Submission Date – April 10, 2025
Plus expenses which can include, but are not limited to: mileage, database fees, DMV fees, court search fees, records, certified copies, tolls, parking, evidence storage, and transcription.
LWP makes every effort not to change pricing. Pricing guarantee for 18 months. Price subject to increase thereafter with advance notice.
• Contract terms and conditions may be negotiated during the agreement process. Respondents are encouraged to provide their best pricing.
Agreed
• Please e- mail the cost proposal separately from the rest of the Proposal to Diane Pitman at [email protected].
6.10 Attachment 4 - LWP Claims Solutions, Inc. Cost Proposal
268
9 5
4 DATE: June 16, 2025
TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council
President and Members of the Estero Municipal Improvement District (EMID) Board of Directors
VIA: Stefan Chatwin, City/District Manager
FROM: Diane Pitman, Administrative Services Director
DEPARTMENT: Administrative Services
SUBJECT: DECLARING THE ASSUMPTION OF ANY AND ALL WORKERS
COMPENSATION LIABILITIES AS A SELF-INSURED EMPLOYER
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the City Council/EMID Board of Directors adopt the attached resolutions declaring the assumption of any and all workers’ compensation liabilities as a Self-Insured employer and authorize the City/District Manager, or their designee to execute any and all documents required to apply for a Certificate of Consent to Self- Insure.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
One of the steps necessary to transition out of the Cities Group Joint Powers Authority (JPA) and into a stand-alone, Self-Insured workers’ compensation program is to receive a Consent to Self-Insure Certificate from the Office of Self-Insurance Plans (OSIP) within the Department of Industrial Relations (DIR). A key component of this process is for Foster City to insure the payments of all workers’ compensation liabilities. The application for a Consent to Self-Insure requires a resolution approved by the City Council assuming any and all workers’ compensation liabilities. The attached Resolution complies with the guidelines set by OSIP.
6.11 6.12 Staff Report
269
9 5
4 BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS
Foster City joined Cities Group JPA in 1978 for the purpose of establishing, operating and maintaining a pooled self-insurance program for workers’ compensation and to provide third party administration for workers’ compensation claims. At the time the JPA was established, there were five cities (Atherton, Half Moon Bay, Brisbane, Hillsborough) in the JPA. The JPA pooled the resources of its member cities to maintain a self-insurance program and administer workers’ compensation claims. The JPA was governed by a Board comprised of a Board Member from each agency. Over the years, the JPA has continued, except that the Cities of San Carlos and Dublin have joined the JPA and the City of Brisbane is no longer a member.
After a year of reviewing the administration of Workers’ Compensation claims for Foster City, it was recommended that Foster City withdraw from the Cities Group and self- insure independently and hire an independent third-party administrator (TPA) to administer the claims. The new administrator will ensure that Human Resources staff are involved in the employee claims processing, that claims are approved or denied in a timely manner, employees receive medical care and treatment so that they can return to work, and that any claim litigation or settlements are handled by the City. Any settlements over $50,000 will be brought to the City Council for approval.
Staff provided Cities Group a withdrawal notice on November 14, 2024. According to the Cities Group by-laws, the withdrawal will become effective July 1, 2025. On June 10, 2025 the Cities Group Board approved a resolution that will transition all existing Foster City claims to the new third-party administrator, rather than leaving the existing claims with the JPA. By retaining Foster City’s claims, the City will have control over the administration of those claims.
As part of the transition process, staff met with the selected TPA, LWP Claims Solutions Inc., to determine what processes and procedures were necessary to become self-insured. One of the steps is to register with the State of California, DIR, OSIP office by applying for a Certificate of Consent to Self-Insure. The application requires a resolution approved by City Council that confirms the City’s intent to self-insure. The attached resolution conforms to the requirement of the OSIP office.
The Cities Group JPA retains reserves allocable to Foster City which will be returned to Foster City according to their by-laws which holds the reserves for a period of at least 5 years. However, at a recent JPA Board meeting, the Board voted to review the dissolution process of the JPA. If a dissolution does occur, any existing assets would likely be returned to the cities at the time of dissolution rather than under the by-laws process. The dissolution process will be monitored by staff to ensure Foster City assets are returned appropriately.
6.11 6.12 Staff Report
270
9 5
4 California Environmental Quality Act
The approval of the resolution declaring the assumption of any and all workers’ compensation liabilities as a Self-Insured employer is not subject to review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21000, et seq. and the CEQA Guidelines (14 Cal. Code Regs. §§ 15000 et. seq.), including without limitation, Public Resources Code section 21065 and California Code of Regulations 15378 as this is an administrative action and not a “project” that may cause a direct, or reasonably foreseeable indirect, physical change in the environment.
FISCAL IMPACT
The long-term fiscal impact of leaving Cities Group JPA is estimated to reduce costs to the City. For the FY 2025/2026, staff has created a Workers Compensation Internal Service Fund assuming the same cost as was budgeted in FY 2024/2025 under the JPA which is approximately $1.5 million. Any unspent funds will be retained in that internal service fund to build reserves for future claims. Any costs incurred in excess of the internal service fund appropriation would require a supplemental appropriation subject to City Council approval.
CITY COUNCIL VISION, MISSION, AND VALUE/PRIORITY AREA
Staff Empowerment and Operational Excellence
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment 1 – City Resolution
Attachment 2 – EMID Resolution
6.11 6.12 Staff Report
271
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FOSTER CITY
DECLARING THE ASSUMPTION OF ANY AND ALL WORKERS COMPENSATION
LIABILITIES AS A SELF-INSURED EMPLOYER
CITY OF FOSTER CITY
WHEREAS, the City’s workers compensation claims are currently administered by Cities Group Joint Power Authority; and
WHEREAS, on November 14, 2024 staff notified Cities Group of Foster City’s intent to withdrawal effective July 1, 2025; and
WHEREAS, on June 10, 2025 the Cities Group Board approved a resolution approving the transition of all existing Foster City workers compensation claims to the new third party administrator; and
WHEREAS, the City of Foster City endeavors to be a Self-Insurer pursuant to Section 3700 et seq. of the California Labor Code.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Foster City that:
1. Staff are authorized to execute any and all documents required to apply for a Certificate of Consent to Self-Insure.
2. In consideration of the Director of Industrial Relations of the State of California issuing a Certificate of Consent to Self-Insure to the City of Foster City, the City agrees to assume any and all workers’ compensation liabilities as it relates to the Cities Group Joint Powers Authority.
3. This Resolution shall cover and extend to all potential workers’ compensation liabilities assumed by the City of Foster City as required by law as a Self-Insurer.
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 June, 2025, by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
STACY JIMENEZ, MAYOR
ATTEST:
PRISCILLA SCHAUS, CITY CLERK
6.11 Attachment 1 - City Resolution
272
3 4
9 8
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE ESTERO MUNICIPAL
IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT DECLARING THE ASSUMPTION OF ANY AND ALL
WORKERS COMPENSATION LIABILITIES AS A SELF-INSURED EMPLOYER
ESTERO MUNICIPAL IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT
WHEREAS, the City’s workers compensation claims are currently administered by Cities Group Joint Power Authority; and
WHEREAS, on November 14, 2024 staff notified Cities Group of Foster City’s intent to withdrawal effective July 1, 2025; and
WHEREAS, on June 10, 2025 the Cities Group Board approved a resolution approving the transition of all existing Foster City workers compensation claims to the new third party administrator; and
WHEREAS, the Board of Directors endeavors to be a Self-Insurer pursuant to Section 3700 et seq. of the California Labor Code.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Directors of the Estero Municipal Improvement District that:
1. Staff are authorized to execute any and all documents required to apply for a Certificate of Consent to Self-Insure
2. In consideration of the Director of Industrial Relations of the State of California issuing a Certificate of Consent to Self-Insure to the City of Foster City, the City agrees to assume any and all workers’ compensation liabilities as it relates to the Cities Group Joint Powers Authority.
3. This Resolution shall cover and extend to all potential workers’ compensation liabilities assumed by the City of Foster City as required by law as a Self-Insurer.
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 June, 2025, by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
STACY JIMENEZ, PRESIDENT
ATTEST:
PRISCILLA SCHAUS, DISTRICT SECRETARY
6.11 Attachment 2 - EMID Resolution
273
DATE: June 16, 2025
TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council President and Members of the Estero Municipal Improvement District (EMID) Board of Directors
VIA: Stefan Chatwin, City/District Manager
FROM: Nate Cruz, Finance Director
Waqas Hassan, Assistant Finance Director
DEPARTMENT: Finance
SUBJECT: CITY/EMID INVESTMENT POLICY
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the City Council/EMID Board of Directors approve the attached resolutions adopting the City/EMID Investment Policy, dated June 16, 2025.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Finance Director/Treasurer reviews the City/EMID’s Investment Policy annually.
There are no changes recommended to the Investment Policy at this time. However, the Policy is updated to reflect the current composition of the City Council/EMID Board of Directors.
BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS
The City/EMID's Investment Policy is reviewed annually by the Finance Director/Treasurer. The Policy’s three primary objectives for its investments, in order of priority, remain unchanged: (a) Safety, (b) Liquidity, and (c) Yield.
There are no changes recommended to the contents of the Investment Policy at this time other than an update of the current composition of the City Council/EMID Board of Directors.
6.12 6.11 Staff Report
274
California Environmental Quality Act
Not Applicable
FISCAL IMPACT
There is no fiscal impact with the adoption of the resolutions.
CITY COUNCIL VISION, MISSION, AND VALUE/PRIORITY AREA
Staff Empowerment and Operational Excellence
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment 1 – City Resolution
Attachment 2 – EMID Resolution
Attachment 3 – City/EMID Investment Policy
6.12 6.11 Staff Report
275
RESOLUTION NO. _____________
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FOSTER CITY ADOPTING AN UPDATED INVESTMENT POLICY DATED JUNE 16, 2025
CITY OF FOSTER CITY
WHEREAS, California Government Code section 53646 requires that a local agency adopt an Investment Policy that governs the investment of public funds in accordance with State law; and
WHEREAS, the City’s Investment Policy was last reviewed and updated on June 17, 2024; and
WHEREAS, the City’s three primary objectives for its investments, in order of priority, remain unchanged: a) Safety, b) Liquidity, and c) Yield; and WHEREAS, the City’s Investment Policy is updated to also reflect the current composition of the City Council.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Foster City that the Investment Policy dated June 16, 2025 is hereby approved.
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 June, 2025 by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
_______________________________
STACY JIMENEZ, MAYOR
ATTEST:
_________________________________
PRISCILLA SCHAUS, CITY CLERK
6.12 Attachment 1 - City Resolution
276
RESOLUTION NO. _____________
A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE ESTERO MUNICIPAL
IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT (DISTRICT) ADOPTING AN UPDATED INVESTMENT POLICY DATED JUNE 16, 2025
ESTERO MUNICIPAL IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT
WHEREAS, California Government Code section 53646 requires that a local agency adopt an Investment Policy that governs the investment of public funds in accordance with State law; and
WHEREAS, the District’s Investment Policy was last reviewed and updated on June 17, 2024; and
WHEREAS, the District’s three primary objectives for its investments, in order of priority, remain unchanged: a) Safety, b) Liquidity, and c) Yield; and WHEREAS, the District’s Investment Policy is updated to also reflect the current composition of the District Board.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Directors of the Estero Municipal Improvement District that the Investment Policy dated June 16, 2025 is hereby approved.
PASSED AND ADOPTED as a resolution of the Estero Municipal Improvement District at the Regular Meeting held on the 16th day of June, 2025 by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
______________________________
STACY JIMENEZ, PRESIDENT
ATTEST:
______________________________________
PRISCILLA SCHAUS, DISTRICT SECRETARY
6.12 Attachment 2 - EMID Resolution
277
City of Foster City, California and
Estero Municipal Improvement District
INVESTMENT POLICY
June 16, 2025
6.12 Attachment 3 - CityEMID Investment Policy
278
CITY OF FOSTER CITY AND
ESTERO MUNICIPAL IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT (DISTRICT)
INVESTMENT POLICY
June 16, 2025
Stacy Jimenez, Mayor/ President
Art Kiesel, Vice Mayor/ Vice President
Suzy Niederhofer, Councilmember/ Director
Patrick Sullivan, Councilmember/ Director
Phoebe Venkat, Councilmember/ Director
Stefan Chatwin, City/District Manager
PREPARED BY:
Financial Services Department
6.12 Attachment 3 - CityEMID Investment Policy
279
CITY OF FOSTER CITY AND
ESTERO MUNICIPAL IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT
INVESTMENT POLICY
TABLE OF CONTENTS
POLICY.............................................................................................................................4 SCOPE .............................................................................................................................4 PRUDENCE......................................................................................................................4 OBJECTIVES ...................................................................................................................5 A. Safety..................................................................................................................... 5 B. Liquidity.................................................................................................................. 5 C. Yield....................................................................................................................... 5 DELEGATION OF AUTHORITY.......................................................................................6 ETHICS AND CONFLICTS OF INTEREST......................................................................6 AUTHORIZED FINANCIAL DEALERS AND INSTITUTIONS ..........................................6 AUTHORIZED AND SUITABLE INVESTMENTS.............................................................7 DOWNGRADED BONDS ...............................................................................................10 COLLATERALIZATION ..................................................................................................10 SAFEKEEPING AND CUSTODY ...................................................................................11 DIVERSIFICATION.........................................................................................................11 MAXIMUM MATURITIES................................................................................................11 INTERNAL CONTROL ...................................................................................................11 PERFORMANCE STANDARDS.....................................................................................11 REPORTING ..................................................................................................................11 INVESTMENT POLICY ADOPTION...............................................................................12 GLOSSARY....................................................................................................................13
6.12 Attachment 3 - CityEMID Investment Policy
280
4 CITY OF FOSTER CITY AND
ESTERO MUNICIPAL IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT
INVESTMENT POLICY
JUNE 16, 2025
POLICY
It is the policy of the City of Foster City /Estero Municipal Improvement District (hereinafter collectively referred to as “City” or "City of Foster City") to invest public funds in a manner which will provide the optimal return available consistent with the City’s liquidity needs and the primary objective of protecting the safety of principal conforming to all laws of the State of California regarding the investment of public funds.
SCOPE
The City Treasurer or his/her designee is authorized to invest the City's funds in accordance with the California Government Code Sections 53601.1, 53602, 53635, and 53646. This investment policy applies to all financial assets of the City. These funds are accounted for in the Annual Comprehensive Financial Report which includes the following fund types:
•General Fund
•Special Revenue
•Capital Projects
•Enterprise
•Internal Service
•Trust and Agency
•Any new fund created by the legislative body, unless specifically exempted.
All monies entrusted to the City Treasurer will be pooled in an actively managed portfolio except for employee retirement funds, which are administered separately.
PRUDENCE
The actions of the City Treasurer in the performance of his/her duties as manager of public funds shall be evaluated using the following prudent person standard applied in the context of managing the overall portfolio:
Investments shall be made with judgment and care, under circumstances then prevailing, which persons of prudence, discretion, and intelligence exercise in the management of their own affairs, not for speculation, but for investment, considering the probable safety of their capital as well as the probable income to be derived.
Investment officers acting in accordance with written procedures and the investment policy exercising due diligence shall be relieved of personal responsibility for an individual security's credit risk or market price changes, provided deviations from
6.12 Attachment 3 - CityEMID Investment Policy
281
5 expectations are reported to the City Council / District Board in a timely fashion and appropriate action is taken to control adverse developments.
OBJECTIVES
There are three (3) primary objectives of the City’s Investment activities. In order of priority, they are: a) Safety, b) Liquidity, and c) Yield. In every case, all investment securities that are chosen to achieve these objectives will be in conformance with California state law and all applicable local ordinances or policies.
A. Safety
Safety of principal is the foremost objective of the investment program. Investments of the City shall be undertaken in a manner that seeks to ensure the preservation of capital in the overall portfolio. The City shall seek to safeguard principal by a careful examination of credit risk and market risk of individual investments.
1. Credit Risk - is defined as the risk of loss due to failure of an issuer of a security, shall be mitigated by investing in only very safe institutions and by diversifying the fund so that the failure of any one issuer would not unduly harm the City's cash flow.
2. Market Risk - is defined as the risk of market value fluctuations of the investment portfolio’s securities due to overall changes in the general level of interest rates, shall be mitigated by managing duration risk of the City/District fund to no less than one year and no greater than three years.
B. Liquidity
The City investment portfolio will remain sufficiently liquid to enable the City to meet all operating expenditure requirements which might be reasonably anticipated. In order to maintain liquidity, the City shall maintain cash and investments with a maturity of not greater than one (1) year that is equal or greater than the sum of the minimum operating and capital reserve requirements established by City Council / District Board policy for the General Fund, Capital Improvement Funds, Enterprise Funds, Internal Service Funds, and any other funds for which the Council/Board may establish minimum reserve requirements. Notwithstanding the above considerations, a minimum of 5% of the portfolio will have investments maturing within one day or in pooled or money market funds.
C. Yield
The City investment portfolio shall be designed with the objective of attaining a market rate of return throughout budgetary and economic cycles, taking into account investment risk constraints and the cash flow characteristics of the portfolio. Whenever possible, consistent with risk limitations and prudent investment principles, the City shall make an effort to achieve returns not less than the market average rate of return. The market-average rate of return is defined as the average return on One-Year U.S.
Treasury Notes, measured by an index comprised of the 12 current U.S. Treasury One- Year Notes.
6.12 Attachment 3 - CityEMID Investment Policy
282
6 DELEGATION OF AUTHORITY
Pursuant to Section 2.16.030 of the City Municipal Code, the City Treasurer has been authorized to undertake investment transactions on behalf of the City. The only officials authorized to undertake investment transactions on behalf of the City are the City Treasurer and Assistant Finance Director. The actual disbursement of funds for the placement of individual investments undertaken by these two officials shall be subjected to a second party approval by officers authorized to sign City checks and wire transfers.
On a quarterly basis, the City Treasurer shall discuss the status of current investments, strategies for future investments, and other investment matters deemed necessary and shall report to the City Council as necessary.
The City Treasurer is responsible for ensuring compliance with the City's investment policies as well as for establishing systems of internal control to regulate the activities of subordinate officials.
ETHICS AND CONFLICTS OF INTEREST
Officers and employees involved in the investment process shall refrain from personal business activity that could conflict with proper execution of the investment program, or which could impair their ability to make impartial investment decisions. Employees and investment officials shall disclose to the City Clerk any material financial interests in financial institutions that conduct business within this jurisdiction, and they shall further disclose any large personal financial investment positions that could be related to the performance of the City investment portfolio.
AUTHORIZED FINANCIAL DEALERS AND INSTITUTIONS
The City Treasurer or his/her designee will maintain a list of financial institutions authorized to provide investment services and shall conduct an annual review of the financial condition and credit worthiness of all institutions that the City is currently using for the placement of investments. All financial institutions including broker/dealers which desire to become qualified bidders for the City's investment transactions must provide the Financial Services Department with the following:
•Certification of qualification under the Security and Exchange Commission’s (SEC) Rule 15c3-1 (Net Capital Requirement for Brokers and Dealers) •Certification of registration with all appropriate federal and state regulatory bodies, which may include but are not limited to: SEC, Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board, Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, California Department of Corporations
•Audited financial statement for the last three years and subsequent quarterly financial statements.
•Certification of having read the City investment policy and depository contracts.
The City may require, at its discretion, periodic recertification of the matters set forth above.
6.12 Attachment 3 - CityEMID Investment Policy
283
7 The City Treasurer or his/her designee will investigate all financial institutions including brokers/dealers to determine if they are adequately capitalized, broker or deal in market securities appropriate to the City's needs, and agree to abide by the conditions set forth in the investment policy of the City. This will be done by having the financial institutions, brokers or dealers complete and return the appropriate questionnaire to the City Treasurer or his/her designee.
AUTHORIZED AND SUITABLE INVESTMENTS
The State of California Government Code (specifically, sections 16429.1, 53601 and 53649) limits the investment vehicles available to local agencies.
The following table summarizes the authorized investments, their maximum maturity, maximum percentage of portfolio, and maximum investment in any one issuer:
Authorized Investment Type1
Maximum
Maturity
Maximum % of
Portfolio
Maximum Investment in
One Issuer (as % of
Portfolio)
State Treasurer’s Local Agency
Investment Fund
N/A 100% 100%
San Mateo County Pool
Investment Program
N/A 10% 10%
Government Agency Issues
•Local Municipal Bonds 5 years 5% 5%
•State Bonds 5 years 5% 5%
•U.S. Treasury Obligations 5 years 100% 100%
•U.S. Agency Securities 5 years 100% 50%
Bankers Acceptances 180 days 25% 5%
Commercial Paper (“A1” rating
or better)
90 days 20% 5%
Negotiable Certificates of
Deposit
5 years 30% 5%
Repurchase Agreements 1 year 50% 50%
Medium-Term Notes (“A1” rating
or better)
5 years 5% 5%
Shares of Beneficial Interest
(Mutual Funds)
N/A 10% 10%
Shares of Beneficial Interest
issued by a joint powers
authority
N/A 50% 50%
Certificates of Deposit (non-
negotiable)
1 year 10% Maximum insurable
deposit with FDIC2
Detailed descriptions of each type of investments listed above are as follows:
1 Investment Grade Ratings are based on Moody’s Long-Term Obligation Ratings. Alternative equivalent ratings by Standard & Poor’s are also acceptable.
2 Current maximum insured amount per institution is $250,000.
6.12 Attachment 3 - CityEMID Investment Policy
284
8 •State Treasurer's Local Agency Investment Fund (LAIF) - Government Code Section 16429.1 authorizes each local government agency to invest funds at a maximum amount allowable in this investment program administered by the California State Treasurer. The maximum amount of funds that can be invested with LAIF as dictated by LAIF regulations.
•San Mateo County Pool Investment Program - Money invested with the San Mateo County Pool Investment Program. Investment in the County Pool is limited to 10% of the portfolio.
•Government Agency Issues – Securities from various government agencies, such as those identified in Government Code Section 53601 (a) through (e), includes the following:
•Local Municipal Bonds or other indebtedness – maximum maturity is 5 years from date of purchase, no limit on the amount of the portfolio, and no more than 5% of the total portfolio invested in any one issuer. Preference will be given to California municipal agencies.
•State Bonds or other indebtedness – maximum maturity of 5 years from date of purchase, a 5% limit on total investments in the portfolio, and no more than 5% of the total portfolio invested in any one issuer.
•U.S. Treasury Obligations, including notes or other indebtedness secured by the full faith and credit of the Federal Government – maximum maturity of 5 years from date of purchase, and no limit on amount invested as a % of total portfolio.
•U.S. Agency Securities, including but not limited to issues by federal agencies such as the Federal Farm Credit Bureau, Government National Mortgage Association, Federal National Mortgage Association, and Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation – maximum maturity of 5 years from date of purchase, no limit on amount investment as a % of total portfolio, and no more than 50% of the total portfolio invested in any one issuer.
•Bankers Acceptances - As authorized by Government Code Section 53601 (f), 25% of the City's portfolio may be invested in Bankers Acceptances that are eligible for purchase by the Federal Reserve System. Purchases of Bankers Acceptances may not exceed a 180 day maturity. No more than 5% of the market value of the portfolio shall be placed with any one institution.
•Commercial Paper - As authorized by Government Code Section 53601 (g), 20% of the City's portfolio may be invested in commercial paper having a 'A1' rating for the issuers debt, rated by Moody's or Standard and Poors, with maturities not to exceed 90 days. No more than 5% of the portfolio shall be placed with any one institution. •Negotiable Certificate of Deposit - As authorized in Government Code Section 53601 (h), the City may invest 30% of its portfolio in negotiable certificates of deposit
6.12 Attachment 3 - CityEMID Investment Policy
285
9 issued by commercial banks and savings and loan associations with a maturity at issuance of no greater than 5 years. No more than 5% of the market value of the portfolio shall be placed with any one institution.
•Repurchase Agreements - As authorized in Government Code Section 53601(l), this investment is an agreement between the local agency and seller for the purchase of securities on or before a specified date for a specified amount. The City may invest in Repurchase Agreements with banks and dealers with which the City has entered into a master repurchase contract which specifies terms and conditions of Repurchase Agreements and are fully collateralized by delivery to an independent third party custodian. In order to conform with the provisions of the Federal Bankruptcy Code which provides for the liquidation of securities held as collateral for repurchase agreement, the only securities acceptable as collateral shall be eligible negotiable certificates of deposit, eligible banker's acceptances, or securities that are direct obligations of, or that are fully guaranteed as to principal and interest by, the United States or any agency of the United States. There is no legal limitation on the amount of the repurchase agreement. However, the maturity period cannot exceed one year.
•Medium-Term Notes - As authorized in Government Code Section 53601(o), medium-term notes are considered notes issued by corporations organized and operating within the United States or by depository institutions licensed by the United States or any state and operating within the United States. Notes eligible for investment under this subdivision shall be rated in a rating category of "A1” or better by Standard & Poor or by Moody's rating services. Securities must have a maturity of no greater than five years from the date of purchase. No more than 5% percent of the portfolio may be invested in medium-term notes.
•Shares of Beneficial Interest (mutual funds) - As authorized by Government Section Code 53601(k), issues by diversified management companies, otherwise known as mutual funds, and as defined in Section 23701(m) of the Revenue and Taxation Code, are allowable investments. Mutual funds must consist of securities and obligations of the U.S. Government authorized by Section 53601 of the California Government Code. To be eligible for investment, said companies shall either:
1. Attain the highest ranking or the highest letter and numerical rating provided by not less than two of the three largest nationally recognized rating services, or
2. Have an investment adviser registered with the Securities and Exchange Commission with not less than five years' experience investing in the securities and obligations as authorized above, and with assets under management in excess of $500,000,000. The price of shares of beneficial interest (mutual funds) shall not include any commission that these companies may charge at the time of purchase or redemption. No more than 10% of the portfolio may be invested in mutual funds.
•Shares of Beneficial Interest (joint powers authority) – Shares of beneficial interest issued by a joint powers authority organized pursuant to Section 6509.7 that invests
6.12 Attachment 3 - CityEMID Investment Policy
286
10 in the securities and obligations authorized in subdivisions (a) to (q), inclusive.
Each share shall represent an equal proportional interest in the underlying pool of securities owned by the joint powers authority. To be eligible under this section, the joint powers authority issuing the shares shall have retained an investment adviser that meets all of the following criteria:
(1) The adviser is registered or exempt from registration with the Securities and Exchange Commission.
(2) The adviser has not less than five years of experience investing in the securities and obligations authorized in subdivisions (a) to (q), inclusive. (3) The adviser has assets under management in excess of five hundred million dollars ($500,000,000).
•Certificates of Deposit (non-negotiable) - As authorized in Government Code Section 53601, Certificates of Deposit are fixed term deposits with a financial institution with stipulated interest rates. The City shall deposit funds only with financial institutions which operate in California. Such investments are required to be collateralized by financial institutions from 105% to 150% depending on the specific security pledged as collateral. These institutions must be insured by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) or other federal government insurance banking systems.
Although financial institutions are required to collateralize such deposits, to guarantee preservation of capital, the City shall limit its investment in certificates of deposit to the maximum insurable deposit guaranteed by the FDIC or other federal insurance guarantor. The Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act was signed into law on July 21, 2010, establishing the FDIC-insured amount in effect per depositor of $250,000. The maximum maturity at issuance may not exceed 1 year.
DOWNGRADED BONDS
In the event that the rating of any investment is downgraded to ‘A2’, the City Treasurer will immediately notify the City Manager. If it is downgraded to ‘A3’ rating, the City Manager will provide notice to the City Council of the downgrade and that the bond will be sold if it falls to “Baa” rating or below, regardless of the loss, unless otherwise directed by City Council resolution at the next available City Council meeting.
COLLATERALIZATION
Collateralization will be required on two types of investments: Certificates of Deposit and Repurchase Agreements. Federal and State law governs the collateralization requirements for Certificates of Deposit, which under the terms of this policy shall not be less than 102% of the value of the deposit. With regards to Repurchase Agreements, the collateralization level will be in conformance with the California Government Code, and in no event less than 102% of market value of principal and accrued interest.
6.12 Attachment 3 - CityEMID Investment Policy
287
11 Collateral will always be held by an independent third party with whom the entity has a current custodial agreement. Clearly marked evidence of ownership (safekeeping receipt) must be supplied to the City and retained by the issuing institution at all times.
SAFEKEEPING AND CUSTODY
All security transactions, including collateral for repurchase agreements, entered into by the City shall be conducted on a delivery-versus-payment (DVP) basis. Securities will be held by a third party custodian designated by the City Treasurer and evidenced by safekeeping receipts.
DIVERSIFICATION
The City will diversify its investments by security type and institution in accordance with the table of Authorized and Suitable Investments. However, 100% of the portfolio may consist of U.S. Treasury, U.S. Agency securities and/or the LAIF investment pool.
MAXIMUM MATURITIES
To the extent possible, the City will attempt to match its investments with anticipated cash flow requirements. The City will not invest in securities maturing more than five (5) years from the date of purchase.
INTERNAL CONTROL
The City Treasurer shall establish an annual process of review internally, including assuring that an independent analysis by an external auditor be conducted annually to review and perform procedures testing on the City’s cash and investments.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS
The investment portfolio will be designed to obtain a market average rate of return during budgetary and economic cycles, taking into account the City's risk constraints and cash flow needs.
The City's investment strategy is to obtain a market average rate of return. The market average rate of return is defined as the average return on one-year U.S. Treasury Notes.
REPORTING
The City Treasurer shall submit investment reports monthly to the City Council which should include a list of the portfolio’s holdings by investment asset class, name of institution, purchase date, maturity date, call date, par value, amount of deposit or cost of security, amortized book value, current market value of securities, coupon and effective yield. In addition, the report will indicate the portfolio’s duration, total weighted average maturity and yield. The report will be signed as mandated in compliance with California Government Code Sections 53607 and 53646.
6.12 Attachment 3 - CityEMID Investment Policy
288
12 INVESTMENT POLICY ADOPTION
The above investment policy is adopted by the resolution of the City of Foster City/Estero Municipal Improvement District. The policy is reviewed on an annual basis by the City Treasurer and any modifications made thereto shall be approved by the City Council/District Board.
6.12 Attachment 3 - CityEMID Investment Policy
289
13 GLOSSARY
AGENCIES: Federal agency securities.
ASKED: The price at which securities are offered.
BANKERS' ACCEPTANCE (BA): A draft or bill or exchange accepted by a bank or trust company. The accepting institution guarantees payment of the bill, as well as the insurer.
BID: The price offered for securities.
BOND RATINGS: bond ratings measure quality and safety based on the issuer's financial condition. These rating services evaluate the likelihood that a debt issuer will be able to meet scheduled interest and principal payments.
Moody's vs. Standard & Poors Bond Ratings
Bond Rating
Moody's
Standard
&
Poor's
Grade Risk
Aaa AAA Investment, Highest Quality Lowest Risk
Aa (1-3) AA Investment, Very High Quality Low Risk
A (1-3) A Investment, High Quality Low Risk
Baa BBB Minimum Investment Grade Medium
Risk
Ba BB Junk, Speculative High Risk
B B Junk, Very Speculative Higher Risk
Caa CCC Junk, Default Possible Higher Risk
Ca CC Junk, Default Probable Extreme
Risk
C D Junk, In actual or imminent
default
Highest
Risk
BROKER: A broker brings buyers and sellers together for a commission paid by the initiator of the transaction or by both sides; he does not position. In the money market, brokers are active in markets in which banks buy and sell money and in interdealer markets.
COLLATERAL: Securities, evident of deposit or other property which a borrower pledges to secure repayment of a loan. Also refers to securities pledged by a bank to secure deposits of public monies.
6.12 Attachment 3 - CityEMID Investment Policy
290
14 CERTIFICATE OF DEPOSIT (CD): A time deposit with a specific maturity evidenced by a certificate. Certificate of Deposit may be issued in either negotiable or nonnegotiable form. Nonnegotiable certificates cannot be resold in the secondary market and may face penalties for early redemption whereas a negotiable CD may be resold.
COUPON: (a) The annual rate of interest that a bond's issuer promises to pay the bondholder on the bond's face value. (b) A certificate attached to a bond evidencing interest due on a payment date.
DEALER: A dealer, as opposed to a broker, acts as a principal in all transactions, buying and selling for his own account.
DEBENTURE: A bond secured only by the general credit of the issuer.
DISCOUNT: The difference between the cost price of a security and its value at maturity when quoted at lower than face value. A security selling below original offering price shortly after sale also is considered to be at a discount.
DISCOUNT SECURITIES: Non-interest bearing money market instruments that are issued at a discount and redeemed at maturity for full face value, e.g., U.S. Treasury bills.
DIVERSIFICATION: Dividing investment funds among a variety of securities offering independent return.
DURATION: A measure of the sensitivity of the asset's price to interest rate movements.
It broadly corresponds to the length of time before the asset is due to be repaid.
Example: the duration of a US Treasury Bill which matures in one year is 1.0. If interest rates immediately move 1% after purchase, the value of the investment would also change by 1%.
FEDERAL CREDIT AGENCIES: Agencies of the Federal government set up to supply credit to various classes of institutions and individuals, e.g., S&L's, small business firms, students, farmers, farm cooperatives, and exporters.
FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION (FDIC): A federal agency that insures bank deposits, currently up to $100,000 per deposit.
FEDERAL FARM CREDIT BUREAU: The Bureau issues a variety of Federal Farm Credit Banks Consolidated System wide Debt Securities (Farm Credit Debt Securities) on behalf of the Farm Credit System Banks with a broad range of maturities and structures.
FEDERAL FUNDS RATE: The rate of interest at which Fed funds are traded. This rate is currently pegged by the Federal Reserve through open-market operations.
FEDERAL HOME LOAN BANKS (FHLB): The institutions that regulate and lend to savings and loan associations. The Federal Home Loan Banks play a role analogous to that played by the Federal Reserve Banks vis-a-vis member commercial banks.
6.12 Attachment 3 - CityEMID Investment Policy
291
15 FEDERAL HOME LOAN MORTGAGE CORPORATION: The FHLMC, or “Freddie Mac”, is a Government-chartered corporation which buys qualified mortgage loans from the financial institutions that originate them, securitizes the loans, and distributes the securities through the dealer community. The securities are not backed by the U.S.
