7 0
3 DATE: September 3, 2024
TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council
VIA: Stefan Chatwin, City Manager
Marlene Subhashini, Assistant City Manager
FROM: Sofia Mangalam, Community Development Director
Monica Ly, Planning Manager
DEPARTMENT: Community Development
SUBJECT: RESPONSE TO THE SAN MATEO COUNTY GRAND JURY
REPORT: "RESTAURANT EXTERIORS: THE NEGLECTED
SPACE"
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the City Council: (1) review the draft response to the San Mateo County Grand Jury Report titled “Restaurant Exteriors: The Neglected Space,” which has been prepared by staff, and by Minute Order, provide direction as needed to finalize the response and authorize the City Manager to execute the response for submission prior to the deadline of October 7, 2024; and (2) find the approval of the response exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) under CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3).
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
On June 9, 2024, staff received a Grand Jury Report (Attachment 2) from the San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury titled “Restaurant Exteriors: The Neglected Space." This report provides seven (7) findings and four (4) recommendations regarding the upkeep and management of restaurant exteriors within the County, highlighting the importance of maintaining clean and aesthetically pleasing public and commercial spaces.
The Civil Grand Jury requests responses from the San Mateo County Board of Supervisors to all findings and recommendations and from the Councils for all 20 cities and towns in the County to respond to Findings 1 through 7 and Recommendation 4. The report further includes that the governing bodies should be aware that the comment or
7 0
3 response of each governing body must be conducted subject to the notice, agenda, and open meeting requirements of the Brown Act. The response must be submitted no later than October 7, 2024.
BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS
The California Legislature has emphasized the importance of maintaining clean and attractive public and commercial spaces to enhance community well-being and economic vitality. The Grand Jury conducted an investigation into the condition of restaurant exteriors in San Mateo County, identifying several areas in need of improvement.
The 2023-2024 San Mateo County Grand Jury issued its report on July 9, 2024. The Grand Jury report found that many restaurants exterior waste storage areas were unsanitary, unsightly, and odorous, often attracting pests, with conditions worsening near garbage collection days. Regulatory enforcement across San Mateo County was inconsistent, typically occurring only in response to complaints, resulting in a reactive approach. Inspections focused primarily on restaurant interiors, leaving exteriors and parklets largely unmonitored. Economic pressures led restaurant operators to resist increasing waste pick-ups or adding containers, exacerbating the problem.
The Grand Jury Letter dated July 9, 2024 (Attachment 3), requires the City of Foster City to respond to all of the findings (1 through 7) indicating one of the following:
1. The respondent agrees with the finding.
2. The respondent disagrees wholly or partially with the finding, in which case the response shall specify the portion of the finding that is disputed and shall include an explanation of the reasons therefore.
Summarized below are the Civil Grand Jury Report findings on how municipalities can more effectively manage and enhance the exteriors of restaurants and staff’s proposed responses.
Civil Grand Jury Report Finding and Responses:
F1: Sanitary conditions of the exterior of restaurant facilities fall outside current inspections of the County Health Department. The varying unsatisfactory conditions in the waste removal areas of the facilities shows something is lacking in the regulatory process.
Response: The City of Foster City agrees with Finding 1.
F2: Sanitary conditions of parklets fall outside of current inspections by the County Health Department or Vector Control.
Response: The City of Foster City agrees with Finding 2, noting that there are currently no parklets in Foster City.
7 0
3 F3: Sanitary conditions of exterior areas used for waste storage and disposal fall outside current inspections by local jurisdictions; local jurisdictions are, by and large, only reactive to an actual complaint.
Response: The City of Foster City partially disagrees with Finding 3, because the City of Foster City takes a proactive inspection approach to ensure exterior areas used for waste storage and disposal are consistently maintained in a sanitary condition.
F4: Most restaurant exterior areas are “out of sight” of the public and as a result complaints are less frequent.
The City of Foster City partially disagrees with Finding 4. There are restaurants that include exterior areas used for waste storage and disposal which are not out of sight and there are other, “out of sight,” exterior areas that are immediately adjacent to fences that abut neighboring properties, which are closely monitored and regularly reported by those neighboring property owners. Further, the City of Foster City takes a proactive inspection approach to ensure exterior areas used for waste storage and disposal are maintained in a sanitary condition consistently.
