 55.2% 56.0% REAL PROPERTY TRANSFER 279,890 $ 279,890$ - $ - 209,025 $ 177,395$ 204,770$ 31,630$ 17.8% 74.7% 64.6% SUBTOTAL 6,856,510 $ 6,318,990$ (537,520)$ (7.8%) 4,218,060 $ 3,400,916$ 6,298,611$ 817,144 $ 24.0% 61.5% 51.7% 001LICENSES & PERMITS
BUSINESS LICENSES 1,452,100 $ 1,452,100$ - $ - 1,469,145$ 1,393,737$ 1,550,377$ 75,408 $ 5.4% 101.2% 87.7% PERMITS 845,802 $ 1,400,000$ 554,198 $ 65.5% 1,783,283 $ 1,411,461$ 1,340,244$ 371,822 $ 26.3% 210.8% 102.8% SUBTOTAL 2,297,902 $ 2,852,100$ 554,198 $ 24.1% 3,252,428 $ 2,805,198$ 2,890,621$ 447,230 $ 15.9% 141.5% 94.7% 001INTERGOVERNMENTAL
GRANTS, REIMBURSEMENTS, ARPA (POST, SB 90, GRANTS)(3) 3,220,000$ 4,084,920$ 864,920 $ 26.9% 4,070,740 $ 6,093 $ 49,119$ 4,064,647$ 66710.1% 126.4% 20.3% 002 HOMEOWNERS PROPERTY TAX RELIEF 100,000$ 100,000$ -$ - 48,040$ 49,294$ 49,242$ (1,254)$ (2.5%) 48.0% 49.3% SUBTOTAL 3,320,000 $ 4,184,920$ 864,920 $ 26.1% 4,118,780 $ 55,387$ 98,361$ 4,063,393$ 7336.4% 124.1% 42.6%

CHARGES FOR CURRENT SERVICES
001 SERVICE FEES 522,397$ 522,397$ -$ - 518,077$ 361,700$ 429,982$ 156,377$ 43.2% 99.2% 64.7% 003 RECREATION AND LEISURE (4) 1,152,920$ 1,152,920$ -$ - 747,889$ 301,585$ 1,122,701$ 446,304$ 148.0% 64.9% 24.2% SUBTOTAL 1,675,317 $ 1,675,317$ - $ - 1,265,966$ 663,285$ 1,552,683$ 602,681 $ 90.9% 75.6% 36.7% 001FINES & FORFEITURES 36,100$ 29,100$ (7,000)$ (19.4%) 11,380$ 5,068$ 21,055$ 6,312$ 124.5% 31.5% 14.0%

INTEREST AND RENTALS
INTEREST (5) 280,500 $ 186,500$ (94,000)$ (33.5%) 120,332 $ 247,460$ 670,381$ (127,128)$ (51.4%) 42.9% 57.0% RENTS & CONCESSIONS (4) 884,190 $ 884,190$ - $ - 998,574 $ 568,204$ 824,266$ 430,370$ 75.7% 112.9% 62.9% SUBTOTAL 1,164,690 $ 1,070,690$ (94,000) $ (8.1%) 1,118,906$ 815,664$ 1,494,647$ 303,242 $ 37.2% 96.1% 76.2% OTHER REVENUES 353,000$ 638,000$ 285,000$ 80.7% 598,566 $ 412,935$ 357,777$ 185,631$ 45.0% 169.6% 117.0% TOTAL GENERAL FUND (FUNDS 001-003) 51,277,019$ 53,153,417$ 1,876,398 $ 3.7% 36,638,394 $ 29,715,433$ 32,705,362$ 6,922,961$ 23.3% 71.5% 63.0% 005GENERAL FUND - COMMUNITY BENEFITS PROGRAM(6) 59,600$ 64,600$ 5,000$ 8.4% 64,006$ 417,215$ 76,802$ (353,209)$ (84.7%) 107.4% 2317.9% 006GENERAL FUND - DARE 10$ 10$ -$ - 7$ 14$ 33$ (7)$ (50.0%) 70.0% - 007GENERAL FUND - SOLAR INCENTIVE GRANT PROGRAM 200$ 200$ -$ - 201$ 518$ 1,631$ (317)$ (61.2%) 100.5% 86.3% 008GENERAL FUND - RENTAL ASSISTANCE 50$ 200$ 150$ 300.0% 148$ 326$ 954$ (178)$ (54.6%) 296.0% 72.4% 009GENERAL FUND - ASSET SEIZURE 1,100$ 1,100$ -$ - 699$ 7,559$ 1,186$ (6,860)$ (90.8%) 63.5% 629.9% 010GENERAL FUND - PENSION STABILIZATION FUND -$ 250$ 250$ - 227$ 19,289$ -$ (19,062)$ (98.8%) - - 011GENERAL FUND - FACILITIES REPLACEMENT 8,600$ 8,600$ -$ - 5,936$ 13,050$ 11,049$ (7,114)$ (54.5%) 69.0% 186.4% 012SUSTAINABLE FOSTER CITY 3,500$ 800$ (2,700)$ (77.1%) 503$ 1,233$ -$ (730)$ (59.2%) 14.4% 45.7% TOTAL ALL GENERAL FUND (FUNDS 001-011) 51,350,079$ 53,229,177$ 1,879,098 $ 3.7% 36,710,121 $ 30,174,637$ 32,797,017$ 6,535,484$ 21.7% 71.5% 64.0%

SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS
101 TRAFFIC SAFETY 60,000$ 60,000$ -$ - 46,110$ 26,585$ 39,417$ 19,525$ 73.4% 76.9% 31.4% 102 MEASURE "A" 720,040$ 720,040$ -$ - 646,207$ 526,134$ 628,883$ 120,073$ 22.8% 89.7% 64.2% 103 GAS TAX 856,600$ 854,100$ (2,500)$ (0.3%) 534,664$ 563,435$ 595,060$ (28,771)$ (5.1%) 62.4% 64.2% 104 PARK-IN-LIEU FEES 11,200$ 8,400$ (2,800)$ (25.0%) 6,963$ 15,308$ 524,464$ (8,345)$ (54.5%) 62.2% 42.8% 105 MEASURE "M" 107,370$ 107,370$ -$ - 1,908$ 72,845$ 38,555$ (70,937)$ (97.4%) 1.8% 61.1% 108 SLESF/COPS GRANT 100,000$ 100,000$ -$ - 134,232$ 130,219$ 128,079$ 4,013$ 3.1% 134.2% 130.2% 114 CALOPPS 441,400$ 441,400$ -$ - 413,222$ 354,508$ 420,425$ 58,714$ 16.6% 93.6% 74.2% 116 FOSTER CITY FOUNDATION 14,163$ 34,255$ 20,092$ 141.9% 32,824$ 22,734$ 52,085$ 10,090$ 44.4% 231.8% 26.4% 119 SB 1 ROAD MAINTENANCE AND REHAB 660,900$ 627,032$ (33,868)$ (5.1%) 383,048$ 354,910$ 376,136$ 28,138$ 7.9% 58.0% 61.4% 122 HOUSING SUCCESSOR-LMIHF 85,180$ 219,800$ 134,620$ 158.0% 193,427$ 107,185$ 165,178$ 86,242$ 80.5% 227.1% 93.9% 124 FC AFFORDABLE HOUSING FUND (7) 34,200$ 677,836$ 643,636$ 1882.0% 28,063$ 26,266$ 38,943$ 1,797$ 6.8% 82.1% 40.9% 125 SUSTAINABLE FOSTER CITY FUND (MOVED TO FUND 012) -$ -$ -$ - -$ -$ 2,312$ -$ - - -

CITY OF FOSTER CITY/ESTERO MUNICIPAL IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT COMPARISON OF BUDGET VS. PROJECTED ACTUAL REVENUES

BUDGET VS ACTUAL & CURRENT VS PRIOR
FOR THE NINE MONTHS ENDED MARCH 31, 2022

216
Attachment 3
FY 2021-22 ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL YR OVER YR % OF BUDGET % OF BUDGET ABOVE (BELOW) FY 2021-22 FY 2020-21 FY 2019-20 FAVORABLE % FY 2021-22 FY 2020-21 ADOPTED ANNUAL BUDGET 9 MONTHS 9 MONTHS 9 MONTHS (UNFAVORABLE)INCREASE 9 MONTHS 9 MONTHS Fund BUDGET PROJECTED $ % AS OF 3/31/2022 AS OF 3/31/2021 AS OF 3/31/2020 VARIANCE (DECREASE) AS OF 3/31/2022 AS OF 3/31/2021

CITY OF FOSTER CITY/ESTERO MUNICIPAL IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT COMPARISON OF BUDGET VS. PROJECTED ACTUAL REVENUES

BUDGET VS ACTUAL & CURRENT VS PRIOR
FOR THE NINE MONTHS ENDED MARCH 31, 2022
127 BAERS (PROGRAM WAS CLOSED OUT IN FY 2020-21) -$ -$ -$ - -$ -$ 214,031$ -$ - - - 128 GENERAL PLAN MAINTENANCE 151,141$ 197,141$ 46,000$ 30.4% 193,426$ 193,517$ 134,396$ (91)$ (0.0%) 128.0% 123.3% 129 CONSTRUCTION AND DEMO RECYCLING 54,200$ 53,300$ (900)$ (1.7%) 32,643$ 44,337$ 36,371$ (11,694)$ (26.4%) 60.2% 54.1% 130 TECHNOLOGY MAINTENANCE 48,678$ 108,678$ 60,000$ 123.3% 105,073$ 73,431$ 32,533$ 31,642$ 43.1% 215.9% 79.0% 131 SB 1186 4,100$ 4,100$ -$ - 5,700$ 5,396$ 6,123$ 304$ 5.6% 139.0% 131.6% 132 SMIP FEE 1,120$ 1,110$ (10)$ (0.9%) 234$ 1,046$ 113$ (812)$ (77.6%) 20.9% 95.1% 133 CRV GRANT FUND 8,540$ 8,540$ -$ - 23$ 52$ 131$ (29)$ (55.8%) 0.3% 0.6% 134 CURBSIDE RECLYCLING 20,500$ 20,500$ -$ - 15,009$ 1,104$ 21,727$ 13,905$ 1259.5% 73.2% 5.1% 135 GREEN BUILDING FEE 1,820$ 720$ (1,100)$ (60.4%) 464$ 1,546$ 435$ (1,082)$ (70.0%) 25.5% 83.1% 136 MEASURE W 318,010$ 318,010$ -$ - 217,067$ 199,174$ 217,406$ 17,893$ 9.0% 68.3% 56.6% 137 COMMERCIAL LINKAGE FEE 1,500$ 1,500$ -$ - 1,412$ 361,250$ -$ (359,838)$ (99.6%) 94.1% 37.3% 138 TENANT RELOCATION ASSISTANCE 120,540$ 120,650$ 110$ 0.1% 80,028$ 51,076$ -$ 28,952$ 56.7% 66.4% - 139 WORKFORCE HOUSING -$ 117,886$ -$ - 41$ -$ -$ 41$ - - - 140 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT-WORKFORCE HOUSING -$ 20,000$ -$ - -$ -$ -$ -$ - - - TOTAL SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS 3,821,202 $ 4,822,368$ 863,280 $ 22.6% 3,071,788 $ 3,132,058$ 3,672,803$ (60,270)$ (1.9%) 80.4% 59.0% 230LEVEE DEBT SERVICE FUND (8) 8,693,523$ 3,992,300$ (4,701,223)$ (54.1%) 2,761,103$ 9,186,110$ -$ (6,425,007)$ (69.9%) 31.8% 62.0%

CAPITAL PROJECTS FUNDS
301 CIP PROJECTS-CITY (9) 143,250$ 285,250$ 142,000$ 99.1% 270,616$ 859,804$ 356,665$ (589,188)$ (68.5%) 188.9% 385.7% 326 CAPITAL ASSET ACQUISITION AND REPLACEMENT FUND1,279,000$ 1,268,000$ (11,000)$ (0.9%) 960,938$ 1,066,924$ 1,457,638$ (105,986)$ (9.9%) 75.1% 63.5% 327 LEVEE PROJECT FUND 50,000$ 90,000$ 40,000$ 80.0% 86,921$ 85,057,252$ -$ (84,970,331)$ (99.9%) 173.8% 100.1% TOTAL CAPITAL PROJECTS FUNDS 1,472,250 $ 1,643,250$ 171,000 $ 11.6% 1,318,475 $ 86,983,980$ 1,814,303$ (85,665,505)$ (98.5%) 89.6% 100.1%

ENTERPRISE FUNDS
401 WATER REVENUE 17,761,142$ 17,761,142$ -$ - 10,194,479$ 11,586,962$ 10,727,351$ (1,392,483)$ (12.0%) 57.4% 68.0% 405 WATER CIP -$ -$ -$ - 300$ -$ -$ 300$ - - - 408 WATER EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT 633,532$ 633,532$ -$ - 475,149$ 332,975$ 342,526$ 142,174$ 42.7% 75.0% 75.0% 409 WATER CONNECTION FEES 452,500$ 452,500$ -$ - 243,923$ -$ -$ 243,923$ - 53.9% - 451 WASTEWATER REVENUE 17,635,668$ 17,635,668$ -$ - 11,116,453$ 10,135,359$ 9,028,161$ 981,094$ 9.7% 63.0% 67.2% 453 WASTEWATER RATE STABILIZATION -$ -$ -$ - -$ -$ -$ -$ - - - 454 SM-FC PUBLIC FINANCING AUTHORITY LOAN 100$ 100$ -$ - 59$ 954$ 294,084$ (895)$ (93.8%) 59.0% 8.0% 455 WASTEWATER CIP -$ -$ -$ - -$ 11,027$ -$ (11,027)$ (100.0%) - - 456 WASTEWATER PLANT EXPANSION 636$ 5,400$ 4,764$ 749.1% 5,367$ 948$ 920$ 4,419$ 466.1% 843.9% 149.1% 458 WASTEWATER EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT 254,683$ 254,683$ -$ - 191,012$ 202,010$ 211,372$ (10,998)$ (5.4%) 75.0% 75.0% 459 WASTEWATER NOTES/WIFIA LOAN (10) 33,676,585$ 66,860,640$ 33,184,055$ 98.5% 63,709$ -$ -$ 63,709$ - 0.2% - 460 WASTEWATER CONNECTION FEES 302,000$ 302,000$ -$ - 92,988$ -$ -$ 92,988$ - 30.8% - 461 STATE REVOLVING LOAN FUND (11) -$ 33,044,400$ 33,044,400$ - -$ -$ -$ -$ - - - TOTAL ENTERPRISE FUNDS 70,716,846 $ 136,950,065$ 66,233,219 $ 93.7% 22,383,439 $ 22,270,235$ 20,604,414$ 113,204 $ 0.5% 31.7% 66.9%

INTERNAL SERVICE FUNDS
501 VEHICLE RENTAL FUND 1,802,082$ 1,802,082$ -$ - 1,336,064$ 1,302,282$ 1,364,103$ 33,782$ 2.6% 74.1% 75.5% 502 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT FUND 695,119$ 695,119$ -$ - 553,178$ 426,310$ 586,728$ 126,868$ 29.8% 79.6% 80.4% 503 SELF INSURANCE FUND 494,670$ 584,332$ 89,662$ 18.1% 437,250$ 404,028$ 360,593$ 33,222$ 8.2% 88.4% 74.5% 504 INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY 2,384,155$ 2,384,155$ -$ - 1,795,880$ 1,657,893$ 1,512,630$ 137,987$ 8.3% 75.3% 74.6% 505 BUILDING MAINTENANCE 3,403,877$ 3,403,877$ -$ - 2,557,111$ 2,529,921$ 2,642,239$ 27,190$ 1.1% 75.1% 75.2% 507 LONGEVITY RECOGNITION PLAN 239,090$ 239,090$ -$ - 178,209$ 181,582$ 204,396$ (3,373)$ (1.9%) 74.5% 72.8% 508 PEMHCA FUND 229,280$ 229,280$ -$ - 168,973$ 178,723$ 222,460$ (9,750)$ (5.5%) 73.7% 69.9% 509 COMPENSATED ABSENCES FUND 505,923$ 505,923$ -$ - 378,747$ 336,508$ 321,583$ 42,239$ 12.6% 74.9% 73.6% TOTAL INTERNAL SERVICE FUNDS 9,754,196 $ 9,843,858$ 89,662 $ 0.9% 7,405,412 $ 7,017,247$ 7,214,732$ 388,165 $ 5.5% 75.9% 75.1%

FIDUCIARY FUNDS
604 SUCESSOR ANGENCY 287,495$ 275,745$ (11,750)$ (4.1%) 275,649$ 62,138$ 279,960$ 213,511$ 343.6% 95.9% 16.9% 607 TOURISM ASSESSMENT 85,868$ 85,868$ -$ - 31,430$ -$ -$ 31,430$ - 36.6% - 608 SMC FIRE 138,000 $ 138,000$ - $ - 105,368 $ - $ -$ 105,368$ - 76.4% - TOTAL CITY / EMID FUNDS 146,319,459 $ 210,980,631$ 64,523,286 $ 44.1% 74,062,785 $ 158,826,405$ 66,383,229$ (84,763,620)$ (53.4%) 50.6% 80.5% 1 The majority of property tax revenues are distributed by San Mateo County in December and April of each fiscal year. 2 TOT revenues were still less than 40% of pre-pandemic levels. As a result, projections for the full year have to reduced accordingly. 3 Projected Intergovernmental revenues include a $4,054,920 ARPA payment ($864,920 higher than original Federal estimates) and a $25,777 carryover of Measure K grant reimbursements. 4 FY 21/22 revenues for the Parks and Recreation Dept. are expected to improve year-over-year as more Recreation Center programming and facility rentals resumed over the course of the year. 5 Although short term interest rates have started to improve, they were still much lower than projected (e.g. our investment portfolio yield was 0.53% as of 3/31/22). As a result, full year revenues forecast have been lowered. 6 FY 21/22 revenues Include $57,500 from Gilead to support non-profits 7 Includes $643,646 of PLHA grant for relocation services and housing subsidies in FY 21/22. 8 Reduced FY 21/22 revenues as budget inadvertently included bond premium from FY 20/21. 9 FY 21/22 revenue projection includes estimated contributions from various sports groups for the Sea Cloud Park Synthetic Turf project (CIP 301-659) 10 FY 21/22 revenue projection reflects proceeds from revenue notes 11 FY 21/22 revenue projection reflects CA State Revolving Loan (SRF) Notes and Explanation of Variances:

217
Attachment 4
ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL INCREASE / % OF BUDGET % OF BUDGET FY 2021-22 FY 2020-21 FY 2019-20 DECREASE / % FY 2021-22 FY 2020-21 AMENDED 9 MONTHS 9 MONTHS 9 MONTHS FROM INCREASE 9 MONTHS 9 MONTHS Fund BUDGET PROJECTED $ % AS OF 3/31/2022 AS OF 3/31/2021 AS OF 3/31/2020 PRIOR YEAR (DECREASE) AS OF 3/31/2022 AS OF 3/31/2021 GENERAL FUND (FUNDS 001-003)
DEPARTMENTS:

COUNCIL/BOARD (1) 373,882$ 373,882$ -$ 0.0% 301,537$ 299,079$ 344,892$ 2,458$ 0.8% 80.7% 79.3% CITY MANAGER (1) 1,369,922$ 1,369,922$ -$ 0.0% 1,046,187$ 913,924$ 979,835$ 132,263$ 14.5% 76.4% 67.6% COMMUNICATIONS/CITY CLERK 849,051$ 849,051$ -$ 0.0% 592,436$ 608,139$ 564,754$ (15,703)$ (2.6%) 69.8% 66.8% CITY ATTORNEY 589,767$ 589,767$ -$ 0.0% 324,068$ 353,555$ 368,127$ (29,487)$ (8.3%) 54.9% 61.9% HUMAN RESOURCES 836,420$ 836,420$ -$ 0.0% 557,815$ 390,159$ 376,248$ 167,656$ 43.0% 66.7% 87.0% FINANCIAL SERVICES 1,052,583$ 1,052,583$ -$ 0.0% 761,884$ 602,720$ 691,142$ 159,164$ 26.4% 72.4% 60.9% PARKS & RECREATION 8,442,235$ 8,442,235$ -$ 0.0% 5,938,509$ 6,156,822$ 5,300,581$ (218,313)$ (3.5%) 70.3% 77.5% POLICE (1) 15,868,171$ 15,868,171$ -$ 0.0% 12,074,613$ 11,079,090$ 10,731,845$ 995,523$ 9.0% 76.1% 73.1% FIRE (1) 11,247,899$ 11,247,899$ -$ 0.0% 10,407,212$ 9,368,729$ 9,737,235$ 1,038,483$ 11.1% 92.5% 91.5% COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 3,461,064$ 3,461,064$ -$ 0.0% 2,367,150$ 2,310,361$ 2,134,802$ 56,789$ 2.5% 68.4% 74.7% PUBLIC WORKS 3,157,623$ 3,157,623$ -$ 0.0% 1,852,032$ 1,490,221$ 1,932,431$ 361,811$ 24.3% 58.7% 56.4% LIBRARY 547,618$ 547,618$ -$ 0.0% 410,713$ 375,729$ 381,789$ 34,984 $ 9.3% 75.0% 75.0% 001 SUBTOTAL 47,796,235$ 47,796,235$ -$ - 36,634,156$ 33,948,528$ 33,543,681$ 2,685,628$ 7.9% 76.6% 76.8% 002 PROPERTY TAX ADMINISTRATION 306,000$ 306,000$ -$ 0.0% 152,731$ 138,847$ 126,224$ 13,884$ 10.0% 49.9% 49.0% 003 SPECIAL RECREATION 1,873,657$ 1,873,657$ -$ - 1,056,696$ 921,145$ 1,554,401$ 135,551$ 14.7% 56.4% 47.6% 49,975,892$ 49,975,892$ - $ - 37,843,583$ 35,008,520$ 35,224,306$ 2,835,063 $ 8.1% 75.7% 75.4% 005GENERAL FUND - COMMUNITY BENEFITS PROGRAM883,320$ 883,320$ - $ 0.0% 209,557$ 111,153$ 142,353$ 98,404 $ 88.5% 23.7% 10.9% 006GENERAL FUND - DARE 600$ 600$ - $ 0.0% - $ -$ -$ -$ - - - 007GENERAL FUND - SOLAR INCENTIVE GRANT PROGRAM25,000$ 25,000$ - $ 0.0% 9,000 $ 9,000$ 17,000$ - $ 0.0% 36.0% 18.0% 008GENERAL FUND - RENTAL ASSISTANCE 58,000$ - $ 58,000$ 100.0% - $ -$ -$ -$ - - - 009GENERAL FUND - ASSET SEIZURE 22,175$ 1,000$ 21,175$ 95.5% - $ -$ 12,748$ - $ - - - 010GENERAL FUND - PENSION STABILIZATION FUND -$ -$ -$ - - $ -$ -$ -$ - - - 011GENERAL FUND - FACILITIES REPLACEMENT -$ -$ -$ - - $ -$ -$ -$ - - - 012SUSTAINABLE FOSTER CITY 221,562$ 94,960$ 126,602$ 57.1% 92,307 $ 17,917$ - $ 74,390$ 415.2% 41.7% 7.4% TOTAL ALL GENERAL FUND (FUNDS 001-011) 51,186,549$ 50,980,772$ 205,777 $ 0.4% 38,154,447$ 35,146,590$ 35,396,407$ 3,007,857 $ 8.6% 74.5% 73.5%

SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS
101 TRAFFIC SAFETY 60,000$ 60,000$ -$ 0.0% 45,000$ 62,250$ 74,018$ (17,250)$ (27.7%) 75.0% 75.0% 102 MEASURE "A" 2,113,596$ 2,113,596$ -$ 0.0% -$ 4,442$ 37,953$ (4,442)$ (100.0%) - 0.6% 103 GAS TAX 1,473,566$ 1,473,566$ -$ 0.0% 477,034$ 673,195$ 450,622$ (196,161)$ (29.1%) 32.4% 77.4% 104 PARK-IN-LIEU FUND 745,435$ 745,435$ -$ 0.0% -$ -$ 1,167,232$ -$ - - - 105 MEASURE "M" 219,300$ 219,300$ -$ 0.0% -$ -$ -$ -$ - - - 108 SLESF/COPS GRANT 100,000$ 100,000$ -$ 0.0% 134,232$ 130,219$ 128,079$ 4,013$ 3.1% 134.2% 130.2% 114 CALOPPS 534,467$ 534,467$ -$ 0.0% 346,947$ 355,979$ 339,245$ (9,032)$ (2.5%) 64.9% 67.6% 116 FOSTER CITY FOUNDATION 112,027$ 112,027$ -$ 0.0% 21,508$ 7,351$ 4,142$ 14,157$ 192.6% 19.2% 6.6% 119 SB 1 ROAD MAINTENANCE AND REHAB 1,592,850$ 1,592,850$ -$ 0.0% 174,492$ 300,091$ 52,235$ (125,599)$ (41.9%) 11.0% 87.5% 122 HOUSING SUCCESSOR-LMIHF 134,760$ 134,760$ -$ 0.0% 62,621$ 82,594$ 46,051$ (19,973)$ (24.2%) 46.5% 62.0% 124 FC AFFORDABLE HOUSING FUND 1,043,636$ 1,043,636$ -$ 0.0% 276,618$ 3,951$ -$ 272,667$ 6901.2% 26.5% - 125 -$ -$ -$ - - $ 181,599$ 29,544$ (181,599)$ (100.0%) - - 127 BAERS (PROGRAM CLOSED OUT IN FY 20/21)(2) -$ -$ -$ - -$ 45,883$ 181,284$ (45,883)$ (100.0%) - 15.2% 128 GENERAL PLAN MAINTENANCE 915,763$ 915,763$ -$ 0.0% 151,583$ 96,568$ 19,541$ 55,015$ 57.0% 16.6% 184.6% 129 CONSTRUCTION AND DEMO RECYCLING 331,750$ 331,750$ -$ 0.0% 31,170$ 3,595$ 3,497$ 27,575$ 767.0% 9.4% 4.7% 130 TECHNOLOGY MAINTENANCE 124,418$ 124,418$ -$ 0.0% 93,090$ 84,696$ 62,951$ 8,394$ 9.9% 74.8% 73.3% 131 SB 1186 1,300$ 1,300$ -$ 0.0% -$ 50$ -$ (50)$ (100.0%) - 3.8% 132 SMIP FEE 500$ 500$ -$ 0.0% -$ -$ -$ -$ - - - 133 CRV GRANT FUND 13,000$ 13,000$ -$ 0.0% 11,781$ 6,854$ 8,001$ 4,927$ 71.9% 90.6% 52.7% 134 CURBSIDE RECLYCLING 25,000$ 25,000$ -$ 0.0% -$ -$ -$ -$ - - - 135 GREEN BUILDING FEE 500$ 500$ -$ 0.0% -$ -$ -$ -$ - - - 136 MEASURE W 500,000 $ 500,000$ - $ 0.0% 1,500 $ - $ -$ 1,500$ - 0.3% - 137 COMMERCIAL LINKAGE GEE - $ -$ -$ - - $ -$ -$ -$ - - - 138 TENANT RELOCATION ASSISTANCE 164,000$ 164,000$ - $ 0.0% - $ -$ -$ -$ - - - 139 WORKFORCE HOUSING 108,656 $ 108,656$ - $ 0.0% 6,060 $ - $ -$ 6,060$ - 5.6% - 140 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT-WORKFORCE HOUSING -$ -$ -$ - - $ -$ -$ -$ - - - TOTAL SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS 10,314,524$ 10,314,524$ -$ - 1,833,636$ 2,039,317$ 2,604,395$ (205,681)$ (10.1%) 17.8% 55.6% 230DEBT SERVICE FUND (3) 6,492,688$ 6,492,688$ -$ 0.0% 6,488,113$ 1,305,682$ -$ 5,182,431$ 396.9% 99.9% 1.5% FY 2021-22

CITY OF FOSTER CITY/ESTERO MUNICIPAL IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT COMPARISON OF BUDGET VS. PROJECTED ACTUAL EXPENDITURES

BUDGET VS ACTUAL & CURRENT VS PRIOR
FOR THE NINE MONTHS ENDED MARCH 31, 2022

SAVINGS (EXCESS) FROM

ADOPTED BUDGET
TOTAL GENERAL FUND (FUNDS 001-003)
SUSTAINABLE FOSTER CITY (MOVED TO FUND 012)

218
Attachment 4
ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL INCREASE / % OF BUDGET % OF BUDGET FY 2021-22 FY 2020-21 FY 2019-20 DECREASE / % FY 2021-22 FY 2020-21 AMENDED 9 MONTHS 9 MONTHS 9 MONTHS FROM INCREASE 9 MONTHS 9 MONTHS Fund BUDGET PROJECTED $ % AS OF 3/31/2022 AS OF 3/31/2021 AS OF 3/31/2020 PRIOR YEAR (DECREASE) AS OF 3/31/2022 AS OF 3/31/2021 FY 2021-22

CITY OF FOSTER CITY/ESTERO MUNICIPAL IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT COMPARISON OF BUDGET VS. PROJECTED ACTUAL EXPENDITURES

BUDGET VS ACTUAL & CURRENT VS PRIOR
FOR THE NINE MONTHS ENDED MARCH 31, 2022

SAVINGS (EXCESS) FROM

ADOPTED BUDGET

CAPITAL PROJECTS FUNDS
301 CIP PROJECTS-CITY 5,811,476$ 5,811,476$ -$ 0.0% 35,359$ 587,898$ 720,704$ (552,539)$ (94.0%) 0.6% 235.2% 326

CAPITAL ASSET ACQUISITION AND
REPLACEMENT FUND 7,000,000$ 7,000,000$ - $ 0.0% - $ -$ -$ -$ - - - 327 LEVEE PROJECT FUND 50,052,978$ 50,052,978$ -$ 0.0% 21,221,761$ 18,100,356$ -$ 3,121,405$ 17.2% 42.4% - TOTAL CAPITAL PROJECTS FUNDS 62,864,454$ 62,864,454$ -$ - 21,257,120$ 18,688,254$ 720,704$ 2,568,866$ 13.7% 33.8% 7475.3%

ENTERPRISE FUNDS
401 WATER REVENUE 15,874,799$ 15,874,799$ -$ 0.0% 9,348,576$ 9,751,921$ 9,804,200$ (403,345)$ (4.1%) 58.9% 64.9% 405 CIP-WATER 5,588,571$ 5,588,571$ -$ 0.0% 584,211$ 258,916$ 247,350$ 325,295$ 125.6% 10.5% - 408 WATER EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT 219,500$ 219,500$ -$ 0.0% 35,184$ 43,757$ 43,261$ (8,573)$ (19.6%) 16.0% 81.8% 409 WATER CONNECTION FEES 450,000$ 450,000$ -$ 0.0% -$ -$ -$ -$ - - - 451 WASTEWATER REVENUE 8,347,922$ 8,347,922$ -$ 0.0% 4,897,617$ 4,586,472$ 4,455,076$ 311,145$ 6.8% 58.7% 58.2% 453 WASTEWATER RATE STABILIZATION - $ -$ -$ - - $ -$ -$ -$ - - - 454 SM-FC PUBLIC FINANCING AUTHORITY LOAN 2,087,125$ 2,087,125$ - $ 0.0% 2,087,125$ 2,083,625$ 922,542$ 3,500 $ 0.2% 100.0% 99.8% 455 CIP-WASTEWATER 62,240,347$ 62,240,347$ -$ 0.0% 17,270,569$ 6,522,980$ 7,331,936$ 10,747,589$ 164.8% 27.7% 31.6% 456 WASTEWATER PLANT EXPANSION - $ -$ -$ - - $ -$ -$ -$ - - - 458 WASTEWATER EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT 179,044$ 179,044$ -$ 0.0% 111,570$ -$ -$ 111,570$ - 62.3% - 459 WASTEWATER NOTES/WIFIA LOAN (4) 2,054,100$ 2,054,100$ - $ 0.0% 2,047,156$ - $ -$ 2,047,156$ - 99.7% - 460 WASTEWATER CONNECTION FEES 300,000$ 300,000$ - $ 0.0% - $ -$ -$ -$ - - - 461 STATE REVOLVING LOAN FUND -$ -$ -$ - - $ -$ -$ -$ - - - TOTAL ENTERPRISE FUNDS 97,341,408 $ 97,341,408$ - $ - 36,382,008$ 23,247,671$ 22,804,365$ 13,134,337$ 56.5% 37.4% 49.8%

INTERNAL SERVICE FUNDS
501 VEHICLE RENTAL FUND 2,524,099$ 2,524,099$ -$ 0.0% 1,221,993$ 775,198$ 1,327,365$ 446,795$ 57.6% 48.4% 34.2% 502 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT FUND 403,700$ 403,700$ -$ 0.0% 45,873$ 119,523$ 791,823$ (73,650)$ (61.6%) 11.4% 13.6% 503 SELF INSURANCE FUND (1) 862,232$ 862,232$ -$ 0.0% 811,161$ 518,797$ 436,814$ 292,364$ 56.4% 94.1% 75.3% 504 INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY 2,541,520$ 2,541,520$ -$ 0.0% 1,347,864$ 1,211,291$ 1,215,010$ 136,573$ 11.3% 53.0% 59.2% 505 BUILDING MAINTENANCE 3,301,113$ 3,301,113$ -$ 0.0% 1,725,151$ 1,638,711$ 1,864,627$ 86,440$ 5.3% 52.3% 50.1% 507 LONGEVITY RECOGNITION PLAN 238,320$ 238,320$ -$ 0.0% 146,305$ 136,378$ 135,910$ 9,927$ 7.3% 61.4% 58.5% 508 PEMHCA FUND 214,320$ 214,320$ -$ 0.0% 135,936$ 124,902$ 122,049$ 11,034$ 8.8% 63.4% 61.4% 509 COMPENSATED ABSENCES FUND 474,368$ 474,368$ -$ 0.0% 233,968$ 51,399$ 136,471$ 182,569$ 355.2% 49.3% 12.0% TOTAL INTERNAL SERVICE FUNDS 10,559,672$ 10,559,672$ - $ - 5,668,251$ 4,576,199$ 6,030,069$ 1,092,052$ 23.9% 53.7% 45.7%

FIDUCIARY FUND
604 SUCESSOR ANGENCY 549,591 $ 549,591$ - $ 0.0% 11,091$ 10,283$ 20,482$ 808 $ 7.9% 2.0% 2.8% 607 TOURISM ASSESSMENT 85,868 $ 85,868$ - $ 0.0% 31,430$ 31,430 $ - 36.6% - 608 SMC FIRE FEES 138,000 $ 138,000$ - $ 0.0% 89,907$ 89,907 $ - 65.2% - TOTAL CITY / EMID FUNDS 239,532,754 $ 239,326,977$ 205,777 $ 0.1% 109,916,003 $ 85,013,996$ 67,576,422$ 24,902,007$ 29.3% 45.9% 43.3% 1 2
3 4
Notes and Explanation of Variances:

Expenditures for various departments exceeded 75% of the annual budget as various payments were made that covered costs for the full year, including annual insurance premiums and required employer unfunded accrued liability pension payments (e.g. the City elected to prepay the entire year's monthly unfunded liability obligations to CalPERS in July). These July payments totaled $6.79M, $6.21M, and $5.59M for FY 21/22, FY 20/21, and FY 19/20 respectively. The citywide cash savings from the early payments were $233,000, $214,000, and $199,000 respectively. The City paid its fourth quarter contribution to SMC Fire JPA in March 2022.

In September 2020, the City discontinued hosting the Bay Area Employee Relations Services (BAERS) program and transferred the remaining Fund Balance to the General Fund The City made its August 2021 Levee GO Bond debt service payment in FY 21/22.

Issuance Cost and debt service for 2021 Wastewater Revenue Notes

219
DATE: May 16, 2022

TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council

VIA: Edmund Suen, Interim City Manager

FROM: Priscilla Schaus, Communications Director/City Clerk

SUBJECT: APPOINTMENT OF ONE MEMBER TO NEW FULL TERM ON

THE PLANNING COMMISSION

RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the City Council interview and by resolution, appoint one (1) member to new full term from June 1, 2022 through May 31, 2026 on the Planning Commission. With this appointment, the Planning Commission will have a full complement.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
A notice of vacancy to fill the new full term on the Planning Commission was advertised in the local newspapers, posted on social media, and displayed on the City's website, FCTV, and the marquee for four (4) weeks.

Seven residents submitted their applications by the established deadline.

However, one withdrew their application. The following six residents (listed in alphabetical order) are to be considered tonight:

1. Sirish Bindal

2. Sam Gill

3. Gaurav Keswani

4. Maxwell Kwan

5. Phoebe Venkat
220

6. Cindy Wang
All applicants have been invited to attend this City Council meeting.

Attached is the resolution appointing one member to the Foster City Planning Commission (name will be filled in after appointment).

FISCAL IMPACT
There is no fiscal impact.

CITY COUNCIL VISION, MISSION, AND VALUE/PRIORITY AREAS
This action promotes continuation of the "City Council Operations and Improved Community Engagement" Value/Priority Area by promoting resident engagement and inviting public participation though citizen advisory committees/planning commission.

Attachments:
Attachment 1 - Resolution
Attachment 2 - Notice of Vacancies
Attachment 3 - Planning Commission Applications
221
RESOLUTION NO. ________

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FOSTER CITY

APPOINTING ONE MEMBER TO THE FOSTER CITY PLANNING COMMISSION

CITY OF FOSTER CITY
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FOSTER CITY, as follows:

WHEREAS, effective June 1, 2022, _________________ is hereby appointed to fill one new full term from June 1, 2022 to May 31, 2026 on the Foster City Planning Commission.

PASSED AND ADOPTED as a Resolution of the City Council of the City of Foster City at the Regular Meeting held on the 16th day of May, 2022, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

RICHA AWASTHI, MAYOR
ATTEST:

PRISCILLA SCHAUS, CITY CLERK
222
Attachment 2

NEWS RELEASE
The City of Foster City
Priscilla Schaus, Public Information Officer
[email protected]; (650) 286-3250

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Press Release #032822-01
Serve Your Community – Join the Planning Commission
Contact: Priscilla Schaus, Communications Director/City Clerk, (650) 286-3250, [email protected]
Foster City, CA; March 28, 2022 – Want to make a positive impact in Foster City? Serving on a Commission is an opportunity for you to participate in local government and serve your community. The City of Foster City is currently accepting applications for the Planning Commission to fill one vacancy. Term information is as follows:
Planning Commission (one vacancy): Four-year term, starting June 1, 2022 to May 31, 2026. Meetings are held on the 1st and 3rd Thursday of each month, and Study Sessions, if needed, are held on the 1st and 3rd Tuesday of each month.

The Planning Commission consists of five Foster City residents. To be eligible to apply, a resident must be at least eighteen years old and must have continuously resided in the City for a period of at least three years immediately prior to submission of an application for appointment to the Planning Commission. Community involvement in Foster City, a license in architecture and relevant experience will be considered in evaluating applicants. Appointments are made by the City Council. Planning Commissioners are compensated $269 per month and are eligible to participate in the City’s health benefits plan.

The Planning Commission acts under Policies and Ordinances adopted by the City Council as set forth in Chapter 2.28 of the Foster City Municipal Code. The Commission makes recommendations to the City Council regarding General Plan amendments, rezoning, zoning ordinance amendments, environmental review, and other matters related to land use and development in the City. The Commission also reviews and renders decisions on conditional use permits, major room additions, new home constructions, use permit modifications, and major development projects pursuant to the architectural and design review and subdivision sections of the Foster City Municipal Code.
223
Those interested are invited to submit applications by 5:00 p.m. on Thursday, April 28, 2022.

Applicants are required to attend the May 16, 2022 City Council meeting for consideration of official appointment. Subject to public health conditions, applicants may be invited to join the meeting via teleconference. For more information and to download an application, visit www.fostercity.org/bc-pc. Return completed applications by email to [email protected].