Government, however it does operate under a conservatorship that began on September 6, 2008, and conducts its business under the direction of the Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA).
FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM: The central bank of the United States created by Congress and consisting of a seven-member Board of Governors in Washington, D.C., 12 Regional Banks and about 5,700 commercial banks that are members of the system.
GOVERNMENT NATIONAL MORTGAGE ASSOCIATION (GNMA or Ginnie Mae):
Securities guaranteed by GNMA and issued by mortgage bankers, commercial banks, savings and loan associations and other institutions. Security holder is protected by full faith and credit of the U.S. Government. Ginnie Mae securities are backed by PHA, VA or FMHM mortgages. The term pass-throughs is often used to describe Ginnie Maes.
LIQUIDITY: A liquid asset is one that can be converted easily and rapidly into cash without a substantial loss of value. In the money market a security is said to be liquid if the spread between bid and asked prices is narrow and reasonable size can be done at those quotes.
LOCAL AGENCY INVESTMENT FUND (LAIF): The aggregate of all funds from political subdivisions that are placed in the custody of the State Treasurer for investment and reinvestment.
MARKET VALUE: The price at which a security is trading and could presumably be purchased or sold.
MATURITY: The date upon which the principal or stated value of an investment becomes due and payable.
MONEY MARKET: The market in which short-term debt instruments (bills, commercial paper, bankers' acceptances, etc.) are issued and traded.
PORTFOLIO: Collection of securities held by an investor.
PRUDENT PERSON RULE: An investment standard. In some states the law requires that a fiduciary, such as a trustee, may invest money only in a list of securities selected by the state - the so-called legal list. In other states the trustee may invest in a security if it is one which would be bought by a prudent person of discretion and intelligence who is seeking a reasonable income and preservation of capital.
PRIMARY DEALER: A group of government securities dealers that submit daily reports of market activity and positions and monthly financial statements to the Federal Reserve Bank of New York and are subject to its informal oversight. Primary dealers include Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) registered securities broker-dealers, banks, and a few regulated firms.
6.12 Attachment 3 - CityEMID Investment Policy
292
16 RATE OF RETURN: The yield obtainable on a security based on its purchase price or its current market price. This may be the amortized yield to maturity on a bond or the current income return.
REPURCHASE AGREEMENT (Repo): A form of short-term borrowing for dealers in government securities. Technically, it represents the simultaneous sell and repurchase of a security. The dealer sells the combination of securities needed to overcollateralize the investor’s principal investment usually on an overnight basis, and buys them back the following day. For the party selling the security (and agreeing to repurchase it in the future) it is a repo; for the party on the other end of the transaction (buying the security and agreeing to sell in the future), it is a reverse repurchase agreement.
QUALIFIED PUBLIC DEPOSITORIES: A financial institution which does not claim exemption from the payment of any sales or compensating use or ad valorem taxes under the laws of this state, which has segregated for the benefit of the commission eligible collateral having a value of not less than its maximum liability and which has been approved by the Public Deposit Protection Commission to hold public deposits.
SAFEKEEPING: A service to customers rendered by banks for a fee whereby securities and valuables of all types and descriptions are held in the bank's vaults for protection.
SECONDARY MARKET: A market made for the purchase and sale of outstanding issues following the initial distribution.
SECURITIES & EXCHANGE COMMISSION: Agency created by Congress to protect investors in securities transactions by administering securities legislation.
TREASURY BILLS: A non-interest bearing discount security issued by the U.S.
Treasury to finance the national debt. Most bills are issued to mature in three months, six months, or one year.
TREASURY BOND: Long-term U.S. Treasury securities having initial maturities of more than ten years.
TREASURY NOTES: Intermediate term coupon bearing U.S. Treasury securities having initial maturities of from one to ten years.
WEIGHTED AVERAGE MATURITY (WAM) – a measure of the portfolio’s investments with respect to timing of cash flows. Example: If a portfolio had only two securities of equal size, one maturing in 2 years and another in 3 years, the portfolio’s WAM would be 2.5 years. If the 2 year investment was $1 mm and the 3 year investment was $10 mm, the WAM would be 2.9 years.
YIELD: An investment’s annualized return. The simplest version of yield is calculated using the following formula: [yield = coupon amount/price.] When a bond is purchased at par (100% of face value), yield is equal to the interest rate. When the price changes, so does the yield.
BOOK YIELD – The yield to maturity at which the investment was purchased.
6.12 Attachment 3 - CityEMID Investment Policy
293
17 MARKET YIELD – the yield to maturity of the bond at current market price PORTFOLIO’S NET YIELD – The total interest received divided by amount invested, plus any gains and minus any losses taken, annualized.
YIELD TO MATURITY – The internal rate of return earned by an investor who buys the bond today at the market price, assuming that the bond will be held until maturity, and that all coupon and principal payments will be made on schedule. Yield to maturity is actually an estimation of future return, as the rate at which coupon payments can be reinvested when received is unknown.
6.12 Attachment 3 - CityEMID Investment Policy
294
DATE: June 16, 2025
TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council
President and Members of the Estero Municipal Improvement District (EMID) Board of Directors
VIA: Stefan Chatwin, City/District Manager
FROM: Diane Pitman, Administrative Services Director
SUBJECT: UPDATED CITY/DISTRICT PAY PLAN FOR FISCAL YEAR 2025-2026 EFFECTIVE JULY 1, 2025
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the City Council/EMID Board of Directors (hereafter referred to as “City Council”) adopt resolutions approving the updated Pay Plan for Fiscal Year 2025-2026, effective July 1, 2025.
BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS
The City Council approves a Pay Plan at a regularly scheduled meeting as part of the budget adoption process or amends the Pay Plan if there are changes during the fiscal year.
On June 1, 2023, the City Council approved the memorandum of understanding (MOU), effective July 1, 2023, through June 30, 2026, between the City and the Foster City Police Officers Association (FCPOA). Within the approved MOU, a general wage increase is provided effective on July 1, 2025. This wage increase is equal to the percentage movement of the San Francisco-Hayward-Oakland CPI-U April 2024 to April 2025, with a minimum of 3% and a maximum of 5%. The CPI-U percentage for April 2024 to April 2025 is 1.3%.
The salary steps of the attached Pay Plan have updated salaries, increased by 3%, for all FCPOA represented classifications.
6.13 6.13 Staff Report
295
In addition, on May 5, 2025, the City Council approved the unrepresented employees compensation and benefits plan, effective May 1, 2025. Within the approved compensation and benefits plan, a general wage increase is provided effective on July 1, 2025. This wage increase is equal to the percentage movement of the San Francisco-Hayward-Oakland CPI-U April 2024 to April 2025, with a minimum of 3% and a maximum of 5%. The CPI-U percentage for April 2024 to April 2025 is 1.3%.
The salary steps of the attached Pay Plan have updated salaries, increased by 3%, for all unrepresented classifications.
No other changes have been made to the Pay Plan. A general wage increase for American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME) with an effective date of September 1, 2025, per the approved MOU, will be brought back to Council at a later date.
To meet CalPERS requirements under Government Code 20636 and CCR section 570.5, which requires public agencies to provide a publicly available pay schedule, which is required to be duly approved and adopted by the Council, staff is bringing this forward to ensure the City's pay schedule is updated with the new pay rates based on the approved FCPOA MOU and unrepresented employees compensation and benefits plan. Staff requests approval of the resolutions to approve the amended Pay Plan for Fiscal Year 2025-2026 which will be effective July 1, 2025. Upon approval, staff will publish the updated Pay Plan on the City's website for public access.
California Environmental Quality Act
CEQA General Rule Exemption
FISCAL IMPACT
The updated FY 2025-2026 Pay Plan reflects the approved salary ranges provided in the FCPOA MOU and unrepresented employees compensation and benefits plan. The FY 2025-2026 budget used a 3% estimate for the anticipated wage increase and the actual increase will be 3%.
CITY COUNCIL VISION, MISSION AND VALUE/PRIORITY AREA
Staff Empowerment and Operational Excellence
ATTACHMENTS
Attachment 1 - City Resolution
Attachment 2 - EMID Resolution
Attachment 3 - City/District Pay Plan for FY 2025-2026 Effective July 1, 2025 (redline) Attachment 4 - City/District Pay Plan for FY 2025-2026 Effective July 1, 2025
6.13 6.13 Staff Report
296
3 4
8 4
RESOLUTION NO. _____________
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FOSTER CITY APPROVING AND ADOPTING THE AMENDED PAY PLAN FOR FISCAL YEAR 2025- 2026, EFFECTIVE JULY 1, 2025
CITY OF FOSTER CITY
WHEREAS, the City Manager has prepared and submitted to the City Council a schedule of pay ranges for job classifications for Fiscal Year 2025-2026; and WHEREAS, the schedule of pay ranges is referred to as the Pay Plan; and WHEREAS, the Pay Plan incorporates the negotiated salary increase for the Foster City Police Officer Association (FCPOA) labor unit and unrepresented management employees compensation and benefits plan; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Foster City must approve the Pay Plan in order for the pay ranges to become effective.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Foster City that the amended Pay Plan for Fiscal Year 2025-2026 is hereby adopted effective July 1, 2025.
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 June 2025, by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
STACY JIMENEZ, MAYOR
ATTEST:
PRISCILLA SCHAUS, CITY CLERK
6.13 Attachment 1 - City Resolution
297
RESOLUTION NO. _____________
A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE ESTERO MUNICIPAL
IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT APPROVING AND ADOPTING THE PAY PLAN FOR FISCAL YEAR 2025-2026, EFFECTIVE JULY 1, 2025
ESTERO MUNICIPAL IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT
WHEREAS, the District Manager has prepared and submitted to the Board of Directors a schedule of pay ranges for job classifications for Fiscal Year 2025-2026; and WHEREAS, the schedule of pay ranges is referred to as the Pay Plan; and WHEREAS, the Pay Plan incorporates the negotiated salary increases for the Foster City Police Officers Association (FCPOA) labor unit and the unrepresented management employees plan; and
WHEREAS, the Board of Directors of the Estero Municipal Improvement District must approve the Pay Plan in order for the pay ranges to become effective.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Directors of the Estero Municipal Improvement District that the amended Pay Plan for Fiscal Year 2025-2026 is hereby adopted effective July 1, 2025.
PASSED AND ADOPTED as a resolution of the Board of Directors of the Estero Municipal Improvement District at the Regular Meeting held on the 16 th day of June 2025, by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
STACY JIMENEZ, PRESIDENT
ATTEST:
________
PRISCILLA SCHAUS, DISTRICT SECRETARY
6.13 Attachment 2 - EMID Resolution
298
City of Foster City / Estero Municipal Improvement District FY 2025-2026 Pay Plan
Effective April 1, 2025 July 1, 2025
Exhibit A
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10
11 12
13 14
15 16
17 18
19 20
21 22
23 24
25 26
27 28
29 30
31 32
33 34
35 36
37 38
39 40
41 42
43 44
45 46
47 48
49 50
51 52
53 54
55 56
57 58
59 60
A B C D E F G H I J K L M N
Code Classification Unit FLSA Step 1 Step 2
Hourly
Step 3 Step 4 Step 5 Step 1 Step 2
Yearly
Step 3 Step 4 Step 5
229 Accountant I Other Management E $45.9461 $48.2434 $50.6556 $53.1884 $55.8478 $95,567.89 $100,346.27 $105,363.65 $110,631.87 $116,163.42 $47.3245 $49.6907 $52.1752 $54.7840 $57.5232 $98,434.96 $103,356.66 $108,524.42 $113,950.72 $119,648.33 923 Accountant II Other Management E $51.0490 $53.6014 $56.2815 $59.0956 $62.0504 $106,181.92 $111,490.91 $117,065.52 $122,918.85 $129,064.83 $52.5805 $55.2095 $57.9700 $60.8685 $63.9119 $109,367.44 $114,835.76 $120,577.60 $126,606.48 $132,936.78 516 Accounting Specialist AFSCME NE $36.7232 $38.5594 $40.4874 $42.5118 $44.6374 $76,384.26 $80,203.55 $84,213.79 $88,424.54 $92,845.79 264 Administrative Assistant I AFSCME NE $37.9743 $39.8730 $41.8667 $43.9600 $46.1580 $78,986.54 $82,935.84 $87,082.74 $91,436.80 $96,008.64 263 Administrative Assistant II AFSCME NE $41.8667 $43.9600 $46.1580 $48.4659 $50.8892 $87,082.74 $91,436.80 $96,008.64 $100,809.07 $105,849.54 114 Administrative Services Director Executive Management E $105.4553 $110.7281 $116.2645 $122.0777 $128.1816 $219,347.02 $230,314.45 $241,830.16 $253,921.62 $266,617.73 $108.6190 $114.0499 $119.7524 $125.7400 $132.0270 $225,927.52 $237,223.79 $249,084.99 $261,539.20 $274,616.26 111 Assistant City Manager Executive Management E $117.7298 $123.6163 $129.7971 $136.2870 $143.1014 $244,877.98 $257,121.90 $269,977.97 $283,476.96 $297,650.91 $121.2618 $127.3249 $133.6911 $140.3757 $147.3944 $252,224.54 $264,835.79 $278,077.49 $291,981.46 $306,580.44 211 Assistant Engineer Other Management E $56.6808 $59.5148 $62.4905 $65.6150 $68.8957 $117,896.06 $123,790.78 $129,980.24 $136,479.20 $143,303.06 $58.3810 $61.3001 $64.3651 $67.5834 $70.9626 $121,432.48 $127,504.21 $133,879.41 $140,573.47 $147,602.15 225 Assistant Finance Director Other Management E $83.4269 $87.5982 $91.9781 $96.5770 $101.4059 $173,527.95 $182,204.26 $191,314.45 $200,880.16 $210,924.27 $85.9297 $90.2262 $94.7375 $99.4744 $104.4481 $178,733.78 $187,670.50 $197,054.00 $206,906.75 $217,252.00 220 Assistant Planner Other Management E $49.5552 $52.0330 $54.6346 $57.3663 $60.2346 $103,074.82 $108,228.64 $113,639.97 $119,321.90 $125,287.97 $51.0418 $53.5939 $56.2736 $59.0873 $62.0416 $106,166.94 $111,475.31 $117,049.09 $122,901.58 $129,046.61 207 Associate Civil Engineer Other Management E $62.9796 $66.1286 $69.4350 $72.9068 $76.5521 $130,997.57 $137,547.49 $144,424.80 $151,646.14 $159,228.37 $64.8690 $68.1125 $71.5181 $75.0940 $78.8487 $134,927.52 $141,674.00 $148,757.65 $156,195.52 $164,005.22 215 Associate Planner Other Management E $55.0636 $57.8168 $60.7076 $63.7430 $66.9301 $114,532.29 $120,258.94 $126,271.81 $132,585.44 $139,214.61 $56.7154 $59.5512 $62.5288 $65.6552 $68.9380 $117,968.03 $123,866.50 $130,059.90 $136,562.82 $143,391.05 507 Building Inspector AFSCME NE $51.5454 $54.1227 $56.8288 $59.6702 $62.6537 $107,214.43 $112,575.22 $118,203.90 $124,114.02 $130,319.70 261 Building Lead Maintenance Worker AFSCME NE $42.9133 $45.0590 $47.3120 $49.6776 $52.1615 $89,259.66 $93,722.72 $98,408.96 $103,329.41 $108,495.92 267 Building Maintenance Worker I AFSCME NE $36.6462 $38.4785 $40.4024 $42.4225 $44.5436 $76,224.10 $80,035.28 $84,036.99 $88,238.80 $92,650.69 268 Building Maintenance Worker II AFSCME NE $40.6447 $42.6769 $44.8107 $47.0512 $49.4038 $84,540.98 $88,767.95 $93,206.26 $97,866.50 $102,759.90 527 Building Permit Technician I AFSCME NE $37.9955 $39.8953 $41.8901 $43.9846 $46.1838 $79,030.64 $82,982.22 $87,131.41 $91,487.97 $96,062.30 544 Building Permit Technician II AFSCME NE $42.3255 $44.4418 $46.6639 $48.9971 $51.4470 $88,037.04 $92,438.94 $97,060.91 $101,913.97 $107,009.76 910 Building Serv. Assistant Hrly/PT/Seasonal NE $17.39 $18.00 $18.63 $19.28 $19.96 310 Building Services Coordinator AFSCME NE $36.6462 $38.4785 $40.4024 $42.4225 $44.5436 $76,224.10 $80,035.28 $84,036.99 $88,238.80 $92,650.69 312 Building Services Coordinator Assistant Hrly/PT/Seasonal NE $19.98 $20.68 $21.40 $22.15 $22.92 309 Building/Fleet Maintance Manager Other Management E $67.8000 $71.1900 $74.7495 $78.4870 $82.4114 $141,024.00 $148,075.20 $155,478.96 $163,252.96 $171,415.71 $69.8341 $73.3258 $76.9921 $80.8417 $84.8837 $145,254.93 $152,517.66 $160,143.57 $168,150.74 $176,558.18 205 Chief Building Official Other Management E $79.9566 $83.9544 $88.1521 $92.5597 $97.1877 $166,309.73 $174,625.15 $183,356.37 $192,524.18 $202,150.42 $82.3552 $86.4730 $90.7967 $95.3365 $100.1033 $171,298.82 $179,863.84 $188,857.14 $198,299.92 $208,214.93 102 Chief of Police Executive Management E $117.7299 $123.6164 $129.7972 $136.2871 $143.1015 $244,878.19 $257,122.11 $269,978.18 $283,477.17 $297,651.12 $121.2619 $127.3250 $133.6912 $140.3758 $147.3945 $252,224.75 $264,836.00 $278,077.70 $291,981.66 $306,580.65 101 City Manager Executive Management E $157.7248 $328,067.58 $162.4565 $337,909.61
920 Clerical Assistant Hrly/PT/Seasonal NE $17.39 $18.00 $18.63 $19.28 $19.9554 255 Code Enforcement Officer I AFSCME NE $35.7448 $37.5320 $39.4086 $41.3790 $43.4480 $74,349.18 $78,066.56 $81,969.89 $86,068.32 $90,371.84 256 Code Enforcement Officer II AFSCME NE $48.5554 $50.9832 $53.5324 $56.2090 $59.0195 $100,995.23 $106,045.06 $111,347.39 $116,914.72 $122,760.56 110 Communications Director / City Clerk Executive Management E $100.6349 $105.6666 $110.9499 $116.4974 $122.3223 $209,320.59 $219,786.53 $230,775.79 $242,314.59 $254,430.38 $103.6540 $108.8367 $114.2785 $119.9924 $125.9920 $215,600.32 $226,380.34 $237,699.28 $249,584.19 $262,063.30 266 Communications Manager Other Management E $56.9322 $59.7788 $62.7677 $65.9061 $69.2014 $118,418.98 $124,339.90 $130,556.82 $137,084.69 $143,938.91 $58.6402 $61.5722 $64.6508 $67.8833 $71.2774 $121,971.62 $128,070.18 $134,473.66 $141,197.26 $148,257.08 106 Community Development Director Executive Management E $105.4553 $110.7281 $116.2645 $122.0777 $128.1816 $219,347.02 $230,314.45 $241,830.16 $253,921.62 $266,617.73 $108.6190 $114.0499 $119.7524 $125.7400 $132.0270 $225,927.52 $237,223.79 $249,084.99 $261,539.20 $274,616.26 913 Department Intern Hrly/PT/Seasonal NE $17.39 $30.00 234 Deputy City Clerk Other Management NE $45.5457 $47.8230 $50.2142 $52.7249 $55.3611 $94,735.06 $99,471.84 $104,445.54 $109,667.79 $115,151.09 $46.9121 $49.2577 $51.7206 $54.3066 $57.0219 $97,577.17 $102,456.02 $107,578.85 $112,957.73 $118,605.62 109 Deputy City Manager Executive Management E $105.4553 $110.7281 $116.2645 $122.0777 $128.1816 $219,347.02 $230,314.45 $241,830.16 $253,921.62 $266,617.73 $108.6190 $114.0499 $119.7524 $125.7400 $132.0270 $225,927.52 $237,223.79 $249,084.99 $261,539.20 $274,616.26 104 Director of Public Works Executive Management E $108.0324 $113.4340 $119.1057 $125.0610 $131.3141 $224,707.39 $235,942.72 $247,739.86 $260,126.88 $273,133.33 $111.2734 $116.8371 $122.6790 $128.8129 $135.2535 $231,448.67 $243,021.17 $255,172.32 $267,930.83 $281,327.33 924 Economic Development Manager Other Management E $78.9966 $82.9464 $87.0937 $91.4484 $96.0208 $164,312.93 $172,528.51 $181,154.90 $190,212.67 $199,723.26 $81.3665 $85.4348 $89.7065 $94.1918 $98.9014 $169,242.32 $177,704.38 $186,589.52 $195,918.94 $205,714.96 512 Engineering Manager Other Management E $87.2310 $91.5926 $96.1722 $100.9808 $106.0298 $181,440.48 $190,512.61 $200,038.18 $210,040.06 $220,541.98 $89.8479 $94.3403 $99.0573 $104.0102 $109.2107 $186,883.63 $196,227.82 $206,039.18 $216,341.22 $227,158.24 503 Equipment Maintenance Worker AFSCME NE $38.4753 $40.3991 $42.4191 $44.5401 $46.7671 $80,028.62 $84,030.13 $88,231.73 $92,643.41 $97,275.57
6.13 Attachment 3 - CityDistrict Pay Plan for FY 2025-2026 Effective July 1, 2025 (redline)
299
City of Foster City / Estero Municipal Improvement District FY 2025-2026 Pay Plan
Effective April 1, 2025 July 1, 2025
Exhibit A
1 A B C D E F G H I J K L M N
Code Classification Unit FLSA Step 1 Step 2
Hourly
Step 3 Step 4 Step 5 Step 1 Step 2
Yearly
Step 3 Step 4 Step 5
61 62
63 64
65 66
67 68
69 70
71 72
73 74
75 76
77 78
79 80
81 82
83 84
85 86
87 88
89 90
91 92
107 Finance Director Executive Management E $105.4553 $110.7281 $116.2645 $122.0777 $128.1816 $219,347.02 $230,314.45 $241,830.16 $253,921.62 $266,617.73 $108.6190 $114.0499 $119.7524 $125.7400 $132.0270 $225,927.52 $237,223.79 $249,084.99 $261,539.20 $274,616.26 300 Financial Services Manager Other Management E $72.7951 $76.4349 $80.2566 $84.2694 $88.4829 $151,413.81 $158,984.59 $166,933.73 $175,280.35 $184,044.43 $74.9790 $78.7279 $82.6643 $86.7975 $91.1374 $155,956.32 $163,754.03 $171,941.74 $180,538.80 $189,565.76 928 Fleet Supervisor Other Management E $52.3947 $55.0144 $57.7651 $60.6534 $63.6861 $108,980.98 $114,429.95 $120,151.41 $126,159.07 $132,467.09 $53.9666 $56.6649 $59.4981 $62.4730 $65.5967 $112,250.53 $117,862.99 $123,756.05 $129,943.84 $136,441.10 925 Housing Coordinator Other Management NE $56.5369 $59.3637 $62.3319 $65.4485 $68.7209 $117,596.75 $123,476.50 $129,650.35 $136,132.88 $142,939.47 $58.2330 $61.1446 $64.2018 $67.4119 $70.7825 $121,124.64 $127,180.77 $133,539.74 $140,216.75 $147,227.66 404 Human Resources Analyst Other Management E $54.0984 $56.8033 $59.6435 $62.6257 $65.7570 $112,524.67 $118,150.86 $124,058.48 $130,261.46 $136,774.56 $55.7214 $58.5075 $61.4329 $64.5045 $67.7297 $115,900.51 $121,695.60 $127,780.43 $134,169.36 $140,877.80 252 Human Resources Manager Other Management E $78.9966 $82.9464 $87.0937 $91.4484 $96.0208 $164,312.93 $172,528.51 $181,154.90 $190,212.67 $199,723.26 $81.3665 $85.4348 $89.7065 $94.1918 $98.9014 $169,242.32 $177,704.38 $186,589.52 $195,918.94 $205,714.96 403 Human Resources Technician Other Management NE $42.4348 $44.5565 $46.7843 $49.1235 $51.5797 $88,264.38 $92,677.52 $97,311.34 $102,176.88 $107,285.78 $43.7077 $45.8931 $48.1878 $50.5972 $53.1271 $90,912.02 $95,457.65 $100,230.62 $105,242.18 $110,504.35 238 Information Technology Manager Other Management E $78.9966 $82.9464 $87.0937 $91.4484 $96.0208 $164,312.93 $172,528.51 $181,154.90 $190,212.67 $199,723.26 $81.3665 $85.4348 $89.7065 $94.1918 $98.9014 $169,242.32 $177,704.38 $186,589.52 $195,918.94 $205,714.96 926 Irrigation Technician AFSCME NE $42.9133 $45.0590 $47.3120 $49.6776 $52.1615 $89,259.66 $93,722.72 $98,408.96 $103,329.41 $108,495.92 228 Management Analyst Other Management E $56.5369 $59.3637 $62.3319 $65.4485 $68.7209 $117,596.75 $123,476.50 $129,650.35 $136,132.88 $142,939.47 $58.2330 $61.1446 $64.2018 $67.4119 $70.7825 $121,124.64 $127,180.77 $133,539.74 $140,216.75 $147,227.66 233 Management Assistant Other Management E $38.6613 $40.5944 $42.6241 $44.7553 $46.9931 $80,415.50 $84,436.35 $88,658.13 $93,091.02 $97,745.65 $39.8212 $41.8123 $43.9029 $46.0980 $48.4029 $82,828.10 $86,969.58 $91,318.03 $95,883.84 $100,678.02 501 Mechanic I AFSCME NE $43.4795 $45.6535 $47.9362 $50.3330 $52.8497 $90,437.36 $94,959.28 $99,707.30 $104,692.64 $109,927.38 520 Office Assistant I AFSCME NE $30.4462 $31.9685 $63,328.10 $66,494.48 519 Office Assistant II AFSCME NE $33.5668 $35.2451 $37.0074 $38.8578 $40.8007 $69,818.94 $73,309.81 $76,975.39 $80,824.22 $84,865.46 108 Parks & Recreation Director Executive Management E $105.4553 $110.7281 $116.2645 $122.0777 $128.1816 $219,347.02 $230,314.45 $241,830.16 $253,921.62 $266,617.73 $108.6190 $114.0499 $119.7524 $125.7400 $132.0270 $225,927.52 $237,223.79 $249,084.99 $261,539.20 $274,616.26 537 Parks Lead Maintenance Worker AFSCME NE $42.9133 $45.0590 $47.3120 $49.6776 $52.1615 $89,259.66 $93,722.72 $98,408.96 $103,329.41 $108,495.92 308 Parks Maintenance Manager Other Management E $66.3730 $69.6916 $73.1762 $76.8350 $80.6767 $138,055.84 $144,958.53 $152,206.50 $159,816.80 $167,807.54 $68.3641 $71.7823 $75.3714 $79.1400 $83.0970 $142,197.33 $149,307.18 $156,772.51 $164,611.20 $172,841.76 927 Parks Maintenance Supervisor Other Management E $53.0204 $55.6714 $58.4550 $61.3777 $64.4466 $110,282.43 $115,796.51 $121,586.40 $127,665.62 $134,048.93 $54.6110 $57.3415 $60.2086 $63.2190 $66.3800 $113,590.88 $119,270.32 $125,233.89 $131,495.52 $138,070.40
6.13 Attachment 3 - CityDistrict Pay Plan for FY 2025-2026 Effective July 1, 2025 (redline)
300
City of Foster City / Estero Municipal Improvement District FY 2025-2026 Pay Plan
Effective April 1, 2025 July 1, 2025
Exhibit A
1 A B C D E F G H I J K L M N
Code Classification Unit FLSA Step 1 Step 2
Hourly
Step 3 Step 4 Step 5 Step 1 Step 2
Yearly
Step 3 Step 4 Step 5
93 94
95 96
97 98
99 100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
533 Parks Maintenance Worker AFSCME NE $32.0227 $33.6238 $66,607.22 $69,937.50 532 Parks Maintenance Worker I AFSCME NE $35.3049 $37.0701 $38.9236 $40.8698 $42.9133 $73,434.19 $77,105.81 $80,961.09 $85,009.18 $89,259.66 530 Parks Maintenance Worker II AFSCME NE $38.9236 $40.8698 $42.9133 $45.0590 $47.3120 $80,961.09 $85,009.18 $89,259.66 $93,722.72 $98,408.96 227 Planning Manager Other Management E $77.1895 $81.0490 $85.1015 $89.3566 $93.8244 $160,554.16 $168,581.92 $177,011.12 $185,861.73 $195,154.75 $79.5053 $83.4806 $87.6546 $92.0373 $96.6391 $165,371.02 $173,639.65 $182,321.57 $191,437.58 $201,009.39 543 Plans Examiner AFSCME NE $62.6537 $65.7864 $69.0757 $72.5295 $76.1560 $130,319.70 $136,835.71 $143,677.46 $150,861.36 $158,404.48 201 Police Captain Other Management E $99.0949 $104.0496 $109.2521 $114.7147 $120.4504 $206,117.39 $216,423.17 $227,244.37 $238,606.58 $250,536.83 $102.0676 $107.1710 $112.5296 $118.1561 $124.0639 $212,300.61 $222,915.68 $234,061.57 $245,764.69 $258,052.94 602 Police Corporal FCPOA NE $64.6590 $67.8920 $71.2866 $74.8509 $78.5934 $134,490.72 $141,215.36 $148,276.13 $155,689.87 $163,474.27 $66.5988 $69.9287 $73.4251 $77.0964 $80.9512 $138,525.50 $145,451.70 $152,724.21 $160,360.51 $168,378.50 541 Police Dispatch Supervisor FCPOA NE $59.3881 $62.3575 $65.4754 $68.7492 $72.1867 $123,527.25 $129,703.60 $136,188.83 $142,998.34 $150,148.34 $61.1698 $64.2283 $67.4397 $70.8117 $74.3523 $127,233.18 $133,594.86 $140,274.58 $147,288.34 $154,652.79 535 Police Lead Dispatcher FCPOA NE $54.4003 $57.1203 $59.9763 $62.9751 $66.1239 $113,152.62 $118,810.22 $124,750.70 $130,988.21 $137,537.71 $56.0323 $58.8339 $61.7756 $64.8644 $68.1076 $116,547.18 $122,374.51 $128,493.25 $134,917.95 $141,663.84 206 Police Lieutenant Other Management E $86.1683 $90.4767 $95.0005 $99.7505 $104.7380 $179,230.06 $188,191.54 $197,601.04 $207,481.04 $217,855.04 $88.7533 $93.1910 $97.8505 $102.7430 $107.8801 $184,606.86 $193,837.28 $203,529.04 $213,705.44 $224,390.69 603 Police Officer FCPOA NE $58.4381 $61.3600 $64.4280 $67.6494 $71.0319 $121,551.25 $127,628.80 $134,010.24 $140,710.75 $147,746.35 $60.1913 $63.2009 $66.3609 $69.6789 $73.1629 $125,197.90 $131,457.87 $138,030.67 $144,932.11 $152,178.74 604 Police Officer Recruit FCPOA NE $53.0050 $55.6553 $110,250.40 $115,763.02 $54.5952 $57.3250 $113,557.91 $119,235.91