F5. Because they lack oversight, unacceptable conditions in restaurant trash areas are likely not to be rectified.
Response: The City of Foster City partially disagrees with Finding 5. When Foster City, staff receives complaints regarding garbage overflow or spill, staff works with the restaurant owners and/or property managers to rectify the issue. Foster City Municipal Code Chapter 8.07 Storage and Disposal of Solid Wastes and Recyclable Materials, and Chapter 9.52 Property Maintenance, provide the City staff with proper oversight and authority to address these issues.
F6. Waste water from the cleaning of trash areas and from rain flow into the storm drain systems.
Response: The City of Foster City partially disagrees with Finding 6. Foster City enforces C.3 stormwater requirements through the permitting process to prevent such occurrences. These requirements include:
•Provide a roofed and enclosed area for dumpsters, recycling containers, etc., designed to prevent stormwater run-on and runoff. •Connect any drains in or beneath dumpsters, compactors, and tallow bin areas serving food service facilities to the sanitary sewer.
F7. Effective inspection of parklet sanitation can be severely hampered by closed skirting and lack of under floor access. Spacing between planking and lack of solid flooring can lead to accumulation of organic debris and possible infestation by vermin.
7 0
3 Response: The City of Foster City agrees with Finding 7, noting that there are currently no parklets in Foster City.
Additionally, the City is required to respond to Recommendation 4 and report one of the following actions:
1. The recommendation has been implemented, with a summary regarding the implemented actions.
2. The recommendation has not yet been implemented but will be implemented in the future, with a time frame for implementation.
3. The recommendation requires further analysis, with an explanation and the scope and parameters of an analysis or study, and a time frame (not exceeding 6 months from the date of publication of the grand jury report).
4. The recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted or reasonable, with an explanation, therefore.
Summarized below are the Civil Grand Jury Report recommendations on how municipalities can more effectively manage and enhance the exteriors of restaurants and staff’s proposed response. As noted above, the Grand Jury has directed that Foster City needs to respond only to Recommendation 4.
Civil Grand Jury Report Recommendations:
R1. By June 30, 2025, the County should amend its Food Facility Checklist to include the condition of trash area flooring, bins, dumpsters and enclosures, and note any needed repair, replacement or cleaning.
R2. By June 30, 2025, the County should amend its Food Facility Checklist to include the entire exterior waste storage area, retention areas and parklets, including flooring and underfloor areas.
R3. By June 30, 2025, the County should require operators/owners of restaurants to have a written diagram of their approved waste storage/retention area posted so the inspector can evaluate the condition of the facilities.
R4. By June 30, 2025, inspectors for all jurisdictions with restaurants should be empowered to require owners/operators to add receptacles or increase the frequency of pick-ups.
Response: The recommendation has been implemented since 2021 in the Foster City Municipal Code Section 8.07.100 Requirements for commercial businesses states:
City shall have the right to review the number and size of a generator’s containers and frequency of collection to evaluate adequacy of capacity provided for each type of collection service for proper separation of materials and containment of materials, and commercial businesses shall adjust their service level for their collection services as requested by the city.
7 0
3 Staff has prepared a draft response letter for the Council’s review and approval (see Attachment 1). In the draft response letter, the City expresses agreement with F1, F2, and F7, and partially disagrees with F3, F4, F5, and F6 of the Grand Jury Report as noted above. Additionally, the City indicated that Recommendation 4 has already been implemented through the City’s Municipal Code Section 8.07.100.
With Council’s direction, staff will submit the City’s response to the Grand Jury Report before the October 7, 2024, deadline as directed by the Grand Jury in its transmittal letter.
CEQA
CEQA Guideline Section 15061(b)(3), Common Sense Exemption because it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the City’s response to the San Mateo County Grand Jury Report may have a significant effect on the environment.
FISCAL IMPACT
The item under consideration has no fiscal impacts because it involves the administrative task of responding to the Grand Jury Report.
CITY COUNCIL VISION, MISSION, AND VALUE/PRIORITY AREA
Smart Planning, Development, and the Local Economy
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment 1 – Proposed Response to Grand Jury Report
Attachment 2 – Grand Jury Report - "Restaurant Exteriors: The Neglected Space" Attachment 3 – Grand Jury Letter