Please note that incomplete applications will not be accepted. ###
224
225
226
227
228
229
230
231
232
233
234
235
236
DATE: May 16, 2022

TO: President and Members of the Estero Municipal Improvement District (EMID) Board of Directors

VIA: Edmund Suen, Interim District Manager

FROM: Louis Sun, Public Works Director

SUBJECT: WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT MASTER PLAN
IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT (CIP 455-652) - CLEAN WATER
PROGRAM - UPDATE FOR QUARTER 1 – JANUARY
THROUGH MARCH 2022

RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the Board of Directors of the Estero Municipal Improvement District (EMID) by minute order, receive and accept this progress update on the Clean Water Program (CWP). No further action is required by the Board of Directors.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This report summarizes the progress-to-date of the Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP) Master Plan Improvements Project (CIP 455-652) - Clean Water Program for the City of San Mateo/EMID Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP) for the months of January 2022 through March 2022. The report includes summary information about construction and other project activities over the first quarter of the calendar year.

BACKGROUND
The CWP is a comprehensive capital improvement program to rehabilitate the 237
sanitary sewer collection system in the City of San Mateo and the treatment systems at the San Mateo WWTP. EMID has 24.12% ownership of the WWTP. In October 2014, the City of San Mateo retained Jacobs to serve as the Program Manager responsible for overseeing the management of the approximately $1 billion-dollar combined program, including the coordination of the design, construction, and start-up activities of this multi-year project.

To remain apprised of the progress of the portion of the CWP for which EMID is responsible (i.e., WWTP Nutrient Removal and Wet Weather Flow Management Upgrade and Expansion Project (WWTP Expansion Project)), the EMID Board of Directors requested that staff provide updates on a regular basis. The WWTP Expansion Project is being performed using a Construction Manager at Risk (CMAR) delivery method, whereby the contractor is involved in the project early in the design process and the City benefits from the contractor providing constructability input and insight to inform the design development.

The Program Manager and Construction Manager is Jacobs. The WWTP Expansion Project Design Engineer is HDR. The team for the disinfection improvements portion of the WWTP Expansion Project is Trussell Technologies. HDR is also providing Engineering Services During Construction (ESDC). The CMAR is Sundt (https://www.sundt.com)

ANALYSIS
Construction for the WWTP Expansion Project is comprised of three separate bid packages identified as GMPs (Guaranteed Maximum Price). Construction is progressing well and on schedule overall.

Construction Package 1 (GMP 1) – Site Preparation, mass excavation, shoring and dewatering (Original Agreement with Sundt Construction Inc.), is approximately 92% complete with the construction of the last remaining scope in progress. The timeline for the completion of the remaining scope was constrained by Pacific Gas & Electric (PG&E), due to certain sequencing constraints related to existing utilities. As of February 2022, PG&E has completed their work. Subsequently, the City executed a contract change order to extend the final completion date for Package 1 to July 1, 2022, to accommodate completion of the remaining scope.

Construction Package 2 (GMP 2) – Foundation Piles (Amendment No. 1 to the Agreement with Sundt), is complete. The last remaining work included 238
installation of pile rebar hooks located in a highly active area with concrete and yard piping installations (as part of the work associated with Package 3).

This work was transferred to Package 3 so as not to impact critical path work in Package 3, to better maintain associated access and laydown areas, and to mitigate safety risks in these areas. This allows the City to close out the Package 2 contract without adding contract days for final completion.

Package 2 contract is currently in the closeout phase.

Construction Package 3 (GMP 3) – WWTP Facilities (Amendment No. 2 to the Agreement with Sundt), has progressed significantly and is approximately 39% complete. Some of the major ongoing work includes formwork, rebar, concrete pouring of slabs and walls, yard piping, process mechanical, plumbing, and electrical work throughout the treatment structure. Construction of the Administration Building is underway. Other ongoing general sitewide work includes potholing for utilities locating, earthwork (excavation and backfilling), replacement of existing emergency generators, and improvements to the existing disinfection system. The work under Package 3 is anticipated to be complete by August 2023, followed by retrofit of existing facilities and commissioning of the integrated WWTP by June 2024.

QUARTERLY CONSTRUCTION REPORT
Attachment 1 consists of selected portions of the Quarterly Progress Report for January through March 2022 published by the Program Management Team on April 25, 2022, summarizing the budget, schedule, and project activities that have occurred during the first quarter of 2022 and activities that are anticipated to occur in the second quarter of 2022 for the following projects:
WWTP Expansion Project (comprised of three separate bid packages GMP-1, GMP-2, and GMP-3),
Immediate Action Projects (IAPs), and
Annual Major Component Projects (AMCs).

Attachment 2 consists of a site plan showing the locations of the various process units being constructed as part of the projects.

Attachment 3 includes photographs of construction activities at the site over the past 3 months.

More detailed information, including additional photographs and architectural 239
renderings of the completed WWTP Expansion Project as well as real time video of the active construction, are available on the Clean Water Program Project site: https://cleanwaterprogramsanmateo.org/wwtp/.

FINANCING
The Program through the San Mateo-Foster City Public Financing Authority (“PFA”) is obtaining additional financing through the two programs as described below:

Water Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act (WIFIA) - The PFA approved the close of the WIFIA loan in November 2020 in the total amount of $277.2 million (San Mateo share is $210.4 million and EMID share is $67.8 million).

The WIFIA loan has excellent rates (1.32% for San Mateo and 1.14% for EMID). We have until 8/1/25 to start drawing on the WIFIA loan. 2021 Wastewater Revenue Notes, Series A (Estero Municipal Improvement District) - On July 1, 2021, the San Mateo-Foster City Public Financing Authority issued $62.76 million of 2021 Wastewater Revenue Notes, Series A (Estero Municipal Improvement District) to attain a cost savings (from lower interest rates than the WIFIA loan) of approximately $1.1 million for the financing of EMID’s share of WWTP project costs. These notes have a maturity date of 8/1/25 when the City will draw on the WIFIA Loan to take out the notes.

State Revolving Fund (SRF) –The technical package was updated and submitted to the State on February 14, 2020, to reflect design changes that have occurred since the initial application submittal in 2017. The PFA is currently negotiating credit and legal terms and conditions with the SRF program and anticipates that those tasks will be completed this fall. The program is potentially eligible for approximately $137 million in SRF low- interest loans, of which EMID would be eligible for approximately $33.7 million.

FISCAL IMPACT
There is no fiscal impact associated with this update.

CITY COUNCIL VISION, MISSION, AND VALUE/PRIORITY AREA
This item is in alignment with the “Facilities and Infrastructure” Value/Priority 240
area. The key outcome is to continue to make progress towards delivery of a successful WWTP project on time and budget while meeting regulatory requirements, address aging infrastructure needs, and progressing sustainability goals through production of reusable water.

Attachments:
Attachment 1 - Selected Portions of Quarterly Progress Report - 1st Quarter Report - January 1, 2022 to March 31, 2022
Attachment 2 - Wastewater Treatment Plant Site Plan
Attachment 3 - Construction Photographs
241
GMP1 – Contract
Contractor Sundt
Award Date 5/6/2019
Construction NTP 6/4/2019
Duration (calendar days) 1124
Contracted Completion Date 7/1/2022
Total Original Contract Amount $33,098,178.00
Contingency Amount $1,725,000.00
Forecast Completion Date 7/1/2022
Current Contracted Amount $34,472,057.00
Actual Expended $29,932,453.00
GMP2 – Contract
Contractor Sundt
Award Date 5/4/2020
Construction NTP 5/5/2020
Duration (calendar days) 619
Contracted Completion Date 01/14/2022
Total Original Contract Amount $17,716,049.00
Contingency Amount $1,645,000.00
Forecast Completion Date 04/30/2022
Current Contracted Amount $17,963,767.00
Actual Expended $17,206,534.00
Active Wastewater Treatment Plant Projects
46T003 WWTP Nutrient Removal and Wet Weather Flow
Management Upgrade
Project Description:

The WWTP Upgrade and Expansion Project will replace aging infrastructure, provide capacity for wet weather flows, comply with regulatory requirements, enhance reliability, and produce a higher quality effluent that meets current and future permit requirements and Title 22 recycled water quality. Producing a higher quality effluent will enable the City to develop a water reuse Program.

GMP3 – Contract
Contractor Sundt
Award Date 9/21/2020
Construction NTP 9/22/2020
Duration (calendar days) 1420
Contracted Completion Date 8/12/2024
Total Original Contract Amount $379,880,747.00
Revised Contract Amount $380,637,980.00
Original Contingency Amount $13,900,000.00
Revised Contingency Amount $15,297,282.00
Forecast Completion Date 8/12/2024
Current Contracted Amount $384,045,194.00
Actual Expended $113,868,610.00
Current Period Activities
Project/Construction Management
• Coordinated with Cal Water and Cal Water’s contractor, West Valley for the construction of the water line ex
tension in 3rd Avenue. Construction completed in February 2022. • Coordinated with PG&E to progress review, approvals, and solidify construction schedule for energizing the SEMS and relocation of its utilities from Detroit Drive. SEMS energized on February 4, 2022. Utilities Relocation to start in May 2022
• Developed a high-level summary project schedule for GMP-3 three-year look-ahead focused on training, and s
tart-up and commissioning activities for City’s planning purposes; participated in Sundt's monthly start -up and c
ommissioning planning meeting.

January thr ough March 2022 P A G E 10

SAN MATEO CLEAN WATER PROGRAM QUARTERLY REPORT
Q1 2022
Project Inside
Project Manager Leswin DCunha
Project Type Wastewater System
Phase Construction

Attachment 1
242

• Monthly WWTP update meeting with Foster City management team.

Engineering Design/ Services During Construction
• Title 22 Recycled Water: HDR, Jacobs, City staff and Sundt are negotiating the change order for this additional work
• Interpretive Signage: RHAA working on the final design phase. • ESDC: HDR continued review of submittals and RFIs on all three GMPs; development of design change notices; onsite and remote support by Resident Engineer. • PG&E: coordinated with PG&E and AT&T to review and finalize the joint trench plans for the relocated utilities.
• Cal Water: coordinated with Cal Water and their contractor for construction of the water line extension in 3rd Avenue. Construction completed in Feb 2022.

Permitting
• SWPPP: Worked with Sundt and their sub, Hydro compliance, to update both the Construction and Industrial SWPPPs to incorporate the existing WWTP site into Sundt’s CGP.

Public Outreach
• PM/CM and the CWP Public Outreach Lead coordinated on regular project updates to the website, newsletter, social media, etc.

Construction
GMP-1
• Continued electrical installations for the SEMS including PG&E inspections, and completion of punch list items from previous PG&E inspections. SEMS energized on Feb 4, 2022. Work on the southeast storm drainage system modifications has begun
GMP-2
• Continued installation of pile rebar hooks and minor repairs to the piles’ caps. Remaining work transferred to GMP3
GMP-3
• Electrical, concrete, and minor mechanical work was performed for the new facilities in all areas. • Commissioning meetings were held to continue discussing start-up activities, including roles and responsibilities.
• Yard piping work in the West Corridor continued to the headworks. • Continued potholing in the East Corridor to support upcoming yard piping activities in the area. • Continued pricing for several change events.
• Construction of the Administration Building continued with foundation and structural framing work

January through March 2022 P A G E 11

SAN MATEO CLEAN WATER PROGRAM QUARTERLY REPORT
Q1 2022
243

Next Period Activities
Project/Construction Management
• PG&E to advertise and award the relocation of their utilities from Detroit Drive. • Negotiations for major design changes including Detroit Drive water main loop, membrane permeate piping and standpipe material change, and Title 22 recycled water. • Finalize HDR’s amendment for additional ESDC services including development of process O&M manuals, process training, expanded discipline-specific Resident Engineer services, and related known scope reflected in the contingency budget.

Engineering Design/Services During Construction
• Title 22: Negotiate Sundt’s cost proposal.
• Interpretive Signage: RHAA to progress to final design. • ESDC: HDR to continue to provide onsite resident engineering services.

Permitting
• Upload to SMARTS the Sundt team’s proposed CGP SWPPP update to incorporate the entire WWTP site (existing and new).
• File Notice of Termination of the City’s Industrial General Permit for the WWTP • Record the WWTP Final Parcel Map with the County upon completion of relocating PG&E and AT&T’s utilities from Detroit Drive (summer 2022).

Public Outreach
• Provide project updates to the CWP Public Outreach Lead for monthly newsletter, website, and social media updates.
• Continue as-needed support in response to resident queries via the communication hotline.

Construction
GMP-1
• Southeast stormwater improvements
GMP-2
• Close out project.

GMP-3
• Concrete in Areas 51, 52, 53, 55, 56, 64, and 80.
• Underground electrical in Areas 51, 56, and 64.
• Process mechanical in Areas 52, 53, 55, and 56.
• Potholing and utilities locating in east corridors.
• Yard piping – Install the Flow Equalization (FEQ) and Secondary Effluent lines. • Earthwork – excavation, grading, and backfilling.

Januar y through March 2022 P A G E 12

SAN MATEO CLEAN WATER PROGRAM QUARTERLY REPORT
Q1 2022
244

Risks and Opportunities
• Cal Water’s New Potable Water Main Extension: Potable water service for fire suppression will be delivered by Cal Water. Cal Water notified the City on May 28, 2020, that final design is complete. Payment of deposit was made in October upon receipt of the invoice, and Cal Water issued the design package on November 10. Design completion took approximately 18 months since application was submitted in October 2018. HDR incorporated the final design for the Detroit Drive loop and Dale Avenue extension that will be executed by Sundt into GMP-3 design documents. The Program coordinated with Cal Water and reached an agreement on the City owning the Detroit Drive loop as a private system to avoid a Public Utility Easement (PUE) to Cal Water for the portion of the loop within the WWTP property. To that effect, Cal Water revised their design and cost estimate (total cost $1.35 million), which was approved by City Council on Jun 21. HDR completed modifications to the Detroit Drive loop design on account of privatization (GMP -3 design change notice 4 and 4.1). This entire infrastructure is desired to be in place by May 2022 as a critical system to support leak testing of the basins. Cal Water construction of the 3 rd Avenue water line extension was
completed in February 2022.
• PG&E’s New Primary Service: Received design from PG&E for the new power feed for the WWTP on August 25, 2020 (after approximately 2 years since application was submitted). Construction of the SEMS was completed and “ready for power” in December 2021. PG&E’s construction energized the SEMS on February 4, 2022.
• Relocation of PG&E’s Utilities from Detroit Drive: On August 8, 2020, the City sent PG&E a letter informing PG&E of its obligation to remove and relocate any facilities used or maintained under the Franchise Agreement at no expense to the City. In December 2020, the City became aware that PG&E had applied for an encroachment permit to perform the relocation work in which PG&E had inconspicuously submitted a design with a sizable portion of the work assigned to the City. The City immediately brought this to PG&E’s attention and on February 19, 2021, formally transmitted design review comments and supporting yard piping plans to assist PG&E to revise its proposed relocation design appropriately. On March 25, 2021, the City’s Special Legal Counsel issued PG&E a letter as notice that failing to relocate the utilities, no later than April 30, 2021, will result in the City pursuing its legal remedies. PG&E issued a response letter acknowledging their responsibility for relocating its utilities from Detroit Drive at its own cost pursuant to their Franchise Agreement with the City. Subsequently, the project team and PG&E coordinat ed to review and finalize PG&E’s one-line design plan (July 27, 2021). PG&E required Joint Trench design to accommodate AT&T. The Program procured Bellecci & Associates in September to develop the Joint Trench design. In December, PG&E and AT&T approved the Joint Trench plan. PG&E estimates it will take 3 to 4 months to advertise and award this relocation work. On March 21, 2022, City Council approved right of way and a public utility easement for PG&E relocation of facilities. However, currently it remains unscheduled with indication from PG&E that construction may start in May 2022.

January through March 2022 P A G E 13

SAN MATEO CLEAN WATER PROGRAM QUARTERLY REPORT
Q1 2022
245

Financial Status
 Overall EAC continue to trend closer to budget. PM and CM team are managing to reduce this gap.

Millions

Budget $532.71

Actual Cost to date $229.89

Estimate at Completion $540.06

Schedule Status
 Part of re-baseline efforts. Current forecast shows to be completed on time in August of 2024.

January through March 2022 PA G E 14

View of Areas 52, 53, 55, and 56 - Ongoing Work

SAN MATEO CLEAN WATER PROGRAM QUARTERLY REPORT
Q1 2022
246
Replace and repair aging infrastructure at the WWTP by adding screening, flexibility, and redundancy for WWTP solids processes. The project includes: (1) Mechanical bar screen and repair of concrete wall at the IJB; (2) Effluent PS #1 pumping and piping improvements; (3) replace two of the oldest pumps in PS #1; (4) Cake pumping system: add second cake pumping system; and (5) Second cake hopper system: add a second cake hopper, slide gate, access walkway, and platform.

Current Period Activities
Project/Construction Management
• Coordinated City negotiations with Contractor for time extension / delays.
 Organized and led design engineer coordination calls to expedite solutions to the sludge cake hopper and sludge cake pump issues.

Engineering Design/ Services During Construction
(Various)
• Stantec ESDC ongoing through remainder of construction period.

Permitting
 No activities this period.

Public Outreach
 No activities this period.

Construction
Immediate Action Projects, Package II (IAP II)
 Continued start-up of new centrifuge.
 Continued testing and troubleshooting of sludge Cake Pump No. 1.  Coordinated resolution of sludge cake hopper elevation conflict.

Next Period Activities
Project/Construction Management
 Continued change management support.

Engineering Design and Engineering Services During Construction  Stantec ESDC ongoing through remainder of construction period.  Continue review of submittals and RFI.

Permitting
 No activities this period.

January through March 2022 P A G E 19
Project Inside
Project Manager Tyler Kirkendall
Project Type Wastewater System
Phase Construction
Design Firm Stantec, HDR

IAP II – Contract
Contractor Myers & Sons
Award Date 2/11/2019
Construction NTP 2/19/2019
Duration (calendar days) 472
Contracted Completion Date 1/4/2021
Contract Amount $6,340,000.00
Contingency Amount $634,000.00
Forecast Completion Date 8/30/2022
Current Contracted Amount $6,643,517.18
Actual Expended $6,453,517.18

247

Public Outreach
 No activities this period.

Construction
Immediate Action Projects, Package II (IAP II)
 Complete start-up and acceptance test of new centrifuge.  Complete analysis of the cake pump issues and determine a path forward  Complete fix of sludge hopper elevation conflict in 2022.

Risks and Opportunities
 Sludge Cake Hopper No. 1 has not successfully completed start-up testing. Contractor working to identify issue affecting Cake Pump No. 1 and requested both design engineer and Vendor assistance in their troubleshooting of Cake Pump No. 1. Design Engineer provided new sludge cake measurement technology selection in DC 8, which was issued to the Contractor in September. Completion of DC 8 will allow the successful start-up of sludge Cake Pump No. 1. Delay to start-up of sludge cake pump system represents significant delay and risk of a delay claim by the Contractor on the project. • The sludge cake hopper was installed at an elevation that does not match the existing sludge cake hopper and results in conflicts with the City’s existing sludge disposal strategies. The design engineer proposed solutions in an alternatives analysis memorandum, which will be implemented by the Contractor. Elevation conflict represents significant delay on the project and risk of delay claim by the Contractor on the project.  Sludge Cake Hopper procured by Contractor did not have jacking points, as identified in the specification.

Contractor has coordinated a fix with the vendor and proposed the solution to the design team. The Vendor and Contractor continue to coordinate solution.
 Delays to the project by both the sludge cake hopper and sludge cake pumping system will result in significant delays to the project.

Financial Status
 Current update shows a slightly overrun of current budget.

Millions

Budget $12.95

Actual Cost to date $11.33

Estimate at Completion $13.91
Schedule Status
Project schedule temporary on hold while issues are being resolved. Anticipat es construction to be completed by Aug 30, 2022

January through March 2022 P A G E 20

SAN MATEO CLEAN WATER PROGRAM QUARTERLY REPORT
Q1 2022
248

46T010 IAP Package III
Project Description:

Upgrade aging infrastructure and increase reliability for the effluent PS at the WWTP. Improvements include perform hydraulic analysis on the effluent PS and flow meters; replace MCCs P1, P2, P3, and P4 in the Main Structure Building; add variable-frequency drives (VFDs) and check valves on stormwater pumps; replace check valves (3) for dry weather pumps; replace MCCs/VFDs (4) and control panels (4) for dry weather pumps; and replace doors (3) and windows (10), repair roof, and add HVAC for the PS.