517 Police Records Specialist AFSCME NE $37.3335 $39.2002 $41.1602 $43.2182 $45.3791 $77,653.68 $81,536.42 $85,613.22 $89,893.86 $94,388.53 540 Police Records Supervisor Other Management NE $51.7677 $54.3561 $57.0739 $59.9276 $62.9240 $107,676.82 $113,060.69 $118,713.71 $124,649.41 $130,881.92 $53.3208 $55.9868 $58.7861 $61.7254 $64.8117 $110,907.26 $116,452.54 $122,275.09 $128,388.83 $134,808.38 601 Police Sergeant FCPOA NE $70.7665 $74.3048 $78.0200 $81.9210 $86.0170 $147,194.32 $154,553.98 $162,281.60 $170,395.68 $178,915.36 $72.8894 $76.5339 $80.3606 $84.3786 $88.5975 $151,609.95 $159,190.51 $167,150.05 $175,507.49 $184,282.82 511 Police/Fire Dispatcher FCPOA NE $49.3427 $51.8098 $54.4003 $57.1203 $59.9763 $102,632.82 $107,764.38 $113,152.62 $118,810.22 $124,750.70 $50.8230 $53.3641 $56.0323 $58.8339 $61.7756 $105,711.84 $110,997.33 $116,547.18 $122,374.51 $128,493.23 250 Principal Management Analyst Other Management E $74.7715 $78.5101 $82.4356 $86.5574 $90.8853 $155,524.72 $163,301.01 $171,466.05 $180,039.39 $189,041.42 $77.0148 $80.8655 $84.9088 $89.1542 $93.6119 $160,190.78 $168,200.24 $176,610.30 $185,440.74 $194,712.67 536 Public Works Lead Maintenance Worker AFSCME NE $43.7108 $45.8963 $48.1911 $50.6007 $53.1307 $90,918.46 $95,464.30 $100,237.49 $105,249.46 $110,511.86 202 Public Works Maintenance Manager Other Management E $71.3679 $74.9363 $78.6831 $82.6173 $86.7482 $148,445.23 $155,867.50 $163,660.85 $171,843.98 $180,436.26 $73.5090 $77.1845 $81.0437 $85.0959 $89.3506 $152,898.72 $160,543.76 $168,570.90 $176,999.47 $185,849.34 213 Public Works Maintenance Superintendent Other Management E $60.6592 $63.6922 $66.8768 $70.2206 $73.7316 $126,171.14 $132,479.78 $139,103.74 $146,058.85 $153,361.73 $62.4790 $65.6029 $68.8830 $72.3272 $75.9435 $129,956.32 $136,454.03 $143,276.64 $150,440.58 $157,962.58 534 Public Works Maintenance Worker AFSCME NE $32.6177 $34.2486 $67,844.82 $71,237.09 531 Public Works Maintenance Worker I AFSCME NE $35.9610 $37.7590 $39.6470 $41.6293 $43.7108 $74,798.88 $78,538.72 $82,465.76 $86,588.94 $90,918.46 529 Public Works Maintenance Worker II AFSCME NE $39.6470 $41.6293 $43.7108 $45.8963 $48.1911 $82,465.76 $86,588.94 $90,918.46 $95,464.30 $100,237.49 265 Recreation Coordinator I AFSCME NE $40.9763 $43.0251 $45.1764 $47.4352 $49.8070 $85,230.70 $89,492.21 $93,966.91 $98,665.22 $103,598.56 262 Recreation Coordinator II AFSCME NE $45.1764 $47.4352 $49.8070 $52.2974 $54.9123 $93,966.91 $98,665.22 $103,598.56 $108,778.59 $114,217.58 907 Recreation Leader I Hrly/PT/Seasonal NE $17.39 $18.00 $18.63 $19.28 $19.96 915 Recreation Leader II Hrly/PT/Seasonal NE $18.63 $19.29 $19.95 $20.67 $21.40 908 Recreation Leader III Hrly/PT/Seasonal NE $19.98 $20.68 $21.40 $22.15 $22.92 307 Recreation Manager Other Management E $65.3257 $68.5920 $72.0216 $75.6227 $79.4038 $135,877.46 $142,671.36 $149,804.93 $157,295.22 $165,159.90 $67.2854 $70.6497 $74.1822 $77.8913 $81.7859 $139,953.63 $146,951.38 $154,298.98 $162,013.90 $170,114.70 251 Senior Accountant Other Management E $58.7084 $61.6438 $64.7260 $67.9623 $71.3604 $122,113.47 $128,219.10 $134,630.08 $141,361.58 $148,429.63 $60.4696 $63.4931 $66.6678 $70.0012 $73.5012 $125,776.77 $132,065.65 $138,669.02 $145,602.50 $152,882.52 528 Senior Accounting Specialist AFSCME NE $40.4874 $42.5118 $44.6374 $46.8693 $49.2128 $84,213.79 $88,424.54 $92,845.79 $97,488.14 $102,362.62 204 Senior Civil Engineer Other Management E $72.4254 $76.0467 $79.8490 $83.8415 $88.0336 $150,644.83 $158,177.14 $166,085.92 $174,390.32 $183,109.89 $74.5983 $78.3282 $82.2446 $86.3568 $90.6746 $155,164.46 $162,922.66 $171,068.77 $179,622.14 $188,603.18 253 Senior Human Resources Analyst Other Management E $62.2146 $65.3253 $68.5916 $72.0212 $75.6223 $129,406.37 $135,876.62 $142,670.53 $149,804.10 $157,294.38 $64.0810 $67.2851 $70.6494 $74.1819 $77.8910 $133,288.48 $139,953.01 $146,950.75 $154,298.35 $162,013.22 245 Senior Management Analyst Other Management E $65.0176 $68.2685 $71.6819 $75.2660 $79.0293 $135,236.61 $141,998.48 $149,098.35 $156,553.28 $164,380.94 $66.9682 $70.3166 $73.8324 $77.5240 $81.4002 $139,293.86 $146,258.53 $153,571.39 $161,249.92 $169,312.37 219 Senior Planner Other Management E $63.3236 $66.4898 $69.8143 $73.3050 $76.9702 $131,713.09 $138,298.78 $145,213.74 $152,474.40 $160,098.02 $65.2233 $68.4845 $71.9087 $75.5041 $79.2793 $135,664.46 $142,447.76 $149,570.10 $157,048.53 $164,900.96 247 Social Media / Communication Assistant AFSCME NE $42.9514 $45.0990 $47.3539 $49.7216 $52.2077 $89,338.91 $93,805.92 $98,496.11 $103,420.93 $108,592.02 525 Sr. Bldg Inspector AFSCME NE $56.8288 $59.6702 $62.6537 $65.7864 $69.0757 $118,203.90 $124,114.02 $130,319.70 $136,835.71 $143,677.46 518 Sr. Comm. Services Officer AFSCME NE $39.1437 $41.1009 $43.1559 $45.3137 $47.5794 $81,418.90 $85,489.87 $89,764.27 $94,252.50 $98,965.15 509 Sr. Engineering Technician AFSCME NE $45.7266 $48.0129 $50.4135 $52.9342 $55.5809 $95,111.33 $99,866.83 $104,860.08 $110,103.14 $115,608.27
6.13 Attachment 3 - CityDistrict Pay Plan for FY 2025-2026 Effective July 1, 2025 (redline)
301
City of Foster City / Estero Municipal Improvement District FY 2025-2026 Pay Plan
Effective April 1, 2025 July 1, 2025
Exhibit A
1 A B C D E F G H I J K L M N
Code Classification Unit FLSA Step 1 Step 2
Hourly
Step 3 Step 4 Step 5 Step 1 Step 2
Yearly
Step 3 Step 4 Step 5
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
216 Sr. Systems Analyst Other Management E $59.7087 $62.6941 $65.8288 $69.1202 $72.5762 $124,194.10 $130,403.73 $136,923.90 $143,770.02 $150,958.50 $61.4999 $64.5749 $67.8036 $71.1938 $74.7535 $127,919.79 $134,315.79 $141,031.49 $148,083.10 $155,487.25 921 Technology Analyst I Other Management E $46.4852 $48.8095 $51.2500 $53.8125 $56.5031 $96,689.22 $101,523.76 $106,600.00 $111,930.00 $117,526.45 $47.8798 $50.2738 $52.7875 $55.4269 $58.1982 $99,589.98 $104,569.50 $109,798.00 $115,287.95 $121,052.24 922 Technology Analyst II Other Management E $52.7791 $55.4181 $58.1890 $61.0984 $64.1533 $109,780.53 $115,269.65 $121,033.12 $127,084.67 $133,438.86 $54.3625 $57.0806 $59.9346 $62.9313 $66.0779 $113,074.00 $118,727.65 $124,663.97 $130,897.10 $137,442.03 248 Videographer Hrly/PT/Seasonal NE $20.00 $30.00
6.13 Attachment 3 - CityDistrict Pay Plan for FY 2025-2026 Effective July 1, 2025 (redline)
302
City of Foster City / Estero Municipal Improvement District FY 2025-2026 Pay Plan
Effective July 1, 2025
Exhibit A
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10
11 12
13 14
15 16
17 18
19 20
21 22
23 24
25 26
27 28
29 30
31 32
33 34
35 36
37 38
39 40
41 42
43 44
45 46
47 48
49 50
51 52
53 54
55 56
57 A B C D E F G H I J K L M N
Code Classification Unit FLSA Step 1 Step 2
Hourly
Step 3 Step 4 Step 5 Step 1 Step 2
Yearly
Step 3 Step 4 Step 5
229 Accountant I Other Management E $47.3245 $49.6907 $52.1752 $54.7840 $57.5232 $98,434.96 $103,356.66 $108,524.42 $113,950.72 $119,648.26 923 Accountant II Other Management E $52.5805 $55.2095 $57.9700 $60.8685 $63.9119 $109,367.44 $114,835.76 $120,577.60 $126,606.48 $132,936.75 516 Accounting Specialist AFSCME NE $36.7232 $38.5594 $40.4874 $42.5118 $44.6374 $76,384.26 $80,203.55 $84,213.79 $88,424.54 $92,845.79 264 Administrative Assistant I AFSCME NE $37.9743 $39.8730 $41.8667 $43.9600 $46.1580 $78,986.54 $82,935.84 $87,082.74 $91,436.80 $96,008.64 263 Administrative Assistant II AFSCME NE $41.8667 $43.9600 $46.1580 $48.4659 $50.8892 $87,082.74 $91,436.80 $96,008.64 $100,809.07 $105,849.54 114 Administrative Services Director Executive Management E $108.6190 $114.0500 $119.7525 $125.7401 $132.0271 $225,927.52 $237,224.00 $249,085.20 $261,539.41 $274,616.37 111 Assistant City Manager Executive Management E $121.2618 $127.3249 $133.6911 $140.3757 $147.3945 $252,224.54 $264,835.79 $278,077.49 $291,981.46 $306,580.56 211 Assistant Engineer Other Management E $58.3810 $61.3000 $64.3650 $67.5833 $70.9625 $121,432.48 $127,504.00 $133,879.20 $140,573.26 $147,602.00 225 Assistant Finance Director Other Management E $85.9297 $90.2262 $94.7375 $99.4744 $104.4481 $178,733.78 $187,670.50 $197,054.00 $206,906.75 $217,252.05 220 Assistant Planner Other Management E $51.0417 $53.5938 $56.2735 $59.0872 $62.0416 $106,166.74 $111,475.10 $117,048.88 $122,901.38 $129,046.53 207 Associate Civil Engineer Other Management E $64.8690 $68.1124 $71.5180 $75.0939 $78.8486 $134,927.52 $141,673.79 $148,757.44 $156,195.31 $164,005.09 215 Associate Planner Other Management E $56.7154 $59.5512 $62.5288 $65.6552 $68.9380 $117,968.03 $123,866.50 $130,059.90 $136,562.82 $143,391.04 507 Building Inspector AFSCME NE $51.5454 $54.1227 $56.8288 $59.6702 $62.6537 $107,214.43 $112,575.22 $118,203.90 $124,114.02 $130,319.70 261 Building Lead Maintenance Worker AFSCME NE $42.9133 $45.0590 $47.3120 $49.6776 $52.1615 $89,259.66 $93,722.72 $98,408.96 $103,329.41 $108,495.92 267 Building Maintenance Worker I AFSCME NE $36.6462 $38.4785 $40.4024 $42.4225 $44.5436 $76,224.10 $80,035.28 $84,036.99 $88,238.80 $92,650.69 268 Building Maintenance Worker II AFSCME NE $40.6447 $42.6769 $44.8107 $47.0512 $49.4038 $84,540.98 $88,767.95 $93,206.26 $97,866.50 $102,759.90 527 Building Permit Technician I AFSCME NE $37.9955 $39.8953 $41.8901 $43.9846 $46.1838 $79,030.64 $82,982.22 $87,131.41 $91,487.97 $96,062.30 544 Building Permit Technician II AFSCME NE $42.3255 $44.4418 $46.6639 $48.9971 $51.4470 $88,037.04 $92,438.94 $97,060.91 $101,913.97 $107,009.76 910 Building Serv. Assistant Hrly/PT/Seasonal NE $17.39 $18.00 $18.63 $19.28 $19.96 310 Building Services Coordinator AFSCME NE $36.6462 $38.4785 $40.4024 $42.4225 $44.5436 $76,224.10 $80,035.28 $84,036.99 $88,238.80 $92,650.69 312 Building Services Coordinator Assistant Hrly/PT/Seasonal NE $19.98 $20.68 $21.40 $22.15 $22.92 309 Building/Fleet Maintance Manager Other Management E $69.8340 $73.3257 $76.9920 $80.8416 $84.8837 $145,254.72 $152,517.46 $160,143.36 $168,150.53 $176,558.10 205 Chief Building Official Other Management E $82.3552 $86.4730 $90.7967 $95.3365 $100.1033 $171,298.82 $179,863.84 $188,857.14 $198,299.92 $208,214.86 102 Chief of Police Executive Management E $121.2618 $127.3249 $133.6911 $140.3757 $147.3945 $252,224.54 $264,835.79 $278,077.49 $291,981.46 $306,580.56 101 City Manager Executive Management E $162.4565 $337,909.52 920 Clerical Assistant Hrly/PT/Seasonal NE $17.39 $18.00 $18.63 $19.28 $19.9554 255 Code Enforcement Officer I AFSCME NE $35.7448 $37.5320 $39.4086 $41.3790 $43.4480 $74,349.18 $78,066.56 $81,969.89 $86,068.32 $90,371.84 256 Code Enforcement Officer II AFSCME NE $48.5554 $50.9832 $53.5324 $56.2090 $59.0195 $100,995.23 $106,045.06 $111,347.39 $116,914.72 $122,760.56 110 Communications Director / City Clerk Executive Management E $103.6540 $108.8367 $114.2785 $119.9924 $125.9920 $215,600.32 $226,380.34 $237,699.28 $249,584.19 $262,063.36 266 Communications Manager Other Management E $58.6402 $61.5722 $64.6508 $67.8833 $71.2775 $121,971.62 $128,070.18 $134,473.66 $141,197.26 $148,257.20 106 Community Development Director Executive Management E $108.6190 $114.0500 $119.7525 $125.7401 $132.0271 $225,927.52 $237,224.00 $249,085.20 $261,539.41 $274,616.37 913 Department Intern Hrly/PT/Seasonal NE $17.39 $30.00 234 Deputy City Clerk Other Management NE $46.9121 $49.2577 $51.7206 $54.3066 $57.0219 $97,577.17 $102,456.02 $107,578.85 $112,957.73 $118,605.55 109 Deputy City Manager Executive Management E $108.6190 $114.0500 $119.7525 $125.7401 $132.0271 $225,927.52 $237,224.00 $249,085.20 $261,539.41 $274,616.37 104 Director of Public Works Executive Management E $111.2734 $116.8371 $122.6790 $128.8130 $135.2536 $231,448.67 $243,021.17 $255,172.32 $267,931.04 $281,327.49 924 Economic Development Manager Other Management E $81.3665 $85.4348 $89.7065 $94.1918 $98.9014 $169,242.32 $177,704.38 $186,589.52 $195,918.94 $205,714.91 512 Engineering Manager Other Management E $89.8479 $94.3403 $99.0573 $104.0102 $109.2107 $186,883.63 $196,227.82 $206,039.18 $216,341.22 $227,158.26 503 Equipment Maintenance Worker AFSCME NE $38.4753 $40.3991 $42.4191 $44.5401 $46.7671 $80,028.62 $84,030.13 $88,231.73 $92,643.41 $97,275.57 107 Finance Director Executive Management E $108.6190 $114.0500 $119.7525 $125.7401 $132.0271 $225,927.52 $237,224.00 $249,085.20 $261,539.41 $274,616.37 300 Financial Services Manager Other Management E $74.9790 $78.7279 $82.6643 $86.7975 $91.1374 $155,956.32 $163,754.03 $171,941.74 $180,538.80 $189,565.79 928 Fleet Supervisor Other Management E $53.9666 $56.6649 $59.4981 $62.4730 $65.5967 $112,250.53 $117,862.99 $123,756.05 $129,943.84 $136,441.14 925 Housing Coordinator Other Management NE $58.2330 $61.1446 $64.2018 $67.4119 $70.7825 $121,124.64 $127,180.77 $133,539.74 $140,216.75 $147,227.60 404 Human Resources Analyst Other Management E $55.7214 $58.5075 $61.4329 $64.5045 $67.7297 $115,900.51 $121,695.60 $127,780.43 $134,169.36 $140,877.78 252 Human Resources Manager Other Management E $81.3665 $85.4348 $89.7065 $94.1918 $98.9014 $169,242.32 $177,704.38 $186,589.52 $195,918.94 $205,714.91 403 Human Resources Technician Other Management NE $43.7077 $45.8931 $48.1878 $50.5972 $53.1271 $90,912.02 $95,457.65 $100,230.62 $105,242.18 $110,504.37 238 Information Technology Manager Other Management E $81.3665 $85.4348 $89.7065 $94.1918 $98.9014 $169,242.32 $177,704.38 $186,589.52 $195,918.94 $205,714.91 926 Irrigation Technician AFSCME NE $42.9133 $45.0590 $47.3120 $49.6776 $52.1615 $89,259.66 $93,722.72 $98,408.96 $103,329.41 $108,495.92 228 Management Analyst Other Management E $58.2330 $61.1446 $64.2018 $67.4119 $70.7825 $121,124.64 $127,180.77 $133,539.74 $140,216.75 $147,227.60 233 Management Assistant Other Management E $39.8212 $41.8123 $43.9029 $46.0980 $48.4029 $82,828.10 $86,969.58 $91,318.03 $95,883.84 $100,678.03 501 Mechanic I AFSCME NE $43.4795 $45.6535 $47.9362 $50.3330 $52.8497 $90,437.36 $94,959.28 $99,707.30 $104,692.64 $109,927.38 520 Office Assistant I AFSCME NE $30.4462 $31.9685 $63,328.10 $66,494.48 519 Office Assistant II AFSCME NE $33.5668 $35.2451 $37.0074 $38.8578 $40.8007 $69,818.94 $73,309.81 $76,975.39 $80,824.22 $84,865.46 108 Parks & Recreation Director Executive Management E $108.6190 $114.0500 $119.7525 $125.7401 $132.0271 $225,927.52 $237,224.00 $249,085.20 $261,539.41 $274,616.37 537 Parks Lead Maintenance Worker AFSCME NE $42.9133 $45.0590 $47.3120 $49.6776 $52.1615 $89,259.66 $93,722.72 $98,408.96 $103,329.41 $108,495.92 308 Parks Maintenance Manager Other Management E $68.3641 $71.7823 $75.3714 $79.1400 $83.0970 $142,197.33 $149,307.18 $156,772.51 $164,611.20 $172,841.76 927 Parks Maintenance Supervisor Other Management E $54.6110 $57.3415 $60.2086 $63.2190 $66.3800 $113,590.88 $119,270.32 $125,233.89 $131,495.52 $138,070.40Page 1 of 2
6.13 Attachment 4 - CityDistrict Pay Plan for FY 2025-2026 Effective July 1, 2025
303
City of Foster City / Estero Municipal Improvement District FY 2025-2026 Pay Plan
Effective July 1, 2025
Exhibit A
1 A B C D E F G H I J K L M N
Code Classification Unit FLSA Step 1 Step 2
Hourly
Step 3 Step 4 Step 5 Step 1 Step 2
Yearly
Step 3 Step 4 Step 5
58 59
60 61
62 63
64 65
66 67
68 69
70 71
72 73
74 75
76 77
78 79
80 81
82 83
84 85
86 87
88 89
90 91
92 93
94 95
96 97
98 99
100
533 Parks Maintenance Worker AFSCME NE $32.0227 $33.6238 $66,607.22 $69,937.50 532 Parks Maintenance Worker I AFSCME NE $35.3049 $37.0701 $38.9236 $40.8698 $42.9133 $73,434.19 $77,105.81 $80,961.09 $85,009.18 $89,259.66 530 Parks Maintenance Worker II AFSCME NE $38.9236 $40.8698 $42.9133 $45.0590 $47.3120 $80,961.09 $85,009.18 $89,259.66 $93,722.72 $98,408.96 227 Planning Manager Other Management E $79.5052 $83.4805 $87.6545 $92.0372 $96.6391 $165,370.82 $173,639.44 $182,321.36 $191,437.38 $201,009.33 543 Plans Examiner AFSCME NE $62.6537 $65.7864 $69.0757 $72.5295 $76.1560 $130,319.70 $136,835.71 $143,677.46 $150,861.36 $158,404.48 201 Police Captain Other Management E $102.0676 $107.1710 $112.5296 $118.1561 $124.0639 $212,300.61 $222,915.68 $234,061.57 $245,764.69 $258,052.91 602 Police Corporal FCPOA NE $66.5988 $69.9287 $73.4251 $77.0964 $80.9512 $138,525.50 $145,451.70 $152,724.21 $160,360.51 $168,378.50 541 Police Dispatch Supervisor FCPOA NE $61.1698 $64.2283 $67.4397 $70.8117 $74.3523 $127,233.18 $133,594.86 $140,274.58 $147,288.34 $154,652.78 535 Police Lead Dispatcher FCPOA NE $56.0323 $58.8339 $61.7756 $64.8644 $68.1076 $116,547.18 $122,374.51 $128,493.25 $134,917.95 $141,663.81 206 Police Lieutenant Other Management E $88.7533 $93.1910 $97.8505 $102.7430 $107.8802 $184,606.86 $193,837.28 $203,529.04 $213,705.44 $224,390.82 603 Police Officer FCPOA NE $60.1914 $63.2010 $66.3610 $69.6790 $73.1629 $125,198.11 $131,458.08 $138,030.88 $144,932.32 $152,178.83 604 Police Officer Recruit FCPOA NE $54.5952 $57.3250 $113,558.02 $119,236.00 517 Police Records Specialist AFSCME NE $38.4535 $40.3762 $42.3950 $44.5148 $46.7405 $79,983.28 $83,982.50 $88,181.60 $92,590.78 $97,220.24 540 Police Records Supervisor Other Management NE $53.3208 $55.9868 $58.7861 $61.7254 $64.8117 $110,907.26 $116,452.54 $122,275.09 $128,388.83 $134,808.34 601 Police Sergeant FCPOA NE $72.8894 $76.5339 $80.3606 $84.3786 $88.5975 $151,609.95 $159,190.51 $167,150.05 $175,507.49 $184,282.80 511 Police/Fire Dispatcher FCPOA NE $50.8230 $53.3641 $56.0323 $58.8339 $61.7756 $105,711.84 $110,997.33 $116,547.18 $122,374.51 $128,493.25 250 Principal Management Analyst Other Management E $77.0147 $80.8654 $84.9087 $89.1541 $93.6118 $160,190.58 $168,200.03 $176,610.10 $185,440.53 $194,712.54 536 Public Works Lead Maintenance Worker AFSCME NE $45.0221 $47.2732 $49.6369 $52.1187 $54.7246 $93,645.97 $98,328.26 $103,244.75 $108,406.90 $113,827.17 202 Public Works Maintenance Manager Other Management E $73.5090 $77.1844 $81.0436 $85.0958 $89.3506 $152,898.72 $160,543.55 $168,570.69 $176,999.26 $185,849.25 213 Public Works Maintenance Superintendent Other Management E $62.4790 $65.6029 $68.8830 $72.3271 $75.9435 $129,956.32 $136,454.03 $143,276.64 $150,440.37 $157,962.48 534 Public Works Maintenance Worker AFSCME NE $32.6177 $34.2486 $67,844.82 $71,237.09 531 Public Works Maintenance Worker I AFSCME NE $35.9610 $37.7590 $39.6470 $41.6293 $43.7108 $74,798.88 $78,538.72 $82,465.76 $86,588.94 $90,918.46 529 Public Works Maintenance Worker II AFSCME NE $39.6470 $41.6293 $43.7108 $45.8963 $48.1911 $82,465.76 $86,588.94 $90,918.46 $95,464.30 $100,237.49 265 Recreation Coordinator I AFSCME NE $40.9763 $43.0251 $45.1764 $47.4352 $49.8070 $85,230.70 $89,492.21 $93,966.91 $98,665.22 $103,598.56 262 Recreation Coordinator II AFSCME NE $45.1764 $47.4352 $49.8070 $52.2974 $54.9123 $93,966.91 $98,665.22 $103,598.56 $108,778.59 $114,217.58 907 Recreation Leader I Hrly/PT/Seasonal NE $17.39 $18.00 $18.63 $19.28 $19.96 915 Recreation Leader II Hrly/PT/Seasonal NE $18.63 $19.29 $19.95 $20.67 $21.40 908 Recreation Leader III Hrly/PT/Seasonal NE $19.98 $20.68 $21.40 $22.15 $22.92 307 Recreation Manager Other Management E $67.2854 $70.6497 $74.1822 $77.8913 $81.7859 $139,953.63 $146,951.38 $154,298.98 $162,013.90 $170,114.67 251 Senior Accountant Other Management E $60.4695 $63.4930 $66.6677 $70.0011 $73.5012 $125,776.56 $132,065.44 $138,668.82 $145,602.29 $152,882.50 528 Senior Accounting Specialist AFSCME NE $40.4874 $42.5118 $44.6374 $46.8693 $49.2128 $84,213.79 $88,424.54 $92,845.79 $97,488.14 $102,362.62 204 Senior Civil Engineer Other Management E $74.5983 $78.3282 $82.2446 $86.3568 $90.6746 $155,164.46 $162,922.66 $171,068.77 $179,622.14 $188,603.17 253 Senior Human Resources Analyst Other Management E $64.0810 $67.2851 $70.6494 $74.1819 $77.8910 $133,288.48 $139,953.01 $146,950.75 $154,298.35 $162,013.28 245 Senior Management Analyst Other Management E $66.9682 $70.3166 $73.8324 $77.5240 $81.4002 $139,293.86 $146,258.53 $153,571.39 $161,249.92 $169,312.42 219 Senior Planner Other Management E $65.2233 $68.4845 $71.9087 $75.5041 $79.2793 $135,664.46 $142,447.76 $149,570.10 $157,048.53 $164,900.94 247 Social Media / Communication Assistant AFSCME NE $44.2399 $46.4519 $48.7745 $51.2132 $53.7739 $92,018.99 $96,619.95 $101,450.96 $106,523.46 $111,849.71 525 Sr. Bldg Inspector AFSCME NE $56.8288 $59.6702 $62.6537 $65.7864 $69.0757 $118,203.90 $124,114.02 $130,319.70 $136,835.71 $143,677.46 518 Sr. Comm. Services Officer AFSCME NE $39.1437 $41.1009 $43.1559 $45.3137 $47.5794 $81,418.90 $85,489.87 $89,764.27 $94,252.50 $98,965.15 509 Sr. Engineering Technician AFSCME NE $45.7266 $48.0129 $50.4135 $52.9342 $55.5809 $95,111.33 $99,866.83 $104,860.08 $110,103.14 $115,608.27 216 Sr. Systems Analyst Other Management E $61.4999 $64.5749 $67.8036 $71.1938 $74.7535 $127,919.79 $134,315.79 $141,031.49 $148,083.10 $155,487.28 921 Technology Analyst I Other Management E $47.8797 $50.2737 $52.7874 $55.4268 $58.1981 $99,589.78 $104,569.30 $109,797.79 $115,287.74 $121,052.05 922 Technology Analyst II Other Management E $54.3625 $57.0806 $59.9346 $62.9313 $66.0779 $113,074.00 $118,727.65 $124,663.97 $130,897.10 $137,442.03 248 Videographer Hrly/PT/Seasonal NE $20.00 $30.00
6.13 Attachment 4 - CityDistrict Pay Plan for FY 2025-2026 Effective July 1, 2025
304
DATE: June 16, 2025
TO: President and Members of the Estero Municipal Improvement District (EMID) Board of Directors
VIA: Stefan Chatwin, District Manager
Marlene Subhashini, Assistant District Manager
FROM: Andrew Brozyna, Public Works Director/ District Engineer Laura Galli, Engineering Manager
Francine Magno, Senior Engineer
DEPARTMENT: Public Works
SUBJECT: WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT MASTER PLAN
IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT (CIP 455-652) - CLEAN WATER
PROGRAM - UPDATE FOR QUARTER 1 – JANUARY THROUGH
MARCH 2025
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the Board of Directors of the Estero Municipal Improvement District (EMID) by Minute Order, receive and accept this Q1 progress update on the Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP) Master Plan Improvements Project (CIP 455-652) – Clean Water Program (CWP). No further action is required by the EMID Board of Directors.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This report summarizes the progress-to-date of the WWTP Master Plan Improvements Project (CIP 455-652) - Clean Water Program (CWP) for the City of San Mateo/EMID WWTP for the months of January 2025 through March 2025. The report includes summary information about construction and other project activities over the first quarter of the calendar year.
BACKGROUND
7.1 7.1 Staff Report
305
The CWP is a comprehensive Capital Improvement Program to rehabilitate the 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. The City of San Mateo, as the lead agency, has responsibility for the performance of tasks required to develop, implement and complete construction of the CWP Improvements, including administration of design and construction, construction management, and program management contracts; management of the CWP budget; and maintenance and operation of the plant facilities. EMID reimburses the City of San Mateo for its share of the program and facility costs.
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 program. EMID’s portion of the CWP consists of the WWTP Expansion Project, Immediate Action Projects (IAPs), and Annual Major Component (AMC) Projects. The WWTP expansion project replaces the existing liquids treatment process with a new facility. IAP Projects comprise critical major infrastructure projects, and the AMC Projects comprise rehabilitation and replacement projects that will both continue to remain in operation after the WWTP expansion project has been completed.
The EMID Board of Directors has requested that staff provide updates on a regular basis.
The WWTP Expansion Project is the CWP’s largest project and is being performed using a Construction Manager at Risk (CMAR) delivery method. The involvement of the contractor during the early stages of the design process, to provide constructability input and insight to inform the design development, ultimately benefits the overall project delivery.
The WWTP Expansion Project 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 Contractor is Sundt Construction Inc. (Sundt).
ANALYSIS
WWTP Expansion Project
Construction Package 1 – Site Preparation (Original Construction Agreement with Sundt - $33,098,178) – Construction is complete and project closeout activities are continuing.
Construction Package 2 – Foundation Piles (Amendment No. 1 to the Construction Agreement with Sundt - $17,716,049) – Construction is complete and this phase has been closed out.
7.1 7.1 Staff Report
306
Construction Package 3 – WWTP above grade Facilities (Amendment No. 2 to the Construction Agreement with Sundt) – Construction is approximately 96% complete and in its final stages. Efforts by the Contractor to mitigate schedule impacts from multiple change events are ongoing.
Administration Building and Maintenance Warehouse
Construction of the Administration Building and Maintenance Warehouse is substantially complete, and both buildings are now furnished. Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) commissioning activities for the Administration Building are in its final stages. The project team is working on final punch list items and is working with San Mateo’s Building and Fire Departments to obtain Temporary Occupancy for both buildings. As of May, San Mateo’s WWTP Operations staff are now occupying the building in preparation for process startup and operations of the new WWTP. General sitewide work, such as site lighting, irrigation, landscaping, signage, and parking lot work, is nearing completion.
Processing Facilities
Construction of the new treatment process facilities is nearly complete and is expected to be fully completed in Summer 2025. Ongoing work includes finalizing the process mechanical, plumbing and electrical work at multiple areas of the treatment structure.
Plant Commissioning
Clean water testing of portions of the treatment facilities that are ready for commissioning began in January 2025 and will be ongoing until the entire plant is ready for clean water testing. Clean water testing, process seeding, startup, and performance testing has shifted by two months and is now anticipated to occur in the June to August 2025 timeframe. The new liquid treatment processes are still anticipated to be in full service by August 2025.
Final Project Completion
The projected date of final completion has shifted slightly from the last quarter update, from April 2026 to May 2026 due to rework associated with the Biological Nutrient Removal (BNR) air aeration piping failing its initial pressure test and delays associated with Tesco programming.
Estimated Cost to Complete WWTP Expansion Project
As of the end of March, the project’s estimate at completion (EAC) is approximately $597.5 million, which is approximately the same as reported during the last quarterly update.
Annual Major Components (AMC) Projects
AMC projects address repairs and replacements of aging components of the existing
7.1 7.1 Staff Report
307
WWTP that will continue to remain in operation after the expansion project has been completed. As of the end of March, the AMC’s estimate at completion is approximately $21.8 million, which is approximately the same as reported during the last quarterly update. AMC project completion is anticipated to coincide with the end of the CWP.
Immediate Action Projects (IAPs)
IAP Projects comprise critical major infrastructure projects. Active IAP projects include IAP 2 and IAP 3. As of the end of March, IAP 2 has an estimate at completion of $18.7 million, and IAP 3 has an estimate at completion of $17.8 million. Both EACs are approximately the same as reported during the last quarterly update. (as of May, IAP 2 is now substantially complete and completion of IAP 3 is estimated in September 2025).
QUARTERLY CONSTRUCTION REPORT
Attachment 1 consists of selected portions of the Quarterly Progress Report for January through March 2025 published by the City of San Mateo Program Management Team on April 21, 2025. This report summarizes the budget, schedule, and project activities that have occurred during the first quarter of 2025 and activities that are anticipated to occur in the second quarter of 2025 for the WWTP Expansion Project, IAP, and AMC projects.
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.
Attachment 4 includes a history of the Project financing.
More detailed information including additional photographs and architectural 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/.
CEQA
A Programmatic Environmental Impact Report (EIR) was prepared for the WWTP Master Plan Improvements Project (State Clearinghouse No. 2015032006).
FISCAL IMPACT
There is no fiscal impact associated with receiving this update.
At the start of the project, a strategic funding and financing plan to deliver the CWP was executed by both Agencies and included raising sewer rates over several years
7.1 7.1 Staff Report
308
(14.25% FY17/18 to FY22/23; 10% FY23/24; and 2% FY24/25), issuing bonds, and pursuing loans. The CWP successfully received three low-interest rate loans from State and/or Federal programs (Attachment 4). These loans were able to reduce the fiscal impact of the Cities’ investment in the wastewater infrastructure on EMID ratepayers. Although there were budget increases in the EACs for the WWTP Expansion Project and the AMCs reported during the last quarterly update, there is sufficient fund surplus to cover these increases without requiring additional rate increases beyond typical inflationary adjustments. The budget information in this update has been incorporated into EMID’s Fiscal Year 2025-2026 Capital Improvement Program Budget for approval this month.
CITY COUNCIL VISION, MISSION, AND VALUE/PRIORITY AREA
Facilities and Infrastructure
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment 1 – Portions of Quarterly Progress Report – 1st Quarter Report, January 1, 2025 to March 31, 2025
Attachment 2 – Wastewater Treatment Plant Site Plan
Attachment 3 – Construction Photographs
Attachment 4 – Project Financing
7.1 7.1 Staff Report
309
Progress Through: March 31, 2025
Quarterly Progress Report
San Mateo Clean
Water Program
for the
Wastewater
Treatment Plant
Projects
1st Quarter Report January 1, 2025
to March 31, 2025
Submitted on: April 21, 2025
7.1 Attachment 1 - Portions of Quarterly Progress Report - 1st Quarter Report, January 1, 2025 to March 31, 2025
310
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 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) 1704
Contracted Completion Date 5/23/2025
Total Original Contract Amount $379,880,747.00
Revised Contract Amount $383,790,833.00
Original Contingency Amount $13,900,000.00
Revised Contingency Amount $38,986,910.00
Forecast Completion Date 4/22/2026
Current Contracted Amount $413,503,766.00
Actual Expended $393,645,606.00
Current Period Activities
Project/Construction Management
• Coordinating the Special Inspections Services
• Providing Construction Inspection Services
• Reviewing and recommending approval of change orders
• Administering the Consultant and Subconsultants contracts • Assisting with the Startup and Commissioning training of Plant Staff • Monthly WWTP update meeting with Foster City management team.
January through March 2025 P A G E 11
SAN MATEO CLEAN WATER PROGRAM
QUARTERLY REPORT
Q1 2025
Project Inside
Project Manager Leswin DCunha
Project Type Wastewater System
Phase Construction
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
Substantial Completion Date 2/1/2023
Current Contracted Amount $34,783,550.00
Actual Expended $31,630,697.00
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
Acceptance Date 3/6//2024
Current Contracted Amount $17,963,767.00
Actual Expended $17,206,534.00
7.1 Attachment 1 - Portions of Quarterly Progress Report - 1st Quarter Report, January 1, 2025 to March 31, 2025
311
Engineering Design/ Services During Construction
• Interpretive Signage - Contractor is in the process of procuring the signage. Signage to be installed mid- April 2025
• ESDC: HDR continued review of submittals and RFIs on GMP 3; development of design change notices; onsite and remote support by Resident Engineer. HDR continuing the preparation of electronic Operations and Maintenance Manuals
Permitting:
Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD)
A/C 30448 (Liquid Processes)
Because the A/C renewal request has been submitted, the City can continue construction/operation under the conditions of the existing permit until a new A/C permit is issued.
A/C 30449 (Generators)
Because construction is complete and source test data submitted, the City does not need to renew the A/C. The Source Test data was approved 10/26/23. The next step is to issue the Permit to Operate (P/O). In the interim, the City can operate the generators under the conditions of the A/C permit.
Public Outreach
• PM/CM and the CWP Public Outreach Lead coordinated on regular project updates to the website, newsletter, social media, etc.
Construction
GMP1
Project close out is almost complete. Anticipated May 2025.
GMP-2
Project is closed out and accepted.
GMP-3
The contracted completion date for GMP3 has been adjusted to May 22, 2025, to account for additional time to incorporate additional scope added for the back-up fuel system.
However, the City was informed by the contractor that the procurement of the electrical panels required for programming the SCADA have been impacted by the supply change issues because of the Covid pandemic, leak testing of the basins took longer than originally planned, the chemical piping system needs to be replaced to account for thermo- expansion and contraction, and the air aeration piping in the BNR area failed its initial pressure t est and required to be reworked.. The project end date is now projected to be April 2026. The Contractor and the City are working together to minimize the potential delays and reduce this potential completion date extension.
Commissioning meetings were held to continue discussing start-up activities. Yard piping is complete except for final connection of the force mains to the Headworks schedule for J une 2025.
Continued to install Electrical (conduit and wiring) and Mechanical Equipment (piping with structural supports) in Areas 70 (Chemicals), and 55 (BNR.).
January through March 202 5 P A G E 12
SAN MATEO CLEAN WATER PROGRAM
QUARTERLY REPORT
Q1 2025
7.1 Attachment 1 - Portions of Quarterly Progress Report - 1st Quarter Report, January 1, 2025 to March 31, 2025
312
Admin Building is pending approval from Building and Fire Departments and completion of the final punch list items.
The warehouse is completed and has been granted temporary occupancy Continued improvements to the existing Sodium Hypochlorite Day and Bulk Storage Tanks, and pumping systems.
Continued improvements to the existing Sodium Bisulfite Tanks and Pumping system. Improvements to the existing Chlorine Contact Basins are completed. Parcel Map Recorded April 11, 2024
Next Period Activities
Project/Construction Management
• HDR’s to continue to provide 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
• ESDC: HDR continues to provide onsite resident engineering services.
Permitting
• Coordination with Building and Fire Departments for Temporary Occupancy for Admin Building. The anticipated temporary occupancy is mid -May 2025.
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
• Close out project
GMP-2
• Completed.
GMP-3
Continue to install Electrical (, conduit and wiring) and Mechanical Equipment (piping with structural supports,) in Areas 55 (BNR) and 790 (Chemical).
Continue coordination with Building and Fire Department for Temporary Occupancy for Admin. Building.
Work on final punch list items.
Continue the improvements to the existing Sodium Hypochlorite and Sodium Bisulfite systems. Installation of Chemical piping in Area 70 (Chemical Area) Modifications to the Aeration Air (AA) piping in the BNRs Continue SCADA programing
January through March 202 5 P A G E 13
SAN MATEO CLEAN WATER PROGRAM
QUARTERLY REPORT
Q1 2025
7.1 Attachment 1 - Portions of Quarterly Progress Report - 1st Quarter Report, January 1, 2025 to March 31, 2025
313
Risks and Opportunities
• Cal Water’s New Potable Water Main Extension: Completed • PG&E’s New Primary Service: Completed
• Relocation of PG&E’s Utilities from Detroit Drive: Completed
Financial Status
The current update shows an overrun ($39.53M) of the original budget.
Millions
Budget $532.71M
Actual Cost to date $538.34M
Estimate at Completion
$597.46M
Schedule Status
The current forecast as of March 2025 shows project completion to be in April 2026
January through March 202 5 P A G E 14
SAN MATEO CLEAN WATER PROGRAM
QUARTERLY REPORT
Q1 2025
7.1 Attachment 1 - Portions of Quarterly Progress Report - 1st Quarter Report, January 1, 2025 to March 31, 2025
314
46T009 IAP Package II
Project Description:
Replace and repair aging infrastructure at 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.
Engineering Design/ Services During Construction
(Various)
Aid in project Close out
Permitting
No activities during this period.
Public Outreach
No activities during this period.
Construction
Immediate Action Projects, Package II (IAP II)
Construction Substantially complete
Next Period Activities
Project/Construction Management
Continued change management support.
Engineering Design and Engineering Services During Construction Aid in project Close out
Permitting
No activities during this period.
Public Outreach
No activities during this period.
Construction
Immediate Action Projects, Package II (IAP II)
Project is Substantially Complete.
Need to resolve outstanding change orders.
January through March 202 5 Page 31
SAN MATEO CLEAN WATER PROGRAM
QUARTERLY REPORT
Q1 2025
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) 848
Contracted Completion Date 6/14/2021
Contract Amount $6,340,000
Contingency Amount $1,144,000
Forecast Completion Date 5/1/2025
Current Contracted Amount $7,181,514
Actual Expended $7,175,514
7.1 Attachment 1 - Portions of Quarterly Progress Report - 1st Quarter Report, January 1, 2025 to March 31, 2025
315
Risks and Opportunities
Project is Substantially complete. Need to resolve the potential Time Impact Analyst and associated costs. Delays to the project by sludge cake pumping system resulted in significant delays to the project.
Financial Status
The current update shows an overrun ($5.7 M) of the original budget.
Millions
Budget $13.0M
Actual Cost to date $13.5M
Estimate at
Completion
$18.7M
Schedule Status
Project schedule temporary on hold while issues are being resolved. Anticipat es construction to be completed by May 1, 2025.
January through March 202 5 P A G E 32
SAN MATEO CLEAN WATER PROGRAM
QUARTERLY REPORT
Q1 2025
7.1 Attachment 1 - Portions of Quarterly Progress Report - 1st Quarter Report, January 1, 2025 to March 31, 2025
316
46T010 IAP Package III
Project Description:
Upgrade aging infrastructure and increase reliability for the effluent PS at the WWTP. Improvements include performing hydraulic analysis on the effluent PS and flow meters; 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 (Jacobs -Riva Mitra/Tanner Pacific) Project Management by Jacobs with assistance from the City Construction Management by Tanner Pacific
Engineering Design/ Services During Construction (HDR)
Review of Submittals and RFI’s
Construction
Continued construction of Site Waste Pump Station, Valve Vault and associated piping Continued construction of the Effluent Pump Station expansion and associated piping Completed replacement of the HVAC units and continued construction of the piping in the Solids Handling Building
Completed replacement of Digester 1 piping.
Completed structural repairs of concrete and installation of new windows in the Effluent Pump Station Building. Completed Valve Replacement in the Effluent Pump Station Next Period Activities
Project/Construction Management (City/Tanner Pacific)
Construction Management by Tanner Pacific
Project Management by Jacobs.
Engineering Design/ Services During Construction
HDR to continue EDSC.
Construction
Continuing the construction of Site Waste Pump Station and Improvements to the Effluent Pump Station and associated piping
Continuing the connection to the Effluent Pump Station discharge piping Risks and Opportunities
Rescoping the project pushed out the completion date of the project.
January through March 202 5 P A G E 35
SAN MATEO CLEAN WATER PROGRAM
QUARTERLY REPORT
Q1 2025
Project Inside
Project Manager TBD
Project Type Wastewater System
Phase Engineering
7.1 Attachment 1 - Portions of Quarterly Progress Report - 1st Quarter Report, January 1, 2025 to March 31, 2025
317
Financial Status
The current update shows an overrun ($15.33 M) of the original budget. The original budget was an estimate to be used as a place holder that was set prior to having any knowledge of the project scope of work. The overall program carried a large contingency to compensate for this unknown and a portion of those contingencies are being used to offset this overrun. The current estimate is based on a defined scope of work.
Budget
$2.47
million
Actual Cost to
date
$9.5
million
Estimate at
Completion
$17.8
million
Schedule Status
The current forecast shows final completion in August 2025.
January through March 202 5 P A G E 36
SAN MATEO CLEAN WATER PROGRAM
QUARTERLY REPORT
Q1 2025
7.1 Attachment 1 - Portions of Quarterly Progress Report - 1st Quarter Report, January 1, 2025 to March 31, 2025
318
46T090 Annual Major Component WWTP
Project Description:
Maintain reliable plant operations to meet regulatory permit requirements and repair and replace critical WWTP
infrastructure. The operations and maintenance team maintain an active list of potential projects that are implemented as funds are available.
Current Period Activities
Project/Construction Management (Jacobs- Riva Mitra/ Tanner Pacific) Jacobs provides Project Management with assistance from the city staff. Tanner Pacific provides Construction management.t
AMC project
Update WWTP Biosolids and Energy Management Plan – Brown and Caldwell are working on the study.
They investigated the condition of the interior of Digester 2. Study to be completed early 2026. Digester 1 Improvements - waiting for biosolids report to be completed. Centrifuge and Centrifuge Feed Pump Replacement – Requests for proposal for the design phase are due in early April 2025.
Solids Handling Systems I&C Improvements - working on the request for proposals. Digester Transfer Pump Project –. VFD’s arrived in late March 2025., Project completion May 2025. 3 Water Pumping Improvements – design ongoing anticipated start of construction fall 2025. DAFT Corrosion Improvements – Study to evaluate alternatives to repairing DAFT was awarded to Carollo in November 2024. Study to be completed in July 2025.
Digest 2 Mixer Repair/Replacement – SPX was awarded the repair of the mixer in September 2024. The mixer will take approximately 6 months to repair. Anticipated to be done in May 2025.inital investigation after cleaning digester 2 is that the interior and draft tube need to be coated, and the draft tube bracing be repaired.
MCC Replacement- HDR is working on finalizing the design for advertisement in May 2025.
Permitting (Various)
None
Construction
Digester Transfer Pump Project was awarded in November 2023. The contractor has procured the equipment.
Minor electrical work has started. VFDs arrived in March 2025. Consecution estimated to be completed in Maty 2025.
Next Period Activities
Project/Construction Management (City/ Tanner Pacific)
Continue CM on the Digester Transfer Pump Project
Engineering Design/ Services During Construction
• Design Consultants providing EDSC for the Digester Transfer Pump project. • Continue the design on the 3 Water/Ferric project
January through March 202 5 P A G E 39
SAN MATEO CLEAN WATER PROGRAM
QUARTERLY REPORT
Q1 2025
Project Inside
Project Manager Riva Mitra
Project Type Wastewater System
Phase Engineering
7.1 Attachment 1 - Portions of Quarterly Progress Report - 1st Quarter Report, January 1, 2025 to March 31, 2025
319
• Advertise for Bid the MCC Replacement project
• Continue working on the Biosolids and Energy management plan • Continue to work on the DAFT Study
• Select Design consultants for the Centrifuge project and for the Solids Handling Systems I&C project • Monthly WWTP update meeting with Foster City management team. for the AMC projects.
Permitting
None
Construction
Continue the Construction on the Digester Transfer Pump project with the installation of the VFDs. Begin Construction procurement for the MCC Replacement project Risks and Opportunities
AMC 36 Centrifuge Conveyor Replacement will be part of the Centrifuge replacement project. Request for proposals for the design of this project is currently being prepared.
Financial Status
Project shows EAC over budget.by $12.93 million The original budget was an estimate to be used as a place holder that was set prior to having any knowledge of the project scope of work. The overall program carried a large contingency to compensate for this unknown and a portion of those contingencies are being used to offset this overrun. The current estimate is based on a defined scope of work.
Budget $8.92M
Actual Cost to date $2.95M
Estimate at Completion $21.85M
Schedule Status
AMC 6 +23 was completed in November 2022.
AMC Digester 2 Mixer Repair/Replace, awarded to SPX in September 2024; will take approximately 6 to 8 months Digester 2 will be offline until the repair is completed. AMC Digester Transfer Pump was awarded in November 2023. The contractor has completed minor electrical work. VFDs arrived in March 2025. Scheduled to be completed in May 2025... All other AMC projects are in the design or predesign phase.
January through March 202 5 P A G E 40
SAN MATEO CLEAN WATER PROGRAM
QUARTERLY REPORT
Q1 2025
7.1 Attachment 1 - Portions of Quarterly Progress Report - 1st Quarter Report, January 1, 2025 to March 31, 2025
320
Completed Projects
Wastewater Treatment Plant Projects
Updated to latest values from EDEN (January 2020)
Name
Start Date
Finish
Date
Actual Cost
469948: SCADA Immediate Projects: Phase 2 (IAP) 1/2/2015 11/25/2015 $1,524,717 469962: Short-Term MCC Replacement Project (IAP) 1/2/2015 11/25/2015 $49,628 469973: Secondary System: Immediate Projects: SCs 1-4 and return- activated sludge Pump Values (IAP)
1/2/2015 11/25/2015 $426,918
469975: Solids: Immediate Projects: GT 1&2 (IAP) 1/2/2015 11/25/2015 $372,358 469976: Immediate Projects: Boiler Replacement 1/2/2015 4/29/2016 $475,296 469978: Solids Building: Immediate. Projects: Centrifuge Hoist Project (IAP) 1/2/2015 11/25/2015 $2,410 46T002 IAP Package I 8/1/2018 8/28/19 $18,621,868
TOTAL $21,472,951
January through March 202 5 P A G E 41
SAN MATEO CLEAN WATER PROGRAM
QUARTERLY REPORT
Q1 2025
7.1 Attachment 1 - Portions of Quarterly Progress Report - 1st Quarter Report, January 1, 2025 to March 31, 2025
321
WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT SITE PLAN
Attachment 2
Area 64
Area 52
Area 80
Area 51Area 51
Area 53
Area 55
Area 56
7.1 Attachment 2 - Wastewater Treatment Plant Site Plan
322
Area 51 Headworks Piping
April 4, 2025
January 8, 2025
January through March 2025 PAGE 15
7.1 Attachment 3 - Construction Photographs
323
Area 51 Preliminary Screens Area
April 4, 2025
January 8, 2025
January through March 202 5 PAGE 16
7.1 Attachment 3 - Construction Photographs
324
Area 51 Electrical Room
April 4, 2025
January 8, 2025
January through March 202 5 PAGE 1 7
7.1 Attachment 3 - Construction Photographs
325
Area 51 Dumpster Bay
April 4, 2025
January 8, 2025
7.1 Attachment 3 - Construction Photographs
326
Area 51 Grit Washers
April 4, 2025
January 8, 2025
January through March 202 5 PAGE 19
7.1 Attachment 3 - Construction Photographs
327
Area 64 Odor Control Area
April 4, 2025
January 08, 2025
January through March 2025 PAGE 20
Area 52 Primary Clarifiers
7.1 Attachment 3 - Construction Photographs
328
April 4, 2025
January 08, 2025
January through March 20254 P A G E 21
7.1 Attachment 3 - Construction Photographs
329
View Inside the Electrical Room for Area 56
April 4, 2025
January 8, 2025
January through March 2025 Page 22
7.1 Attachment 3 - Construction Photographs
330
View inside the Membrane Permeate Pump Room Area 56
April 4, 2025
January 8, 2025
January through March 2025 Page 23
7.1 Attachment 3 - Construction Photographs
331
Area 56 MBR Cartridge Trains
April 4, 2025
January 8, 2025
January through March 2025 Page 24
7.1 Attachment 3 - Construction Photographs
332
Area 56 Blowers Room
April 4, 2025
January 08, 2025
January through March 2025 Page 25
7.1 Attachment 3 - Construction Photographs
333
View of Area 80 – Ongoing Work
April 4, 2025
January 8. 2025
January through March 2025 Page 26
7.1 Attachment 3 - Construction Photographs
334
Area 80 Admin Building Exterior North elevation.
April 4, 2025
January 8, 2025
January through March 2025 Page 27
7.1 Attachment 3 - Construction Photographs
335
East Elevation
April 4, 2025
January 8, 2025
January through March 2025 Page 28
7.1 Attachment 3 - Construction Photographs
336
Area 80 Admin. Bldg. - South Elevation
April 5, 2025
January 8, 2025
January through March 2025 Page 29
7.1 Attachment 3 - Construction Photographs
337
View of the Warehouse
April 4, 2025
January 2, 2025
January through March 2025 Page 30
7.1 Attachment 3 - Construction Photographs
338
IAP2
Hopper
April 4, 2025
January 2, 2025
January through March 2025 P A G E 33
7.1 Attachment 3 - Construction Photographs
339
Piping
April 4, 2025
January 2, 2025
January through March 2025 P A G E 34
7.1 Attachment 3 - Construction Photographs
340
IAP3
Site Waste Station Site
April 4, 2025
January 2, 2025
January through March 2025 P A G E 37
7.1 Attachment 3 - Construction Photographs
341
Effluent Pump Station Site- Drilling Wet Well
April 4, 2025
January 2, 2025
January through March 2025 P A G E 38
7.1 Attachment 3 - Construction Photographs
342
ATTACHMENT #4
PROJECT FINANCING
In addition to cash from the District’s and City of San Mateo’s wastewater enterprises, financing for the project consists of the following funding sources:
Revenue Bonds – The San Mateo Foster City Public Financing Authority (“PFA”) sold $270 million in revenue bonds in 2019 for Clean Water Program costs. The District’s share of the proceeds from that bond issue was $40,131,000. The WWTP 2019 bond funds were fully expended in July 2021.
The Program through the San Mateo-Foster City 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 PFA issued $62.76 million of 2021 Wastewater Revenue Notes, Series A (EMID) 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 pay off the notes.
State Revolving Fund (SRF) –The SRF loan package, for a maximum loan amount of $137,000,000, was approved by the State with an interest rate not to exceed
1.6% (EMID’s share of the loan is $33,044,400). These funds are now available as part of the financial strategy for the project.
7.1 Attachment 4 - Project Financing
343
DATE:June 16, 2025
TO:Mayor and Members of the City Council
VIA:Stefan Chatwin, City Manager
Marlene Subhashini, Assistant City Manager
FROM:Derek Schweigart, Parks and Recreation Director
Justin Lai, Senior Civil Engineer
DEPARTMENT: Parks and Recreation Department
SUBJECT:RECREATION CENTER REBUILD PROJECT (CIP 301-678)
GENERAL UPDATE
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the City Council, by Minute Order, receive and accept the update report on the Recreation Center Rebuild Project (Project). This is an informational report only. No further action is required.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Staff will provide a verbal update of the latest Project activities at the City Council meeting. The Project update will consist of this staff report and the attached Construction Manager’s Report. Some of the notable highlights from the past months of the Project include:
•A majority of the underground utilities beneath the building footprint were installed, which include stormwater, sewer, and electrical. •Waterproofing of the foundation was completed.
•Temporary power was completed with PG&E.
•Coordination with AT&T and Comcast for future communication connections began.
•Concrete forms were installed for pouring the two new bocce courts and preparing for the building slab.
7.2 7.2 Staff Report
344
BACKGROUND AND ANALYSIS
During the past two months, BHM completed most of the underground work beneath the building footprint. The underground utilities were installed; grade beams and waterproofing were mostly completed for the building. This included thousands of feet of piping and conduit. The building slab was being prepped, and the forms were constructed. Outside of the building footprint, the two new bocce courts were formed and prepped for concrete. Bioretention areas are continuing to be constructed and developed with proper drainage material. Temporary power was successfully brought to the site in coordination with PG&E. Additional coordination was performed between AT&T and Comcast for bringing communication lines to the property.
During the construction submittal and request for information (RFI) process, it was found that multiple aspects of the design required additional scope which resulted in Contract Change Order #3 (CCO #3) and Contract Change Order #4 (CCO #4).
CCO #3 consisted of the following:
•The first scope change was a result of the contractor needing to handle four different patterns of carpet instead of one. The additional cost for materials and labor was $4,995.
•The second item that was addressed on CCO #3 was regarding underground conduit support. The design did not account for necessary electrical conduit supports due to the soil conditions and building design. The additional underground conduit supports cost was $138,492.
The total cost of CCO #3 was $143,487.
CCO #4 was later approved for changes in work that addressed the following:
•Installation of insulation for the grease waste heat trace pipes ($32,000). The scope and cost were negotiated to address a requirement for the grease waste piping installation.
•Waterproofing the electrical supports that were added as part of CCO #3 ($12,978)
•Adding additional mop sinks in the janitor closet not shown on the bid documents ($8,979)
•Crediting the City for additional design services requested by the contractor. ($8,050 credit)
The total cost of CCO #4 was $45,907.
The remaining contingency balance following the execution of CCO #3 and CCO #4 is $4,053,596 and the current contract amount is $45,035,004.
Upcoming Construction Activity
Underground work and grading are expected to continue, followed by pouring the building slab and erecting the building’s steel columns. Work within the public right of way will also be conducted over the coming months which consists of utility connections
7.2 7.2 Staff Report
345
and testing, concrete work, and signal modifications. Additional information on the site activities can be found in the Construction Manager’s Reports attached.
Project Schedule Summary
Site Work, Underground Utilities and Grading January 2025 – October 2025 Foundation and Structural Framing January 2025 - August 2025 Building Exterior Framing and Envelope September 2025 - December 2025 Interior Framing & Mechanical, Electrical, and
Plumbing
September 2025 – April 2026
Interior Finishes and Closeout April 2026 – July 2026
Project Completion July 2026
CEQA
In July 2023, the City of Foster City, in accordance with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”), the State CEQA Guidelines adopted by the Secretary of Resources, and the City of Foster City Environmental Review Guidelines, prepared an Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration (SCH # 20231009) with Standards Conditions and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (SCAMMRP), and CEQA Findings (IS/MND) for the Recreation Center Rebuild Project.
On November 16, 2023, the City Planning Commission adopted the IS/MND and approved the Use Permit for the Project. Pursuant to Public Resources Code section 21166 and CEQA Guidelines section 15164(b), the City prepared an Addendum to the adopted Mitigated Negative Declaration for the temporary Modular Buildings portion of the work.
7.2 7.2 Staff Report
346
FISCAL IMPACT
There is no fiscal impact associated with this update. Any fiscal impacts to the Project will be presented to the City Council as a separate agenda item with a recommended action. The construction budget is shown on the attached Construction Manger’s Report.
CITY COUNCIL VISION, MISSION, AND VALUE/PRIORITY AREA
Facilities and Infrastructure
ATTACHMENT:
Attachment 1 – Monthly Construction Manager's Report April 2025 Attachment 2 – Monthly Construction Manager's Report May 2025 Attachment 3 – Contract Change Order Summary Sheet
7.2 7.2 Staff Report
347
FOSTER CITY RECREATION CENTER REBUILD PROJECT
CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT MONTHLY REPORT (CIP 301-678)
GRIFFIN STRUCTURES
Report Period: April 1 – 30, 2025
General Contractor: BHM Construction LLC
Construction Manager: Griffin Structures
Architect of Record: Group 4 Architecture
Introduction
April 2025 marked the transition from early utility infrastructure to major foundation activities for the Foster City Recreation Center project. Efforts focused on deep underground conduit support, vault rebar layout, and mat slab preparation. Although a concrete placement originally planned for late April was postponed due to conflicting inspection expectations, work continued across multiple scopes—including epoxy dowel installation, waterproofing coordination, and layout corrections.
The project team advanced trenching activities, coordinated with PG&E and AT&T, and addressed a correction notice issued by the City's Building Inspector. A formal instruction was issued to BHM to proceed with the installation of a 2-inch insulated heat trace for the grease waste piping, which allowed plumbing and backfill operations to continue uninterrupted while credit negotiations for unused base bid insulation are pending.
Meanwhile, elevator and electrical vault slabs and lower walls were successfully placed, setting the stage for continued progress. These coordinated activities helped maintain schedule momentum and prepared the site for expanded foundation work in May.
7.2 Attachment 1 - Monthly Construction Manager's Report April 2025
348
FOSTER CITY RECREATION CENTER REBUILD PROJECT
CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT MONTHLY REPORT (CIP 301-678)
GRIFFIN STRUCTURES
Contract Schedule Summary
NTP Issuance 11/04/24
Contract Duration 608 Calendar Days
Substantial Completion 06/17/26
Contract Final Completion 07/05/26
Approved Extension Days 0
Anticipated Completion
Date
07/05/26
Construction Activities Completed April 2025
Foundation and Underground Work:
• Ongoing trenching and compaction for sewer, storm drain, electrical, and grease waste. • Rebar installation for mat slabs, vaults, and grade beams observed by Apex and Group 4. • Trench backfills reviewed by Romig; vibration and jetting with sand confirmed. • Rebar inspections and epoxy dowel pull testing conducted at vault locations. • Partial inspection approvals granted for grease waste and vault areas. • Planned concrete placement postponed due to an inspection alignment issue regarding rebar cleaning.
Site Utilities and Infrastructure:
• PG&E vault trenching and backfill extended to the western road. • SE lot storm drains sections completed; groundwater managed with a pump. • Bocce court light standard layout initiated, trenching and mock-up planning underway. • Subgrade bioretention work commenced in late April.
Electrical and Power Coordination:
• Site conduit installed for site lighting and building feed. • Temporary power infrastructure completed; PG&E activation confirmed for early May.
Testing, Inspection & Coordination:
• IR log updated with inspection dates for vaults, sewer, waterproofing, and rebar. • Pull test on four vault dowels passed by the special inspector, addressing Structural observation comments.
• Structural Engineer of Record and Geotechnical Engineer of Record responding to Correction Notice 001 issued for conduit support and spacing to ensure alignment with RFI. Follow-up inspection and resolution of Correction Notice 001 is anticipated in early May. • Final verification of rebar corrections is scheduled for the first week of May, pending SEOR walkthrough confirmation.
7.2 Attachment 1 - Monthly Construction Manager's Report April 2025
349
FOSTER CITY RECREATION CENTER REBUILD PROJECT
CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT MONTHLY REPORT (CIP 301-678)
GRIFFIN STRUCTURES
Construction Activities Planned for May 2025
Foundation and Structural Work:
• Finalize foundation corrections and inspection approvals at the Events Wing and Electrical Vault. • Place concrete for initial mat slab placements upon receipt of City and SEOR concurrence. • Waterproof vertical elevator pit walls and install a drainage board per the manufacturer's recommendations.
Utility and Infrastructure Work:
• Continue domestic water, fire water, and sewer line trenching at the north and west wings. • Excavate AT&T and PG&E routes and coordinate final tie-in sequencing with utility providers. • Begin slab-on-grade subgrade prep at Café and Events Wing; rough-in MEP as required.
Site Improvements and Mock-Ups:
• Complete site concrete mock-up for color, finish, and scoring; begin forming bocce court base and seat wall.
• Layout and verify foundations for shade structures; confirm anchor coordination.
Submittals and Procurement:
• Group 4 continues review of active submittals.
• Issue revised submittals for structural steel and confirm fabrication schedule. • Track lead times and delivery updates for RTUs, elevator equipment, and electrical gear.
Key Challenges
• Contract Change Order #3, supports for deep underground electrical conduit. • Structural Reinforcement Adjustments: Additional rebar and dowels needed to address discrepancies noted by SEOR during walkthrough. BHM addressed items with Special Inspection. • SEOR observations and necessary foundation rebar corrections resulted in a delay of the foundation pour. • BHM instructed to proceed with grease waste heat trace pipe insulation • Power and Irrigation Conflicts: Incomplete documentation of legacy systems required exploratory trenching and field coordination.
Budget Updates
Contract Change Order #3 Summary:
Approved in April 2025, CCO #3 totals $143,487 and includes:
• COR #15.1 – Carpet Tile Pattern & Color Change – $4,995.00 ▪ Introduced a multi-color layout replacing the originally specified single-color tile.
Additional layout and sequencing labor were required to accommodate the design team’s revised pattern.
• COR #17 – Deep Underground Electrical Conduit Support – $138,492.00 ▪ Added stainless-steel trapeze racks and EPS geofoam/CLSM backfill to mitigate settlement concerns per RFIs 088.1 and 088.2. This work was critical to electrical conduit integrity and coordinated with the slab-on-grade prep sequence.
7.2 Attachment 1 - Monthly Construction Manager's Report April 2025
350
FOSTER CITY RECREATION CENTER REBUILD PROJECT
CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT MONTHLY REPORT (CIP 301-678)
GRIFFIN STRUCTURES
The contractor did not assert delay claims but reserved the right to revisit time impacts pending future conditions. No additional calendar days were added to the contract.
Pending Change Orders Under Review (Not Yet Included in Budget):
• COR #22 – Electrical support waterproofing (RFI 124): $12,978 • COR #23 – Modify domestic hot water routing (RFIs 40 & 40.1): $11,859 • COR #24 – Added mop sinks at janitor closets (RFI 33): $8,979
Contract and Contingency Financial Overview:
Original Contract Amount $44,626,000.00
Contingency (10%) $4,462,600.00
Executed Contract Change Orders $363,097.00
Total Adjusted Contract Amount $44,989,097.00
Contingency Remaining $4,099,503.00
Contingency % Remaining 91.9%
Total Completed and Stored to Date $6,216,044.58
% of Contracts billed to Date 13.9%
Summary
April 2025 marked a period of underground progress, coordinated corrections, and enhanced documentation at the Foster City Recreation Center project. The construction team executed critical trenching, rebar installation, dowel anchoring, and conduit support for mat slab preparation across multiple wings. Two structural observations by Degenkolb confirmed conformance in key areas while also triggering follow-up corrective actions. In response, BHM performed dowel pull testing, added supplemental anchorage, and refined slab rebar layout.
Coordination among the City, Griffin, Design Team, and BHM is ongoing with frequent coordination meetings and site walks to mitigate unforeseen items. An instruction was issued to BHM to proceed with the installation of 2-inch insulated heat trace for the grease waste piping, allowing plumbing and backfill work to continue while the associated cost credit is being negotiated.
PG&E and AT&T trenching and layout advanced, while the site’s temporary power infrastructure neared activation. Design coordination continued through structural steel submittals, LEED reviews, and mock-up planning.
Though the April foundation concrete placement was deferred, the work performed laid essential groundwork for May’s structural pours, with the team remaining focused on documentation accuracy, inspection transparency, and schedule preservation.
Note: This report is a monthly update for the Foster City Recreation Center Rebuild Project, highlighting key construction activities, upcoming tasks, challenges, and budgetary considerations.
7.2 Attachment 1 - Monthly Construction Manager's Report April 2025
351
CCO #3 Deep Electrical
Underground Supports
Hardscape Demolition and Disposal
Hardscape Demolition
Electrical Vault Slab Rebar
Electrical Vault Wall Rebar
Below Building Plumbing
7.2 Attachment 1 - Monthly Construction Manager's Report April 2025
352
Temporary Power Poles
Waterproofing in progress
CCO #3 Deep Electrical
Underground Supports
Foundation Rebar
Foundation Waterproofing
Electrical Vault Rebar
7.2 Attachment 1 - Monthly Construction Manager's Report April 2025
353
Rebar for Foundation
New Storm Drain Materials Deliveries
Deep Underground Electrical Rough In
Formwork for Electrical Vault Walls
Deep Underground Waste Plumbing
New Tie-in at Existing 54" Storm Drain
7.2 Attachment 1 - Monthly Construction Manager's Report April 2025
354
Electrical Vault Rebar and Grade Beam
Storm Drain Installation and Backfill
Storm Drain Curb Inlet Installation
Grease Waste and Sewer Pipe Installation
Grade Beam Rebar Installation
Grease Waste and Sewer Pipe Installation Backfill
7.2 Attachment 1 - Monthly Construction Manager's Report April 2025
355
FOSTER CITY RECREATION CENTER REBUILD PROJECT
CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT MONTHLY REPORT (CIP 301-678)
GRIFFIN STRUCTURES
Report Period: May 1 – 31, 2025
General Contractor: BHM Construction LLC
Construction Manager: Griffin Structures
Architect of Record: Group 4 Architecture
Introduction
May 2025 marked the successful transition from subgrade infrastructure to the completion of major structural foundation scopes at the Foster City Recreation Center Project. The construction team completed extensive concrete placements across the building footprint, pile caps, and grade beams. These activities complemented the earlier elevator pit and vault placements and were followed immediately by formwork removal, waterproofing application, and rebar installation in preparation for vertical framing. Progress continued in parallel across scopes such as layout and formwork for new bocce courts, bioretention grading, fire water underground, and storm drain backfill. PG&E finalized temporary power activation, while coordination with AT&T continued. Offsite fabrication for structural steel advanced to maintain schedule alignment. With all primary foundation work complete and inspections passed; the project remains on its critical path entering June.
Contract Schedule Summary
NTP Issuance 11/04/24
Contract Duration 608 Calendar Days
Substantial Completion 06/17/26
Contract Final Completion 07/05/26
Approved Extension Days 0
Anticipated Completion Date 07/05/26
7.2 Attachment 2 - Monthly Construction Manager's Report May
356
FOSTER CITY RECREATION CENTER REBUILD PROJECT
CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT MONTHLY REPORT (CIP 301-678)
GRIFFIN STRUCTURES
Construction Activities Completed May 2025
Foundation and Underground Work:
• Concrete placement completed at elevator pit and electrical vault. • Formwork stripping and foundation cleaning were completed for the following pour. • The installation of rebar, edge forms, and slab dowels for suspended slab areas has progressed. • Waterproofing of vault and slab edges performed.
• Suspended slab gravel base, and drainage mat preparation continued west and east.
Site Utilities and Infrastructure:
• Backfill of electrical vault using approved CLSM completed. • Trenching and pipe installation for storm drains and bioretention progressed in the Southeast lot and the bocce court area.