Current Period Activities
Project/Construction Management (City/Jacobs)
 Management of design during the 100% and final phases.

Engineering Design/ Services During Construction (HDR)
 None reported.

Next Period Activities
Project/Construction Management (City/Jacobs)
 Advertise and Award Project.

Engineering Design/ Services During Construction
 HDR to begin EDSC.

Risks and Opportunities
 The addition of design scope will push out the completion date of the 100% design.

Financial Status
 With final design estimate, project shows an overrun of $10.5 million. The PM is working to generate a CRF to move budget funds after the designer produces an estimate based on the final design. PM is also working on a CRF to move scope to GMP3, this effect will be reflected into this numbers after CRF is approved.

Budget
$2.47
million

Actual Cost to date
$1.14
million

Estimate at Completion $14.95 million

Schedule Status
 Current forecast shows final completion on time in Jun 2023.

January through March 2022 P A G E 21

SAN MATEO CLEAN WATER PROGRAM QUARTERLY REPORT
Q1 2022
Project Inside
Project Manager Daniel Patten
Project Type Wastewater System
Phase Engineering

249

46T090 Annual Major Component WWTP
Project Description:

Maintain reliable plant operations to meet regulatory permit requirement and repair and replace critical WWTP infrastructure.

Operations and maintenance team maintain an active list of potential projects that are implemented as funds are available.

Current Period Activities
Project/Construction Management (City/ Jacobs)
 Ongoing construction management of AMC 6 + 23
Permitting (Various)
 Working with the City Building Division on the Building Permit for AMC 6 + 23 Construction
 EPS Inc. is working on AMC 6 + 23.

Next Period Activities
Project/Construction Management (City/ Jacobs)
 Ongoing construction management of AMC 6 + 23
Permitting
 Completion of Building Permit on AMC 6 + 23.

Construction
 Completion of Building Permit on AMC 6 + 23.
 Continued construction of AMC 6 + 23.

Risks and Opportunities
 AMC 36 Centrifuge Conveyor Replacement is on hold.

Financial Status
 Project shows EAC underbudget.

Millions

Budget $7.34

Actual Cost to date $0.87

Estimate at Completion $1.80 $8.83
Schedule Status
 AMC Projects is still on plan.

January through March 2022 P A G E 22

SAN MATEO CLEAN WATER PROGRAM QUARTERLY REPORT
Q1 2022
Project Inside
Project Manager Daniel Patten
Project Type Wastewater System
Phase Engineering

250

WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT SITE PLAN
Attachment 2
251
View of Areas 52, 53, 55, and 56 ‐ Ongoing Work
January 1, 2022
March 31, 2022
January through March 2022 P A G E 15
Attachment 3
252

January 1, 2022

March 31, 2022

January through March 2022 P A G E 16

View of Areas 56 ‐ Ongoing Work
253

View of Area 80 – Ongoing Work

January 1, 2022

March 31, 2022

January through March 2022 P A G E 17 254

View of Areas 51 and 64 Ongoing Work

January 1, 2022

March 28, 2022*
*Overhead camera was not operational on March 29 through March 31 January through March 2022 P A G E 18 255
DATE: May 16, 2022

TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council

VIA: Edmund Suen, Interim City Manager

FROM: Louis Sun, Public Works Director
Paul Nagengast, Project Advisor, Regional Government
Services

SUBJECT: LEVEE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT (CIP 327-657) - APRIL 2022 - GENERAL UPDATE

RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the City Council, by Minute Order, consider and accept this progress update on the Levee Improvements Project (Project). No further action is required by the City Council.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Staff will provide a verbal update of the latest Project activities at the City Council meeting. This report provides an update of Project progress and budget impacts with current expenditures detailed in an attached work sheet.

Highlights of Project progress and pictures, since the last City Council update on April 18, 2022, are included in the attached Construction Managers Report and listed below:
Staff is continuing conversations with various regulatory agencies regarding the mitigation requirement to provide full tidal action into O’Neill Slough. Staff will provide a verbal update to the City Council 256
when known as to the results of the discussions with the regulatory agencies to determine if muted tidal action can continue until a later date.
Huffman Broadway Group completed and submitted protocol bird nesting surveys to the regulatory agencies (United States Fish and Wildlife Services (USFWS), California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW), and San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission (BCDC)) to determine if any rail bird nests were identified near the Project work areas in the restricted Phase 1 portion. On May 2, 2022, the City received authorization from the regulatory agencies to resume work within a specific segment of Phase I from the southern end of Project to Station 270+00 (Gateshead Park). The remaining portion from Gateshead Park to Shorebird Park will remain restricted until September 1st due to observed birds, similar to the 2021 authorization.
The Baffin Street Bridge has been installed. Additional work is still necessary before the bridge can be safely opened. Construction may resume in this section of Phase 1, as no nesting birds were found in this area. It is anticipated Baffin Street Bridge can be opened by Summer 2022, barring any unforeseen issues.
The Contractor continues construction operations under the San Mateo Bridge in accordance with the encroachment permit received from Caltrans. Progress related to flood wall 25 and 10 continues to be made. The Contractor has moved easterly to complete subgrade excavations and will initiate forming and placing concrete for Floodwall 11 footings near Werder Pier.
The Contractor continues to work along Beach Park Boulevard including, but not limited to, constructing land side access points and associated flat work, constructing street light foundations and installation of water irrigation mains for landscape maintenance. The Contractor has completed approximately 3.8 miles of the 4.2 miles of the revised concrete cap for the top of installed sheet piles (CCO #9; $110K and #10; $932K). The concrete cap along Beach Park Boulevard as part of Phase II of the Project is complete. The concrete cap remaining to be constructed is mainly in Phase III between Baywinds Park and San Mateo Bridge and portions of Phase I.
The Contractor continues to work on the block retaining walls related to CCO #20, which include retaining walls 2 and 4 that extend along the Bayside Towers property in Phase 3. Significant progress has been made on retaining wall 4 and will be completed following the 257
construction of access point 10 near the San Mateo Bridge next to Bayside Towers parking lot. The Contractor is providing additional resources to complete the approximately 2,000 linear feet for retaining wall 2.
Staff continues to monitor the Safe Routes to School plan for Bowditch Middle School and other locations that may be affected by the Project. Coordination by staff with the school personnel provides direct feedback about the dropping off and picking up of students as well as the walking and biking by students to school.

Current Schedule Timeline
Award of Contract: July 20, 2020
Notice to Proceed: September 28, 2020
Phase 1 Bay Trail Closure - Opening: October 2020 - January 2023 Phase 2 Bay Trail Closure - Opening: January 2021 - November 2022 Phase 3 Bay Trail Closure - Opening: April 2021 - January 2023 Project Substantial Completion: August 2023
Project Completion: January 2024

PROJECT BUDGET AND COST/EXPENSES
The Project continues to be on time and within budget and expenses continue to trend as anticipated.

Summary of known costs to date:
Total Budget/Bond Measure: Budget = $87M Bond Measure = $90M; Bonds Released = $85M; Additional City reserves for Project if necessary = $10M
Bid: Shimmick: $60.2M; and $9M contingency for change orders. Payments: Shimmick: $43M; Others: $11.8M; Total: $54.8M Change Orders Approved: As of 5/02: CCO #1-22 = $4.7M
Change Orders Anticipated: TBD

FISCAL IMPACT
Fiscal impacts to the Project are presented to City Council as a separate agenda item with a recommended action to take from City staff.

While there are no fiscal impacts requiring City Council approval associated with this Project update, staff will be presenting to City Council for approval at 258
a future City Council meeting a construction contract change order. This change order is necessary due to a change in backfill limits and material to facilitate the use of originally specified Lightweight Cellular Concrete (LCC).

Additional cement was necessary to be added to the LCC mixture for higher dry densities in the backfill behind the levee. A detailed staff report will be presented by staff at a future City Council meeting.

CITY COUNCIL VISION, MISSION, AND VALUE/PRIORITY AREA
The Levee Improvements Project is in alignment to the City Council's adopted Vision and Mission statements, in that it seeks to create a sustainable environment through infrastructure improvements for current and future generations to come. This item is also directly related to the "Facilities and Infrastructure" Value/Priority Area. The key outcome is to make substantial progress toward an improved levee on time and budget to protect the community and critical infrastructure from storms and high tide.

Attachments:
Attachment 1 - Monthly Construction Manager's Report - April 2022 Attachment 2 - Expenditure Report as of April 30, 2022 Attachment 3 - Memorandum and Communications Metrics - April 2022 Dashboard Report
259
MONTHLY CONSTRUCTION MANAGER’S REPORT
Foster City Levee Improvements Project
City Project No. CIP 301-657
Contractor: Shimmick Construction Co Report Period: April 1-30, 2022 CM: Tanner Pacific, Inc.

Designer: Schaaf & Wheeler
Original Contract
Duration
(Calendar Days):

Days Elapsed: 580 % Elapsed: 48.3%
Substantial Final
Completion Completion
Date: Date:

Original Contract Approved Revised
Contract
Value: CCOs: Value:

Contingency: $9,000,000.00 Remaining
Contingency: $ 4,314,075.82 % Contingency
Used: 52%
Costs Billed to Date: $43,475,234.19 % of Contract
Billed to Date: 67%
$60,218,000.00 $ 4,685,924.18 $64,903,924.18
Contract/Schedule Update
1200 Additional Days
Granted: 0 Calendar Days
Remaining: 620
Notice To Proceed: 9/28/2020 10/2/2023 1/10/2024
Cost Management Update
Attachment 1
260
MONTHLY CONSTRUCTION MANAGER’S REPORT

Work Summary
Recently Completed:

• Floodwall 4 placement (near Baywinds Park)
• Embankment fill from Sta. 0+50 – 9+00 (E. 3rd Ave near Anchor Rd.) • Subgrade excavation for Floodwall 2 (near Mariner’s Point Golf Center) • Finalization of AP-9 Pedestrian bridge foundation design submittals • Retaining Wall 2 initial courses of block placement near ~Sta. 93+00 • Floodwall 11 concrete placements near ~Sta. 102+00 (adjacent to Werder Pier) • Floodwall 25 concrete footing placement at ~ Sta. 98+50 (near SM Bridge) • Completion of sheet pile wall concrete cap along Floodwall 12 (Phase II, Beach Park Blvd) • Commencement of streetlight conduit and wire along Phase II • Commencement of irrigation mainline installation along Phase II • Completion of storm drain pipe installation near ~Sta. 189+00 (near Shorebird Park) • Report submission to regulatory agencies on bird nesting protocol surveys for 2022 in Phase III (Shorebird Park to Southern Project Limit)

Upcoming:

• Continued submittals for landscaping, irrigation, striping, and site furnishings • Continued import of materials to staging areas
• Continued construction for concrete floodwalls from ~Sta. 0+00 – Sta. 100+00 (E. 3rd Ave to SM Bridge)
• Excavation for subgrade of Floodwall 1 near Sta. 11+00 (near Mariner’s Point Golf Center) • Rebar placement for Floodwall 2 (near Mariner’s Point Golf Center) • Excavation for Retaining Wall 1 construction near ~Sta. 50+00 (south of Baywinds Park) • Continued construction of bay-side paths along Floodwalls 5 & 8 (Phase III) • Lagoon outfall structure work at ~Sta. 70+00 (Phase III) • Continued construction of Retaining Wall 02 (northwest of the SM Bridge) • Construction of AP-9 pedestrian bridge foundations at ~Sta. 85+00 (northwest of the SM Bridge)
• Completion of Retaining Wall 04 blocks and lightweight concrete fill (northwest of the SM Bridge)
• Continued construction of bay-side paths along Floodwall 12 (Phase II, Beach Park Blvd) • Concrete flatwork at access points in Phase II, Beach Park Blvd. • Completion of street light foundations along Phase II, Beach Park Blvd • Continued irrigation main installation along Phase II (Shorebird Park to Bridgeview Park) • Landscaping work along Phase II (Shorebird Park to Bridgeview Park) • Access Point 24 Retaining Walls near Sta. 185+00 (north of Shorebird Park) • Traffic Detour Switch from Egress Bridge to Baffin St. Bridge

261
MONTHLY CONSTRUCTION MANAGER’S REPORT
Monthly Progress Photos
Dry finishing of concrete cap along Floodwall 12 near
Sta. 110+00 (near Bridgeview Park)
Rebar and formwork placement for Floodwall 11 near
Sta. 102+00 (adjacent to Werder Pier)
Bayside grading work at Access Point 18 along Beach
Park Blvd in Phase II
Grading work near Access Point 20 retaining walls along Beach Park Blvd in Phase II
262
Levee Project Approved Budget: 85,000,000.00$
Vendor Name or Expense Consultant Role or Expense Category Base Contract Amount
Contingency Contract
Amendments
Current Contract
Authority
Amount
Total
Expected/Actual
Cost
Invoices Received
and Paid As Of
04/30/22
Contingency
Spent
Contingency
Remaining
Status
Shimmick Construction Construction Contractor 60,218,000.00$ 9,000,000.00$ 69,218,000.00$ 69,218,000.00$ $42,910,813.20 $4,685,924.18 $4,314,075.82 Active Tanner Pacific (TPI) Construction Management and Inspection 6,698,877.00$ 300,000.00$ 491,500.00$ 7,490,377.00$ 7,550,000.00$ $4,080,148.35 $0.00 $300,000.00 Active Schaaf & Wheeler (S&W) - Phase 3 Engineering Consultant 2,600,000.00$ -$ 208,745.00$ 2,808,745.00$ 3,100,000.00$ $2,161,833.77 N/A N/A Active Urban Planning Partners (UPP) Planning Consultant - EIR 340,404.00$ 51,061.00$ 70,099.00$ 461,564.00$ 470,000.00$ $436,823.79 $51,061.00 $0.00 Active Regional Government Services Authority (RGS) Project Advisory Services** 561,600.00$ -$ -$ 561,600.00$ 561,600.00$ $178,758.00 N/A N/A Active Tripepi Smith (TS) Communications / Outreach Consultant 49,000.00$ -$ 61,000.00$ 110,000.00$ 110,000.00$ $93,478.75 N/A N/A Active Tripepi Smith (TS) Communications / Outreach Consultant 127,056.00$ -$ -$ 127,056.00$ 127,056.00$ $65,446.25 N/A N/A Active Huffman-Broadway Group (HBG) Environmental Consultant - Post Construction Environmental Monitoring
275,000.00$ 275,000.00$ $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 Future Contract Wilsey Ham (WH) RUNCO Survey 16,518.00$ -$ -$ 16,518.00$ 17,000.00$ $4,825.00 N/A N/A In Progress Wilsey Ham (WH) On-Call Surveyor 44,946.00$ 4,000.00$ -$ 48,946.00$ 50,000.00$ $8,522.00 $0.00 $4,000.00 In Progress Bender Rosenthal, Inc. (BRI) Property Acquisition Consultant 218,083.00$ 31,000.00$ 249,083.00$ 249,083.00$ $10,815.50 $0.00 $31,000.00 In Progress Miscellaneous Expenses Other Miscelleneous Expenses 40,000.00$ 40,000.00$ $62,724.87 Active Miscellaneous Expenses Communications / Outreach Expenses 40,000.00$ 40,000.00$ $23,703.24 Active Miscellaneous Expenses Fees Paid to Other Agencies 200,000.00$ 200,000.00$ $179,797.64 Active Miscellaneous Expenses Property Acquistion Cost of acquisition 100,000.00$ 100,000.00$ $0.00 In Progress Burke, Williams & Sorenson, LLP* City Attorney $ 500,000.00 $ 500,000.00 $360,828.62 Active TBWB Strategies (TBWB) Public Outreach 29,986.00$ 119,565.00$ 149,551.00$ $141,427.04 $141,427.04 Closed Rutan & Tucker (R&T) Attorney 53,874.86$ 53,874.86$ $53,874.86 $53,874.86 Closed EMC Research, Inc. (EMC) Public Opinion Research 44,000.00$ 2,500.00$ 46,500.00$ $46,500.00 $46,500.00 Closed SCI Consulting (SCI) Public Finance Consultant 110,000.00$ 110,000.00$ $37,168.72 $37,168.72 Closed Kitahata Company + William Euphrat Municipal
Finance, Inc. (KC&WE)
Public Finance Advisory Consultant 80,000.00$ 80,000.00$ $24,610.50 $24,610.50 Closed Stradling, Yocca, Carlson & Rauth (SYCR) Attorney - Bond Counsel 15,000.00$ 15,000.00$ $15,000.00 $15,000.00 Closed Huffman-Broadway Group (HBG) Environmental Consultant 20,000.00$ 20,000.00$ $19,980.65 $19,980.65 Closed Schaaf & Wheeler (S&W) - Phase 1 Engineering Consultant 887,644.00$ 887,644.00$ $887,430.58 $887,430.58 Closed Schaaf & Wheeler (S&W) - Phase 2 Engineering Consultant 2,324,286.00$ 529,150.00$ 2,853,436.00$ $2,853,649.42 $2,853,649.42 Closed Miscellaneous (MISC)- Keech Properties LLC Levee Mitigation Credits/Expenses 170,000.00$ 170,000.00$ $170,000.00 $170,000.00 Closed Chrisp Striping for Edgewater 16,764.55$ 3,000.00$ 19,764.55$ $15,818.40 $15,818.40 $3,000.00 Closed 74,626,039.41$ 9,389,061.00$ 86,873,199.17$ $54,843,979.15 *Includes former City Attorney fees
**Assumes 3 years ($187,200 each year) Total Contract Authority Cost: 86,652,659.41$ Levee Project - Budget Cost: 86,873,199.17$ Assuming using all contingencies

ONGOING AND FUTURE

CONTRACTS AND EXPENSESMISCC LOSED CONTRACTS

CITY OF FOSTER CITY
CIP 327-657 Levee Improvements Project
Budget and Cost Information
Attachment 2
263
City of Foster City

MEMORANDUM
DATE: May 3, 2022
TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council
VIA: Edmund Suen, Interim City Manager
FROM: Jennifer Nentwig, Director, Tripepi Smith
SUBJECT: LEVEE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT – COMMUNICATIONS METRICS Tripepi Smith would like to share the attached updated Levee Improvements Project Communications Dashboard Report with the Mayor and Members of the City Council. In the report, you will see that the metrics now reflect our communication efforts through the month of April 2022.

As a reminder, t his report is a summary that our team typically develops at the end of each month. It includes data on website traffic, social media engagement, community forum participation, and the number and rate of project email and hotline contacts. While Tripepi Smith has been involved in project communications since January 2021, we have pulled numbers (where available) going back to October 2020 to provide a baseline for comparison.

I would like to highlight a few items of note:
• In April 2022, the City gained approximately 147 new followers/subscribers across all social platforms (Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, Nextdoor and the Levee E - Newsletter).
• The number of Levee Project inquiries in April 2022 totaled 7, which remains relatively low and comparable to previous months.
• The team presented a levee update at the City’s Parks and Recreation Department meeting in April 2022. Additionally, Public Works Director Louis Sun gave a presentation at the Infraday conference in Los Angeles. There continues to be a consistent demand for speaking engagements and presentations from the project team.
• Reach and engagement were significantly higher compared to previous months. A single Facebook post highlighting the project website earned a total reach of 4,105.

Attachment 3
264
Consequently, the popular post drove website traffic, earning a total of 3,568 website visitors in April 2022 compared to 2,628 visitors in March 2022.

• The Levee Improvements Project earned several media mentions in April 2022 from the San Mateo Daily Journal. Recreational Water Users were also sharing project information in their respective Facebook groups. Additionally, Mayor Richa Awasthi’s reshare of the City’s post highlighting the completion of the Phase 2 concrete caps earned positive comments from followers.

• There have been no new levee petition signatures since August 2021.