• Fire water trenching staged, pipe delivery in progress; traffic control plans coordinated. • CCTV of 54" storm drain line documentation submitted. • Irrigation conduit rerouting in Rose Garden coordinated with Parks.
Electrical and Power Coordination:
• Site conduit rough-in at slab areas for lighting and power completed. • Temporary power infrastructure activated by PG&E after panel adjustments. • AT&T redline review initiated; routing revisions underway.
Testing, Inspection & Coordination:
• Apex conducted field sampling and observation for vault and elevator slab concrete. • Romig completed site compaction and bioretention excavation observation. • Correction Notice 001 was resolved following the design engineer's comments to the Building Official.
• Coordination meetings held for LEED documentation and weekly submittal review. • Concrete mockups, waterproofing submittals, and lighting base rebar approvals are underway.
Construction Activities Planned for June 2025
Foundation and Structural Work:
• Finalize edge formwork and slab prep at Events and Community Wings. • Place west and east structural slab concrete.
• Begin vertical structural steel erection following slab cure and anchor survey • Helical piles deferred submittal approval.
Utility and Infrastructure Work:
• Continue fire water and domestic water installation and testing. • Finalize layout for site storm drain risers and tie-ins. • Continue rough grading and tree protection measures in the landscape areas.
Site Improvements and Mock-Ups:
• Install and review site concrete color/finish mockups. • Place and review the seat wall and flatwork concrete at the bocce courts. • Confirm elevations and anchor details for shade structures.
Submittals and Procurement:
7.2 Attachment 2 - Monthly Construction Manager's Report May
357
FOSTER CITY RECREATION CENTER REBUILD PROJECT
CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT MONTHLY REPORT (CIP 301-678)
GRIFFIN STRUCTURES
• Structural steel, mechanical rooftop units, curtain wall, storefront, and waterproofing procurement tracking.
• Ongoing elevator product data coordination and management. • Resubmit the LEED action plan and schedule update.
Key Challenges
• LEED and Mock-Up Scheduling: Tracking long lead submittals and action plan revisions for LEED. • Telecom Coordination: AT&T and Comcast trench layouts require adjustment due to conflict with the driveway apron and existing utilities.
• Timely submittal and RFIs from the contractor and their review by the design team. • Change orders due to design coordination and revisions.
Budget Updates
The following Change Order Requests were approved by the City in May 2025 and included in approved Contract Change Order #4 (Total Amount $45,907.00).
• COR #16 – Grease Waste Heat Trace Insulation: $32,000 Negotiated amount agreed to by all parties. This COR covers insulation for heat trace wire for grease waste piping.
• COR #22 – Electrical Support Waterproofing: $12,978
Approved by the City. Adds waterproofing for electrical support hardware per RFI 124. • COR #24 – Added mop sinks at janitor closets: $8,979
Approved by the City. Provides for additional mop sink rough-in and trim based on revised layout in response to RFI 33.
• COR #27 – Design Services Transfer for Operable Partition Bracing: ($8,050.00) Approved by the City. This credit reflects the removal of bracing scope from BHM and assignment to the structural engineer.
Contract and Contingency Financial Overview:
Original Contract Amount $44,626,000.00
Contingency (10%) $4,462,600.00
Approved Contract Change Orders $409,004.00
Total Adjusted Contract Amount $45,035,004.00
Contingency Remaining $4,053,596.00
Contingency % Remaining 91%
Total Completed and Stored to Date $10,020,409.09
% of Contracts Billed to Date 22.5%
7.2 Attachment 2 - Monthly Construction Manager's Report May
358
FOSTER CITY RECREATION CENTER REBUILD PROJECT
CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT MONTHLY REPORT (CIP 301-678)
GRIFFIN STRUCTURES
Summary
May 2025 represented the culmination of the project’s foundation phase and a key advancement toward vertical construction. Full building foundation placement was completed, encompassing not only the elevator pit and electrical vault but also grade beams and pile cap connections. Inspection approvals were secured for rebar, grease waste piping, floor drains, and conduit systems below the slab. Vault waterproofing, slab edge formwork, and CLSM backfill were all finalized.
On-site coordination also addressed AT&T routing, temporary power activation, and layout adjustments for light pole conduits and bioretention areas. Submittals and mockups progressed to support the procurement of long-lead items, including structural steel and curtain wall systems. The City’s Building Inspector and third-party consultants confirmed compliance at multiple milestones.
With subgrade scopes concluded, the project enters June prepared for steel erection, utility tie-ins, and early MEP infrastructure.
Note: This report is a monthly update for the Foster City Recreation Center Rebuild Project, highlighting key construction activities, upcoming tasks, challenges, and budgetary considerations.
7.2 Attachment 2 - Monthly Construction Manager's Report May
359
Grading of the site for future walkway
Concrete Foundation in Place
RFI 88.1/CCO #3 Electrical
Conduit Trench Backfill
Foundation Concrete
Placement
Foundation Rebar
Foundation Concrete
Placement
7.2 Attachment 2 - Monthly Construction Manager's Report May
360
Grease Waste Insulation (COR 16)
Electrical Conduit Backfill at Settlement Vaults (CCO 3) Building Slab Edge Forming
Waterproofing Electrical Vault
Plumbing Backfill and Compaction
Electrical Vault Conduit
7.2 Attachment 2 - Monthly Construction Manager's Report May
361
Slab Edge Forming Completed
Bocce Court forming ongoing
CLSM backfill around
electrical vault
Concrete Mockups completed for
review by design team
Plumbing Trenches inspected and
backfill ongoing
Plumbing Trenches inspected and
backfill ongoing
7.2 Attachment 2 - Monthly Construction Manager's Report May
362
Below Slab Conduit
Slab Edge Forming
Completed
Slab Edge Forming
Completed
Below Slab Rock
Placement
Storm Drain Installation
Storm Drain Installation
7.2 Attachment 2 - Monthly Construction Manager's Report May
363
Contract Change Order Summary Sheet
Original Construction Contract
Current Construction Contract
Original Contingency
$
$
$
$
44,626,000.00
45,035,004.00
4,462,600.00
4,053,596.00Remaining Contingency
Contract
Change Order
Number
Change Order
Request Number Description Price Execution Date
CCO#1
CCO#2
CCO#2
CCO#2
CCO#2
CCO#2
CCO#2
CCO#3
CCO#3
CCO#4
CCO#4
CCO#4
CCO#4
2.1 3
4.1 5
Unforeseen Plastic Cell Removal During Demolition
Handling and Disposal of Existing Asbestos Piping
Repair and Relocate Unforeseen Damaged Conduit
Unforeseen Vapor Barrier under Existing Bldg. Slab
Unforeseen Concrete Slab Thickness
Handling and Disposal of Additional Existing Asbestos Piping Lime Treatment of the Building Pad
Carpet Tile Pattern and Color Change
Deep Electrical Underground Conduit Support
Grease Wate Heat Trace Insulation
Electrical Support Waterproofing
Added Mop Sinks at Janitor Closets
Design Service Transfer for Operable Partition Bracing (Credit) $
$
$
7,641.00
4,284.00
6,901.00
12/17/2024
2/4/2025
2/4/2025
2/4/2025
2/4/2025
2/4/2025
2/4/2025
5/7/2025
5/7/2025
6/6/2025
6/6/2025
6/6/2025
6/6/2025
$ 145,594.00
$ 12,026.007
10 11.1
15.1 17
16 22
24 27
$ 7,464.00
$ 35,700.00
$ 4,995.00
$ 138,492.00
$ 32,000.00
$ 12,978.00
$
$
8,979.00
(8,050.00)
Total Change Orders $ 409,004.00
7.2 Attachment 3 - Contract Change Order Summary Sheet
364
6 4
9 DATE: June 16, 2025
TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council
President and Members of the Estero Municipal Improvement District (EMID) Board of Directors
FROM: Stefan Chatwin, City/District Manager
Nate Cruz, Finance Director
DEPARTMENT: City Manager, Finance
SUBJECT: ADOPTION OF FY 2025-2026 CITY/DISTRICT BUDGET
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the City Council/EMID Board of Directors (City Council) approve the attached resolutions approving the Fiscal Year 2025-2026 City/EMID Budget.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
As part of the City/EMID’s annual budget process, the City Council held budget study sessions on January 23rd, March 24th, and May 22nd to review various sections of the budget, including CIP Funds, Enterprise Funds, Internal Service Funds, and the General Fund. The Council then held a public hearing regarding the Preliminary Budget on June 2. Staff now recommends City Council’s approval of the FY 2025-2026 City/EMID Budget. There have been no changes to the budget since the June 2, 2025 public hearing.
Notably, the legislature’s version of the 2025-2026 State Budget (SB101) includes a provision to reimburse local governments to the VLF shortfall. If the Final Budget approved by the Governor includes this provision, General Fund revenues are estimated to increase by $2.2 million.
BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS
On May 22, City staff presented the FY 2025-2026 Preliminary Budget and 5-year financial plan for all Funds, including the General Fund (Funds 001 to 003). The budget
8.1 8.1 Staff Report
365
6 4
9 indicated a $3.83 million General Fund structural deficit for FY 2025-2026 as well as structural deficits for the entirety of the 5-year financial plan. Budget revisions were presented to the City Council on June 2, including revenue adjustments to Permits, Rentals/EMID, and Other Revenue (Fines, Shared Services, Street Sweeping, Other) for a revised FY 2025-2026 deficit of $3.79 million. No further revisions to the FY 2025- 2026 budget have been made1.
The FY 2025-2026 City/EMID Budget for all funds totaling $219.7 million includes direction received from the City Council at various budget study sessions and a public hearing. The City Council also provided direction to use the General Fund reserves to address the FY 2025-2026 General Fund budget shortfall and for staff to develop strategies to address subsequent deficits.
Having reviewed the Preliminary Budget and having held a public hearing on the Preliminary Budget, it is recommended that the City Council/EMID Board adopt the attached resolutions approving the proposed FY 2025-2026 City/EMID Budget. The financial and personnel summary pages of the FY 2025-2026 Budget are attached to this report (Attachment 3). The entire proposed FY 2025-2026 Budget is available on the City’s website at https://www.fostercity.org/finance/page/annual-budget.
CEQA
Not Applicable
FISCAL IMPACT
Adoption of the annual budget authorizes expenditures identified in the budget for FY 2025-2026.
CITY COUNCIL VISION, MISSION, AND VALUE/PRIORITY AREA
Staff Empowerment and Operational Excellence
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment 1 - City Resolution
Attachment 2 - EMID Resolution
Attachment 3 - Exhibit to City/EMID Resolutions: Financial and Personnel Summaries 1 The current year (FY 2024-25) projection of interest earnings for fund 326 was increased to reflect actual interest earnings. This increase had no impact on General Fund or the FY 2025-26 budget.
8.1 8.1 Staff Report
366
RESOLUTION NO. _____________
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FOSTER CITY APPROVING THE FISCAL YEAR 2025-2026 CITY BUDGET
CITY OF FOSTER CITY
WHEREAS, the City Manager is responsible for preparing and submitting a City budget for the operation and improvements of the community; and WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed and evaluated the proposed budget submitted by the City Manager; and
WHEREAS, the citizens have had an opportunity to review and make additional suggestions to the City Council.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Foster City that:
1. The City budget for the 2025-2026 fiscal year ending June 30, 2026, is hereby approved as set forth in the attached Exhibit and incorporated herein.
2. The City Manager is hereby delegated responsibility for the administration of the budget, including transfers between departments, except that any transfers between funds must be approved by the City Council.
3. The City Manager is hereby authorized to make administrative corrections to the adopted budget FY 2025-2026, including but not limited to corrections of typographical errors, formatting, account coding, and other non- substantive revisions that do not change the total appropriations or materially alter the intent of the budget as adopted by the City Council.
4. The City Treasurer shall not certify any encumbrance nor execute any payment in excess of department budget appropriations.
8.1 Attachment 1 - City Resolution
367
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 June, 2025, by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
________________________________________
STACY JIMENEZ, MAYOR
ATTEST:
___________________________________
PRISCILLA SCHAUS, CITY CLERK
8.1 Attachment 1 - City Resolution
368
RESOLUTION NO. _____________
A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE ESTERO MUNICIPAL IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT APPROVING THE FISCAL YEAR 2025-2026 DISTRICT BUDGET
ESTERO MUNICIPAL IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT
WHEREAS, the District Manager is responsible for preparing and submitting a District budget for the operation and improvements of the community; and WHEREAS, the Board of Directors has reviewed and evaluated the proposed budget submitted by the District Manager; and
WHEREAS, the citizens have had an opportunity to review and make additional suggestions to the Board of Directors.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Directors of the Estero Municipal Improvement District that:
1. The District budget for the 2025-2026 fiscal year ending June 30, 2026 is hereby approved as set forth in the attached Exhibit and incorporated herein.
2. The District Manager is hereby delegated responsibility for the administration of the budget, including transfers between departments, except that any transfers between funds must be approved by the City Council.
3. The District Manager is hereby authorized to make administrative corrections to the adopted budget FY 2025-2026, including but not limited to corrections of typographical errors, formatting, account coding, and other non-substantive revisions that do not change the total appropriations or materially alter the intent of the budget as adopted by the City Council.
4. The District Treasurer shall not certify any encumbrance nor execute any payment in excess of department budget appropriations.
8.1 Attachment 2 - EMID Resolution
369
3 4
6 9
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 June, 2025, by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
__________________________________
STACY JIMENEZ, PRESIDENT
ATTEST:
_______________________________________
PRISCILLA SCHAUS, DISTRICT SECRETARY
8.1 Attachment 2 - EMID Resolution
370
General Funds
001 GENERAL FUND $63,077,213 $22,466,421 $40,616,307 $5,759,654 $120,400,287 $61,489,537 $0 $61,489,537 ($4,166,463) $58,910,750 002 GENERAL FUND-DISTRICT $0 $41,302,192 $0 $40,616,307 $685,885 $305,500 $0 $305,500 $380,385 $380,385 003 SPECIAL RECREATION $0 $2,330,552 $759,654 $0 $3,090,206 $3,090,206 $0 $3,090,206 $0 $0 005 COMMUNITY BENEFIT PROGRAM $952,523 $20,000 $0 $0 $972,523 $0 $0 $0 $20,000 $972,523 006 DRUG ABUSE RESIST EDUCATION $7,021 $13,030 $0 $0 $20,051 $12,600 $0 $12,600 $430 $7,451 007 SOLAR INCENTIVE GRANT PROGRAM $29,568 $1,854 $0 $0 $31,422 $15,000 $0 $15,000 ($13,146) $16,422 008 EE HOME LOAN PROGRAM $67,277 $1,494 $0 $0 $68,771 $0 $0 $0 $1,494 $68,771 009 ASSET SEIZURE $39,350 $1,751 $0 $0 $41,101 $4,097 $0 $4,097 ($2,346) $37,004 010 PENSION STABILIZATION $102,792 $3,399 $0 $0 $106,191 $0 $0 $0 $3,399 $106,191 011 FACILITIES REPLACEMENT $2,691,620 $77,971 $0 $0 $2,769,591 $0 $0 $0 $77,971 $2,769,591 012 SUSTAINABLE FC $278,471 $4,841 $50,000 $0 $333,312 $8,700 $0 $8,700 $46,141 $324,612 Subtotal General Funds $67,245,835 $66,223,505 $41,425,961 $46,375,961 $128,519,340 $64,925,640 $0 $64,925,640 ($3,652,135) $63,593,700 Special Revenue Funds
101 TRAFFIC SAFETY $6,279 $41,200 $0 $0 $47,479 $40,000 $0 $40,000 $1,200 $7,479 102 MEASURE "A" $2,875,167 $1,090,092 $0 $0 $3,965,259 $0 $0 $0 $1,090,092 $3,965,259 103 GAS TAX $533,373 $949,793 $0 $0 $1,483,166 $627,270 $500,000 $1,127,270 ($177,477) $355,896 104 PARK IN-LIEU FEES $2,399,895 $100,000 $0 $0 $2,499,895 $0 $0 $0 $100,000 $2,499,895 105 MEASURE M $0 $127,823 $0 $0 $127,823 $0 $0 $0 $127,823 $127,823 108 SLESF/COPS GRANT $0 $169,950 $0 $0 $169,950 $100,000 $0 $100,000 $69,950 $69,950 114 CalOpps Fund $369,206 $464,982 $0 $0 $834,188 $472,120 $0 $472,120 ($7,138) $362,068 116 FOSTER CITY FOUNDATION FUND $353,437 $21,000 $0 $0 $374,437 $88,000 $0 $88,000 ($67,000) $286,437 119 SB1 ROAD MAINT&REHAB A/C $1,998,433 $930,502 $0 $0 $2,928,935 $0 $1,500,000 $1,500,000 ($569,498) $1,428,935 122 LMIHAF-HOUSING SUCCESSOR $2,549,885 $146,878 $0 $0 $2,696,763 $186,500 $0 $186,500 ($39,622) $2,510,263 124 FC AFFORDABLE HOUSING $4,762,052 $66,364 $0 $0 $4,828,416 $5,224 $0 $5,224 $61,140 $4,823,192 128 GENERAL PLAN MAINTENANCE $2,511,590 $1,198,168 $0 $0 $3,709,758 $409,512 $0 $409,512 $788,656 $3,300,246 129 CONST & DEMO RECYCLING FUND $705,954 $76,014 $0 $50,000 $731,968 $106,500 $0 $106,500 ($80,486) $625,468 130 TECHNOLOGY MAINTENANCE $274,758 $210,983 $0 $0 $485,741 $105,485 $0 $105,485 $105,498 $380,256 131 SB 1186 FUND $53,619 $7,056 $0 $0 $60,675 $2,300 $0 $2,300 $4,756 $58,375 132 SMIP FEE FUND $5 $639 $0 $0 $644 $500 $0 $500 $139 $144 133 CRV GRANT FUND $6,049 $9,002 $0 $0 $15,051 $13,000 $0 $13,000 ($3,998) $2,051 134 CURBSIDE RECYCLING $279,052 $24,257 $0 $0 $303,309 $25,000 $0 $25,000 ($743) $278,309 135 GREEN BUILDING FEE $8,254 $927 $0 $0 $9,181 $500 $0 $500 $427 $8,681 136 MEASURE W $937,157 $501,095 $0 $0 $1,438,252 $0 $0 $0 $501,095 $1,438,252 137 AFFORDABLE HOUSING-COMMERCIAL LINKAGE FEES $5,564,059 $7,848,278 $0 $0 $13,412,337 $10,000 $0 $10,000 $7,838,278 $13,402,337 138 TENANT RELOCATION ASSISTANCE $254,649 $3,708 $0 $0 $258,357 $0 $0 $0 $3,708 $258,357 139 WORKFORCE HOUSING $308,611 $661,395 $0 $0 $970,006 $375,088 $0 $375,088 $286,307 $594,918 140 EQUIP REPLACEMENT-WORKFORCE HOUSING $76,511 $29,767 $0 $0 $106,278 $0 $0 $0 $29,767 $106,278 141 SB1383 IMPLEMENTATION $6,464 $515 $0 $0 $6,979 $6,979 $0 $6,979 ($6,464) $0 142 IMPACT FEE - PARKS FACILITIES $21,821 $915,952 $0 $0 $937,773 $0 $467,000 $467,000 $448,952 $470,773 143 IMPACT FEE - PUBLIC SAFETY $64,022 $96,684 $0 $0 $160,706 $0 $0 $0 $96,684 $160,706 144 IMPACT FEE - TRANSPORTATION $200,490 $310,405 $0 $0 $510,895 $0 $0 $0 $310,405 $510,895 145 LOCAL HOUSING TRUST $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Subtotal Special Revenue Funds $27,120,792 $16,003,429 $0 $50,000 $43,074,221 $2,573,978 $2,467,000 $5,040,978 $10,912,451 $38,033,243 (Continued on next page)
Fund
*Available
July 1, 2025
Estimated
Revenues Transfers In Transfers Out Total Available
Operating
Expenditures
Capital
Expenditures
Total
Requirements
Net Change in
Reserves
*Available
June 30, 2026
CITY OF FOSTER CITY / EMID
Summary of Resources and Requirements by Funds
For the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2026
PRELIMINARY BUDGET
City of Foster City's FY 2025-26 Preliminary Budget Page 1
8.1 Attachment 3 - Exhibit to CityEMID Resolution Financial and Personnel Summaries
371
(Continued from previous page)
Debt Service Fund
230 LEVEE PROTECT I&R IMP $4,862,742 $4,212,185 $0 $0 $9,074,927 $3,904,988 $0 $3,904,988 $307,197 $5,169,939 231 2023 GO BOND-LEVEE PRJ FD $151,223 $319,815 $0 $0 $471,038 $214,300 $0 $214,300 $105,515 $256,738 Subtotal Debt Service Funds $5,013,965 $4,532,000 $0 $0 $9,545,965 $4,119,288 $0 $4,119,288 $412,712 $5,426,677 Capital Projects Funds
301 CIP-CITY $21,131,781 $1,465,708 $6,861,400 $0 $29,458,889 $0 $8,228,263 $8,228,263 $98,845 $21,230,626 326 CAPITAL ASSET ACQUISITION & REPLACEMENT $9,418,600 $1,472,780 $0 $0 $10,891,380 $0 $0 $0 $1,472,780 $10,891,380 327 LEVEE PROJECT FUND $939,135 $0 $0 $0 $939,135 $0 $0 $0 $0 $939,135 328 LEVEE PROJECT FD-2023 GO BOND $13,737 $0 $0 $0 $13,737 $0 $0 $0 $0 $13,737 Subtotal Capital Projects Funds $31,503,253 $2,938,488 $6,861,400 $0 $41,303,141 $0 $8,228,263 $8,228,263 $1,571,625 $33,074,878 Enterprise Funds
Water Funds
401 WATER REVENUE $11,796,456 $19,741,000 $0 $2,600,000 $28,937,456 $19,488,871 $0 $19,488,871 ($2,347,871) $9,448,585 405 CIP-WATER $5,436,028 $0 $2,600,000 $0 $8,036,028 $0 $800,000 $800,000 $1,800,000 $7,236,028 408 WATER EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT $4,578,128 $470,470 $0 $0 $5,048,598 $59,700 $0 $59,700 $410,770 $4,988,898 409 WATER CONNECTION FEE $62,894 $531,639 $0 $0 $594,533 $0 $0 $0 $531,639 $594,533 Subtotal Water Funds $21,873,506 $20,743,109 $2,600,000 $2,600,000 $42,616,615 $19,548,571 $800,000 $20,348,571 $394,538 $22,268,044 Wastewater Funds
451 WASTEWATER REVENUE $20,130,172 $22,559,000 $2,500 $23,579,311 $19,112,361 $11,227,479 $0 $11,227,479 ($12,245,290) $7,884,882 453 WASTEWATER SURPLUS $2,000,000 $0 $2,088,875 $2,088,875 $2,000,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $2,000,000 454 SAN MATEO-FOSTER CITY PUBLIC FINANCING AUTHORITY LOAN ($37,414,690) $0 $2,088,875 $0 ($35,325,815) $2,090,625 $0 $2,090,625 ($1,750) ($37,416,440) 455 CIP-SEWER $174,577,756 $0 $16,000,000 $0 $190,577,756 $0 $20,359,516 $20,359,516 ($4,359,516) $170,218,240 456 WASTEWATER PLANT EXPANSION $0 $2,500 $0 $2,500 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 458 WASTEWATER EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT $3,168,694 $476,101 $0 $0 $3,644,795 $305,000 $0 $305,000 $171,101 $3,339,795 459 WATER INFRASTRUCTURE FINANCE & INNOVATION ACT LOAN ($49,545,163) $66,960,640 $4,228,832 $0 $21,644,309 $66,988,832 $0 $66,988,832 $4,200,640 ($45,344,523) 460 WASTEWATER CONNECTION $680,033 $1,209,560 $0 $0 $1,889,593 $0 $0 $0 $1,209,560 $1,889,593 461 STATE REVOLVING FUND/OTHER BONDS ($33,583,004) $0 $1,261,604 $0 ($32,321,400) $1,261,604 $0 $1,261,604 $0 ($33,583,004) Subtotal Wastewater Funds $80,013,798 $91,207,801 $25,670,686 $25,670,686 $171,221,599 $81,873,540 $20,359,516 $102,233,056 ($11,025,255) $68,988,543 Subtotal Enterprise Funds $101,887,304 $111,950,910 $28,270,686 $28,270,686 $213,838,214 $101,422,111 $21,159,516 $122,581,627 ($10,630,717) $91,256,587 Internal Service Funds
501 VEHICLE REPLACEMENT $6,523,736 $2,181,031 $0 $0 $8,704,767 $2,339,837 $0 $2,339,837 ($158,806) $6,364,930 502 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT $7,850,887 $830,163 $0 $0 $8,681,050 $924,900 $0 $924,900 ($94,737) $7,756,150 503 SELF INSURANCE $1,147,784 $2,162,925 $0 $0 $3,310,709 $1,980,000 $0 $1,980,000 $182,925 $1,330,709 504 COMMUNICATION & INFO SVC $6,748,563 $2,955,171 $0 $0 $9,703,734 $2,780,864 $0 $2,780,864 $174,307 $6,922,870 505 BUILDING MAINTENANCE $10,425,598 $3,784,842 $0 $1,861,400 $12,349,040 $3,657,183 $0 $3,657,183 ($1,733,741) $8,691,857 507 EMPLOYEE BENEFITS LIAB $2,925,754 $297,487 $0 $0 $3,223,241 $231,820 $0 $231,820 $65,667 $2,991,421 508 PEMHCA $6,629,086 $162,915 $0 $0 $6,792,001 $566,314 $0 $566,314 ($403,399) $6,225,687 509 COMPENSATED ABSENCES $3,719,841 $87,975 $0 $0 $3,807,816 $493,029 $0 $493,029 $(405,054) $3,314,787 510 WORKERS COMPENSATION $0 $1,564,082 $0 $0 $1,564,082 $1,180,100 $0 $1,180,100 $383,982 $383,982 Subtotal Internal Service Funds $45,971,249 $14,026,591 $0 $1,861,400 $58,136,440 $14,154,047 $0 $14,154,047 ($1,988,856) $43,982,393 Fiduciary Fund
604 SUCCESSOR AGENCY ($438,920) $309,309 $0 $0 ($129,611) $504,630 $0 $504,630 ($195,321) ($634,241) 608 SAN MATEO CONSOLIDATED FIRE $0 $149,000 $0 $0 $149,000 $149,000 $0 $149,000 $0 $0 Subtotal Fiduciary Fund ($438,920) $458,309 $0 $0 $19,389 $653,630 $0 $653,630 ($195,321) ($634,241) Total All Funds $278,303,478 $216,133,232 $76,558,047 $76,558,047 $494,436,710 $187,848,694 $31,854,779 $219,703,473 ($3,570,240) $274,733,237 Fund
*Available
July 1, 2025
Estimated
Revenues Transfers In Transfers Out Total Available
Operating
Expenditures
Capital
Expenditures
Total
Requirements
Net Change in
Reserves
*Available
June 30, 2026
*Beginning and Ending available resources excludes Capital Assets (except for Fund 455) and Non-Spendable, Restricted, Committed, and/or Assigned Funds, including Prepayments, Inventory, Garbage Stabilization Reserve, and unrealized investment gains/losses.