Our team is actively monitoring the metrics to analyze the effectiveness of various types of communication and to align the cadence of our efforts to the community’s interest levels. We believe that the City’s proactive social media communications are leading to fewer people having questions or concerns about the project in general – reflecting positively on overall outreach and engagement efforts.

During April 2022, social media reach and engagement was higher than usual despite not posting on Instagram or Nextdoor. Additionally, website traffic increased compared to the month prior, earning an average of about 85 webpage visitors per day.

The construction team will continue work with the project team to provide updated information to the Recreational Water User community once a definitive work schedule is available. Any new information will be updated on the project website and social media, which will likely drive traffic to the project’s channels.

As you review the full report, please feel free to let me know if you have any questions. I would be happy to walk you through the report one -on-one if it would be helpful, and we will continue to refine the metrics over time to best meet the project’s needs.

265
1 Levee Project CommunicationsPrepared by: Danielle RodriguezMonthly Dashboard ReportApril 2022 FOLLOWERS / SUBSCRIBERSCity FacebookCity TwitterCity Instagram [1]City Nextdoor [2]Levee E-Newsletter Total Audience2020 - November1,8041,385 - - 8022020 - December1,8291,392 - - 8022021 - January1,8791,4121,35013,5061,0072021 - February1,9191,4251,38513,7011,0952021 - March2,0591,4311,47913,8311,1082021 - April2,1091,4541,51013,9571,1612021 - May2,1221,4571,51414,1281,1822021 - June2,1351,4581,53114,1861,1922021 - July2,1681,4731,54714,2931,1952021 - August2,1741,4841,56514,3811,2002021 - September2,4001,4931,58714,4931,2022021 - October2,4131,5121,61714,5951,2002021 - November2,4361,5251,63414,6911,2032021 - December2,4451,5311,65314,7291,2072022 - January2,4591,5351,67014,7661,2172022 - February2,4671,5431,68414,8311,2212022 - March2,4781,5521,70414,8951,2292022 - April [3]2,5001,5761,71514,9811,233

LEVEE COMMUNITY FORUMS
COMMUNITY UPDATE WEBINARS# Webinars# Participants# Questions Answered via Webinar PROJECT TOURS/ SPEAKING EVENTS [4]# of EventsDescription2020 - November- - - 2022 - January2 1 Project Tour with the City of Corte Madera, 1 Presentation to APWA Silicon Valley [5] 2020 - December- - - 2022 - February5 4 Project Tours with the City of Foster City City Council, 1 Presentation to Hillsdale United Methodist Church [6] 2021 - January1 148 20 2022 - March2 1 Presentation to County Engineers Association, 1 Presentation at 2022 Silicon Valley Women in Engineering Conference [7]2021 - February1 97 45 2022 - April2 1 Presentation at the Ciy's Parks & Recreation Meeting, 1 Presentation at Infraday [8]2021 - March1 48 202021 - April1 28 202021 - June0 0 02021 - July0 0 02021 - August1 20 202021 - September0 0 02021 - October0 0 02021 - November0 0 02021 - December0 0 02022 - January0 0 02022 - February0 0 02022 - March0 0 02022 - April0 0 0 NUMBER OF LEVEE EMAILS/CALLSProject Email/Hotline Contacts Avg. Email/Hotline Contacts/Day2020 - November15 0.52020 - December25 0.82021 - January69 2.22021 - February53 1.92021 - March46 1.52021 - April21 0.72021 - May22 0.72021 - June16 0.52021 - July48 1.52021 - August16 0.52021 - September16 0.52021 - October8 0.22021 - November14 0.42021 - December8 0.22022 - January4 0.12022 - February8 0.22022 - March12 0.32022 - April7 0.2 266
2 NUMBER OF LEVEE PROJECT POSTS [9]City FacebookCity Twitter [10]City Instagram*City Nextdoor2020 - November1 1 0 02020 - December4 4 0 12021 - January8 7 5 22021 - February7 12 7 12021 - March12 21 9 22021 - April7 20 4 162021 - May5 8 1 72021 - June8 13 2 32021 - July9 17 2 22021 - August9 18 1 12021 - September10 16 0 02021 - October7 9 0 02021 - November10 10 0 12021 - December9 9 0 02022 - January7 9 0 02022 - February8 9 0 12022 - March11 11 1 12022 - April8 9 0 0*During the months October - December 2020 the City did not post levee related items on the City's Instagram page. In January 2021, Tripepi Smith made the first levee related post.

LEVEE POST IMPRESSIONS/REACHCity Facebook - Post ReachCity Twitter - ImpressionsCity Instagram - Impressions [11]City NextdoorTOTAL2020 - November259 399 0 0 658 * The increase of the Nextdoor engagement for December is due to the City posting about the closure of Shorebird Park. 2020 - December1,3001,391 0 2447*2,691 This drove many angry comments, which increased the post reach.2021 - January61,00615,9492161 192281,0382021 - February17,492**3,7112,192 924 6,827 In January 2021, Tripepi Smith boosted three posts with a total spend of $900 for the month. 2021 - March60,1558,7533,5552,28274,745 In February 2021, Tripepi Smiith boosted two posts with a total spend of $433.2021 - April11,8385,5431,49610,78929,666 In March 2021, Tripepi Smith boosted four posts with a total spend of $1,100.2021 - May1,4352,786 346 5,1469,713 In April 2021, Tripepi Smith boosted one post with a total spend of $300.2021 - June2,0083,377 545 2,6488,578 In May 2021, Tripepi Smith did not boost levee project related posts.2021 - July8,8354,643 599 1,71515,792 In June 2021, Tripepi Smith did not boost levee project related posts.2021 - August3,3494,318 340 967 8,974 In July 2021, Tripepi Smith boosted one post with a total spend of $300 to promote the August 5 community update. This boosted post ran through August 4, so metrics for this dashboard and the next will reflect the boosted post numbers. 2021 - September1,8082,568 0 0 4,3762021 - October3,7961,257 0 0 5,0532021 - November3,7221,809 0 1,5547,085 In August 2021, Tripepi Smith boosted one post with a total spend of $300 to promote the August 5 community update. The post was boosted in late July 2021 and ran through August 4.2021 - December4,4411,397 0 0 5,8382022 - January869 1,265 0 0 2,1342022 - February2,7011,078 0 1,0624,841 In September 2021, Tripepi Smith did not boost levee project related posts.2022 - March1,4751,293 355 797 3,920 In October 2021, Tripepi Smith did not boost levee project related posts.2022 - April6,440 [12]1,214 0 0 7,654 [13] In November 2021, Tripepi Smith did not boost levee project related posts.In December 2021, Tripepi Smith did not boost levee project related posts.In January 2022, Tripepi Smith did not boost levee project related posts.In February 2022, Tripepi Smith did not boost levee project related posts.In March 2022, Tripepi Smith did not boost levee project related posts.

LEVEE POST ENGAGEMENT [14]City Facebook - Post EngagementsCity Twitter - EngagementsCity InstagramCity Nextdoor - Thanks & RepliesTOTAL2020 - November13 7 0 0 202020 - December63 90 0 17 1702021 - January3,776 604 2,101 13 6,4942021 - February1,278 142 2,019 3 3,4422021 - March2,801 183 3,291 1 6,2762021 - April1,192 100 1,333 11 2,6362021 - May65 67 309 2 4432021 - June87 60 94 13 2542021 - July875 161 13 4 1,0532021 - August90 122 13 1 2262021 - September46 37 0 0 832021 - October128 52 0 0 1802021 - November284 66 0 4 3542021 - December108 21 0 0 1292022 - January85 61 0 0 1462022 - February159 27 0 2 1882022 - March90 26 6 0 1222022 - April411 34 [15] 0 0 445 LEVEE WEBSITE ANALYTICS2020 - November # of Vistors2020 - December # of Vistors2021 - January # of Vistors2021 - February # of Vistors2021 - March # of Vistors2021 - April # of Vistors2021 - May # of Vistors2021 - June # of Vistors2021 - July # of Vistors2021 - August # of Vistors2021 - September # of Vistors2021 - October # of Vistors2021 - November # of Vistors2021 - December # of Vistors2022 - January # of Vistors2022 - February # of Vistors2022 - March # of Vistors2022 - April # of Vistors [16]Average Visits Per Day [17]Average Visit Length (Minutes)fostercity.org [18]2940 3423 4601- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -fostercitylevee.org [19]- - - 4,3299,145 4,5014,163 4,9424,9263,7672,790 2,6372,7522,1103,0133,0172,6283,568 85 1:21 267
3 LEVEE PETITIONPetition Signatures2021 - February2,7192021 - March2,7192021 - April2,7202021 - May2,7222021 - June2,7222021 - July2,7232021 - August2,7222021 - September2,7222021 - October2,7222021 - November2,7222021 - December2,7222022 - January2,7212022 - February2,7212022 - March2,7212022 - April [20]2,721

TOP LEVEE PROJECT SOCIAL MEDIA POSTS
City FacebookThe top Facebook posts during April 2022 for the Levee Project shows residents/followers interact the most with postsCity TwitterThe top Twitter posts in April 2022 for the Levee Project shows residents/followers interact the most withfeaturing project milestones and updates and general information like website reminders and FAQ webpage information. website reminders and recurring Safety Tip of the Week posts.

City InstagramThe Levee Improvements Project did not post on Instagram in April 2022.

Zencity Insights
Most Popular Topics: Conversation items classified by topic, arranged from highest number of interactions to lowest.Popular Words: The words that appear most frequently across your channels. 268
4 BOOSTED LEVEE PROJECT POSTSTripepi Smith did not boost any levee project-related social media posts in April 2022.

NOTABLE LEVEE PROJECT MEDIA MENTIONSPlatformGroup Post URLSan Mateo Daily Journal- Foster City hires new interim city manager https://www.smdailyjournal.com/news/local/foster-city-hires-new-interim-city-manager/article_27fdf674-b17a-11ec-9840-4fd6f508f0e9.htmlSan Mateo Daily Journal- Foster City eyes infrastructure project optionshttps://www.smdailyjournal.com/news/local/foster-city-eyes-infrastructure-project-options/article_1002bf7a-b3ee-11ec-949d-cb47dc80308c.htmlFacebook3rd Ave Kiteboarding https://www.facebook.com/groups/3rdAveKite/ FacebookBay Area Kiteboarding https://www.facebook.com/groups/BayAreaKiteBoarding/ FacebookFoster City Together https://www.facebook.com/groups/347395922628639 269
5 FacebookFoster City Together https://www.facebook.com/groups/347395922628639

OTHER NOTABLE LEVEE PROJECT SUPPORT
Social media monitoring Since January 2021, Tripepi Smith began monitoring the City's social media sites daily to ensure items relating to the Levee Project are intact and to ensure there is no misinformation being shared. Tripepi Smith has been able to comment back to several followers regarding questions or clarification. Infraday brochureTripepi Smith created a short informational brochure for Public Works Director Louis Sun's presentation at Infraday in April 2022. 270
6 [1] Due to the recent connectivity with Sprout Social, the metrics generator, we were unable to retrieve the followers metrics for previous months. [2] Nextdoor metrics does not archive the previous months members metric. It must be calculated at the first of the month. [3] Followers/subscribers continue to rise across all platforms. [4] This is a new section as of January 2022.
[5] The Levee Improvements Project team took the City of Corte Madera's Public Works Director, Planning Manager and Senior Civil Engineer on a tour of the project site.
[6] The Levee Improvements Project team took the Foster City City Council on four separate project tours in February 2022, which is also where Mayor Awasthi filmed an episode of "The Mayoral Minute." Additionally Public Works Director Louis Sun and Senior Civil Engineer Francine Magno gave a presentation to Hillsdale United Methodist Church.
[7] The Levee Improvements Project team participated at the 2022 CEAC Spring Conference. Additionally, Senior Civil Engineer Francine Magno presented at the 2022 Silicon Valley Women in Engineering Conference in March 2022. [8] Senior Civil Engineer Francine Magno provided a levee update at the City's Parks & Recreation meeting and Public Works Director Louis Sun gave a presentation at the Infraday Conference in Los Angeles. [9] Number of posts is only relating to the Levee Improvements Project. [10] Due to the character limit on Twitter, some Tweets had to be posted in a thread (series of Tweets about one topic). [11] Instagram Impressions: The number of times your content is displayed, no matter if it was clicked or not. [12] Facebook post reach in April 2022 increased significantly due to a well-performing post promoting the project website. The post earned a higher-than-usual reach of 4,105.
[13] Though there were not any levee-related posts published on Instagram or Nextdoor in April 2022, impressions/reach almost doubled compared to the month prior.
[14] Facebook Engagement: Calculated based on the number of likes, comments, shares, and clicks your posts are generating Instagram Engagement: Anytime a user likes, shares or comments on one of your posts.

Twitter Engagement: Total number of times users interacted with a Tweet (clicks anywhere on the Tweet including Retweets, replies, follows, likes, links, cards, hashtags, embedded media, username, profile photo, or Tweet expansion). [15] April 2022 marked the highest number of Twitter engagements since January 2022. [16] The number of page views on the project website increased significantly likely due to a well-performing Facebook post promoting the project website. 271
7 [17] Average visits per day in April 2022 increased to about 119 visitors a day compared to approximately 85 website visitors in March 2022. [18] This data was retrieved from the highest trafficked Levee URLs:
/publicworks/project/levee-improvements-project-cip-301-657 /community/page/levee-trail-close-shorebird-park-san-mateo-bridge-early-january /publicworks/page/levee-improvements-project-what-will-improved-levee-look /publicworks/page/levee-improvements-project-latest-construction-updates [19] The new Foster City Levee Project webpage was created in Feb. 2020. There was no data from Oct. - January. However, data will only populate under this new website from Feb. on.
[20] There have been no new signatures since August 2021 and an additional signature was removed from the petition in January 2022. 272
DATE: May 16, 2022

TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council

VIA: Edmund Suen, Interim City Manager

FROM: Marlene Subhashini, Community Development Director

SUBJECT: RECEIVE UPDATE ON DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES AND

COMMERCIAL LINKAGE FEES AND PROVIDE DIRECTION

REGARDING PROPOSED IMPACT FEE AMOUNTS

RECOMMENDATION

It is recommended that the City Council, by Minute Order, receive and accept a report on the preliminary findings of the Development Impact Fee (DIF) and Commercial Linkage Fees nexus studies and provide policy direction on the following:

1. The DIF and Commercial Linkage Fee amounts that staff should bring back for Council adoption on June 20, 2022; and

2. Whether, and to what extent, the Council would like to set the DIFs or Commercial Linkage Fees at reduced amounts or grant fee waivers for certain types of development, such as affordable housing projects, affordable housing units, ADUs etc.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Last year, the City Council approved an agreement with Economic and Planning Systems, Inc. (EPS) to conduct a comprehensive DIF nexus study and update the City’s Commercial Linkage Fees. The purpose of this item is to update the City Council and the public on the preliminary results of the DIF and Commercial Linkage Fee nexus studies before these fees are brought to 273
Council for formal adoption in June.

Foster City’s primary source of revenue generation has been through property tax while secondary sources of revenue have been from sales tax, Transient Occupancy Tax and charges for services (e.g. planning and building fees, recreation classes, etc.). While sources for revenue generation are limited, the capital needs of Foster City have grown, propelled by population growth, new jobs and an aging infrastructure. From 1990 to 2019, the City’s population grew from 26,000 to 33,693. With fewer options to generate revenue, pressing current and anticipated capital and infrastructure needs, DIFs and updated Commercial Linkage Fees provide an additional revenue source to offset costs of public facilities related to development projects.

The nexus studies will provide analyses regarding the proposed limits the City can collect for each development impact fee category, with the fee amounts ultimately determined by City Council policy. It should be noted that the City will need to ensure that fee amounts are sufficient to fund new amenities and mitigate future impacts resulting from future development as proposed in the General Plan and other City planning documents when considering at what levels the fees should be set. It is also important to consider economic impacts and regional comparisons when establishing new fee amounts.

Staff and EPS are currently working to finalize the nexus studies, but we have calculated the maximum fee amounts for the DIFs and Commercial Linkage Fees. The focus of the May 16, 2022 meeting is to provide the City Council with an overview of the preliminary findings and fee calculations, which will be included in the DIF and Commercial Linkage Fee nexus studies that will be presented to Council in June. Comments and policy direction can be provided at this meeting. The policy direction received at this meeting will help staff and EPS refine and finalize the studies prior to the adoption of the DIFs and Commercial Linkage Fees at the June 20th City Council meeting.

BACKGROUND

Under AB 1600 (California Government Code Section 66000 et. seq.), cities and counties have the authority to implement DIFs. DIFs allow cities to collect fees from new development projects to fund improvements that address those projects’ impacts to the City’s infrastructure.

In establishing, increasing, or imposing a fee as a condition for the approval 274
of a development project, Government Code 66001(a) and (b) require a local agency to:

1. Identify the purpose of the fee;

2. Identify how the fee is to be used;

3. Determine how a reasonable relationship exists between the fee use and type of development project for which the fee is being used;

4. Determine how the need for the public facility relates to the type of development project for which the fee is imposed; and

5. Show the relationship between the amount of the fee and the cost of the public facility.

The nexus is based on the premise that new development should pay for its proportionate share of public improvement costs. Because residents, business and their employees create the need for and benefit from the availability of public services and infrastructure improvements, new development should pay its fair share of public facilities/improvements that will serve the development.

The City Council–adopted Strategic Priorities for 2021 identified DIF study, a key project/initiative identified by CDD staff as a priority under Smart Planning, Development and the Local Economy. The two key milestones that were identified for this effort to be completed in 2021 were: 1) to seek City Council direction on initiating an Impact Fee/Nexus Study to consider DIFs; and 2) to issue an RFP and award of contract to an economic consultant to conduct the Impact Fee/Nexus Study pending Council direction. These milestones were met in 2021 as listed below:
On March 11, 2021, by Minute Order No. 1742, the City Council affirmed each of the Value/Priority areas identified in the Strategic Priorities for 2021 and approved initiation of Impact Fee study to establish Development Impact Fees for development projects. On April 5, 2021, the City Council authorized staff to issue an RFP for professional services to conduct a Comprehensive Development Impact Fee Study.
On April 6, 2021, staff issued an RFP with a due date for proposals/responses by May 7, 2021, and staff received four (4) responses to the RFP.
275
On June 21, 2021, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2021-89 and authorized the Mayor to enter into an agreement with Economic and Planning Systems, Inc. (EPS).
On November 15, 2021, the City Council approved a contract amendment with EPS to include the study of Affordable Housing Fees to the original scope of work.

For additional background information, refer to the March 11, 2021 City Council Staff Report (Attachment 1).

ANALYSIS

Impact fee revenues are used to cover the cost of constructing capital and infrastructure improvements required to serve new development and growth in the area in which they apply. As such, impact fees must be based on a reasonable nexus, or connection, between new development and the need for specific capital facilities and improvements. Impact fee revenues cannot be used to cover the operation and maintenance costs of these or any other facilities and infrastructure. In addition, impact fee revenue cannot be collected or used to cover the cost of preexisting infrastructure needs or deficiencies.

Foster City currently has a Quimby Act dedication and in-lieu fee requirement for parkland acquisition and an affordable housing fee charged to non- residential development (Commercial Linkage Fee). The City has other fees such as sewer and water connection fees, which are separate from the DIFs.

The park in-lieu fee was established in 1984 to ensure that new residential subdivision developments contribute to the City’s Park system with park land dedication, credit for on-site facilities or in-lieu fee payments. The affordable housing fee or Commercial Linkage Fee was adopted in 2016. Even though the fee was adopted in 2016, most major commercial development projects had received their entitlements prior to that. Additionally, the City Council recently adopted a Below Market Rate Housing In-lieu fees by Resolution No. 2022-21.

In September 2021, the State of California adopted Assembly Bill (AB) 602, which includes several new requirements related to the development and implementation of impact fee programs. The key provisions related to the calculations documented in the DIF nexus study are summarized below. 276
Capital Improvement Plan: AB 602 requires that jurisdictions adopt a Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) as part of the nexus study process.

This adoption can occur at the same time as the fee ordinance adoption. Accordingly, the nexus study will include a Foster City DIF Long-Term CIP (Foster City DIF CIP) to be approved by the City Council in conjunction with the DIF Program. The Foster City DIF CIP presented in the nexus study will be derived from the capital improvements identified as part of the nexus study.
Explanation of Level of Service and Fee Increase: AB 602 requires that the nexus study provide explanations if the fee calculation is based on a change in existing levels of service. Since Foster City does not currently have a DIF Program, the calculations presented in the nexus study will provide justification for entirely new fees rather than an increase over an existing amount. The nexus study will rely on service standards developed in consultation with City staff and with reference to the existing capital facilities and improvements in the City as appropriate and documented herein.
Residential Fees Adopted After July 1, 2022: AB 602 also requires that any residential fees adopted after July 1, 2022 must be charged on a per square foot basis, unless the City Council makes certain findings.

Since the City has already undergone substantial work to calculate the residential DIFs on a per unit basis, the Council needs to adopt the DIFs before July 1, 2022 in order to avoid the new requirement, which would result in increased costs to revise the fee calculations and would delay the City’s adoption of the new DIFs. The new, per square foot calculation requirement does not apply to the Commercial Linkage Fees because those fees are not imposed on residential development.

DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES

The DIF nexus study (“Nexus Study”) calculates the DIFs by using the methodology described below:

While the nexus methodology employed varies by fee category as appropriate given the range of capital facilities and improvements covered, there are basic steps common to all. Specifically, for each fee category, EPS has applied the following general steps to calculate the nexus-supported fee amounts:
277

1. Estimated existing and future population and employment in Foster City through buildout of the current General Plan using a variety of third- party sources, as described in the subsequent section.

2. Identified the new infrastructure and capital facility improvements needed to serve both existing and future residents and employees.

These needs were based on interviews with City staff and analysis of existing city facilities capacity and service standards.

3. Developed cost estimates for capital facility improvements described in step 2 above. These costs estimates were developed based on information provided by City departmental staff as well as additional research and in-house resources.

4. Allocated the capital facility costs identified in step 3 above between existing and new development to determine the share included in the DIF program. These allocation shares were determined in a variety of ways depending on improvement, available data, and City guidance. In cases where the facility or improvement is entirely triggered by new development, the costs are allocated 100 percent to the DIF program.

In cases where the improvement is expected to service both the existing population and the future population equally, the share of costs attributable to new development is based on the City’s current versus future service population.

5. Once costs have been allocated between new and existing development, they are further distributed among residential and commercial uses to arrive at a cost per resident and a cost per employee. This distribution is based on the proportion of total forecasted service population that is composed of residents and employees, respectively.

6. Once costs are allocated to a “cost per resident” and “cost per employee” basis, they are multiplied by the people per household for each residential fee category or by the employment density for each commercial fee category.

7. A 2 percent charge is added to the fee to cover the cost of administering the fee program.

EPS has prepared a table set that summarizes the “maximum allowable” development impact fee schedule for the capital facility and equipment needs as evaluated in this nexus study. The DIF revenues will be used to fund:
Parks facilities – this fee will fund, park, trail, and recreation facility improvements necessary to accommodate growth.
278
Public Safety Facilities – this fee will fund police and fire capital facilities and equipment (e.g., vehicles) necessary to accommodate growth.
Transportation Improvements – this fee will fund needed additions and improvements to the City’s transportation infrastructure to accommodate future transportation volumes associated with new development. These improvements will include infrastructure that supports both vehicles as well as transit, pedestrian, bicycle, and other modes.

The table below (Attachment 2) shows the Foster City Maximum Fee Calculations for the three categories listed above including Commercial Linkage Fees.

The table below (Attachment 3) compares the maximum allowable DIF calculated for Foster City (excluding any affordable housing in-lieu fee, commercial linkage fees, school district, or utilities such as water, sewer, etc.) with those of six (6) “peer” jurisdictions (Belmont, Burlingame, Millbrae, Redwood City, San Carlos, and San Mateo).

279
It must be noted that the fees shown in the table above for the peer cities under the various land use categories are their council-adopted fees currently in effect whereas the fees shown for Foster City are the maximum fees derived from the nexus studies. As shown, if approved as calculated, the Foster City DIF would put the city in the “middle of the pack” for a majority of the land use categories.

COMMERCIAL LINKAGE FEE UPDATE

Consistent with the 2015 study underpinning the City’s existing Commercial Linkage Fee, the EPS Commercial Linkage Fee Study estimates the number of workers likely to be employed in an office/medical office/R&D, retail/restaurant/services, or hotel development, the wages of those workers, and the likelihood that those workers would have household incomes that require affordable housing because they cannot afford market-rate housing in Foster City. The number of income-qualified worker households requiring affordable housing is then multiplied by the estimated subsidy required to produce each of those affordable units to calculate the full subsidy requirement, which is then divided by the assumed square footage of the employment-generating building to calculate the maximum fee per square foot.

Due to the very high cost of producing housing in Foster City and throughout San Mateo County, the maximum nexus-based fee is extremely high – hundreds of dollars per square foot, just as was determined in the 2015 study. To illustrate one potential adjustment that the City can make to determine an appropriate fee level, EPS then calculated an “adjusted 280
maximum” fee reflecting the fact that only a small proportion (7.9 percent) of employees who work in Foster City also live in Foster City, whereas the true maximum fee is calculated to provide adequate subsidy for all income- qualified employees working in Foster City regardless of where they might choose to live. While such adjustments are not legally required, they can be used and combined with feasibility considerations to justify adopting a fee below the very high maximum level.

The table below (Attachment 3) compares the Foster City Adjusted Maximum Commercial Linkage Fees with the six (6) peer jurisdictions.

Even with this potential adjustment based on commute patterns, the adjusted maximum linkage fees remain substantially higher than those charged in most jurisdictions, as shown in the table above. Charging linkage fee at these levels could present a financial challenge that potential developers and employers may not face in other communities around Foster City. Foster City’s current Commercial Linkage Fees are shown below:

Based on the comparative analysis shown in the table above (Attachment 3), if the City charged Commercial Linkage Fees equal to the average of the six peer cities, the Foster City total impact fee burden would be:
The highest of all six (6) cities for Office Development 281
The 5 th highest for Retail Development
The 4 th highest for Industrial Development; and
The 5 th highest for Hotel Development

POLICY CONSIDERATIONS IN DETERMINING FEE AMOUNTS

1. As noted above, charging higher commercial linkage fees could present a financial challenge that potential developers and employers may not face in other communities thereby, making Foster City less desirable to attract new businesses. However, a Commercial Linkage Fee on new commercial development is a way to provide funding for affordable housing projects and/or programs. The 2023-2031 Housing Element Update Policy H-A-4-d Budgeting for Housing Programs identifies the following programs that need funding sources:
i. Staffing and other resources to administer housing programs. ii. H-B-2-a: Lower Income Homeowner Rehabilitation.
iii. H-B-2-b: Facilitate Non-Profit Rehabilitation and Maintenance Assistance.
iv. H-D-4-c: ADU Financial Incentive Program.
v. H-D-6-e: Development Fee Waivers.
vi. H-E-3-c: Reduced or Waived Fees for Affordable Units. vii. H-F-2-a: Emergency Housing Assistance.
viii. H-G-2-a: Fair Housing Training for Landlords and Tenants.

2. Given the City’s continued challenges to attract retail and restaurant businesses, charging a higher restaurant/retail linkage fee may make it more challenging to attract new restaurant/retail businesses in Foster City.

3. One of the governmental factors that constrain affordable housing development are fees. In order to reduce these constraints, the 2023- 2031 Housing Element update includes the following policies and programs:
i. H-D-6-d Development Fee Waivers. Provide waivers of
development impact fees for 100% below market rate
developments with units restricted to very low- and low-income households.
ii. H-E-3 Incentives for Affordable Housing. The City shall offer development incentives to developers of multifamily housing projects which meet the City’s housing needs, in exchange for an agreement that more than twenty percent (20%) of the total number of units 282
constructed (or another percent, depending upon the project) shall be affordable to very low as defined by State Health and Safety Code Section 50105, low- and moderate-income persons and families as defined by Section 50093 of the State of California Health and Safety Code for a minimum period of 99 years for rentals and 45 years for ownership (restarting with each sale). Incentives to be considered include the following:
oDensity bonuses, as allowed by State law and Chapter 17.86. oReduced or waived fees for very low-income units if funding is available.
oAssistance and support in securing public financing, such as bonds or tax credits.

CONCLUSION

The DIFs and Commercial Linkage fees enable the City to not only proactively address the aging infrastructure needs but also address the needs of the growing community and supporting affordable housing needs. These one-time charges on new development can be used to mitigate the impacts of new development by funding a range of capital programs required to address needs related to that development, including: transportation, parks, public safety, and capital facilities including the recreation center important to the City's future and quality of life. Funds from the Commercial Linkage Fees can provide an affordable housing funding source to accomplish the housing programs and policies identified in the 2023-2031 Housing Element Update.

POLICY QUESTIONS

Based on the policy considerations listed in the previous section, the City Council has the authority to adopt fee amounts less than the maximum fee amounts and reduce or waive fees for certain types of development. Given the information in the report, staff requests City Council policy direction on the following:

1. The DIF and Commercial Linkage Fee amounts that staff should bring back for Council adoption on June 20, 2022; and

2. Whether, and to what extent, the Council would like to set the DIFs or Commercial Linkage Fees at reduced amounts or grant fee waivers for 283
certain types of development, such as affordable housing projects, affordable housing units, ADUs etc.

FISCAL IMPACT

DIF can have a positive fiscal impact to the City. DIF revenues from new development are a significant portion of the funding sources supporting the City’s CIP. DIFs alone generally do not pay for capital projects and can only fund the portion attributable to new growth. For several of the projects, DIFs provide the required “local match” to leverage and help the City secure grants and other funding assistance. Therefore, additional funding sources must be identified to pay for the portion attributable to existing deficiencies to fund projects that will help mitigate the impacts of new development on the community.

When implemented carefully, they do not reduce the City’s competitiveness to development relative to its neighboring cities; ensure other goals, like housing production, can also be met; and provide the opportunity to still gain community benefits through the Development Agreement process.

The cost to the City to maintain a DIF program is the staff time required to apply the fees upon building permit issuance, monitor the program to ensure appropriate collection and use, and manage the construction of capital projects once funds are collected. Many of these costs can be paid for by the DIF funds through the administrative charge and by charging staff time for project development as a project cost.

The estimated revenues collected from the DIFs and Commercial Linkage Fees that result from the 2022 DIF and Commercial Linkage Fee nexus studies will depend on the fee levels ultimately adopted by City Council.

NEXT STEPS

Upon the completion of the nexus studies, staff will bring the studies and recommendations to the City Council at the June 20th City Council Public Hearing adoption.

CITY COUNCIL VISION, MISSION, AND VALUE/PRIORITY AREA

This item directly relates to two (2) action items, (i) Affordable Housing, and 284
(ii) Development Impact Fee Study, both included in the "Smart Planning, Development, and the Local Economy" Value/Priority Area.

Attachments:
Attachment 1 – March 11, 2021 City Council Staff Report Attachment 2 – Foster City Maximum Fee Calculations Tables Attachment 3 – Fee Comparisons with neighboring cities 285
DATE: March 11, 2021

TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council

VIA: Peter Pirnejad, City Manager

FROM: Marlene Subhashini, Community Development Director Sofia Mangalam, Planning Manager

SUBJECT: REQUESTING CITY COUNCIL DIRECTION TO UNDERTAKE AN

IMPACT FEE STUDY TO ESTABLISH DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES

FOR DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS

RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the City Council, by Minute Order, provide direction to City staff to undertake an Impact Fee study to establish Development Impact Fees for development projects.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Cities and counties have relatively limited sources of revenue at their disposal.

According to a 2019 Report prepared by Terner Center for Housing Innovation at UC Berkeley, “compared with the U.S. average, California counties and cities now collect relatively little of their own source revenue (revenue generated by the local government itself) from taxes. This is largely a result of state-imposed policies such as Proposition 13, which was passed in 1978 and sets strict limits on property taxes as well as special taxes levied by local governments. The State of California also sets statutory limits on sales and uses taxes and entirely preempts local personal income taxes. Additionally, Proposition 218, passed in 1996, requires majority or supermajority voter approval to impose, extend, or increase any state or local tax, limiting taxes' feasibility as a revenue source.”
The report further notes that in addition to constricted tax revenues, a number of 286
important intergovernmental transfers from the federal and state governments to local governments have also declined or been eliminated. The 2012 elimination of California’s Redevelopment Agencies, which funded local priorities via tax-increment financing not only removed a source of revenue but, in many cases, burdened cities with the financial liabilities of the dissolved agencies.

These declines in revenues have been offset by local agencies through increase in local charges and other local sources of revenue.

Foster City’s primary source of revenue generation has been through property tax while secondary sources of revenue have been from sales tax, real property transfer tax, Transient Occupancy Tax and charges for services. While sources for revenue generation are limited, the capital needs of Foster City have grown, propelled by population growth, new jobs, and an aging infrastructure. From 1990 to 2019, the City’s population grew from 26,000 to 33,693.

The state and federal governments have also imposed several new requirements regarding the services local governments must provide, including infrastructure, housing, etc. Local governments must now comply with federal and state mandates regarding the provision of clean water, sewage treatment, transportation, energy efficiency, and housing production (Regional Housing Needs Allocations) goals even as financial support from the federal and state levels has declined.

With fewer options to generate revenue, pressing current and anticipated capital and infrastructure needs, Foster City may consider adopting “Development Impact Fees” as an additional revenue source to offset costs of public facilities related to the development project.

BACKGROUND
What is a Development Impact fee?
A development impact fee is a monetary exaction other than a tax or special assessment that is charged by a local governmental agency to an applicant in connection with the approval of a development project for the purpose of defraying all or a portion of the cost of public facilities related to the development project - Gov. Code § 66000(b). “Public Facilities” are defined to include public improvements, public services and community amenities - Gov. Code § 66000 (d). The legal requirements for enactment of the development impact fee program are outlined in Gov. Code §§ 66000- 66025 (the "Mitigation Fee Act or MFA"), the bulk of which were adopted during 1987 under Assembly Bill AB 1600. A development impact fee is not a tax or special assessment; by its definition, a fee is voluntary and must be reasonably related to the cost of the service provided by the local agency.
287
Development impact fees may be used to construct water treatment and distribution facilities, wastewater treatment and collection facilities, parks, public facilities (such as fire stations), and to acquire land for public uses. Development impact fees enable local agencies to allocate the cost of building new infrastructure and facilities to new development equitably. The MFA requires that local agencies must demonstrate an “essential nexus” between the project impact and the fee charged.

Types of Development Impact Fees
Jurisdictions typically categorize development impact fees based on the services they fund.
 Transportation fees fund the costs of expanding transportation infrastructure usage related to new development.
 Environmental fees pay for environmental mitigation programs. Fire and public safety fees go towards expanding the capacity of fire and public safety systems.  Library fees go towards expanding library resources.
 Park fees are set aside for park facilities and parkland.  Housing fees are earmarked for developing affordable housing needed to complement market-rate housing growth.
 Capital improvement fees are fees that pay for any expansions of city facilities or infrastructure, such as facilities for general administration, health and human services, and public works.
 Utility impact fees pay for expansions of water, sewer, electricity, and gas infrastructure.

Some localities pair impact fees with a small administrative fee to cover the cost of fee implementation and collection.

What are Development Impact Fees based on?
For impact fees to be charged, a local jurisdiction must conduct an analysis that identifies growth-related infrastructure costs and apportions those costs to projected development, often by development type, on a square foot, unit, or per-trip basis. This is known as Impact Fee Study or Nexus Study.

Once a city decides what public services and infrastructure will require funding through impact fees, it should prepare a fee study. A fee study provides the quantified basis for the imposition of fees. The goal of the study is two-fold. First, the fee study provides the city with the legal support to impose the fee. A fee study demonstrates the required nexus between the impact created by new development and the amount of the fee.

Second, the fee study quantifies the projected burden that the new development will 288
create on the city’s infrastructure.

Gov. Code § 66001 (a) requires that any action establishing, increasing or imposing a fee as a condition of approval of a development project must do all of the following:
 Identify the purpose of the fee;
 Identify how the fee is to be used;
 Determine how a reasonable relationship exists between the fee’s use and the type of development project on which the fee is imposed;  Determine how a reasonable relationship exists between the need for the public facility and the type of development project on which fee is imposed.

Applicability of Impact Fees
Impact fees apply to any new building or building addition that results in net new residential dwelling units, non-residential building square footage, hotel rooms, or water meters.

ANALYSIS
Foster City currently has impact fees for affordable housing (commercial linkage fee) and park in-lieu and charges sewer and water connection fees for new development.

The park in-lieu fee was established in 1984 to ensure that new residential developments contribute to the City’s park system with park land dedication, credit for on-site facilities or in-lieu fee payments. Affordable housing fee or Commercial Linkage Fee was adopted in 2016. Even though the fee was adopted in 2016, most major commercial development projects had received their entitlements prior to that. It wasn’t until recently (2020) that the City received commercial linkage fee revenue in the amount of $360,580 for the Gilead Wellbeing Center.

In order to evaluate the pros and cons of Development Impact Fees, City staff has presented the following information for City Council’s review and consideration.

1. Revenue Benefits
For a local jurisdiction who needs to pay for infrastructure necessitated by new growth, impact fees can certainly work to alleviate some of the fiscal burden associated with the expansion of growth-related infrastructure and services. The most obvious benefit of impact fees is the revenue-raising capability. Rather than relying heavily on property taxes, which may fluctuate and/or capped by the State, a local government is able to diversify its revenue stream through this alternative revenue source.

2. Upfront Revenue
289
Local jurisdictions are able to receive the revenue associated with impact fees in one lump sum (at the time of issuance of a building permit or Certificate of Occupancy), as opposed to waiting over an extended period of time, which is the case with many of the standard taxes collected at the local level. Thus, the funds to pay for the infrastructure are readily available, instead of financing the cost over time with debt-servicing costs associated with the usual forms of revenue.

3. Capital Improvement Projects (CIPs)
The fundamental problem is that the vast amounts of land in our cities are devoted to public facilities such as streets and parks, which requires maintenance and it does not yield any productive economic returns (in terms of taxable value per acre). Every year, the City undertakes variety of CIPs to maintain and enhance the infrastructure of roadways, sidewalks, utilities, structures, and facilities for the benefit of the community. Some of these projects include playground ADA compliance, median modifications, water system improvements, new traffic signals, etc. Per Final Budget Fiscal Year 2020/2021, CIP would cost $62M in FY 2021/2022, $56M in FY 2022/2023, $17M in FY 2023/2024 and so on. Recently, at the Vision and Policy Summit held on February 10, 2021, City Council discussed the costs associated with upgrading the Recreation Center which would be between $40M to $70M. Keeping in mind the high cost of CIP projects, it seems necessary to have multiple sources of revenues to fund these projects. This is where development impact fees can help fund future CIPs.

4. Regulatory Pressure
Cities are required to update their CIPs to comply with updated regulations at Federal or State level. As an example, increased wastewater discharge standards imposed by a Regional Water Quality Control Board can directly impact infrastructure needs at a wastewater treatment facility. Similarly, increased regulations related to storm water runoff, storage, and discharge can directly impact costs of storm drainage infrastructure. Development Impact Fees can ease the financial burden on cities as they try to comply with state and federal regulations as it relates to infrastructure improvements.

5. Community Needs
Development impact fees can be used to fund infrastructure and other public facilities that are nice to have and driven by the needs of the community but not necessarily driven by a regulatory need. Improvements that may fall into this category include recreation centers, or other such large-scaled community facilities which can serve to differentiate a community from its neighboring jurisdictions.

6. Reporting and Implementation Requirements under the Mitigation Fee Act (MFA) 290
Fees subject to the MFA must be deposited in separate capital facilities accounts or funds to avoid any commingling of the fees with other City funds and may be spent only for the purpose for which the fee was originally collected and any earned interest must remain within the fund. This requires City to establish various funds which requires additional administration from the city staff. MFA also contains requirements for two (2) public reports. An annual report is required to be prepared between July 1 and January 1 each year. After the fifth fiscal year following the first deposit into each fund, if any funds remain “unexpended,” the city or county must make findings to retain the unexpended funds and continue to collect the fees. City staff need to do reporting on each fee on an annual and five-year basis, requiring administrative staff time.