CITY OF FOSTER CITY / EMID
Summary of Resources and Requirements by Funds
For the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2026
PRELIMINARY BUDGET
City of Foster City's FY 2025-26 Preliminary Budget Page 2
8.1 Attachment 3 - Exhibit to CityEMID Resolution Financial and Personnel Summaries
372
General Fund 001-003
City
Property Taxes in-lieu of Vehicle License Fee $4,288,848 $4,631,493 $2,680,715 Sales Taxes $4,099,600 $4,003,133 $3,992,179
Transient Occupancy Tax $4,698,500 $4,300,000 $4,600,000 Business License Tax $1,890,000 $4,061,000 $4,100,000
Franchise Taxes $1,377,700 $1,377,700 $1,377,700
Real Property Transfer Tax $268,600 $268,600 $304,900
Permits $1,081,140 $2,744,194 $2,721,093
Intergovernmental (POST, SB90, Grants, etc.) $42,000 $42,000 $43,260 Charges for current services $523,366 $651,732 $566,739 Fines and forfeitures $47,400 $47,400 $87,922
Interest $1,350,000 $1,724,305 $1,500,000
Other (Fines, Reimbursement, Street Sweeping, Other) $477,585 $477,585 $491,913 General Fund (City) Subtotal $20,144,739 $24,329,142 $22,466,421 District
Property Taxes $35,476,460 $35,506,460 $36,356,666
Excess ERAF $2,800,000 $3,600,000 $3,600,000
Intergovernmental $98,000 $98,000 $100,940
Rentals $1,063,700 $1,063,700 $1,030,686
Interest $213,900 $373,248 $213,900
General Fund (District) Subtotal $39,652,060 $40,641,408 $41,302,192 Special Recreation
Program Revenues $1,640,589 $1,640,589 $1,781,431
Rents and Concessions $500,000 $500,000 $549,121
General Fund (Special Recreation) Subtotal $2,140,589 $2,140,589 $2,330,552 total general fund 001-003 $61,937,388 $67,111,139 $66,099,165 General Fund 005-012
City
Community Benefits Program $20,000 $20,000 $20,000
Intergovernmental (D.A.R.E.) $1,000 $1,000 $13,030
Solar Incentive Grant Program $1,800 $1,800 $1,854
Employee Rental Assistance Program $1,450 $1,450 $1,494 Asset Seizure Program $1,700 $1,700 $1,751
Pension Sustainability Fund $3,300 $3,300 $3,399
Facilities Replacement Fund $75,700 $75,700 $77,971
Sustainable Foster City Fund $4,700 $4,700 $4,841
General Fund 005-012 (City) Subtotal $109,650 $109,650 $124,340 total general fund 005-012 $109,650 $109,650 $124,340
Total General Fund (ALL) $62,047,038 $67,220,789 $66,223,505 (Continued on next page)
2024-25 2025-26
Approved Projected Budget
City of Foster City / Estero Municipal Improvement District Revenue by Source
For the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2026
City of Foster City's FY 2025-26 Preliminary Budget Page 3
8.1 Attachment 3 - Exhibit to CityEMID Resolution Financial and Personnel Summaries
373
Special Revenue Funds
Traffic Safety
Vehicle Code Fines $40,000 $40,000 $41,200
Interest $0 $0 $0
Traffic Safety Subtotal $40,000 $40,000 $41,200
Measure A
Sales Taxes $936,400 $936,400 $964,492
Interest $125,600 $125,600 $125,600
Measure A Subtotal $1,062,000 $1,062,000 $1,090,092
Gas Tax (2030; 2105 - 2107.5; 2103 Gas Tax Swap)
Gas Tax (2105-2107.5) $609,000 $609,000 $627,270
Gas Tax (2103) $299,229 $299,229 $308,206
Interest $13,900 $13,900 $14,317
Gas Tax (2030; 2105-2107.5; 2103 Gas Tax Swap) Subtotal $922,129 $922,129 $949,793 Park In-Lieu Fees
Developer Fees $0 $0 $0
Interest $100,000 $100,000 $100,000
Park In-Lieu Fees Subtotal $100,000 $100,000 $100,000
Measure M
Vehicle License Fees $124,100 $124,100 $127,823
Measure M Subtotal $124,100 $124,100 $127,823
SLESF/COPS Grant
Grant $165,000 $165,000 $169,950
SLESF/COPS Subtotal $165,000 $165,000 $169,950
CalOpps.org
Fees for Services $545,000 $545,000 $445,000
Interest $19,400 $19,400 $19,982
CalOpps.org Subtotal $564,400 $564,400 $464,982
Foster City Foundation
Grants and Donations $40,200 $40,200 $21,000
Foster City Foundation Subtotal $40,200 $40,200 $21,000 SB1 Road Maintenance and Rehabilitation
Road Maintenance and Rehabilitation Account $874,600 $874,600 $900,838 Interest $28,800 $28,800 $29,664
SB1 Road Maintenance and Rehabilitation Fund Subtotal $903,400 $903,400 $930,502 Low- and Moderate-Income Housing Fund (LMIHF)
Loan Payment $0 $0 $0
Rentals $61,500 $61,500 $63,345
Interest $81,100 $81,100 $83,533
LMIHF Fund Subtotal $142,600 $142,600 $146,878
City Affordable Housing Fund
Loan Repayment $0 $0 $0
Other $0 $0 $35,000
Interest $30,450 $30,450 $31,364
City Affordable Housing Fund Subtotal $30,450 $30,450 $66,364 (Continued on next page)
2024-25 2025-26
Approved Projected Budget
City of Foster City / Estero Municipal Improvement District Revenue by Source
For the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2026
(Continued from previous page)
City of Foster City's FY 2025-26 Preliminary Budget Page 4
8.1 Attachment 3 - Exhibit to CityEMID Resolution Financial and Personnel Summaries
374
General Plan Maintenance Fund
Other $130,000 $130,000 $1,136,522
Interest $59,850 $59,850 $61,646
General Plan Maintenance Fund Subtotal $189,850 $189,850 $1,198,168 Construction & Demo Fund
Other $37,900 $37,900 $39,037
Interest $35,900 $35,900 $36,977
Construction & Demo Fund Subtotal $73,800 $73,800 $76,014 Technology Maintenance Fund
Other $31,940 $31,940 $203,773
Interest $7,000 $7,000 $7,210
Technology Maintenance Fund Subtotal $38,940 $38,940 $210,983 SB 1186 Fund
Other $5,500 $5,500 $5,665
Interest $1,350 $1,350 $1,391
SB 1186 Fund Subtotal $6,850 $6,850 $7,056
SMIP Fund
Other $420 $420 $433
Interest $200 $200 $206
SMIP Fund Subtotal $620 $620 $639
CRV Grant Fund
Other $8,500 $8,500 $8,755
Interest $240 $240 $247
CRV Grant Fund Subtotal $8,740 $8,740 $9,002
Curbside Recycling Fund
Other $15,000 $15,000 $15,450
Interest $8,550 $8,550 $8,807
Curbside Recycling Fund Subtotal $23,550 $23,550 $24,257 Green Building Fees Fund
Other $700 $700 $721
Interest $200 $200 $206
Green Building Fees Fund Subtotal $900 $900 $927
Measure W Fund
Sales Taxes $454,100 $454,100 $467,723
Interest $32,400 $32,400 $33,372
Measure W Fund Subtotal $486,500 $486,500 $501,095
Affordable Housing Fund-Commercial Linkage Fees Fund
Charges for current services $0 $0 $7,831,386
Interest $16,400 $16,400 $16,892
Affordable Housing Fund-Commercial Linkage Fees Fund Subtotal $16,400 $16,400 $7,848,278 Tenant Relocation Assistance Fund
Interest $3,600 $3,600 $3,708
Tenant Relocation Assistance Fund Subtotal $3,600 $3,600 $3,708 (Continued on next page)
2024-25 2025-26
Approved Projected Budget
City of Foster City / Estero Municipal Improvement District Revenue by Source
For the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2026
(Continued from previous page)
City of Foster City's FY 2025-26 Preliminary Budget Page 5
8.1 Attachment 3 - Exhibit to CityEMID Resolution Financial and Personnel Summaries
375
Workforce Housing Fund
Rentals $631,551 $631,551 $622,488
Other $38,811 $38,811 $32,889
Interest $5,900 $5,900 $6,018
Workforce Housing Fund Subtotal $676,262 $676,262 $661,395 Workforce Housing - Equipment Replacement Fund
ISF Charges $28,340 $28,340 $29,190
Interest $560 $560 $577
Workforce Housing - Equipment Replacement Fund Subtotal $28,900 $28,900 $29,767 SB1383 Implementation Fund
Interest $500 $500 $515
SB1383 Implementation Subtotal $500 $500 $515
Impact Fees - Parks Facilities
Charges for current services $0 $0 $915,952
Interest $0 $0 $0
Impact Fees - Parks Facilities Subtotal $0 $0 $915,952
Impact Fees - Public Safety
Charges for current services $0 $0 $96,684
Interest $0 $0 $0
Impact Fees - Public Safety Subtotal $0 $0 $96,684
Impact Fees - Transportation
Charges for current services $0 $0 $310,405
Interest $0 $0 $0
Impact Fees - Transportation Subtotal $0 $0 $310,405
Local Housing Trust Fund
Intergovernmental $500,000 $0 $0
Local Housing Trust Fund Subtotal $500,000 $0 $0
total special revenue funds $6,149,691 $5,649,691 $16,003,429 Debt Services Fund
City - GO Bond 2020
Property Taxes $4,085,000 $4,085,000 $4,207,550
Interest $4,500 $4,500 $4,635
City Debt Services Subtotal $4,089,500 $4,089,500 $4,212,185 City - GO Bond 2023
Property Taxes $240,294 $240,294 $319,300
Interest $500 $500 $515
City Debt Services Subtotal $240,794 $240,794 $319,815
total debt services fund $4,330,294 $4,330,294 $4,532,000 (Continued on next page)
2024-25 2025-26
Approved Projected Budget
City of Foster City / Estero Municipal Improvement District Revenue by Source
For the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2026
(Continued from previous page)
City of Foster City's FY 2025-26 Preliminary Budget Page 6
8.1 Attachment 3 - Exhibit to CityEMID Resolution Financial and Personnel Summaries
376
Capital Projects Fund
City Capital Projects
Other $15,250 $15,250 $15,708
Interest $2,877,400 $2,877,400 $1,450,000
City Capital Projects Subtotal $2,892,650 $2,892,650 $1,465,708 Capital Asset Acquisition and Replacement Fund
Loans Receivable Payments $708,255 $708,255 $755,754
Interest $267,000 $730,000 $717,026
Capital Asset Acquisition and Replacement Subtotal $975,255 $1,438,255 $1,472,780 total capital projects fund $3,867,905 $4,330,905 $2,938,488 Enterprise Funds
Water Revenue
User Charges $18,109,000 $18,109,000 $19,174,000
Interest $650,000 $650,000 $317,000
Sustainability Fund Revenues $200,000 $200,000 $250,000 Water Revenue Subtotal $18,959,000 $18,959,000 $19,741,000 Water Equipment Replacement
Equipment Rental $456,767 $456,767 $470,470
Water Equipment Replacement Subtotal $456,767 $456,767 $470,470 Water Connection
Connection Fees $0 $0 $497,855
Interest $32,800 $32,800 $33,784
Water Connection Subtotal $32,800 $32,800 $531,639
Wastewater Revenue
User Charges $21,284,000 $21,284,000 $21,558,000
Other $0 $0 $1,000
Interest $1,120,000 $1,120,000 $1,000,000
Wastewater Revenue Subtotal $22,404,000 $22,404,000 $22,559,000 Wastewater Expansion
Other $636 $636 $2,500
Wastewater Expansion Subtotal $636 $636 $2,500
Wastewater Equipment Replacement
Equipment Rental $462,234 $462,234 $476,101
Wastewater Equipment Replacement Subtotal $462,234 $462,234 $476,101 Water Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act (WIFIA) Financing Proceeds $0 $0 $66,860,640
Interest $1,900,000 $1,900,000 $100,000
Water Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act (WIFIA) Subtotal $1,900,000 $1,900,000 $66,960,640 Wastewater Connection
Connection Fees $8,928,037 $254,365 $1,200,496
Interest $8,800 $8,800 $9,064
Wastewater Connection Subtotal $8,936,837 $263,165 $1,209,560 total enterprise funds $53,152,274 $44,478,602 $111,950,910 (Continued on next page)
2024-25 2025-26
Approved Projected Budget
City of Foster City / Estero Municipal Improvement District Revenue by Source
For the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2026
(Continued from previous page)
City of Foster City's FY 2025-26 Preliminary Budget Page 7
8.1 Attachment 3 - Exhibit to CityEMID Resolution Financial and Personnel Summaries
377
Internal Service Funds
Vehicle Replacement
Vehicle Replacement Charges $2,028,234 $2,028,234 $2,089,081 Interest $122,600 $122,600 $91,950
Vehicle Replacement Subtotal $2,150,834 $2,150,834 $2,181,031 Equipment Replacement
Equipment Rental $638,362 $638,362 $657,513
Interest $230,200 $230,200 $172,650
Equipment Replacement Subtotal $868,562 $868,562 $830,163 Self-Insurance
Insurance Charges $2,081,723 $2,081,723 $2,144,175
Interest $25,000 $25,000 $18,750
Self-Insurance Subtotal $2,106,723 $2,106,723 $2,162,925 Information Technology
User Charges $2,697,950 $2,697,950 $2,778,889
Other $40,662 $40,662 $41,882
Interest $179,200 $179,200 $134,400
Information Technology Subtotal $2,917,812 $2,917,812 $2,955,171 Building Maintenance
User Charges $3,510,769 $3,510,769 $3,616,092
Interest $225,000 $225,000 $168,750
Building Maintenance Subtotal $3,735,769 $3,735,769 $3,784,842 Longevity Recognition Benefits
Longevity Benefits Charges $222,720 $222,720 $229,402
Interest $90,780 $90,780 $68,085
Longevity Recognition Benefits Subtotal $313,500 $313,500 $297,487 PEMHCA Benefits Plan
PEMHCA Benefits Charges $257,760 $257,760 $0
Interest $217,220 $217,220 $162,915
PEMHCA Benefits Plan Subtotal $474,980 $474,980 $162,915 Compensated Absences
Employer Contributions $0 $0 $0
Interest $117,300 $117,300 $87,975
Compensated Absences Subtotal $117,300 $117,300 $87,975 Workers Compensation
Workers Compensation Charges $0 $0 $1,563,882
Interest $0 $0 $200
Workers Compensation Subtotal $0 $0 $1,564,082
total internal service funds $12,685,480 $12,685,480 $14,026,591 (Continued on next page)
2024-25 2025-26
Approved Projected Budget
City of Foster City / Estero Municipal Improvement District Revenue by Source
For the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2026
(Continued from previous page)
City of Foster City's FY 2025-26 Preliminary Budget Page 8
8.1 Attachment 3 - Exhibit to CityEMID Resolution Financial and Personnel Summaries
378
Fiduciary Fund
Successor Agency of Community Development Agency
Property, Current Secured $296,500 $296,500 $305,395
Interest $3,800 $3,800 $3,914
Successor Agency - Redevelopment Property Tax Trust Subtotal $300,300 $300,300 $309,309 San Mateo Consolidated Fire
Other $149,000 $149,000 $149,000
San Mateo Consolidated Fire Subtotal $149,000 $149,000 $149,000 total fiduciary funds $449,300 $449,300 $458,309
TOTAL REVENUE ALL FUNDS $142,681,982 $139,145,061 $216,133,232 2024-25 2025-26
Approved Projected Budget
City of Foster City / Estero Municipal Improvement District Revenue by Source
For the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2026
(Continued from previous page)
City of Foster City's FY 2025-26 Preliminary Budget Page 9
8.1 Attachment 3 - Exhibit to CityEMID Resolution Financial and Personnel Summaries
379
City of Foster City / Estero Municipal Improvement District Appropriations by Fund
For the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2026
Total Appropriations: $219,703,473
General Fund (001-003); $64,885,243; 29.53%
General Fund (005-012); $40,397; 0.02%
Special Revenue Funds; $5,040,978; 2.29%
Debt Service Funds; $4,119,288; 1.88%
Capital Improvements Projects; $8,228,263; 3.75%
Enterprise Funds; $122,581,627; 55.79%
Agency Fund; $653,630; 0.30%
Internal Service Funds; $14,154,047; 6.44%
General Fund (001-003) General Fund (005-012) Special Revenue Funds Debt Service Funds Capital Improvements ProjectsLevee Project Fund Enterprise Funds Agency Fund Internal Service Funds
City of Foster City's FY 2025-26 Preliminary Budget Page 10
8.1 Attachment 3 - Exhibit to CityEMID Resolution Financial and Personnel Summaries
380
City of Foster City, California / Estero Municipal Improvement District Summary of Appropriations by Fund
Annual Appropriations for the Year Ending June 30, 2026 2024-25 2024-25 2025-26
APPROVED PROJECTED REQUESTED
GENERAL FUND (001-003) $61,771,027 $61,667,827 $64,885,243 GENERAL FUND (005-012) $238,163 $370,532 $40,397
TRAFFIC SAFETY $40,000 $40,000 $40,000
MEASURE A $1,000,000 $4,652,153 $0
GAS TAX (2105-2107) $1,109,000 $1,109,000 $1,127,270
PARK IN-LIEU FEES $745,000 $745,000 $0
SLESF/COPS GRANT $100,000 $100,000 $100,000
CALOPPS.ORG $466,040 $716,349 $472,120
FOSTER CITY FOUNDATION $85,000 $85,000 $88,000
SB1 ROAD MAINTENANCE AND REHABILITATION $750,000 $1,200,000 $1,500,000 LMIHAF-HOUSING SUCCESSOR $156,384 $173,884 $186,500
CITY AFFORDABLE HOUSING FUND $0 $0 $5,224
GENERAL PLAN MAINTENANCE FUND $595,350 $876,162 $409,512 CONSTRUCTION AND DEMOLITION FUND $101,500 $104,500 $106,500 TECHNOLOGY MAINTENANCE FUND $105,485 $105,485 $105,485
SB 1186 FUND $2,300 $2,300 $2,300
SMIP FEE FUND $500 $500 $500
CRV GRANT FUND $14,000 $14,000 $13,000
CURBSIDE RECYCLING FEE FUND $25,000 $25,000 $25,000
GREEN BUILDING FEE FUND $500 $500 $500
MEASURE W $1,000,000 $1,575,000 $0
AFFORDABLE HOUSING-COMMERCIAL LINKAGE FEES $110,000 $110,000 $10,000 WORKFORCE HOUSING $341,161 $357,208 $375,088
SB1383 IMPLEMENTATION $92,779 $92,779 $6,979
IMPACT FEE - PARKS FACILITIES $560,300 $560,300 $467,000 LOCAL HOUSING TRUST $509,860 $509,860 $0
DEBT SERVICES FUND $3,904,188 $3,904,188 $3,904,988
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS $8,398,104 $8,998,104 $8,228,263 DSF-231 $214,100 $214,100 $214,300
LEVEE PROJECT FUND $0 $2,118,579 $0
WATER $18,631,468 $19,411,358 $20,348,571
WASTEWATER $27,336,054 $27,342,572 $102,233,056
VEHICLE REPLACEMENT $2,611,527 $2,619,617 $2,339,837
EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT $616,300 $745,796 $924,900
SELF INSURANCE $2,007,000 $2,007,000 $1,980,000
INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY $2,511,199 $3,022,579 $2,780,864 BUILDING MAINTENANCE $4,921,120 $4,965,436 $3,657,183
LONGEVITY RECOGNITION BENEFITS $232,720 $232,720 $231,820 PEMHCA BENEFITS PLAN $267,760 $554,054 $566,314
COMPENSATED ABSENCES $514,834 $514,834 $493,029
WORKERS COMPENSATION $0 $0 $1,180,100
SUCCESSOR AGENCY (SA) OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
AGENCY $625,392 $625,392 $504,630
SAN MATEO CONSOLIDATED FIRE $149,000 $149,000 $149,000
TOTAL FOR CITY / EMID $142,860,115 $152,618,668 $219,703,473 City of Foster City's FY 2025-26 Preliminary Budget Page 11
8.1 Attachment 3 - Exhibit to CityEMID Resolution Financial and Personnel Summaries
381
City of Foster City, California / Estero Municipal Improvement District Summary of Operating Expenditures and Capital Expenditures by Category Annual Operating Budget Appropriations For the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2026 2024-25 2024-25 2025-26
APPROVED PROJECTED REQUESTED
EMPLOYEE SERVICES $49,764,155 $ 49,065,612 $51,812,286
SERVICES AND SUPPLIES $52,934,124 $ 65,551,124 $118,259,346 CAPITAL OUTLAY $2,137,250 $ 3,372,346 $2,783,804
INTERNAL SERVICES $12,334,519 $ 12,334,519 $14,993,258
REALLOCATIONS $0 $0 $0
TOTAL OPERATING EXPENDITURES $117,170,048 $130,323,601 $187,848,694 CAPITAL EXPENDITURES $25,690,067 $22,295,067 $31,854,779 TOTAL CITY / EMID / SA EXPENDITURES $142,860,115 $152,618,668 $219,703,473 City of Foster City's FY 2025-26 Preliminary Budget Page 12
8.1 Attachment 3 - Exhibit to CityEMID Resolution Financial and Personnel Summaries
382
City of Foster City
General Fund Operating Expenditures by Department (001-012) For the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2026
Total General Fund Operating Expenditures: $64,925,640
COUNCIL/BOARD: $546,534: 0.84%
CITY/DISTRICT MANAGER: $2,065,778: 3.18%
COMMUNICATIONS/CITY CLERK: $1,321,187: 2.04%
CITY ATTORNEY: $684,554: 1.05%
ADMINISTRATIVE SVCS: $1,926,240: 2.97%
FINANCIAL SERVICES: $1,893,929: 2.92%
POLICE: $20,023,154: 30.84%
FIRE: $13,527,093: 20.83%
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT: $4,724,422: 7.28%
PARKS & RECREATION: $11,630,139: 17.91%
PUBLIC WORKS: $5,669,550: 8.73%
LIBRARY SERVICES: $607,560: 0.94%
PROPERTY TAX ADMINISTRATION: $305,500: 0.47%
COUNCIL/BOARD CITY/DISTRICT MANAGER
COMMUNICATIONS/CITY CLERK CITY ATTORNEY
ADMINISTRATIVE SVCS FINANCIAL SERVICES
POLICE FIRE
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PARKS & RECREATION
PUBLIC WORKS LIBRARY SERVICES
PROPERTY TAX ADMINISTRATION
City of Foster City's FY 2025-26 Preliminary Budget Page 13
8.1 Attachment 3 - Exhibit to CityEMID Resolution Financial and Personnel Summaries
383
City of Foster City, California / Estero Municipal Improvement District Summary of General Fund Appropriations (001-003)
Annual Operating Budget Appropriations For the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2026 2024-25 2024-25 2025-26
DEPARTMENT APPROVED PROJECTED REQUESTED
COUNCIL/BOARD $501,844 $501,844 $546,534
CITY/DISTRICT MANAGER $1,901,526 $1,839,046 $2,065,778
COMMUNICATIONS/CITY CLERK $1,355,948 $1,390,110 $1,321,187 CITY ATTORNEY $677,968 $677,968 $684,554
ADMINISTRATIVE SVCS $2,262,391 $2,227,159 $1,926,240
FINANCIAL SERVICES $1,816,099 $1,895,108 $1,893,929
PARKS & RECREATION $11,354,928 $11,344,220 $11,630,139
POLICE $18,726,067 $18,332,502 $20,006,457
FIRE $12,531,604 $12,531,604 $13,527,093
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT $4,453,562 $4,767,980 $4,715,722
PUBLIC WORKS $5,234,983 $5,206,179 $5,654,550
LIBRARY SERVICES $547,507 $547,507 $607,560
PROPERTY TAX ADMINISTRATION $406,600 $406,600 $305,500
TOTAL GENERAL FUND APPROPRIATIONS $61,771,027 $61,667,827 $64,885,243 2024-25 2024-25 2025-26
EXPENDITURES BY CATEGORY APPROVED PROJECTED REQUESTED
EMPLOYEE SERVICES $39,196,741 $38,194,263 $40,297,001
SERVICES AND SUPPLIES $17,618,282 $18,402,560 $19,043,231 CAPITAL OUTLAY $0 $115,000 $33,500
INTERNAL SERVICES $8,097,964 $8,097,964 $8,702,933
REALLOCATIONS ($3,141,960) ($3,141,960) ($3,191,422)
TOTAL OPERATING EXPENDITURES $61,771,027 $61,667,827 $64,885,243 City of Foster City's FY 2025-26 Preliminary Budget Page 14
8.1 Attachment 3 - Exhibit to CityEMID Resolution Financial and Personnel Summaries
384
City of Foster City, California / Estero Municipal Improvement District Summary of General Fund Appropriations (005-012)
Annual Operating Budget Appropriations For the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2026 2024-25 2024-25 2025-26
DEPARTMENT APPROVED PROJECTED REQUESTED
COUNCIL/BOARD $0 $0 $0
CITY/DISTRICT MANAGER $162,000 $183,231 $0
COMMUNICATIONS/CITY CLERK $0 $0 $0
CITY ATTORNEY $0 $0 $0
HUMAN RESOURCES $0 $0 $0
FINANCIAL SERVICES $0 $0 $0
POLICE $42,463 $42,463 $16,697
FIRE $0 $0 $0
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT $8,700 $119,838 $8,700
PUBLIC WORKS $25,000 $25,000 $15,000
LIBRARY SERVICES $0 $0 $0
PROPERTY TAX ADMINISTRATION $0 $0 $0
TOTAL GENERAL FUND APPROPRIATIONS $238,163 $370,532 $40,397 2024-25 2024-25 2025-26
EXPENDITURES BY CATEGORY APPROVED PROJECTED REQUESTED
EMPLOYEE SERVICES $0 $0 $0
SERVICES AND SUPPLIES $238,163 $370,532 $40,397
CAPITAL OUTLAY $0 $0 $0
INTERNAL SERVICES $0 $0 $0
REALLOCATIONS $0 $0 $0
TOTAL OPERATING EXPENDITURES $238,163 $370,532 $40,397
City of Foster City's FY 2025-26 Preliminary Budget Page 15
8.1 Attachment 3 - Exhibit to CityEMID Resolution Financial and Personnel Summaries
385
City of Foster City / Estero Municipal Improvement District Personnel Summary - Full-Time Employees
For the Fiscal Years Ended June 30, 2025 to 2026
Department Prior Years Budget
2023-24 2024-25 2025-26
City / District Manager 4.00 5.00 4.00
Communications/City Clerk 5.00 5.00 5.00
Community Development 18.00 17.00 17.00
Financial Services/City Treasurer 9.00 9.00 9.00
Administrative Services 9.00 9.00 9.00
Parks and Recreation 30.00 30.00 30.00
Police 55.00 55.00 56.00
Public Works 47.00 49.00 51.00
Totals 177.00 179.00 181.00
Personnel Changes FY 2025-26
• City/District Manager:
◦ Remove Deputy City Manager.
• Communications/City Clerk :
◦ None.
• Community Development :
◦ Upgrade Housing Coordinator to Housing and Sustainability Manager. • Financial Services/City Treasurer:
◦ Upgrade (1) Sr. Accounting Specialist to Accountant.
• Administrative Services:
◦ Upgrade Administrative Assistant to Human Resource Technician. • Parks and Recreation:
◦ None.
• Police:
◦ One overhire Police Officer for FY 2025-26 only.
• Public Works:
◦ Add One (1) Associate Engineer.
◦ Add One (1) Connection Control Coordinator.
City of Foster City's FY 2025-26 Preliminary Budget Page 16
8.1 Attachment 3 - Exhibit to CityEMID Resolution Financial and Personnel Summaries
386
TABLE C
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT (CIP) PLAN (FISCAL YEAR 2025-26)
PROJECT NAME
Funding
Source*
Total Project
Cost
Prior Years'
Funding FY 2025-26
CIP City
(Fund 301)
Developer
Deposits (4)
Impact Fees -
Park Facility
(Fund 142)
Gas Tax
2103
(Fund 103)
SB1
(FUND
119)
Water CIP
(Fund 405)
Wastewtr
CIP (Fund
455)
BUILDING PROJECTS
BD-02 (NEW CIP) INSTALL ELECTRIC
VEHICLE CHARGING STATIONS (FY
2025-2026)
CC $1,000,000 $0 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 TOTAL BUILDING PROJECTS 1 $1,000,000 $0 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
PARKS PROJECTS
PK-01 (CIP 301-678) RECREATION CENTER
REBUILD (FY 2017-2018)
PIF $61,501,770 $61,034,770 $467,000 $0 $0 $467,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 TOTAL PARKS PROJECTS 1 $61,501,770 $61,034,770 $467,000 $0 $0 $467,000 $0 $0 $0 $0
STORMWATER/LAGOON PROJECTS
SW-01 (CIP 301-717) LAGOON PUMP STATION
SEISMIC REHABILITATION AND CAPACITY
ENHANCEMENT PROJECT (NEW NAME) (FY
2023-2024)
CC $9,620,000 $2,670,000 $6,950,000 $6,950,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 SW-02 (CIP 301-721) LAGOON INTAKE
STRUCTURE REHABILITATION (FY 2024-2025)
CC $1,550,000 $1,500,000 $50,000 $50,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 TOTAL STORMWATER/LAGOON PROJECTS 2 $11,170,000 $4,170,000 $7,000,000 $7,000,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
STREETS/TRAFFIC PROJECTS
ST-02 (NEW CIP) STREET REHABILITATION
(FY 2025-2026)
GT/SB1/
DD
$2,228,263 $0 $2,228,263 $0 $228,263 $0 $500,000 $1,500,000 $0 $0 TOTAL STREETS/TRAFFIC PROJECTS 1 $2,228,263 $0 $2,228,263 $0 $228,263 $0 $500,000 $1,500,000 $0 $0
WATER PROJECTS
WA-01 (CIP 405-723) WATER MAIN
CONDITION ASSESSMENT (FY 2024-2025)
WCF $750,000 $250,000 $500,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $500,000 $0 WA-02 (NEW CIP) PERMANENT EMERGENCY
BYPASS TRANSMISSION MAIN ON E. THIRD
AVE. (FY 2025-2026)
WCF $300,000 $0 $300,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $300,000 $0
TOTAL WATER PROJECTS 2 $1,050,000 $250,000 $800,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $800,000 $0
WASTEWATER PROJECTS
WW-01 (CIP 455-652) WASTEWATER
TREATMENT PLANT MASTER PLAN
IMPROVEMENTS (FY 2015-2016)
CWW $172,478,998 $162,519,482 $9,959,516 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $9,959,516 WW-02 (CIP 455-705) EMERGENCY
GENERATOR REPLACEMENTS (FY 2021-2022)
CWW $6,200,000 $4,200,000 $2,000,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $2,000,000 WW-03 (CIP 455-710) SHELL BRIDGE
SANITARY SEWER FORCE MAIN
REHABILITATION (FY 2022-2023)
CWW $1,500,000 $1,000,000 $500,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $500,000 WW-04 (CIP 455-719) SANITARY SEWER LIFT
STATION IMPROVEMENTS - PHASE 6 (FY
2023-2024)
CWW $8,500,000 $600,000 $7,900,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $7,900,000 TOTAL WASTEWATER PROJECTS 4 $188,678,998 $168,319,482 $20,359,516 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $20,359,516 GRAND TOTAL 11 $265,629,031 $233,774,252 $31,854,779 $8,000,000 $228,263 $467,000 $500,000 $1,500,000 $800,000 $20,359,516 *BMF=Building Maintenance Fund; CC=CIP City; CW=CIP Water; CWW=CIP Wastewater; CWW-ERF= Wastewater Equipment Replacement Fund; DD=Developers Deposit; ERF=Equipment Replacement Fund; GT=Gas Tax (2103); MA=Measure A; MM=Measure M; MW=Measure W; SB 1 = Road Maintenance & Rehab; PIF = Park Facility Impact Fees; PIL = Park-In-Lieu; TIF = Transportation Impact Fees; WCF=Water Connection Fees; WWCF=Wastewater Connection Fees
City of Foster City's FY 2025-26 Preliminary Budget Page 17
8.1 Attachment 3 - Exhibit to CityEMID Resolution Financial and Personnel Summaries
387
City of Foster City / Estero Municipal Improvement District Schedule of Fund Balance Transfers
For the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2026
Transfers Out Fund
# Transfer In Fund 001 002 129 401 451 453 456 505 Totals 1 001 GENERAL FUND $0 $40,616,307 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $40,616,307 2 003 GENERAL FUND-SPECIAL
RECREATION $759,654 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $759,654
3 012 SUSTAINABLE FOSTER CITY $0 $0 $50,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $50,000 4 301 CAPITAL INVESTMENT-CITY $5,000,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,861,400 $6,861,400 5 405 CAPITAL INVESTMENT-WATER $0 $0 $0 $2,600,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $2,600,000 6 451 WASTEWATER REVENUE $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $2,500 $0 $2,500 7 453 WASTEWATER RATE
STABLIZATION FUND $0 $0 $0 $0 $2,088,875 $0 $0 $0 $2,088,875 8 454 SM-FC PFA LOAN FUND* $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $2,088,875 $0 $0 $2,088,875 9 455 CAPITAL INVESTMENT-
WASTEWATER $0 $0 $0 $0 $16,000,000 $0 $0 $0 $16,000,000 10 459 WIFIA* $0 $0 $0 $0 $4,228,832 $0 $0 $0 $4,228,832 11 461 SRF LOAN* $0 $0 $0 $0 1,261,604 $0 $0 $0 $1,261,604 Totals $5,759,654 $40,616,307 $50,000 $2,600,000 $23,579,311 $2,088,875 $2,500 $1,861,400 $76,558,047 *SRF = State Revolving Fund; WIFIA = Water Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act Loan Fund 002 - General Fund - District; Fund 129 - Construction & Demolition; Fund 137 - Commercial Linkage Fee; Fund 401 - Water Revenue; Fund 456 - Wastewater Plant Expansion; Fund 505 - Building Maintenance Footnotes:
1. Transfer of District Surplus to General Fund 001 $40,616,307.
2. Transfers to subsidize Special Recreation Fund $759,654.
3. Annual transfer to General Fund Sustainable Foster City Fund $50,000.
4. Set aside funds for long-term Capital Improvement Projects $5,000,000 & transfer $1,861,400 from Fund 505 to CIP 301-678
5. Transfers to set aside funds for Long-Term CIP Projects in the Water Capital Investment Fund $2,600,000.
6. Transfers to transfers to Wastewater Revenue $2,500.
7. Set aside funds for Wastewater Rate Stabilization Fund $2,088,875.
8. Transfers to SM-FC PFA debt service $2,088,875.
9. Set aside funds for Long-Term CIP Projects in the Wastewater Capital Investment Fund $16,000,000.
10. Set aside funds for debt service, fiscal agent fees and expenses $4,228,832.
11. Set aside funds for debt service, fiscal agent fees and expenses $1,261,604.
City of Foster City's FY 2025-26 Preliminary Budget Page 18
8.1 Attachment 3 - Exhibit to CityEMID Resolution Financial and Personnel Summaries
388
DATE: June 16, 2025
TO: Mayor and Members of the Foster City Council
VIA: Stefan Chatwin, City Manager
Marlene Subhashini, Assistant City Manager
FROM: Andrew Brozyna, Public Works Director
Laura Galli, Engineering Manager
Francine Magno, Senior Civil Engineer
DEPARTMENT: Public Works
SUBJECT: ADOPTION OF COUNTY WIDE AND FOSTER CITY LOCAL
ROADWAY SAFETY PLAN (LRSP) AND ACCOMPANYING
VISION ZERO GOAL
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the City Council of the City of Foster City adopt the attached resolution accepting the Countywide and Foster City Local Roadway Safety Plan (LRSP) and accompanying Vision Zero Goal.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
In March 2023, the City/County Association of Governments of San Mateo County (C/CAG) Board of Directors hired Kittelson & Associates (Kittelson) to develop a San Mateo Countywide LRSP, which included a standalone chapter for Foster City. An LRSP identifies and analyzes roadway safety needs and develops a prioritized list of safety improvements. It establishes goals to reduce and eventually eliminate traffic deaths and serious injuries using a data-driven, multi-disciplinary approach that increases safe mobility for all. The Traffic Review Committee (TRC) met to review and discuss the LRSP at the May 29, 2025 regular meeting. The TRC recommends the City Council adopt the Countywide and Local Roadway Safety Plan, including the accompanying Vision Zero Goal.
8.2 8.2 Staff Report
389
City Council’s approval of the attached resolution will adopt the Countywide and Foster City LRSP as a guiding document to address safety needs and render the City eligible for future grant funding.
BACKGROUND
On January 26, 2022, the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) adopted Resolution No. 4505 outlining the One Bay Area 3 (OBAG 3) County & Local Program’s policies and procedures for the selection of projects to be funded with Surface Transportation Planning, Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement Program funds. A requirement to maintain eligibility for OBAG 3 funding is that jurisdictions must have an LRSP or equivalent safety plan in place. As a result, C/CAG initiated a procurement process to hire a firm to prepare an LRSP for San Mateo County and for the 10 County jurisdictions lacking an existing plan (including Foster City). The C/CAG Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) provided review and input into the RFP prior to solicitation.
On March 9, 2023, the C/CAG Board of Directors awarded an agreement to Kittelson for the preparation of the LRSP and development began in Spring 2023. The project team assembled a working advisory group comprised of city staff from various San Mateo County jurisdictions (including Foster City staff), public health staff, public safety, and other community partners to inform the development of the plan. The advisory group met three times throughout the course of the plan’s development. The advisory group played an integral part in identifying priorities, provided a local context, and reviewed various stages of the plan development. In addition, the project team held various public engagement events across the County in August 2023, December 2023, and January 2024 to receive feedback on areas of safety concern from the public. For Foster City, outreach took place at the City’s Summer Days event in August 2023.
Draft versions of the LRSP were presented to the CCAG TAC and Board on March 21, 2024, and April 11, 2024, respectively. Input and comments provided by each body were incorporated into the final plans. The C/CAG TAC and Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Committee (BPAC) recommended approval of the Final San Mateo Countywide LRSP at their May 16 and May 23, 2024, meetings, respectively. On June 13, 2024, the C/CAG Board of Directors approved Resolution 24-47 adopting the Final San Mateo Countywide LRSP and accompanying Vision Zero Goal.
ANALYSIS
Following the C/CAG Board of Directors adoption of the Final San Mateo Countywide LRSP, it was anticipated that the 10 cities (Atherton, Belmont, Brisbane, Colma, East Palo Alto, Foster City, Half Moon Bay, Hillsborough, San Carlos, and Woodside) that were provided individual plans through the Countywide LRSP process would locally adopt separate resolutions in order to become eligible for future USDOT, Caltrans, and other safety funding opportunities.
8.2 8.2 Staff Report
390
The adoption of the LRSP supports Foster City’s desire to improve roadway safety. The LRSP identifies existing conditions of the roadway network and analyzes roadway safety needs. Through this analysis, the LRSP develops a framework for systematic safety improvements in the areas of engineering, enforcement, education, and emergency response. An LRSP offers a proactive approach to addressing safety needs and demonstrates an agency’s responsiveness to safety challenges. The LRSP also contributes to the California Strategic Highway Safety Plan (SHSP), which aims to reduce traffic fatalities and serious injuries across the State’s roadways.
The adoption of the Countywide and the Foster City LRSP includes the adoption of the County’s accompanying Vision Zero Goal. A Vision Zero Goal establishes a desired future condition that maintains a safe transportation system, achievable with collaboration efforts amongst all agencies within the County to eliminate death and severe injury on county and local roads. Foster City’s Vision Zero Goal is to “Eliminate all traffic fatalities and reduce the number of non-fatal crashes by 50% by 2050 as part of a broader effort to promote roadway safety for Foster City’s employees, businesses, and residents”. The LRSP contains an engineering countermeasure (improvements) toolbox which includes specific actions that could be implemented to make progress towards Foster City‘s Vision Zero Goal. Countermeasure examples include raised medians, improved traffic signal hardware, street lighting improvements, or additional pedestrian crossings, In addition, both near-term and long-term policy and program recommendations are included in the LRSP such as engaging in a High-Visibility Media Campaign to maximize exposure while promoting safety awareness, deployment of more speed monitoring awareness radar trailers, and/or roadway safety education in schools. Progress towards the Vision Zero Goal will be presented annually to the City Council. To further enable collaboration between jurisdictions, City staff will participate in an inter-jurisdictional Transportation Safety Advisory Committee (TSAC) led by C/CAG, with staff from partner agencies.
The TRC met to review and discuss the Roadway Safety Plan at the May 29, 2025 regular meeting. The TRC recommends the Council adopt the Countywide and Local Roadway Safety Plan, including the accompanying Vision Zero Goal.
CEQA
This action does not require a CEQA exemption.
FISCAL IMPACT
There are no fiscal impacts associated with this Council action.
The development of the Countywide LRSP and the Foster City Chapter was funded through Federal Surface Transportation Funds, including Local Congestion Relief Plan funds match, secured by C/CAG.
8.2 8.2 Staff Report
391
The adoption of the Foster City LRSP will render the City eligible for future grant funding from the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC), OBAG 3 County and Local Program, Caltrans Highway Safety Improvement Program, and US Department of Transportation Safe Streets for All (SS4A).
CITY COUNCIL VISION, MISSION, AND VALUE/PRIORITY AREA
Infrastructure and Facilities
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment 1 – Resolution
Attachment 2 – CCAG Countywide LRSP - Foster City Chapter Exhibit A (Link only) – County Wide Local Roadway Safety Plan (includes Foster City Chapter on pg. 263): https://ccag.ca.gov/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/28717_CCAG- Countywide-LRSP-Countywide-Local-w-appendices_Jun7_2.pdf
8.2 8.2 Staff Report
392
3 4
6 3
RESOLUTION NO. ____________
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FOSTER CITY ADOPTING
THE COUNTYWIDE AND FOSTER CITY LOCAL ROADWAY SAFETY PLAN AND
ACCOMPANYING VISION ZERO GOAL
CITY OF FOSTER CITY
WHEREAS, according to data from the California Strategic Highway Safety Plan, 17,317 people have been killed in traffic collisions in California from 2013 through 2017, for an average of 9.5 people per day; and
WHEREAS, Foster City is dedicated to strategies that aim to reduce and eliminate deaths and serious injuries on streets in all jurisdictions countywide; and WHEREAS, seniors, children, people with disabilities, people walking, and people bicycling face a disproportionate risk of traffic injuries and fatalities; and WHEREAS, the City Local Roadway Safety Plan (LRSP) identifies pedestrian and bicyclist safety, nighttime/low light safety, unsignalized intersections on arterial/collector roadways, safety for youth and aging populations, speed-related roadway crashes, and roadways with posted speeds 35mph or higher as emphasis areas for safety improvement; and
WHEREAS, Vision Zero is a public health-based traffic safety strategy to reduce and eventually eliminate traffic deaths and serious injuries using a data-driven, multi- disciplinary, and Safe System approach that also increases safe, healthy, and equitable mobility for all; and
WHEREAS, the Safe System Approach recognizes that while human error will always occur, a system of redundant engineering and non-engineering solutions can reduce crashes and can prevent crashes from causing death or severe injuries; and WHEREAS, the Federal Highway Administration has made a commitment to eliminating fatalities and serious injuries on the nation's roadways using a Safe System approach to achieve the goals of Vision Zero; and
WHEREAS, the Federal Highway Administration and State Department of Transportation (Caltrans) grant funding for improving safety requires the preparation and implementation of a systematic approach to improve safety as presented in the Countywide and City LRSP (Exhibit A); and
WHEREAS, Caltrans has adopted the goal of moving “toward zero deaths” by incorporating the Safe System Approach and using proven effective strategies and countermeasures; and
WHEREAS, the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) passed a Vision Zero policy in 2020 that identified actions to support agencies like Foster City.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City of Foster City adopts Vision Zero as its guiding principle for transportation planning, in conjunction with C/CAG adopting
8.2 Attachment 1 - Resolution
393
3 4
6 3
this vision at the County level; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City of Foster City shall pursue the recommended near-and long-term policy, program, and guidelines recommendations identified in the LRSP, with the overriding goal of eliminating traffic-related fatalities and reduce the number of non-fatal crashes by 50% by 2050; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City of Foster City shall refer to the prioritized locations in the Countywide and City LRSP sections when considering safety improvements; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City of Foster City shall participate in an inter- jurisdictional Transportation Safety Advisory Committee (TSAC) led by C/CAG, to include staff from constituent jurisdictions along with partner agencies identified in the LRSP; and which will be used to implement the LRSP and integrate the Safe System approach into all aspects of transportation planning and engineering; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City of Foster City adopts the Countywide Local Roadway Safety Plan and the City Local Roadway Safety Plan that summarizes specific recommendations and action items to be taken by City and partner agencies that will address the listed emphasis areas; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the LRSP will be implemented in an equitable manner, accounting for historic inequities in transportation and safety investments across the county; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City of Foster City shall develop an annual update and a 3-5 year report on progress toward the Vision Zero goals, tracking process and outcome metrics, and shall present these updates to the City Council.
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 June, 2025, by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
STACY JIMENEZ, MAYOR
ATTEST:
PRISCILLA SCHAUS, CITY CLERK
8.2 Attachment 1 - Resolution
394
City of
Foster City
LOCAL ROADWAY SAFETY PLAN
FINAL DRAFT
MAY 2024
8.2 Attachment 2 - CCAG Countywide LRSP - Foster City Chapter
395
/ City of Foster City
San Mateo C/CAG Countywide LRSP
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
C/CAG Project
Management Team
Jeff Lacap
Eva Gaye
Advisory Group Members
LOCAL JURISDICTION
REPRESENTATIVES
Robert Ovadia, Town of Atherton
Matt Hoang, City of Belmont
Tracy Scramaglia, City of Belmont
Karen Kinser, City of Brisbane
Tomas Santoyo, City of Brisbane
Andrew Wong, City of Burlingame
Abdulkader Hashem, Town of Colma
Richard Chiu, Jr.; City of Daly City
Irene Chiu, City of East Palo Alto
Humza Javed, City of East Palo Alto
Anwar Mirza, City of East Palo Alto
Justin Lai, City of Foster City
Francine Magno, City of Foster City
Amy Zhou, City of Foster City
Maz Bozorginia, City of Half Moon Bay
Jonathan Woo, City of Half Moon Bay
Paul Willis, Town of Hillsborough
Matthew Hui, City of Menlo Park
Sam Bautista, City of Millbrae
Lisa Peterson, City of Pacifica
Howard Young, Town of Portola Valley
Malahat Owrang, City of Redwood City
Hae Won, City of San Bruno
Harry Yip, City of San Bruno
Hanieh Houshmandi, City of San Carlos
Steven Machida, City of San Carlos
Bethany Lopez, City of San Mateo
Azalea Mitch, City of San Mateo
Jeff Chou, City of South San Francisco
Matthew Ruble, City of South San Francisco
Yazdan Emrani, Town of Woodside
Sindhi Mekala, Town of Woodside
Diana Shu, County of San Mateo
PARTNER AGENCY REPRESENTATIVES
Mackenzie Crouch, California Highway Patrol
Greg Currey, Caltrans
Joel Slavit, County of San Mateo Sustainability
Department
Bryan Redmond, Metropolitan Transportation
Commission
Jessica Manzi, SamTrans
Theresa Vallez-Kelly, San Mateo County Office of
Education
Liz Sanchez, San Mateo County Health
Anthony Montes, Silicon Valley Bicycle Commission
8.2 Attachment 2 - CCAG Countywide LRSP - Foster City Chapter
396
/ City of Foster City
San Mateo C/CAG Countywide LRSP
Consultant Team
KITTELSON & ASSOCIATES, INC.
Mike Alston
Matt Braughton
Laurence Lewis
Grace Carsky
Michael Ruiz-Leon
Doreen Gui
SAFE STREETS RESEARCH &
CONSULTING
Rebecca Sanders
Brian Almdale
CIRCLEPOINT
Stacey Miller
Ivy Morrison
GLOSSARY OF TERMS
Countermeasures are engineering infrastructure improvements that can be implemented to reduce the risk of collisions.
Emphasis Areas represent types of roadway users, locations, or collisions with safety issues identified based on local trends that merit special focus in the City’s approach to reducing fatal and severe injury collisions.
Local Roadway Safety Plans, or LRSPs, are documents that provide local-level assessments of roadway safety and identify locations and strategies to improve safety on local roadways.
Crash Severity is defined by the guidelines established by the Model Minimum Uniform Crash Criteria (MMUCC, Fifth Edition) and is a functional measure of the injury severity for any person involved in the crash. Fatal Collision [K] is death because of an injury sustained in a collision or an injury resulting in death within 30 days of the collision.
Severe Injury [A] is an injury other than a fatal injury which results in broken bones, dislocated or distorted limbs, severe lacerations, or unconsciousness at or when taken from the collision scene. It does not include minor laceration.
Other Visible Injury [B] includes bruises (discolored or swollen); places where the body has received a blow (black eyes and bloody noses); and abrasions (areas of the skin where the surface is roughened or blotchy by scratching or rubbing which includes skinned shins, knuckles, knees, and elbows). Complaint of Pain [C] classification could contain authentic internal or other non- visible injuries and fraudulent claims of injury. This includes: 1. Persons who seem dazed, confused, or incoherent (unless such behavior can be attributed to intoxication, extreme age, illness, or mental infirmities). 2. Persons who are limping but do not have visible injuries; 3. Any person who is known to have been unconscious because of the collision, although it appears he/she has recovered; 4. People who say they want t o be listed as injured do not appear to be so.
Property Damage Only [O] Collision is a noninjury motor vehicle traffic collision which results in property damage.
Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) is one of the nation’s core federal-aid programs. Caltrans administers HSIP funds in the state of California and splits the state share of HSIP funds between State HSIP (for state highways) and local HSIP (for local roads). The latter is administered through a call for projects biennially.
8.2 Attachment 2 - CCAG Countywide LRSP - Foster City Chapter
397
/ City of Foster City
San Mateo C/CAG Countywide LRSP.
Primary Collision Factors (PCFs) convey the violation or underlying causal factor for a collision. Although there are often multiple causal factors, a reporting officer at the scene of a collision indicates a single relevant PCF related to a California Vehicle Code violation.
Safe Streets for All (SS4A) is a federal discretionary grant program created by the 2021 Bipartisan Infrastructure Law with $5 billion in appropriated funds for 2022 through 2026.
Safe System Approach is a layered method for roadway safety promoted by the FHWA. This approach uses redundancies to anticipate mistakes and minimize injury. For more, visit https://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/zerodeaths/docs/FHWA_SafeSystem_Brochure_V9_508_200717.pdf.
Safety Partners are agencies, government bodies, businesses, and community groups that the City can work with to plan, promote, and implement safety projects.
Strategies are non-engineering tools that can help address road user behavior, improve emergency services, and build a culture of safety.
Systemic safety defines an analysis and improvement approach based on roadway and environmental factors correlated with crash risk (rather than targeting locations solely on documented crash history). The approach takes a broad view to evaluate risk across an entire roadway system.
8.2 Attachment 2 - CCAG Countywide LRSP - Foster City Chapter
398
/ City of Foster City
San Mateo C/CAG Countywide LRSP. / 1
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Introduction .............................................................................................................................................................................. 3 Contents ........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................ 3 Vision & Goals ...........................................................................................................................................................................4 Plan Development ...................................................................................................................................................................4 Existing Safety Efforts ............................................................................................................................................................................................................. 4 Safety Partners .......................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 5 Community Engagement and Input ........................................................................................................................................................................... 6 Engagement Timeline and Events ........................................................................................................................................................................... 6 Online Map Survey ............................................................................................................................................................................................................... 7 Crash Data & Trends ............................................................................................................................................................... 9 Emphasis Areas ........................................................................................................................................................................................................................ 9 Countywide High Injury Network ................................................................................................................................................................................... 13 Project Identification & Prioritization ................................................................................................................................ 15 Methodology .............................................................................................................................................................................................................................. 15 Social Equity ............................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 17 Results ............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................ 17 Improvements – Engineering, Policy & Programs .......................................................................................................... 20 Project Scopes .........................................................................................................................................................................................................................20 Engineering Countermeasure Toolbox..................................................................................................................................................................... 21 Proposed Policy, Program, and Guidelines Recommendations .............................................................................................................25 Near-Term Actions ...........................................................................................................................................................................................................25 Long-Term or Ongoing Actions .............................................................................................................................................................................. 26 Implementation & Monitoring ............................................................................................................................................. 28
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1. Phase 1 pop-up event held as part of the City of Foster City’s “Summer Days.” ............................................................ 5 Figure 2. Online Map Survey Tool........................................................................................................................................................................................ 7 Figure 3. Webmap Comments in Foster City ............................................................................................................................................................. 8 Figure 4. Countywide HIN within the City of Foster City ..................................................................................................................................... 14 Figure 5. Pedestrian Prioritization Factor/Criteria Weighting (Sum to 100 Percent)....................................................................... 15 Figure 6. Bicycle Prioritization Factor/Criteria Weighting (Sum to 100 Percent) ............................................................................... 16 Figure 7. Motor Vehicle Prioritization Factor/Criteria Weighting (Sum to 100 Percent) ................................................................ 16 Figure 8: Foster City Priority Locations .......................................................................................................................................................................... 19
8.2 Attachment 2 - CCAG Countywide LRSP - Foster City Chapter
399
/ City of Foster City
San Mateo C/CAG Countywide LRSP. / 2
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1. City of Foster City Safety Policies, Plans, Guidelines, Standards, and Programs .............................................................. 4 Table 2. Community Engagement Phases and Events ....................................................................................................................................... 6 Table 3. Countywide HIN Segments in Foster City ................................................................................................................................................. 13 Table 4. Priority Locations ....................................................................................................................................................................................................... 17 Table 5. City of Foster City Countermeasure Toolbox ......................................................................................................................................... 21 Table 6. City of Foster City Policy and Program Recommendations ...................................................................................................... 25 Table 7. Foster City Goals and Measures of Success ........................................................................................................................................ 28
8.2 Attachment 2 - CCAG Countywide LRSP - Foster City Chapter
400
/ City of Foster City
San Mateo C/CAG Countywide LRSP. / 3
INTRODUCTION
This chapter serves as a standalone local roadway safety plan (LRSP) for the City of Foster City. It was developed concurrently with the Countywide LRSP; therefore, some discussion will refer back to the Countywide LRSP to avoid redundancy.
However, because every community has unique safety challenges, this LRSP includes individually tailored emphasis areas, crash trends, prioritized project lists, project scope recommendations, Safe System-aligned recommendations, and implementation/monitoring recommendations. A living document, this LRSP is designed to be flexible and responsive to evolving community needs. The City will revisit and update this LRSP at least every five years.
The City of Foster City has a 2023 population of 32,703 per California Department of Finance. The city has 50 total centerline miles per Caltrans 2022 California Public Road Data. From 2018 through 2022, there were 150 reported crashes on surface streets in the City and 13 fatal/severe injury crashes. In that time period, pedestrians were involved in 13 percent of all reported crashes and 46 percent of fatal/severe injury crashes.
Bicyclists were involved in 11 percent of all reported crashes and 23 percent of fatal/severe injury crashes. The LRSP provides Safe System-aligned strategies tailored to Foster City’s crash history and local priorities, as well as performance measures to evaluate progress.
This LRSP was informed by technical analysis as well as from input from key stakeholders and the general public. The following sections describe the plan development and recommendations.
Contents
This LRSP provides the following:
Upon Council adoption and affirmation of the plan’s vision and goals in 2024, this plan will be posted online by the City for public viewing.
A vision and associated goals
Crash data and trends
Engagement and coordination activities
Policies, plans, guidelines and standards
Safe System – aligned r ecommendations
Implementation and tracking
Prioritized projects and social
equity considerations
8.2 Attachment 2 - CCAG Countywide LRSP - Foster City Chapter
401
/ City of Foster City
San Mateo C/CAG Countywide LRSP. / 4
VISION & GOALS
The City of Foster City’s vision for roadway safety is:
• Eliminate all traffic fatalities and reduce the number of non-fatal crashes by 50 percent by 2050 as part of a broader effort to promote roadway safety in Foster City’s departments, businesses, and residents.
To support this vision, the City has established the following goals:
1. Regularly review crash history and community needs to identify and prioritize opportunities to reduce crash risk for roadway users of all ages and abilities.
2. Provide opportunities for community engagement to identify issues and inform safety solutions across the community.
PLAN DEVELOPMENT
Existing Safety Efforts
This LRSP relies on Foster City’s solid foundation of plans, policies, and programs that support safe, equitable mobility in the city. For a list of the City of Foster City’s existing initiatives and ongoing efforts to build a Safe System, see Table 1:
Table 1. City of Foster City Safety Policies, Plans, Guidelines, Standards, and Programs Program Name Program Description Safe System
Elements
San Mateo C/CAG Safe
Routes to School
(SR2S) Program Guide
The SR2S program works to make it easier and safer for
students to walk and bike to school. C/CAG partners with the County Office of Education to increase biking and walking and safe travel to school. Annual reports summarize schools’ participation.
Safe Roads
Safe Speeds
Safe Road Users
General citywide
improvement
initiatives
The City plans to improve safety through multiple tools and programs. The Police Department will enforce policies and help to lead public education programs. Meanwhile, the Traffic Review Committee will map and monitor collisions, conduct speed surveys, and review safety improvements to make
recommendations.
Safe Roads,
Safe Speeds,
Safe Road
Users, Safe
Vehicles
8.2 Attachment 2 - CCAG Countywide LRSP - Foster City Chapter
402
/ City of Foster City
San Mateo C/CAG Countywide LRSP. / 5
Safety Partners
A variety of agency staff and community partners were involved throughout the development of this LRSP and played an integral role in identifying priorities, providing local context, and reviewing the existing conditions analysis. Many of the strategies identified in this plan will require coordination with these partners and their support of Foster City’s effort to create a culture of roadway safety. While additional partners may be identified in the future, those involved in development of the LRSP include:
• City/County Association of Governments of San
Mateo County (C/CAG)
• County Public Health
• Sustainability Department
• San Mateo County Office of Education (SMCOE)
• San Mateo County Transportation Authority
(SMCTA)
• California Highway Patrol
• Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC)
• Silicon Valley Bicycle Coalition (SVBC)
• Caltrans
• Foster City Police Department
Figure 1. Phase 1 pop-up event held as part of the City of Foster City’s “Summer Days.”
8.2 Attachment 2 - CCAG Countywide LRSP - Foster City Chapter
403
/ City of Foster City
San Mateo C/CAG Countywide LRSP. / 6
Community Engagement and Input
This LRSP includes community members’ experiences and concerns gathered from project team hosted pop-up events and an interactive webmap.
ENGAGEMENT TIMELINE AND EVENTS
The project team hosted a series of public engagement events countywide to support the concurrent development of the Countywide LRSP and of the City’s plan. These events focus on jurisdiction-specific issues and on countywide concerns. The table below lists the events, organized by themed engagement phases, and is followed by the community input themes we heard.
Table 2. Community Engagement Phases and Events
Date Event Location
August 10, 2023 Countywide Virtual Kickoff
Meeting: Shared the purpose and
timing of the plan
Virtual meeting (recorded and
posted to plan website)
August 16, 2023 Phase 1 Pop-up/Tabling Event:
Shared crash data analysis;
received input on locations and
safety concerns
East Palo Alto
August 19, 2023 Half Moon Bay Farmers Market
August 20, 2023 Foster City Summer Days
August 27, 2023 San Carlos Block Party
August – September, 2023 Phase 1 Concurrent Online Input Online webmap (countywide input)
December 17, 2023 Phase 2 Pop-up/Tabling Event:
Shared draft prioritized locations
and types of engineering
recommendations; received
comments on locations and
votes/input on types of
treatments and desired locations
Belmont Farmers’ Market
December 20, 2023 Woodside Public Library
January 9, 2024 Colma BART Station
January 16, 2024 Atherton Library
January 18, 2024 Brisbane Farmers’ Market
February 7, 2024 Portola Valley Bicycle, Pedestrian,
& Traffic Safety Committee
March – April 2024 Phase 3 Draft Plan
Share the draft plan publicly on
the project website, through
electronic distribution channels,
and with presentations to C/CAG
Committees and the Board.
Various
8.2 Attachment 2 - CCAG Countywide LRSP - Foster City Chapter
404
/ City of Foster City
San Mateo C/CAG Countywide LRSP. / 7
ONLINE MAP SURVEY
The project team made an online countywide webmap tool and survey available during August and September 2023 for the public to provide comments and respond to questions to guide the plan’s development (see Figure 2). Respondents were able to record location-specific feedback, associate a travel mode, and leave a detailed comment pertaining to a safety concern.
Figure 2. Online Map Survey Tool
Countywide, there were a total of 528 comments recorded by 352 respondents. There were five comments made within the City of Foster City in addition to the conversations and feedback recorded at the Phase 1 event in August. The comments included the following:
Biking Concerns/Requests
• Request to add new bike infrastructure such as bike lanes. Noted location includes San Mateo Bridge.
Pedestrian Concerns/Requests
• Signage requests including push buttons for WALK signs and pedestrian hybrid beacons.
Traffic Enforcement Concerns
• Concerns regarding speeding observed and requests for traffic calming, especially near school zones.
Roadway Infrastructure/ Traffic Operations Concerns
• Concerns regarding high traffic volumes and traffic congestion on Highway 101. • Requests to improve signal timing design to reduce intersection delay.
The location and modal emphasis of comments in Foster City is presented in Figure 44. The comments received are provided in Appendix A. The project team also identified common themes in the responses made countywide which may be relevant to the City. Those are presented in the Community Engagement section of the Countywide LRSP.
8.2 Attachment 2 - CCAG Countywide LRSP - Foster City Chapter
405
/ City of Foster City
San Mateo C/CAG Countywide LRSP. / 8
Figure 3. Webmap Comments in Foster City
8.2 Attachment 2 - CCAG Countywide LRSP - Foster City Chapter
406
/ City of Foster City
San Mateo C/CAG Countywide LRSP. / 9
CRASH DATA & TRENDS
This section provides an overview of the five years of crash data used for this analysis. The data were downloaded from the Transportation Injury Mapping System1 (TIMS) Crash database representing the full years 2018 through 2022. TIMS is a commonly used data source for safety plans. This analysis includes only crashes for which some level of injury is reported and excludes property damage only (PDO) crashes. We removed crashes along grade-separated freeways from the dataset, but we retained crashes that occur along at-grade State Highway facilities and those that occurred within the influence area of freeway ramp terminal intersections.
The crash records used provide the best available data for analysis but do not account for crashes that go unreported or for near-miss events. This plan includes recommendations that would improve jurisdictions’ ability to capture one or both of those elements and enhance future crash analyses.
The discussion that follows provides a high-level overview of crash trends that informed the plan recommendations. For a more complete description of trends and findings, refer to Appendix B.
Emphasis Areas
The project team analyzed crash data in Foster City and compared countywide trends to establish emphasis areas. Emphasis areas are crash dynamic, behavioral, or road user characteristics that the City can focus on to maximize fatal and severe injury reduction on local roads.
A review of crash data and input led to the development of the following emphasis areas for the City of Foster City:
1. Pedestrian and bicyclist safety. Countywide, pedestrians were involved in 13 percent of injury crashes but 23 percent of fatal/severe injury crashes, showing a disproportionate involvement in the most severe outcomes. Similarly, bicyclists were involved in 13 percent of injury crashes but 20 percent of fatal/severe injury crashes. In Foster City, pedestrians and bicyclists were involved in 46 percent and 23 percent of the 13 reported F/SI crashes—higher than their overall share of all injury crashes (13 percent and 11 percent, total).
2. Nighttime/low light safety. Countywide, crashes occurring in dark conditions—especially in dark, unlit conditions--are more severe than those that occur in daylight. Motor vehicle crashes in dark, unlit conditions have about double the average severity when they occur compared to crashes in daylight. In Foster City, four of the six fatal/severe injury pedestrian crashes (67 percent) and three of the four fatal/severe injury motor vehicle crashes (75 percent) occurred in dark conditions.
3. Unsignalized intersections on arterials/collectors. Countywide, crashes for all modes most frequently occurred at the intersection of higher order and lower order roadways – most commonly along arterial and collector roadways. Pedestrian and bicyclist crashes most frequently occur at unsignalized intersections.
4. Vulnerable age groups (youth and aging). Countywide across all modes, crash victims between the 15 to 34 years old are more likely to be injured including F/SI as a result of traffic safety than other groups.
Victims between the ages 50 – 69 and 75 to 84 are also more likely to be severely injured than other groups. In Foster City, 8 crashes or 5 percent of all reported injury crashes involve at fault drivers who are under 30 years old.
1 Transportation Injury Mapping System, http://tims.berkeley.edu
8.2 Attachment 2 - CCAG Countywide LRSP - Foster City Chapter
407
/ City of Foster City
San Mateo C/CAG Countywide LRSP. / 10
5. Motor vehicle speed related roadway segment crashes. Countywide, motor vehicle crashes were more severe along roadway segments than at any other location type; unsafe speed was the most commonly cited the primary crash factor (27 percent of injury crashes and 23 percent of fatal/severe injury crashes).
In Foster City, “Too fast for conditions” was the top-cited violation among motor vehicle crashes (in 39 percent of injury crashes).
6. High speed roadways (35+mph). Countywide, crashes on roadways with posted speeds 40mph or higher had an average crash severity per mile 13 times higher than along roadways with posted speeds of 25 mph or less.
The next pages present summary findings from a crash data review that compares the City of Foster City to countywide trends in these emphasis areas. It includes summary statistics related to the above-cited emphasis areas but also shows:
• The share of local crashes that occurred on or at a State Highway facility compared to Countywide levels. • The most frequently reported local crash types compared to Countywide levels. • The share of bicyclist and motor vehicle crashes among all injury crashes and among F/SI crashes.
Countywide and locally, bicyclist crashes account for a higher share of F/SI crashes than among all injury levels.
• The share of local and Countywide crashes occurring in dark conditions for crashes of all injury levels and for F/SI crashes (organized by mode).
• Reported pedestrian and bicyclist crashes summarized by the most common preceding movements countywide, with a comparison of those movements’ share of local crashes to Countywide shares. • The local and Countywide share of crashes involving drugs or alcohol and involving drivers under age 30.
8.2 Attachment 2 - CCAG Countywide LRSP - Foster City Chapter
408
18%
(1,164)
18%
(20)
Foster City—Crash History
Most Frequent Collision Types
12%
(787) 30%
(1,908)
10%
(607)
39%
(44)
11%
(13)
14%
(16)
18%
(21)
Broadside, rear-end, head-on, and hit-object crashes were the most common crash types in the region. Here is how
Foster City compares:
CountywideFoster
City 3% (5) 5% (8)
of reported collisions
in Foster City
involved drugs or
alcohol
of reported collisions
in Foster City
involved young
drivers2
29%
(1,858)
Total Crashes
In Foster City, 150 fatal and injury crashes were reported on at-grade facilities between 2018 – 2022, where:
Local
57% (5,756)
State Highway
43% (2,712)
Countywide
Local
71% (143)
State Highway
29% (7)
Foster
City
Broadside
Rear end
Head on Other
Hit object
Mode Involvement
Pedestrian Crashes (20)
Bicycle Crashes (16)
Motor Vehicle1 Crashes (114)
23% (3)
31% (4)
46% (6)13% (20)
11% (16)
Countywide
Countywide
Countywide
13% (1,073)
13% (1,067)
75% (6,324)
23% (208)
20% (176)
57% (515)
76% (114)
Foster City
Foster City
Foster City
1. Motor crashes include motor vehicles and motorcyclists.
2. Y oung driver crashes are crashes that involve at fault drivers who are under 30 years old.
All Injury Crashes
All Injury Crashes
All Injury Crashes
Fatal/Severe Injury Crashes
Fatal/Severe Injury Crashes
Fatal/Severe Injury Crashes
Compared to the countywide total, where
5% (472) of reported collisions involved
young drivers2
Compared to the countywide total,
where 8% (625) of reported collisions
involved drugs or alcohol
8%
(625)
5%
(472)
8.2 Attachment 2 - CCAG Countywide LRSP - Foster City Chapter
409
Foster City—Crash History
Foster City
Foster City
Foster City
Share of Bicyclist Crashes in Dark Conditions (1)
Share of Pedestrian Crashes in Dark Conditions (8)
Share of Motor Vehicle Crashes in Dark Conditions (28)
All Injury Crashes (114)
All Injury Crashes (16)
All Injury Crashes (20)
Fatal/Severe Injury Crashes (4)
Fatal/Severe Injury Crashes (3)
Fatal/Severe Injury Crashes (6)
67% (4)
0% (0)
Countywide
Countywide
Countywide
25% (28) 75% (3)
Dark Conditions
Crashes reported in nighttime conditions were found to be more severe—especially in dark, unlit conditions. Here is how Foster City compares to Countywide crashes:
6% (1)
40% (8)
Reported Pedestrian Crashes (20)
Reported Bicycle Crashes (16)
Pedestrian Crossing at Intersection
Bicyclist Proceeding Straight
Pedestrian Crossing
Not at a Crosswalk
Countywide
Countywide
Agency
Agency
Perpendicular
Bicyclist Crashes
30%
(6)
24%
(256)
Motorist Making
left turn
30%
(6)
15%
(163)
Motorist proceeding
straight
10%
(2)
25%
(2)
Motorist proceeding
straight
13%
(2)
21%
(186)
6%
(1)
12%
(106)
13%
(2)
11%
(100)
Motorist
making
right turn
Motorist
proceeding
straight
Motorist
making
left turn
38%
(6)
35%
(372)
34% (363)
11% (122)
26% (1,674)
47% (98)
15% (26)
34% (173)
8.2 Attachment 2 - CCAG Countywide LRSP - Foster City Chapter
410
/ City of Foster City
San Mateo C/CAG Countywide LRSP. / 13
Countywide High Injury Network
In addition to the systemic analysis findings, the analysis included countywide spatial analysis to identify a countywide high injury network for each travel mode (pedestrians, bicyclists, and motor vehicles). The countywide HIN results were folded into the subsequent regional and local prioritization (described in the next section). Additionally, the characteristics of the HIN and crashes along them were identified as risk factors and incorporated into emphasis areas and into a systemic portion of the prioritization process. Table 3 and Figure 4 show the HIN segments identified within the City.
Table 3. Countywide HIN Segments in Foster City
Roadway name
All County Jurisdiction(s)
including this HIN Roadway
Total Length, all
jurisdictions
included (mi)
Motor
Vehicle
HIN
Bicyclist
HIN
Pedestrian
HIN
Foster City Blvd Foster City 1.7 X X
Metro Center
Blvd
Foster City 0.7 X
Shell Blvd Foster City 1.1 X
Hillsdale Blvd Foster City, San Mateo 3.9 X X X
8.2 Attachment 2 - CCAG Countywide LRSP - Foster City Chapter
411
/ City of Foster City
San Mateo C/CAG Countywide LRSP. / 14
Figure 4. Countywide HIN within the City of Foster City
8.2 Attachment 2 - CCAG Countywide LRSP - Foster City Chapter
412
/ City of Foster City
San Mateo C/CAG Countywide LRSP. / 15
Ped Crash Severity
Score, 16.7% Ped HIN Presence, 16.7%
C/CAG Active
Transportation Equity
Focus Areas, 8.3%
MTC Equity Priority
Communities, 8.3%
USDOT Historically
Disadvantaged
Communities, 8.3%
USDOT Areas of
Persistent Poverty, 8.3%
≤250 ft
from
transit stop, 5.6%
≤1/4 mile
from school, 6.7%
Arterial or Collector,
7.2%
Posted speed
35mph+, 7.0%
Unsignalized
intersection, 6.8%
0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35%
Crash
History
Social
Equity
Systemic
Criteria
Factors
PROJECT IDENTIFICATION
& PRIORITIZATION
Methodology
Using the results of the crash data analysis and adding a focus on social equity, the project team identified priority locations for the City to target for future safety improvements. The prioritization used three equally weighted factors to prioritize locations for safety projects:
• Crash history – used to identify the locations with the highest reported five-year crash frequency and severity.
• Social equity – used to identify locations where projects would benefit disadvantaged populations and align with future grant funding opportunities that emphasize social equity. • Systemic factors – used to identify locations that have roadway and land use characteristics associated with crash frequency and severity. Using systemic factors emphasizes a proactive rather than purely reactive approach. Each factor was weighted relative to the other factors based on the average severity of relevant crashes (for example, if pedestrian crashes on arterials/collectors were overall twice as severe as pedestrian crashes at unsignalized intersections overall, then the former would be weighted twice the latter).
Each factor is comprised of multiple criteria and overlaid on jurisdictions’ roadway data to identify locations for future safety projects. The prioritization process was conducted three times, one for each travel mode. The weighting scheme for each mode is presented in the three figures below (Figure 46, Figure 47, and Figure 48).
Figure 5. Pedestrian Prioritization Factor/Criteria Weighting (Sum to 100 Percent)
8.2 Attachment 2 - CCAG Countywide LRSP - Foster City Chapter
413
/ City of Foster City
San Mateo C/CAG Countywide LRSP. / 16
Figure 6. Bicycle Prioritization Factor/Criteria Weighting (Sum to 100 Percent)
Figure 7. Motor Vehicle Prioritization Factor/Criteria Weighting (Sum to 100 Percent)
MV Crash Severity
Score, 16.7% MV HIN Presence, 16.7%
C/CAG Active
Transportation Equity
Focus Areas, 8.3%
MTC Equity Priority
Communities, 8.3%
USDOT Historically
Disadvantaged
Communities, 8.3%
USDOT Areas of
Persistent Poverty, 8.3%
Arterial or Collector,
8.1%
Posted speed
35mph+, 16.0%
Unsignalized
intersection, 9.3%
0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35%
Crash
History
Social
Equity
Systemic
Criteria
Factors
Bike Crash Severity
Score, 16.7% Bike HIN Presence, 16.7%
C/CAG Active
Transportation Equity
Focus Areas, 8.3%
MTC Equity Priority
Communities, 8.3%
USDOT Historically
Disadvantaged
Communities, 8.3%
USDOT Areas of
Persistent Poverty, 8.3%
≤1/4 mile
from school, 8.0%
Arterial or Collector,
8.6%
Posted speed
35mph+, 6.8%
Unsignalized
intersection, 9.9%
0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35%
Crash
History
Social
Equity
Systemic
Criteria
Factors
8.2 Attachment 2 - CCAG Countywide LRSP - Foster City Chapter
414
/ City of Foster City
San Mateo C/CAG Countywide LRSP. / 17
Social Equity
Social equity is a critical factor for project prioritization, and emphasizing social equity within a project prioritization process helps to promote infrastructure spending and improvements in disadvantaged and/or disinvested neighborhoods. We considered and included multiple local, regional, and national datasets for social equity prioritization to reflect different measures available and because available funding opportunities use different indicators. The prioritization included measures accounting for all of the following indicators:
• C/CAG Active Transportation Equity Focus Areas
• MTC Equity Priority Communities
• USDOT Historically Disadvantaged Communities
• USDOT Areas of Persistent Poverty
Layering in these four indicators allows the prioritization to identify more locations that may meet the criteria for just one of these indicators while still elevating locations that show up in multiple or all indicators. The raw scoring data also equips the City to understand which locations meet which measures.