7. Court Cases/Litigation
The MFA was passed in response to developers’ concerns that local agencies were imposing development fees for purposes unrelated to development projects. As noted previously, the MFA requires the agency to determine how there is a reasonable relationship between the need for the public facility and the type of development project on which the fee is imposed. In simpler words, facilities fees are justified only to the extent that they are limited to the cost of increased services made necessary by virtue of the development. In recent times, there have been challenges in the court against cities who were not abiding by MFA, e.g. Boatworks, LLC v. City of Alameda, Cal.App.5th, Case No.

A151063 (1st Dist. May 15, 2019).

8. Audits
Under the MFA, any party may protest or request an audit of development impact fees. If a developer suspects that their fees surpass the true cost of their project’s impacts, they can request an audit of the fees. The protesting party may request an independent auditor but they must cover the cost of the audit. However, the local government must cover the cost of the audit if they required the payment of the fee but failed to adhere to MFA regulations surrounding the establishment or increase of a fee for three (3) consecutive years. If the audit determines that the fees exceed the cost of public facilities, the local agency must adjust the fee (Gov. Code §66023).

9. Deterrence to Development
Development Impact Fees could also deter potential developers from development within a jurisdiction. As an example, Foster City has historically seen a robust growth of the Life Sciences industry within the City due to relatively less development-related fees when compared to neighboring jurisdictions.

Given its central location, Foster City continues to attract Life Sciences type of uses. Imposing Development Impact Fees could potentially act as a deterrent for future development projects – both residential and commercial. According to a 291
2018 Report prepared by Terner Center for Housing Innovation at UC Berkeley, in cases where affordable housing projects pay impact fees for parks, transportation, capital improvements or other priorities, those fees work directly against the goal of building affordable housing.

10.Impact Fees Might Lead to Adverse Design Choices
The same 2018 Terner Report mentioned above states that several builders noted that expensive development fees can adversely affect the design of projects. Architects and civil engineers mentioned that arbitrary-seeming differences in fee rates can incentivize suboptimal design choices to minimize fees. Interestingly, the report further notes that, in interviews, architects and builders noted that they will sometimes increase the sizes but reduce the total number of units in a project to avoid paying higher total per-unit fees. This is of particular concern given the need for more housing supply in California. On the other hand, in some cities there is a need for larger family-sized units, and in those places a per-square-foot fee that incentivizes smaller units might be less desirable.

Staff extensively researched and reviewed the fee schedule of neighboring jurisdictions in San Mateo County and statewide for comparison with the City’s fees (see Table 1 and 2).
292
After evaluating the Impact Fees schedule of eight (8) jurisdictions in San Mateo County, staff observed that cities charge a variety of impact fees (between 5 to 6) on both residential and non-residential (hotel, industrial, office and retail) development projects with the exception of Affordable Housing/Commercial Linkage fee which is mostly applicable to commercial projects. Attachment 1 illustrates in detail the types and amount of impact fees charged by each city, and range of measures to calculate these fees including square feet, valuation, units, bedrooms, and even the number of new trips generated by the development.

CONCLUSION
As the City approaches its 50th Anniversary, it has become more important than ever to address the quality-of-life issues that the City is challenged with. Given the budgetary constraints, the City has already deferred some CIP projects. With an additional source of revenue stream through impact fees, the City can, not only proactively address the aging infrastructure needs but also address the needs of the growing community. These one-time charges on new development can be used to mitigate the impacts of new development by funding a range of capital programs required to address needs related to that development, including: transportation, parks, utilities (such as water, sewer, and storm drain), and public safety, and capital facilities such as the Recreation Center important to the City's future and quality of life.

NEXT STEPS
If the City Council directs staff to undertake an Impact Fee Study, the next step would be to engage a consultant to conduct a development impact fee study through the issuance of a Request of Proposal (RFP). Staff will then bring the studies and recommendations to the City Council/Planning Commission in a Study Session, followed by Public Hearing before adoption.
293

FISCAL IMPACT
If the City Council directs staff to prepare and issue an RFP to conduct a Development Impact Fee study, it would cost approximately $125,000 for consultant costs. This cost estimate was derived by researching cities that recently hired consultants to conduct such studies. The funding for this study would need a supplemental appropriation in the current fiscal year’s General fund at the time of award of a contract to the consultant.

Attachments:
 Attachment 1 - Details of Development Impact Fees Neighboring Jurisdictions in San Mateo County
Useful Links:
 Residential Impact Fees in California
 Improving Impact Fees in California: Rethinking the Nexus Studies Requirements  It All Adds Up: The Cost of Housing Development Fees in Seven California Cities

294
Table 1
Foster City Maximum Allowable Fee Levels
Foster City Development Impact Fee Study; EPS #211040
Public Commercial
Land Use Parks Safety Transportation Linkage1 Total
Residential (per unit)
Single Family Residential $14,926 $1,594 $2,478 - $18,998 Multifamily Residential $11,639 $1,243 $1,932 - $14,815 Non-Residential (per Sq.Ft. or Room)
Office (per Sq. Ft.) $10.71 $1.14 $4.22 $36.80 $52.88
Retail (per Sq. Ft.) $5.95 $0.64 $2.35 $59.81 $68.74
Industrial (per Sq. Ft.) $3.51 $0.38 $1.38 $36.80 $42.07 Hotel (per Sq. Ft.) $2.14 $0.23 $0.84 $22.75 $25.97
Source: City of Foster City; Fehr & Peers; Economic & Planning Systems *Includes 2 percent administration charge.
[1] Values shown represent adjusted maximum fees, not maximum allowable. Adjusted maximum fee values reduce the maximum allowable fee by the proportion of workers who may actually reside in Foster City, based on recent commute patterns.
295
Appendix Table A-1
Development Impact Fee Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) List Foster City Development Impact Fee Study; EPS #211040
Total Cost Anticipated Cost
Improvement Item (Unallocated) Location Source
Public Safety
Fire Engines 22 Engines $26,690,547 N / A EPS with Fire Dept. Confirmation Patrol Vehicles 3 Vehicles $192,337 N / A Personal Communication with Foster City Police Dept.

Traffic Motorcycles 1 Motorcycles $37,000 N / A Personal Communication with Foster City Police Dept.

Police Locker Room Expansion 1,000 $500,000 Existing Location EPS with Police Dept. Confirmation Police Evidence Room Improvements 1 $100,000 N / A EPS with Police Dept. Confirmation Fire Training Facility 1 $70,000,000 TBD within Foster City EPS Assumption from similar Bay Area project (City of Hayward Fire Station No. 6 & Training Center)
Fire Mechanic Shop 10,000 Sq. Ft. $2,120,000 TBD within Foster City Light Industrial / Warehouse averaged construction cost per RLB 2020 Construction Cost Report inflated to 2022$ using Engineering News-Record Construction Cost Index.

Fire Administrative Office 10,000 Sq. Ft. $3,960,000 TBD within Foster City Secondary Office averaged construction cost per RLB 2020 Construction Cost Report (for San Francisco) inflated to 2022$ using Engineering News-Record Construction Cost Index.

Emergency Operations Center Technology/Equipment 1 $40,000 TBD within Foster City Personal Communication with Foster City Police Dept.

Total Public Safety $103,639,883
Transportation
New Traffic Signals 4 $3,000,000 TBD depending on new growth areas Fehr & Peers Communication with Foster City Public Works Dept.

Citywide Traffic Signal Upgrade 1 $8,000,000 Citywide Foster City Final Budget (Fiscal Year 2021-2022, page 510); Bicycle, Pedestrian, Intersections Evaluation Study (2018).

Citywide Street Rehabilitation 1 $7,500,000 Citywide Foster City Final Budget (Fiscal Year 2021-2022, page 512) 101/92 Interchange 1 $10,000,000 101/92 Interchange Fehr & Peers Communication with Foster City Public Works Dept.

Hovercraft Feasibility 1 $200,000 N / A (planning) Fehr & Peers Communication with Foster City Planning Dept.

Pedestrian/Bicycle Improvements
Sharrows on Foster City Blvd 1 Foster City Blvd
Bicycle Facilities on Beach Park Blvd 1 Beack Park Blvd Bicycle Facilities on Edgewater Blvd 1 Edgewater Blvd
Bicycle Facilities on Gull Ave 1 Gull Ave
Bicycle Facilities on Swordfish St 1 Swordfish St
Curb Extensions / Bulbouts 1 Various Citywide
New Roundabouts 1 Various Citywide
Reduce Curb Radii 1 Various Citywide
High Visibility Crosswalks 1 Various Citywide
Signalize Crossing at Foster City Blvd / Polynesia Dr 1 Foster City Blvd / Polynesia Dr Total Pedestrian/Bicycle Improvements 10 $1,000,000 Fehr & Peers Total Transportation $29,700,000
Parks and Recreation
Site Prep (e.g., demolition, remediation, grading) 14.34 Acres $6,452,972 EPS with Parks Dept. Confirmation Construction 14.34 Acres $10,754,954 EPS with Parks Dept. Confirmation Recreation Facilities1 8,998 Sq. Ft. $8,226,583 Based on $685/SF Community Center cost from 2014 Antioch Development Impact Fee Study, inflated to 2022$ (rounded) per Engineering News-Record Construction Cost Index.

Total Parks and Recreation $25,434,509
Source: Economic & Planning Systems
Units
Number of
[1] The Recreation Facility square footage displayed here represents the amount needed to maintain the existing service standard based on the existing square footage of recreation facilities and the projected increase in service population by 2040.

The total cost of $8.27 million shown therefore represents the cost fully attributable to new development and thus included in the fee program. 296
Table 1
Summary of Total Impact Fee Burden for Selected Cities (Excluding Affordable Housing In-Lieu and Commercial Linkage Fees) Foster City Development Impact Fee Analysis; EPS #211040 Land Use
Belmont Burlingame Millbrae Redwood City San Carlos San Mateo Foster City
(Maximum
Allowable)
Single Family Residential (Per Unit) $20,152 $8,381 $71,309 $15,841 $12,869 $35,853 $18,998 Multifamily Residential (Per Unit) $14,205 $5,146 $52,173 $13,785 $7,960 $23,635 $14,815 Office (Per Sq. Ft.) $11.28 $9.59 $4.51 $2.38 $7.13 $7.62 $16.08 Retail (Per Sq. Ft.) $19.01 $3.40 $9.25 $0.94 $23.61 $25.26 $8.93 Industrial (Per Sq. Ft.) $5.54 $1.92 $1.58 $1.55 $4.15 $4.18 $5.27 Hotel (Per Sq. Ft.) $20.10 $3.40 $3.41 $1.89 $7.44 $7.96 $3.21 *Fee comparison excludes any affordable housing in-lieu, commercial linkage, school district, or utilities (e.g., water, sewer, etc.) fees. **For the purposes of converting between per-unit or per-square foot values for fees that are assessed differently than presented here, the following size assumptions are made:
- Single Family Residential Unit: 2,000 square feet
- Multifamily Residential Unit: 1,000 square feet
- Hotel Room: 500 square feet
Source: Cities of Belmont, Burlingame, Millbrae, Redwood City, San Carlos, and San Mateo; Economic & Planning Systems Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 5/10/2022
297
Table 2
Summary of Affordable Housing Fee Burdens for Selected Cities Foster City Development Impact Fee Analysis; EPS #211040 Land Use
Belmont Burlingame Millbrae Redwood City San Carlos San Mateo Average of
Comparison
Cities
Foster City
(Adjusted
Maximum)1
Commercial Linkage Fees
Office (Per Sq. Ft.) $13.47 $25.00 $12.86 $23.62 $20.00 $28.36 $20.55 $36.80 Retail (Per Sq. Ft.) $5.61 $7.00 $5.80 $5.91 $5.00 $5.68 $5.83 $59.81 Industrial (Per Sq. Ft.) $13.47 $0.00 $12.86 $23.62 $20.00 $28.36 $16.39 $36.80 Hotel (Per Sq. Ft.) $4.50 $12.00 $7.74 $5.91 $10.00 $11.35 $8.58 $22.75 *Fee comparison excludes any school district fees or utilities (e.g., water, sewer, etc.) fees. **For the purposes of converting between per-unit or per-square foot values for fees that are assessed differently than presented here, the following size assumptions are made:
- Single Family Residential Unit: 2,000 square feet
- Multifamily Residential Unit: 1,000 square feet
- Hotel Room: 500 square feet
[1] Commercial Linkage Fees represent adjusted maximum values as calculated in the Commercial Linkage nexus study. Adjusted maximum fee values reduce the maximum allowable fee by the proportion of workers who may actually reside in Foster City, based on recent commute patterns.

Source: Cities of Belmont, Burlingame, Millbrae, Redwood City, San Carlos, and San Mateo; Economic & Planning Systems Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 5/10/2022
298
Table 3
Detail of Total Impact Fee Burden for Selected Cities
Foster City Development Impact Fee Analysis; EPS #211040 Land Use
Belmont Burlingame Millbrae Redwood
City San Carlos San Mateo
Foster City
(Maximum
Allowable)
Single Family Residential (Per Unit)
Parks $13,117 $590 $63,161 $14,224 $6,735 $29,598 $14,926 Public Safety $0 $1,079 $1,277 $0 $0 $0 $1,594
Transportation $7,035 $1,573 $2,067 $1,617 $6,134 $6,255 $2,478 Library Facilities $0 $2,383 $239 $0 $0 $0 $0
General Gov / Administration $0 $2,756 $4,565 $0 $0 $0 $0 Subtotal $20,152 $8,381 $71,309 $15,841 $12,869 $35,853 $18,998 Housing In-Lieu1
$44,900 $70,000 $42,791 $50,000 $4,120 $23,737 $96,420
Total with Housing Fees $65,052 $78,381 $114,100 $65,841 $16,989 $59,590 $115,418 Multifamily Residential (Per Unit)
Parks $8,745 $350 $46,540 $12,793 $4,490 $20,476 $11,639 Public Safety $0 $640 $941 $0 $0 $0 $1,243
Transportation $5,460 $1,105 $1,169 $992 $3,470 $3,159 $1,932 Library Facilities $0 $1,415 $176 $0 $0 $0 $0
General Gov / Administration $0 $1,636 $3,346 $0 $0 $0 $0 Subtotal $14,205 $5,146 $52,173 $13,785 $7,960 $23,635 $14,815 Housing In-Lieu1
$22,450 $30,000 $54,248 $20,000 $2,830 $27,352 $75,320
Total with Housing Fees $36,655 $35,146 $106,421 $33,785 $10,790 $50,987 $90,135 Office (Per Sq. Ft.)
Parks $0.71 $0.17 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $10.71
Public Safety $0.00 $0.51 $0.90 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $1.14 Transportation $10.57 $7.29 $2.40 $2.38 $7.13 $7.62 $4.22 Library Facilities $0 $0.70 $0.17 $0 $0 $0 $0
General Gov / Administration $0 $0.93 $1.05 $0 $0 $0 $0 Subtotal $11.28 $9.59 $4.51 $2.38 $7.13 $7.62 $16.08
Commercial Linkage2
$13.47 $25.00 $12.86 $23.62 $20.00 $28.36 $36.80
Total with Housing Fees $24.75 $34.59 $17.37 $26.00 $27.13 $35.98 $52.88 Retail (Per Sq. Ft.)
Parks $2.37 $0.12 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $5.95
Public Safety $0.00 $0.35 $0.41 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.64 Transportation $16.64 $1.81 $7.95 $0.94 $23.61 $25.26 $2.35 Library Facilities $0 $0.48 $0.08 $0 $0 $0 $0
General Gov / Administration $0 $0.64 $0.82 $0 $0 $0 $0 Subtotal $19.01 $3.40 $9.25 $0.94 $23.61 $25.26 $8.93
Commercial Linkage2
$5.61 $7.00 $5.80 $5.91 $5.00 $5.68 $59.81
Total with Housing Fees $24.62 $10.40 $15.05 $6.85 $28.61 $30.94 $68.74 Industrial (Per Sq. Ft.)
Parks $0.95 $0.06 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $3.51
Public Safety $0.00 $0.17 $0.09 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.38 Transportation $4.59 $1.15 $1.31 $1.55 $4.15 $4.18 $1.38 Library Facilities $0 $0.23 $0.02 $0 $0 $0 $0
General Gov / Administration $0 $0.31 $0.16 $0 $0 $0 $0 Subtotal $5.54 $1.92 $1.58 $1.55 $4.15 $4.18 $5.27
Commercial Linkage2
$13.47 $0.00 $12.86 $23.62 $20.00 $28.36 $36.80
Total with Housing Fees $19.01 $1.92 $14.44 $25.17 $24.15 $32.54 $42.07 Hotel (Per Sq. Ft.)
Parks $0.85 $0.12 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $2.14
Public Safety $0.00 $0.35 $0.36 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.23 Transportation $19.25 $1.81 $2.49 $1.89 $7.44 $7.96 $0.84 Library Facilities $0.00 $0.48 $0.07 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 General Gov / Administration $0.00 $0.64 $0.49 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 Subtotal $20.10 $3.40 $3.41 $1.89 $7.44 $7.96 $3.21
Commercial Linkage2
$4.50 $12.00 $7.74 $5.91 $10.00 $11.35 $22.75
Total with Housing Fees $24.60 $15.40 $11.14 $7.80 $17.44 $19.31 $25.96 *Fee comparison excludes any school district fees or utilities (e.g., water, sewer, etc.) fees. **For the purposes of converting between per-unit or per-square foot values for fees that are assessed differently than presented here, the following size assumptions are made:
- Single Family Residential Unit: 2,000 square feet
- Multifamily Residential Unit: 1,000 square feet
- Hotel Room: 500 square feet
Source: Cities of Belmont, Burlingame, Millbrae, Redwood City, San Carlos, and San Mateo; Economic & Planning Systems [2] Values shown for Foster City Commercial Linkage fee levels represent adjusted maximum values, not maximum allowable. Adjusted maximum fee values reduce the maximum allowable fee by the proportion of workers who may actually reside in Foster City, based on recent commute patterns. [1] Affordable Housing In-Lieu Fees represent adopted per-square foot values multiplied by the unit sizes listed above. 299
$20,152
$8,381
$71,309
$15,841
$12,869
$35,853
$18,998
$0
$10,000
$20,000
$30,000
$40,000
$50,000
$60,000
$70,000
$80,000
Belmont Burlingame Millbrae Redwood City San Carlos San Mateo Foster City (Maximum)
Total Impact Fee Level (per Unit)
Single Family Residential Development
*Total Fee Level values shown exclude Affordable Housing In-Lieu fees. This fee is excluded to better facilitate comparison. 300
$14,205
$5,146
$52,173
$13,785
$7,960
$23,635
$14,815
$0
$10,000
$20,000
$30,000
$40,000
$50,000
$60,000
Belmont Burlingame Millbrae Redwood City San Carlos San Mateo Foster City (Maximum)
Total Impact Fee Level (per Unit)
Multifamily Residential Development
*Total Fee Level values shown exclude Affordable Housing In-Lieu fees. This fee is excluded to better facilitate comparison. 301
$24.75
$34.59
$17.37
$26.00 $27.13
$35.98 $36.63
$0.00
$5.00
$10.00
$15.00
$20.00
$25.00
$30.00
$35.00
$40.00
Belmont Burlingame Millbrae Redwood City San Carlos San Mateo Foster City (Maximum)
Total Impact Fee Level (per Sq. Ft.)
Office Development
*Value shown represents maximum allowable fee levels for all fee categories other than the Commercial Linkage fee. Value used for Fo ster City Commercial Linkage fee is the average of the comparison cities' adopted fee level (see Table 2) to better facilitate comparison.
302
$24.62
$10.40
$15.05
$6.85
$28.61
$30.94
$14.77
$0.00
$5.00
$10.00
$15.00
$20.00
$25.00
$30.00
$35.00
Belmont Burlingame Millbrae Redwood City San Carlos San Mateo Foster City (Maximum)
Total Impact Fee Level (per Sq. Ft.)
Retail Development
*Value shown represents maximum allowable fee levels for all fee categories other than the Commercial Linkage fee. Value used for Fo ster City Commercial Linkage fee is the average of the comparison cities' adopted fee level (see Table 2) to better facilitate comparison.
303
$19.01
$1.92
$14.44
$25.17 $24.15
$32.54
$21.66
$0.00
$5.00
$10.00
$15.00
$20.00
$25.00
$30.00
$35.00
Belmont Burlingame Millbrae Redwood City San Carlos San Mateo Foster City (Maximum)
Total Impact Fee Level (per Sq. Ft.)
Industrial Development
*Value shown represents maximum allowable fee levels for all fee categories other than the Commercial Linkage fee. Value used for Fo ster City Commercial Linkage fee is the average of the comparison cities' adopted fee level (see Table 2) to better facilitate comparison.
304
$24.60
$15.40
$11.14
$7.80
$17.44
$19.31
$11.80
$0.00
$5.00
$10.00
$15.00
$20.00
$25.00
$30.00
Belmont Burlingame Millbrae Redwood City San Carlos San Mateo Foster City (Maximum)
Total Impact Fee Level (per Sq. Ft.)
Hotel Development
*Value shown represents maximum allowable fee levels for all fee categories other than the Commercial Linkage fee. Value used for Fo ster City Commercial Linkage fee is the average of the comparison cities' adopted fee level (see Table 2) to better facilitate comparison.
305
Prepared Date 04/28/2022 City of Foster City, CA
Accounts Payable Check Register

Accounting Period 2022/10
Report Number 30
Check Number Vendor Name Description
145675 A PLUS TREE INC TREE TRIMMING SERVICES AT SEA CLOUD PLARK 5,054.37 145676 ALEXANDER VOLOKITIN UNIFORM ALLOWANCE - POLICE 60.00 145677 ALICE ZHANG PLANNING DEPOSIT REFUND 428.00 145678 AMY SIROTA FOSTER CITY PARKS & RECREATION SUMMER 2022 GUIDE 2,500.00 145679 AT&T BUSINESS PHONE LINE ACCOUNT - APRIL 2022 1,665.54 145680 AT&T MOBILITY POLICE CARS CELLULAR SERVICES - APRIL 2022 567.45 145681 BMR-LINCOLN CENTRE LP PLANNING DEPOSIT REFUND 2,830.37 145682 BOETHING TREELAND FARMS INC. PLANT MATERIALS 5,508.89 145683 BURKE, WILLIAMS & SORENSEN, LLP GENERAL LEGAL SERVICES FOR CITY, AND CIP657: LEVEE IMPROVEMENT PROJECT - FEBRUARY 2022
43,197.00
145684 BURR PLUMBING & PUMPING INC. GREASE TRAP MAINTENANCE 120.00 145685 CAL ENGINEERING & GEOLOGY INC CIP455-626 SEWER LIFT STATION PROJECT PHASE 5 1,872.50 145686 CAL-WEST LIGHTING & SIGNAL MTNC INC TRAFFIC SIGNAL & STREET LIGHT REPAIR MAINTENANCE - JANUARY 2022
3,667.50
145687 CALIFORNIA DIESEL & POWER LIFT STATION #29 REPAIR SERVICES & SUPPLIES 989.63 145688 CEL ANALYTICAL INC LAGOON TESTING - JANUARY 2022 - FEBRUARY 2022 3,580.00 145689 CH BULL COMPANY PIPE AND CHAIN 797.51 145690 CHEMSEARCH ECOFLOW BIOAMP TREATMENT FOR LIFT STATIONS 1,893.28 145691 CINTAS CORPORATION UNIFORM/LAUNDRY SERVICES - APRIL 2022 443.42 145692 CITY OF SAN MATEO RANGE USE FEE - JANUARY 2022 - MARCH 2022 1,007.50 145693 CLARA LEONG POST TRAINING - CLARA LEONG 299.16 145694 CLARK PEST CONTROL OF STOCKTON INC PEST AWAY SERVICE - APRIL 2022 135.00 145695 CORE & MAIN LP MISCELLANEOUS SUPPLIES - WATER PROGRAM 4,204.38 145696 CORY CALL POST TRAINING - CORY CALL 1,487.07 145697 COURTNEY ROYCE INSTUCTOR FEE - MARINERS PRESCHOOL 305.50 145698 CREATE MIX & MINGLE INSTRUCTOR FEE - CREATE MIX AND MINGLE 376.00 145699 CREST/GOOD MANUFACTURING CO. INC PLUMBING MATERIAL & SUPPLIES 2,134.76 4/28/2022
4/28/2022
4/28/2022
4/28/2022
4/28/2022
4/28/2022
4/28/2022
4/28/2022
4/28/2022
4/28/2022
4/28/2022
4/28/2022
4/28/2022
4/28/2022
4/28/2022
4/28/2022
4/28/2022
4/28/2022
4/28/2022
4/28/2022
4/28/2022
Check Date Check Amount
4/28/2022
4/28/2022
4/28/2022
4/28/2022
306
Prepared Date 04/28/2022 City of Foster City, CA
Accounts Payable Check Register

Accounting Period 2022/10
Report Number 30
Check Number Vendor Name DescriptionCheck Date Check Amount 145700 CWEA CERTIFICATION RENEWAL - MATTHEW CULLEN 91.00 145701 DAVID BELTRAN CLASS REFUND - CERAMICS LEVEL 2 220.50 145702 EATON CORPORATION UPS ANNUAL MAINTENANCE RENEWAL 3,314.54 145703 ERLER & KALINOWSKI, INC. CIP652:WASTE WATER TREATMENT PLANT 814.32 145704 ELIZABETH CARDON CLASS REFUND - GOLF 94.00 145705 ESTERO MUNICIPAL IMPROVEMENT DIST. WATER SERVICES - FEBRUARY 10, 2022 - APRIL 10, 2022 92.44 145706 EWING IRRIGATION PRODUCTS MISCELLANEOUS MATERIALS AND IRRIGATION SUPPLIES-

PARK PROGRAM
748.39
145707 ROGER FISHER UNIFORM ALLOWANCE - POLICE 60.00 145708 FOSTER CITY ISLANDER LEGAL NOTICES FOR PUBLIC HEARING 1,039.00 145709 FOSTER'S LANDING RENT SUBSIDY - MAY 2022 - JULY 2022 6,087.64 145710 NATHALIE GATTENBERGER INSTRUCTOR FEE - ART CLASS 1,656.00 145711 GOOD CITY CO ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CONSULTANT SERVICES - MARCH 2022
5,960.00
145712 RUEDI GRAF INSTRUCTOR FEE - SOCCER 341.60 145713 GRANITE ROCK COMPANY #26462 MISCELLANEOUS SUPPLIES SEWER PRGRAM 1,208.20 145714 HOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES MISCELLANEOUS SUPPLIES - WATER, STREET, SEWER, &

VEHICILE PROGRAM
4,926.54
145715 HOSSAM HINDI SOLAR REBATE 1,000.00 145716 HOUYNA LOU-HARALANOV CLASS REFUND - SKYHAWKS MINI HAWKS 79.00 145717 HYDROSCIENCE ENGINEERS D538:LIFT STATION 27 DESIGN REVIEW 1,629.20 145718 IEDA LABOR RELATION SERVICES - APRIL 2022 3,044.20 145719 INTERSTATE TRAFFIC CONTROL PROD INC ENCR2018-040 SCHOOL SIGN & MISCELLANEOUS

SUPPLIES STREET PROGRAM
2,660.88
145720 ISAAC PARHAM POST TRAINING - ISAAC PARHAM 330.38 145721 RODERICK SCOTT JENNINGS INSTRUCTOR FEE - CERAMICS 2,184.00 145722 ZHIMEI JIANG INSTRUCTOR FEE - CREATE AND LEARN 550.20 145723 JOSIAH SEGERQUIST POST TRANING - JOSIAH SEGERQUIST 24.00 145724 JUSTIN LAI VISION REIMBURSEMENT - JUSTIN LAI 200.00 4/28/2022
4/28/2022
4/28/2022
4/28/2022
4/28/2022
4/28/2022
4/28/2022
4/28/2022
4/28/2022
4/28/2022
4/28/2022
4/28/2022
4/28/2022
4/28/2022
4/28/2022
4/28/2022
4/28/2022
4/28/2022
4/28/2022
4/28/2022
4/28/2022
4/28/2022
4/28/2022
4/28/2022
4/28/2022
307
Prepared Date 04/28/2022 City of Foster City, CA
Accounts Payable Check Register

Accounting Period 2022/10
Report Number 30
Check Number Vendor Name DescriptionCheck Date Check Amount 145725 KIRAN AUJLA LAGOON ROOM RENTAL DEPOSIT REFUND 500.00 145726 L & M DISTRIBUTION INC TENNIS COURT SUPPLIES 1,542.09 145727 LDVALI, LLC INSTRUCTOR FEE - LINE DANCE 423.00 145728 LORAL LANDSCAPING INC. GRASS REMOVAL - GULL PARK & LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE - APRIL 2022
13,895.00
145729 LYNGSO GARDEN MATERIALS, INC. LANDSCAPE MATERIALS 903.16 145730 MICAELA CARDOSO LAGOON ROOM RENTAL DEPOSIT REFUND 500.00 145731 MIKE BROWN ELECTRIC CO. CIP694:CONSTRUCTION SERVICES - MARCH 2022 41,108.89 145732 MISSION CLOUD SERVICES, INC CALOPPS WEBSITE HOSTING SERVICES: MONITORING &

ALERT RESPONSE, BACKUPS, PATCHING, AND
MAINTENANCE- MARCH 2022
1,464.89
145733 MISSION LINEN SUPPLY-UNIFORM LAUNDRY SERVICES - APRIL 2022 181.77 145734 MORRIS MOUSSA INSTRUCTOR FEE - YOUTH CERAMICS 833.00 145735 MOTION INDUSTRIES INC. MISCELLANEOUS SUPPLIES WATER PROGRAM 1,071.94 145736 NBC SUPPLY CORP LATEX EXAM GLOVES 196.88 145737 OFFICE DEPOT OFFICE SUPPLIES 173.56 145738 OGAWA-MUNE INC PLANT MATERIALS 946.09 145739 ORIT WOHL CLASS REFUND - CAMP OUTBACK22-1, 22-2, 22-3 700.00 145740 OWEN EQUIPMENT SALES SEWER JET SUPPLIES 2,134.38 145741 PACE GLASS COMPANY REPLACE RECREATION CENTER BROKEN WINDOW GLASS 2,318.72 145742 PACIFIC GAS & ELECTRIC COMPANY ELECTRICITY AND GAS - MARCH 2022 36,258.52 145743 PACIFIC NURSERIES PLANT MATERIALS 1,993.89 145744 ANTHONY REY PADILLA UNIFORM ALLOWANCE - POLICE 60.00 145745 PENINSULA MUSIC TOGETHER INSTRUCTOR FEE - PENINSULA MUSIC 770.00 145746 PETTY CASH/FINANCIAL SVCS PETTY CASH - FINANCIAL SERVICES 183.66 145747 FERGUSON ENT #3325-DBA POLLARDWATER MISCELLANEOUS SUPPLIES WATER PROGRAM 2,962.43 145748 PREFERRED ALLIANCE "DOT"COMPLIANCE EXPENSES - MARCH 2022 229.60 145749 PRIYANKA LINGWAL GULL PARK RENTAL FEE REFUND 105.00 4/28/2022
4/28/2022
4/28/2022
4/28/2022
4/28/2022
4/28/2022
4/28/2022
4/28/2022
4/28/2022
4/28/2022
4/28/2022
4/28/2022
4/28/2022
4/28/2022
4/28/2022
4/28/2022
4/28/2022
4/28/2022
4/28/2022
4/28/2022
4/28/2022
4/28/2022
4/28/2022
4/28/2022
4/28/2022
308
Prepared Date 04/28/2022 City of Foster City, CA
Accounts Payable Check Register

Accounting Period 2022/10
Report Number 30
Check Number Vendor Name DescriptionCheck Date Check Amount 145750 PRUDENTIAL OVERALL SUPPLY TOWEL/UNIFORM LAUNDRY SERVICES - MARCH 2022 158.18 145751 R&J TRAILERS INC CUSHION CYLINDER ASSYEMBLY FOR TILTED BED

TRAILERS
351.81
145752 REGIONAL GOVERNMENT SERVICES (RGS) CIP657: LEVEE IMPROVEMENT PROJECT MANAGEMENT CONSULTING SERVICES - MARCH 2022
9,355.50
145753 RENNE PUBLIC LAW GROUP, LLP LOBBYING SERVICES - FEBRUARY 2022 - MARCH 2022 6,500.00 145754 RICOH USA, INC COPIER SERVICES - MARCH 2022 50.47 145755 CHRISTINE ROYCE INSTRUCTOR FEE - MARINERS PRESCHOOL 305.50 145756 SFPUC - WATER WATER SERVICES - MARCH 11, 2022 - ARPIL 11, 2022 758,183.70 145757 COUNTY OF SAN MATEO CLETS ACCESS - MARCH 2022 246.76 145758 SAN MATEO COUNTY MOSQUITO ABATEMENT SERVICES - MARCH 2022 175.58 145759 SAN MATEO LAWN MOWER SHOP MISCELLANEOUS EQUIPMENT PARTS/SUPPLIES - PARK

PROGRAM
1,183.16
145760 SAN MATEO LOCK WORKS INC. LOCKS & KEYS - BUILDINGS 194.58 145761 SBRTC POST TRAINING - CLARA LEONG 177.00 145762 SBWMA SHRED/EWASTE COST REIMBURSEMENT 2,017.76 145763 SCELZI EQUIPMENT INC TRUCK BODY PARTS 714.29 145764 SEHYUN KIM STARBOARD ROOM RENTAL REFUND 105.00 145765 SERVICE PRESS INC. BUSINESS CARDS - KAY KHIN 29.53 145766 SHELL DOOR SERVICE, INC. DOOR REPAIR PARTS 346.41 145767 SPEEDPRO IMAGING OF S.F. PENINSULA METAL SIGNS FOR PARKS 122.94 145768 STAPLES BUSINESS CREDIT OFFICE SUPPLIES 139.17 145769 CALTRANS - DISTRICT 4 CIP657:EQUIPMENT STORAGE RENTAL FEE - FEBRUARY 2022 - APRIL 2022
600.00
145770 DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE FINGERPRINTING SERVICES - MARCH 2022 209.00 145771 T.H.E. OFFICE CITY OFFICE SUPPLIES 644.84 145772 T-MOBILE CELLULAR SERVICES - APRIL 2022 2,884.25 145773 TANNER PACIFIC INC CIP657 - CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT & SUPPORT SERVICES - MARCH 2022
255,648.31
4/28/2022
4/28/2022
4/28/2022
4/28/2022
4/28/2022
4/28/2022
4/28/2022
4/28/2022
4/28/2022
4/28/2022
4/28/2022
4/28/2022
4/28/2022
4/28/2022
4/28/2022
4/28/2022
4/28/2022
4/28/2022
4/28/2022
4/28/2022
4/28/2022
4/28/2022
4/28/2022
4/28/2022
309
Prepared Date 04/28/2022 City of Foster City, CA
Accounts Payable Check Register

Accounting Period 2022/10
Report Number 30
Check Number Vendor Name DescriptionCheck Date Check Amount 145774 TARGET SPECIALTY PRODUCTS AGRICULTURAL MATERIALS & SAFETY SUPPLIES 653.07 145775 KAREN M TESKE INSTRUCTOR FEE - ZUMBA 616.00 145776 THE HOME DEPOT PRO JANITORIAL SUPPLIES - BUILDING AND PARKS PROGRAM 3,404.32 145777 THIRKETTLE CORPORATION WATER METER PURCHASES 1,093.75 145778 SCOTT A THOMPSON INSTRUCTOR FEE - ADVANCED VOLLEYBALL 2,418.00 145779 TOWNE FORD SALES AUTO PARTS & SUPPLIES - VEHICLE MAINTENANCE 345.24 145780 TRACY AVELAR EMPLOYEE REIMBURSEMENT - TRACY AVELAR 273.07 145781 HENRY TRUONG UNIFORM ALLOWANCE - POLICE 60.00 145782 TURNER CONSTRUCTION COMPANY PLANNING DEPOSIT REFUND 2,387.15 145783 URBAN INSIGHT, INC. CALOPPS TECHNOLOGY SUPPORT SERVICES 9,600.00 145784 VAISHALI NAYAK CLASS REFUND - ACADEMIC WRITING 295.00 145785 VERITIV OPERATING COMPANY JANITORIAL SUPPLIES 211.64 145786 VOIANCE LANGUAGE SERVICES,LLC TRANSLATION SERVICES 34.81 145787 WATCHGUARD VIDEO BODYWORN CAMERA SOFTWARE MAINTENANCE 6,697.50 145788 WE GO LOGO STAFF UNIFORMS 42.66 4/28/2022
4/28/2022
1,303,413.28
Submitted for Information:
____________________________________________
Edmund Suen, City Treasurer
CHECKS ON THIS REGISTER PROCESSED AND MAILED ON APRIL 28,2022 4/28/2022
4/28/2022
4/28/2022
4/28/2022
4/28/2022
4/28/2022
4/28/2022
4/28/2022
4/28/2022
4/28/2022
4/28/2022
4/28/2022
4/28/2022
310
Prepared Date 5/5/2022 City of Foster City, CA
Accounts Payable Check Register

Accounting Period 2022/11
Report Number 31
Check Number Vendor Name Description
145789 STEVEN ARCHER LONGEVITY 04/16/2022-05/15/2022
140.00
Check Date Check Amount
5/5/2022 140.00
Submitted for Information:
____________________________________________
Edmund Suen, City Treasurer
CHECKS ON THIS REGISTER PROCESSED AND MAILED ON MAY 5, 2022 311
Prepared Date 5/5/2022 City of Foster City, CA
Accounts Payable Check Register

Accounting Period 2022/11
Report Number 31
Check Number Vendor Name DescriptionCheck Date Check Amount 312
Prepared Date 5/5/2022 City of Foster City, CA
Accounts Payable Check Register

Accounting Period 2022/11
Report Number 31
313
Prepared Date 5/5/2022 City of Foster City, CA
Accounts Payable Check Register

Accounting Period 2022/11
Report Number 31
314
Prepared Date 5/5/2022 City of Foster City, CA
Accounts Payable Check Register

Accounting Period 2022/11
Report Number 32
ACH Date ACH Vendor Name Description
5/5/2022 ACH WILLIAM CLARK LONGEVITY 04/16/2022-05/15/2022 210.00 5/5/2022 ACH BARBARA SCHUTZ LONGEVITY 04/16/2022-05/15/2022 200.00 5/5/2022 ACH DAVID VILLANUEVA LONGEVITY 04/16/2022-05/15/2022 200.00 5/5/2022 ACH MOSHE JOSHUA LONGEVITY 04/16/2022-05/15/2022 275.00 5/5/2022 ACH GLENN WILSON LONGEVITY 04/16/2022-05/15/2022 140.00 5/5/2022 ACH ERIC EGAN LONGEVITY 04/16/2022-05/15/2022 210.00 5/5/2022 ACH DOUGLAS ESTILL LONGEVITY 04/16/2022-05/15/2022 350.00 5/5/2022 ACH THOMAS LINARI LONGEVITY 04/16/2022-05/15/2022 350.00 5/5/2022 ACH MONICA MEDRANO LONGEVITY 04/16/2022-05/15/2022 345.00 5/5/2022 ACH JOSEPH PIERUCCI LONGEVITY 04/16/2022-05/15/2022 140.00 5/5/2022 ACH BRIAN TIDWELL LONGEVITY 04/16/2022-05/15/2022 210.00 5/5/2022 ACH MICHAEL TOWNS LONGEVITY 04/16/2022-05/15/2022 350.00 5/5/2022 ACH CHARLES GOODWIN LONGEVITY 04/16/2022-05/15/2022 350.00 3,330.00
Submitted for Information:
____________________________________________
Edmund Suen, City Treasurer
ACH ON THIS REGISTER PROCESSED ON MAY 5, 2022
Amount
315