Results
The prioritization resulted in the following top locations. For more details (including the scores of each location), consult Appendix C. Figure 8 also shows the locations.
Table 4. Priority Locations
ID Location Corridor/
Intersection
State
Highway?
Motor Vehicle
Emphasis
Bicycle
Emphasis
Pedestrian
Emphasis
1 Chess Dr and Foster City Blvd Intersection No X
2 Regulus St and Edgewater Blvd Intersection No X
3 Catamaran St and Shell Blvd Intersection No X X
4 Galleon Ln and Foster City Blvd Intersection No X X X 5 Hillsdale Blvd and Parkway Ln Intersection No X X X
6 Marlin Ave and Foster City Blvd Intersection No X X
7 Foster City Blvd and 3rd Ave Intersection No X
8 Beach Park Blvd and Egret St Intersection No X X
9 Altair Ave and Edgewater Blvd Intersection No X
10 Marlin Ave and Beach Park
Blvd
Intersection No X
11 3rd Ave and Mariners Island
Blvd
Intersection No X
8.2 Attachment 2 - CCAG Countywide LRSP - Foster City Chapter
415
/ City of Foster City
San Mateo C/CAG Countywide LRSP. / 18
ID Location Corridor/
Intersection
State
Highway?
Motor Vehicle
Emphasis
Bicycle
Emphasis
Pedestrian
Emphasis
12 Commons Ln and Metro
Center Blvd
Intersection No X
13 Foster City Blvd and Caravel Ln Intersection No X X 14 Shell Blvd and Bounty Dr Intersection No X
15 Hillsdale Blvd and Meridian
Bay Ln
Intersection No X X
16 Hillsdale Blvd and Admiralty Ln Intersection No X X 17 Foster City Blvd and Civic
Center Dr
Intersection No X
18 Foster City Blvd and Admiralty
Ln
Intersection No X
19 Shell Blvd and Civic Center Dr Intersection No X
20 Hillsdale Blvd and Portal Ln Intersection No X
21 Promontory Point Ln and
Hillsdale Blvd
Intersection No X
22 Foster City Blvd and Hillsdale
Blvd
Edgewater Blvd and Dorado Ln
Intersection No X
23 Beach Park Blvd and Swordfish
St
Intersection No X
24 Edgewater Blvd and Ram Ln Intersection No X
25 Tarpon St and Beach Park Blvd Intersection No X
26 Foster City Blvd, Chess Dr to
Bounty Dr
Corridor No X X X
27 Hillsdale Blvd, Sea Spray Ln to
north of Pilgrim Dr
Corridor No X X X
28 Shell Blvd, Hillsdale Blvd to
Beach Park Blvd
Corridor No X X
29 Edgewater Blvd, Hillsdale Blvd
to Beach Park Blvd
Corridor No X X
30 Hillsdale/Beach Park Blvd,
Pilgrim Dr to Foster City Blvd
Corridor No X X
8.2 Attachment 2 - CCAG Countywide LRSP - Foster City Chapter
416
/ City of Foster City
San Mateo C/CAG Countywide LRSP. / 19
Figure 8: Foster City Priority Locations
8.2 Attachment 2 - CCAG Countywide LRSP - Foster City Chapter
417
/ City of Foster City
San Mateo C/CAG Countywide LRSP. / 20
IMPROVEMENTS – ENGINEERING,
POLICY & PROGRAMS
This section presents Safe System-aligned recommendations that can create levels of redundancy for traffic safety in the City of Foster City. First are engineering recommendations: identified project scopes and a table of engineering countermeasures proven to reduce fatal and severe injury crashes. The countermeasures align to the crash types as listed in the table. Complementing those countermeasures is a holistic set of policy and programmatic recommendations that will help align City departments and partners in pursuit of the plan’s vision and goals.
Project Scopes
With the development of this plan the project team worked with the City to identify two project locations or two groups of project locations to apply safety treatments. We worked from the list of priority project locations and used potential benefit-to-cost ratio to identify a suite of treatments the City could consider at these locations.
The City can move forward with further project development and community engagement to advance solutions at these locations. They may also consider bundling some of the treatments identified with the same treatments at other, similar locations identified in this plan, for a systemic approach.
The project scopes were developed exclusively from a list of City-approved engineering countermeasures, which are presented as an engineering toolbox in the next section. The team prepared a suite of treatments to reduce crashes at the project locations. For each treatment, the list presents a planning-level cost of the treatments as recommended and the crash reduction benefit.
The scoped project locations include:
Shell Blvd and Civic Center Dr. Recommended improvements include:
o Upgraded, larger stop sign at Civic Center Dr
o Installation of a pedestrian crossing at the west leg of the intersection
8.2 Attachment 2 - CCAG Countywide LRSP - Foster City Chapter
418
/ City of Foster City
San Mateo C/CAG Countywide LRSP. / 21
o Installation of a pedestrian hybrid beacon at the west leg of the intersection Marlin Ave and Foster City Blvd. Recommended improvements include:
o Change of traffic control
o Pedestrian countdown signal heads
o Advance stop bar before all crosswalks (bicycle box)
For more information on the location, cost, and crash diagnostics of these project scopes, see Appendix D.
Engineering Countermeasure Toolbox
This section presents Safe System-aligned engineering recommendations that can create levels of redundancy for traffic safety in the City of Foster City. First is a table of engineering countermeasures proven to reduce fatal and severe injury crashes. The countermeasures align to the crash types as listed in the table. Complementing those countermeasures is a holistic set of policy and programmatic recommendations that will help align City departments and partners in pursuit of the plan’s vision and goals.
Table 5. City of Foster City Countermeasure Toolbox
Countermeasure
Name
Applicable
Location(s)1
Crash Types
Applicable
Crash
Reduction
Factor (If
Available)
Cost (if
available)2
Systemic
Opportunity?
Lighting* All Nighttime 0.4 Medium
Improve signal hardware:
lenses, back plates with
retroreflective borders,
mounting, size, and
number*
SI Signalized
local/arterial
intersections
0.15 $ Very High
Install left-turn lane and add
turn phase*
SI Signalized
local/arterial
intersections
0.55 $-$$$ Low
Convert signal to mast arm
(from pedestal mounted)*
SI Signalized
local/arterial
intersections
0.3 $-$$$ Medium
Install raised median on
approaches*
SI Signalized
local/arterial
intersections
0.25 $-$$$ Medium
Create directional median
openings to allow (and
restrict left turns and U-turns
(signalized intersection)*
SI Signalized
local/arterial
intersections
0.5 $-$$ Medium
Install raised pavement
markers and striping*
SI Wet, night, all 0.1 $ High
Install flashing beacons as
advance warning (SI)*
SI Rear end,
broadside
0.3 $-$$ Medium
Centerline hardening or
continuous raised median
SI All crashes 0.46 $ Medium
8.2 Attachment 2 - CCAG Countywide LRSP - Foster City Chapter
419
/ City of Foster City
San Mateo C/CAG Countywide LRSP. / 22
Countermeasure
Name
Applicable
Location(s)1
Crash Types
Applicable
Crash
Reduction
Factor (If
Available)
Cost (if
available)2
Systemic
Opportunity?
Install pedestrian
countdown signal heads*
SI Pedestrian
crashes,
signalized
local/arterial
intersections
0.25 $ High
Install pedestrian crossing* SI Pedestrian
crashes,
signalized
local/arterial
intersections
0.25 $ High
Install advance stop bar
before crosswalk (bicycle
box)*
SI Pedestrian
crashes,
signalized
local/arterial
intersections
0.15 $ High
Modify signal phasing to
implement a Leading
Pedestrian Interval (LPI)
SI Pedestrian
crashes,
signalized
local/arterial
intersections
0.6 $ High
Convert to all-way STOP
control (from two-way or
Yield control)*
UI All crashes 0.5 $ Low
Install signals* UI All crashes 0.3 $$$ Low
Create directional median
openings to allow (and
restrict) left turns and U-turns
(unsignalized intersections)*
UI All crashes 0.5 $-$$ Medium
Install raised medians
(refuge islands)*
UI Pedestrians and
bicycle
0.45 $ Medium
Install pedestrian crossings
(signs and markings only)*
UI Pedestrians and
bicycle
0.25 $-$$$ High
Install pedestrian crossings
(with enhanced safety
features)*
UI Pedestrians and
bicycle
0.35 $-$$$ Medium
Install/upgrade larger or
additional STOP signs or
other intersection warning
or regulatory signs*
UI Turning crashes
related to lack
of driver
awareness
0.15 $ High
Upgrade intersection
pavement markings*
UI Turning crashes
related to lack
0.25 $ High
8.2 Attachment 2 - CCAG Countywide LRSP - Foster City Chapter
420
/ City of Foster City
San Mateo C/CAG Countywide LRSP. / 23
Countermeasure
Name
Applicable
Location(s)1
Crash Types
Applicable
Crash
Reduction
Factor (If
Available)
Cost (if
available)2
Systemic
Opportunity?
of driver
awareness
Install pedestrian signal or
pedestrian hybrid beacon*
UI Pedestrian and
bicycle
0.3 $$$ High
Road diet (Reduce travel
lanes from four to three,
and add a two-way, left-
turn lane and bike lanes)*
R All crashes 0.35 $ Medium
Corridor access
management
R N/A 0.35 $ Medium
Install separated bike lanes* R Pedestrian and
bicycle
0.45 $-$$ High
Install/upgrade pedestrian
crossing (with enhanced
safety features)*
R Pedestrian and
bicycle
0.35 $$-$$$ Medium
Install raised pedestrian
crossing*
R Pedestrian and
bicycle
0.35 $ Medium
Remove or relocate fixed
objects outside of clear
recovery zone*
R Hit object 035 $-$$ High
Install delineators, reflectors,
and/or object marker*
R All crashes 0.15 $ High
Install/upgrade signs with
new fluorescent sheeting
(regulatory or warning)*
R All crashes 0.15 $ High
Install dynamic/variable
speed warning signs*
R Driver behavior 0.3 $ High
Extend pedestrian crossing
time
SI Pedestrian N/A $ High
Pedestrian phase recall SI Pedestrian N/A $ High
Extend green time for bikes SI Bicycle N/A $ High
Extend yellow and all-red
time
SI All crashes N/A $ High
Lane narrowing R All crashes N/A $-$$ Low
8.2 Attachment 2 - CCAG Countywide LRSP - Foster City Chapter
421
/ City of Foster City
San Mateo C/CAG Countywide LRSP. / 24
Countermeasure
Name
Applicable
Location(s)1
Crash Types
Applicable
Crash
Reduction
Factor (If
Available)
Cost (if
available)2
Systemic
Opportunity?
Bicycle crossing (solid green
paint)
UI Bicycle N/A $ Medium
Bicycle signal/exclusive bike
phase
SI Bicycle N/A $-$$ Low
ADA-compliant directional
curb ramps and audible
push buttons
SI Pedestrian N/A $-$$ Low
Curb radius reduction SI, UI All crashes N/A $$ Low
Approach curvature UI, SI All crashes N/A $$$ Low
Roadside design features All All crashes N/A $-$$$ Low
*Indicates countermeasure is eligible for California HSIP funding as of the most recent funding cycle 1: UI = Unsignalized Intersection; SI = Signalized Intersection; R = Roadway segments; All = All of the above 2: $ = ≤$50,000; $$ = $50,000 - $200,000; $$$ = > $200,000
8.2 Attachment 2 - CCAG Countywide LRSP - Foster City Chapter
422
/ City of Foster City
San Mateo C/CAG Countywide LRSP. / 25
Proposed Policy, Program, and Guidelines
Recommendations
In addition to the engineering countermeasures and projects recommended above, the City aims to promote policies, programs, and standards that foster a culture of safety. The table below defines several policy and program recommendations organized into thematic categories. Implemented in cooperation with partners, these recommendations will deepen the dedication to safety shared throughout the community and round out the City’s Safe System Approach.
Table 6. City of Foster City Policy and Program Recommendations Category Near-Term Recommendations Long-Term or Ongoing Recommendations Local Culture Shift
(LCS)
LCS1: Transportation Safety
Advisory Committee participation
LCS2: High-Visibility Media Campaign
Local Enforcement
Coordination (LEC)
LEC2: Speed Monitoring Awareness Radar Trailer
Local Funding (LF) LF1: Dedicated Funding LF2: Equitable Investment LF3: Prioritize Investments
Local Education /
Outreach (LEO)
LEO1: Roadway Safety Education in Schools
LEO3: Educational Materials for New Facilities
Local Planning/
Evaluation (LPE)
LPE1: Annual Review
LPE2: Plan Update
LPE4: Safe Routes to School
LPE8: Speed Limits/Speed Management Plan
NEAR-TERM ACTIONS
LCS1: Transportation Safety Advisory Committee Participation Actively participate in the newly-formed County Transportation Safety Advisory Committee (TSAC). Bring agenda items as relevant, including but not limited to:
• Safety project updates with every step along the project development process (studies initiated / under way /complete, funding identified, design phases initiated / under way / complete) • Annual updates to the TSAC regarding implementation progress that may be relevant for C/CAG annual monitoring reporting (e.g., projects on identified priority locations and/or the regional High Injury Network, community engagement efforts and summaries, safety funding applied for / received) • Opportunities for cross-jurisdiction coordination (e.g., roadways or intersections shared with adjacent jurisdictions or Caltrans)
• Requests for trainings / best practices that could be provided through the TSAC Lead agency: City of Foster City Public Works
LF1: Dedicated Funding
Propose ongoing, dedicated funding and staffing for implementation and monitoring of the safety plan, including presiding over the TSAC. This role may be fulfilled by a partial FTE or through staff augmentation.
8.2 Attachment 2 - CCAG Countywide LRSP - Foster City Chapter
423
/ City of Foster City
San Mateo C/CAG Countywide LRSP. / 26
Lead agency: City of Foster City Public Works
LONG-TERM OR ONGOING ACTIONS
LCS2: High-Visibility Media Campaign
Coordinate with County Public Health and the City of Foster City Police Department to implement a local high- visibility media campaign pertaining to one or more emphasis areas identified in this plan.
Dedicated law enforcement with media supporting the enforcement activity to ensure public awareness.
Potential communication tools:
• Bus ads • Social media • Text messages
Lead agency: County Public Health
Coordinating partners: County Sheriff’s Office, California Highway Patrol, Sustainability Department, SMCOE, City of Foster City Police Department, City of Foster City Public Works LEC2: Speed Monitoring Awareness Radar Trailer
Coordinate with Foster City PD to deploy a trailer to monitor speeds on streets and to raise awareness of speeding. It can be deployed long term along HIN and other arterials, or short term in neighborhoods. Use the priority locations and data in this plan to identify locations and schedule for deployment.
Lead agency: City of Foster City Police Department
Coordinating partners: City of Foster City Public Works LF2: Equitable Investment
Prioritize citywide safety investments in disadvantaged communities. Use the presence of disadvantaged communities (as identified with C/CAG Equity Focus Areas, MTC Equity Priority Communities, USDOT Historically Disadvantaged Communities, and/or USDOT Areas of Persistent Poverty) as a factor to elevate funding for certain projects or other safety-related programs.
Lead agency: City of Foster City Public Works
LF3: Prioritize Investments
Use the priority locations identified in this plan to determine safety project opportunities to advance for further project development and to identify funding. Identify pathways for improvement for the locations on the list.
Continue to engage the community to refine the priorities within the list of identified sites.
Lead agency: City of Foster City Public Works
LEO1: Roadway Safety Education in Schools
Continue School Travel Fellowship Program to provide the following:
• Technical assistance to schools and planners to implement demonstration projects • ATP Project Specialist to work with educators to provide technical assistance (bike rodeos, parent engagement workshops and resources, walk and bike audits, and additional support for walk/bike to school encouragement events) to schools in EPCs
Lead agency: SMCOE
Coordinating partners: County Public Health, Sustainability Department, SVBC LEO3: Educational Materials for New Facilities
Develop and distribute educational materials and/or videos demonstrating how to navigate and interact with newer active transportation facilities (e.g., bike boxes, Pedestrian Hybrid Beacons, separated bike lanes, etc.)
8.2 Attachment 2 - CCAG Countywide LRSP - Foster City Chapter
424
/ City of Foster City
San Mateo C/CAG Countywide LRSP. / 27
Include information about the purpose and goals of this infrastructure.
Lead agency: City of Foster City Public Works
LPE1: Annual Review
Provide an annual review of plan implementation progress. This review includes an update and presentation to City Council as well as a written update to the TSAC so that C/CAG may compile county plan implementation status.
Lead agency: City of Foster City Public Works
LPE2: Plan Update
Update the plan within five years of publication. The plan update will revise actions to reflect current crash trends and will integrate technological advancements and changes in best practices as needed.
Lead agency: City of Foster City Public Works
LPE4: Safe Routes to School
Continue to participate in school safety assessments at all public and private schools, develop implementation plans for improvements up to one quarter mile from the schools. Develop a plan and timeline to include all schools in the City.
Lead agency: SMCOE
Coordinating partners: City of Foster City Public Works LPE8: Speed Limits/Speed Management Plan
Per California Assembly Bill 43 (passed in 2021), identify business activity districts, safety corridors, and in areas with high ped/bike activities to implement reduced speeds. To the extent possible, complement the speed reduction with design treatments like those identified in this plan to effect reduced speeds by the desired amount.
Lead agency: City of Foster City Public Works
8.2 Attachment 2 - CCAG Countywide LRSP - Foster City Chapter
425
/ City of Foster City
San Mateo C/CAG Countywide LRSP. / 28
IMPLEMENTATION & MONITORING
A key part of achieving Foster City’s vision is consistently evaluating roadway safety performance and tracking progress towards the goals. The City of Foster City will develop a process to regularly collect data and information around the performance measures that can be used to assess changes city-wide and at the top priority locations.
Implementation actions are organized by plan goals and grouped by time: near-term actions, which Foster City can initiate immediately, and longer-term actions, which may require coordination and additional staff time.
This section identifies recommendations for Foster City and other county-level safety partners to implement the plan. These are aligned with the Safe System Approach and include a framework to measure plan progress over time.
Table 7. Foster City Goals and Measures of Success
GOAL MEASURE OF SUCCESS
1. Regularly monitor crashes to
respond to safety problems and
changing conditions. Prioritize
locations with high crash rates for
safety improvements.
• Number of LRSP project locations advanced through project development, reported at the agency level
• Annual and three-year total reported crashes, fatal/severe injury crashes, crashes by mode, and crashes by emphasis areas identified
• Implementation of a high-visibility media campaign
• Report-backs to the City Council and TSAC regarding community engagement, including information about outreach to
disadvantaged communities where applicable
• Number of trainings city staff have participated in regarding Safe System elements, available tools, or practices
• Improved data availability or maintenance to enhance safety analysis and practice
2. Provide opportunities for
community engagement to
identify issues and inform safety
solutions across the community.
• Distribution at the jurisdiction level for safety projects within equity focus areas (C/CAG EFAs or MTC EPCs) versus outside these areas • Report-backs to the City Council and TSAC regarding community engagement, including information about outreach to
disadvantaged communities where applicable.
• Expansion of SRTS and Roadway Safety Education in Schools programs to more schools within the City
• Community engagement included as part of all C/CAG-funded safety project development activities
• Number of engagement touchpoints and number of community member interactions citywide for safety plans or projects. • Percent of school district participation in SRTS and roadway safety education opportunities
8.2 Attachment 2 - CCAG Countywide LRSP - Foster City Chapter
426
/ City of Foster City
San Mateo C/CAG Countywide LRSP. / 29
Appendix A
Webmap Comments
City of Foster City
San Mateo C/CAG Countywide LRSP
8.2 Attachment 2 - CCAG Countywide LRSP - Foster City Chapter
427
DATE: June 16, 2025
TO: Mayor and Members of City Council
VIA: Stefan Chatwin, City Manager
FROM: Andrew Brozyna, Public Works Director
Zaheed Danish, Public Works Maintenance Manager
Greg Baeza, Public Works Maintenance Superintendent
DEPARTMENT: Public Works
SUBJECT: CONFIRMING THE REPORT ON THE COST OF REPAIRS,
APPROVING THE NOTICE OF LIEN AND RECORDATION OF
LIEN ASSESSING COSTS OF REPAIR AGAINST THE PARCEL
OF REAL PROPERTY LOCATED AT 800 REGULUS STREET
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the City Council adopt the attached resolution confirming the attached Report on the Cost of Repairs, approving the Notice of Lien and recordation of lien assessing costs of repair against real property located at 800 Regulus Street, Foster City California (APN 094-422-080).
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Property owners are required to maintain sidewalks adjacent to their property pursuant to State law and City Ordinance. The City has adopted a Private Sidewalk Inspection and Maintenance Policy which outlines a process whereby the City must notify a property owner of necessary repairs, and if the property owner does not undertake repairs, the City may complete repairs on behalf of a property owner at the owner’s expense.
Between August 2023 and June 2024, the City sent multiple notices to the property owner at 800 Regulus Street to repair their portion of the sidewalk. Even after repeated attempts to notify, the property owner did not undertake the repairs, so in accordance with the Sidewalk Policy, the City instructed its contractor to perform repairs to the sidewalk adjacent to 800 Regulus Street in June 2024 and submitted an invoice to the property owner for the repairs in July 2024 (Attachment 3). As of the date of this report, the property owner has not paid the invoice, and the City Council is recommended to confirm the attached report on the cost of repairs (Attachment 4) and assess the cost of repairs against the property as a special assessment lien (Attachment 5). The property owner
8.3 8.3 Staff Report
428
was notified by mail as required by law of the opportunity to dispute the charge at the June 16th City Council meeting (Attachment 2).
BACKGROUND
Property owners are required to maintain sidewalks adjacent to their properties pursuant to California Streets & Highways Code Sections §5600-5630 and Foster City Municipal Code Section 11.08.010 et seq. The City Council first adopted a formal Sidewalk Maintenance Policy in 2010 and adopted a comprehensive update to the Sidewalk Maintenance Policy in June 2024. The City’s Sidewalk Maintenance Policy implements State law and Foster City Municipal Code Section 11.08.010 et seq. and provides a process for the City to undertake repairs if a property owner is not responsive to notices by the City of necessary repairs. Property owners can also elect to have the City contractor complete the repairs at the property owner’s expense and reimburse the City later.
From July 2023 to present, the City's contractor has completed repairs on 21 properties— either at the property owner's request to have the repairs completed via City contractor, or due to a lack of response from the owner, necessitating City action. Costs of repairs ranged from $312.50 to $23,550.
Of the 21 repaired locations, one property owner has not provided payment. On August 8, 2023, the owner of 800 Regulus Street, adjacent to a segment of out of repair sidewalk on Regulus Street and Polaris Avenue, was advised in writing by certified mail that the sidewalk was in need of repair and posed a condition that endanger persons or property, that the sidewalk required repair in conformance with the City of Foster City Standards for Sidewalk Repair, that repairs were to commence within specified timeframes in conformance with the California Streets and Highways Code and that, if repairs were not commenced by that date or if repairs were commenced but were not diligently and without interruption prosecuted to completion, the Public Works Director for the City of Foster City would make the required repairs and that the costs incurred by the City in making the repairs would become liens against adjacent property.
On September 8, 2023, the owner of 800 Regulus Street was provided with a written Notice to Repair by certified mail.
In June 2024, the City Council updated the Sidewalk Policy, so staff mailed a second Repair Notice by certified mail on June 5, 2024, and a second Repair Notice on June 10, 2024, to ensure that all due process was followed per the updated Sidewalk Policy.
The property owner did not repair the sidewalk after receiving multiple written notices as well as engaging in in-person and telephone communications with the Public Works Maintenance Superintendent and the Public Works Maintenance Manager. Therefore, a notice of the work was posted at the property on June 10, 2024, at 12:55 pm. The City’s sidewalk repair contractor was dispatched and performed the required repairs on June 19, 2024, as allowed by state law and in order to ensure pedestrian safety.
Invoice 16184 (Attachment 3) was duly submitted to the owner for payment on July 29,
8.3 8.3 Staff Report
429
2024, with a due date of August 28, 2024. The invoice was subsequently sent by certified mail on December 19, 2024, which was signed for on December 23, 2024. This invoice is unpaid and a late penalty of 10% has been added to the total due as stated on the invoice.
The owner of 800 Regulus Street was provided with written notice as required by law that the City Council will consider the attached report specifying the repairs, their cost and the proposed cost to be levied to pay the cost of repairs and pass upon the report at this meeting (Attachment 2).
ANALYSIS
As of the date of this report, the owner of 800 Regulus Street has not paid the $10,800.90 owed for the cost of repairs to the sidewalk adjacent to the property, which is the responsibility of the property owner. This total includes the Administrative Fee of $419.00 in the Council-adopted FY 2022-23 Master Fees and Services Charges Schedule which was in effect at the time of the repair as well as a 10% late penalty fee.
In accordance with the City’s adopted Sidewalk Maintenance Policy, the City Council is recommended to confirm the Report on the Cost of Repairs (Attachment 4) and assess the repair cost against the parcel of real property located adjacent to the area of sidewalk that has been repaired.
CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT
This item to approve the recovery of costs relating to the sidewalk repair is not subject to review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21000, et seq. and the CEQA Guidelines (14 Cal. Code Regs. §§ 15000 et. seq.), including without limitation, Public Resources Code section 21065 and California Code of Regulations 15378 as this is not a “project” that may cause a direct, or reasonably foreseeable indirect, physical change in the environment.
Additionally, the repair of the sidewalk is categorically exempt from review under CEQA pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 15301 (Class 1-Existing Facilities) as the project involved the repair of an existing sidewalk and involved negligible or no expansion of use.
FISCAL IMPACT
Taking this action will allow the City to place a special assessment lien on the property to recover $10,800.90 for the cost of the repairs, Administrative Fee and late penalty.
CITY COUNCIL VISION, MISSION, AND VALUE/PRIORITY AREA
Facilities and Infrastructure
ATTACHMENTS:
8.3 8.3 Staff Report
430
Attachment 1 – Resolution
Attachment 2 – Billing Notice
Attachment 3 – Invoice 16184
Attachment 4 – Report on the Cost of Repairs
Attachment 5 – Notice of Lien
Attachment 6 – Photographs of repairs at 800 Regulus Street
8.3 8.3 Staff Report
431
3 4
7 2
RESOLUTION NO. ______
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FOSTER CITY
CONFIRMING THE REPORT ON THE COST OF REPAIRS, APPROVING THE
NOTICE OF LIEN AND RECORDATION OF LIEN AND ASSESSING COSTS OF REPAIR AGAINST THE PARCEL OF REAL PROPERTY LOCATED AT 800 REGULUS STREET
CITY OF FOSTER CITY
WHEREAS, property owners are required to maintain sidewalks adjacent to their property pursuant to California Streets & Highways Code Sections §5600-5630 and Foster City Municipal Code section 11.08.010 et seq.; and WHEREAS, the City Council first adopted a formal Sidewalk Maintenance Policy in 2010, and adopted a comprehensive update to the Sidewalk Maintenance Policy in June 2024; and
WHEREAS, the City’s Sidewalk Maintenance Policy implements State law and Foster City Municipal Code section 11.08.010 et seq.; and WHEREAS, on August 8, 2023, the owner of property located at 800 Regulus Street, Foster City California (APN 094-422-080) was provided with written notice that their sidewalks were out of repair and in a condition to endanger persons or property, that the sidewalk required repair in conformance with the City of Foster City Standards for Sidewalk Repair, that repairs were to commence within specified timeframes in conformance with the California Streets and Highways Code and that, if repairs were not commenced by that date or if repairs were commenced but were not diligently and without interruption prosecuted to completion, the Public Works Director for the City of Foster City would make the required repairs and that the costs incurred by the City in making the repairs would become liens against adjacent property; and WHEREAS, the property owner did not commence repairs by the date specified nor did they undertake repairs to completion or elected to have the City's contractor perform the repairs, and
WHEREAS, the Public Works Director undertook the required repairs and completed such repairs as indicated in Exhibit A which is attached and hereby incorporated into this Resolution; and
WHEREAS, the owner of property located at 800 Regulus Street, Foster City, California was provided with written notice that the Public Works Director would prepare a report specifying the repairs which were made, the cost of the repairs, a description of the real property in front of which the repairs were made and the assessment against each lot or parcel of land proposed to be levied to pay the cost of
8.3 Attachment 1 - Resolution
432
3 4
7 2
repairs and that the City Council of the City of Foster City would hear and pass upon the report by the Public Works Director on the cost of repair at this meeting; and WHEREAS, on June 16, 2025, the City Council heard the reports and all comments, objections and protests from the property owner and from other interested persons; and
WHEREAS, the approval of the recovery of costs relating to the sidewalk repair is not subject to review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21000, et seq. and the CEQA Guidelines (14 Cal.
Code Regs. §§ 15000 et. seq.), including without limitation, Public Resources Code section 21065 and California Code of Regulations 15378 as this is not a “project” that may cause a direct, or reasonably foreseeable indirect, physical change in the environment. Additionally, the repair of the sidewalk is categorically exempt from review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 15301 (Class 1-Existing Facilities) as the project involved the repair of an existing sidewalk and involved negligible or no expansion of use.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Foster City does hereby:
1. Confirm the Report on the Cost of Repairs for 800 Regulus, attached hereto as Exhibit A; and
2. Assess the real property owner for 800 Regulus $10,800.90 as more specifically detailed in the Notice of Lien, attached hereto as Exhibit B; and
3. Order that the Notice of Lien shall be delivered to the county auditor, who shall enter the amount thereof on the county assessment book opposite the description of the particular property and the amount shall be collected together with all other taxes thereon against the property pursuant to Government Code section 54988. The City Attorney may make edits to the Notice of Lien as necessary for recordation, consistent with this Resolution.
8.3 Attachment 1 - Resolution
433
3 4
7 2
PASSED AND ADOPTED as a Resolution of the City Council of the City of Foster City at the Regular Meeting held on the 16 th day June, 2025, by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
____________________________
STACY JIMENEZ, MAYOR
ATTEST:
________________________________
PRISCILLA SCHAUS, CITY CLERK
8.3 Attachment 1 - Resolution
434
BILLING NOTICE
June 4, 2025
Tripathi Kailash Pati
800 Regulus Street
Foster City, CA 94404
SUBJECT: Payment for sidewalk repair on Regulus Street and Polaris Avenue Dear Property Owner:
On August 8, 2023, September 8, 2023, and June 10, 2024, you were notified that the sidewalk on Regulus Street and Polaris Avenue adjacent to the property you own at 800 Regulus Street, Foster City, California, was out of repair and in condition to endanger persons or property, that property owners are required to maintain sidewalks adjacent to their property pursuant to Streets & Highways Code Sections §5600-5630, and that the subject sidewalk required repair by owner. This repair work was required to include a reconstruction of the damaged area, specifically, saw cut, removal of sidewalk, removal of tree roots, if any, installation of root barrier, and reconstruction of the sidewalk with class “A” concrete.
You were given 21 days from the initial notification on August 8, 2023, to commence repairs and were notified that if you did not commence repairs by that date the Public Works Director for the City of Foster City would make the required repairs to the sidewalk and that the costs incurred by the City in making the repairs to the sidewalk would become a lien on your property if not paid.
You did not commence repairs within the required time frame. The Public Works Director for the City of Foster City therefore undertook the required repairs to the sidewalk and the repairs were completed on June 19, 2024. The cost for these repairs, including an administrative fee and late payment fee, is $10,800.90, which amount is due and payable to the City. Checks should be made payable to “City of Foster City” and mailed to City Hall, 610 Foster. City Boulevard, Foster City CA 94404. Please address the envelope to the attention of the Sidewalk Maintenance Program. Credit card payment can be accepted from individuals coming into City Hall. Credit card transactions may be subject to a convenience fee charged by the credit card company.
8.3 Attachment 2 - Billing Notice
435
As legally mandated, the Public Works Director will prepare a report to be filed with the City Council specifying the repairs that were made, the cost of the repairs, a description of the real property adjacent to which the repairs were made and the assessment against each lot or parcel of land proposed to be levied to pay the cost of repairs. This report will include a description of the property you own at 800 Regulus Street, Foster City, California. If full payment for the repairs is not received within five days after the hearing date set below, the costs incurred by the City in making the repairs to the sidewalk will become a lien on your property.
If you choose to pay this bill prior to the time that the report goes to the City Council, the report will indicate that the payment has been made and no further action will be required.
If you wish to dispute, object or protest this amount, you are invited to attend the City Council meeting at which the City Council will hear and pass upon the Report by the Public Works Director on the cost of the repair.
The City Council meeting at which the City Council is expected to receive a report on the sidewalks that were repaired by the Public Works Director is:
DATE: June 16, 2025
TIME: 6:30 PM
PLACE: City Council Chambers 620 Foster City· Boulevard Foster City, CA 94404 If you have any questions or need additional information, please do not hesitate to contact the Public Works Maintenance Division at 650-286-8140.
Sincerely,
Andrew Brozyna
Public Works Director/Designee City of Foster City
8.3 Attachment 2 - Billing Notice
436
8.3 Attachment 3 - Invoice 16184
437
8.3 Attachment 3 - Invoice 16184
438
8.3 Attachment 3 - Invoice 16184
439
8.3 Attachment 3 - Invoice 16184
440
8.3 Attachment 3 - Invoice 16184
441
8.3 Attachment 3 - Invoice 16184
442
REPORT ON THE COST OF REPAIRS
On August 8, 2023, the owner of 800 Regulus Street, Foster City, CA (APN 094-422-080) was advised that the sidewalk on Regulus Street and Polaris Avenue located adjacent to his/her property was out of repair and in condition to endanger persons or property, that property owners are required to maintain sidewalks adjacent to their property pursuant to Streets & Highways Code Sections §5600-5630, Foster City Municipal Code Section and the City of Foster City Standards for Sidewalk Repair that the sidewalk on Regulus Street and Polaris Avenue required a reconstruction of the damaged area, including but not limited to, saw cut, removal of sidewalk, removal of tree roots, if any, installation of root barrier, and reconstruction of the sidewalk with class "A" concrete per the City of Foster City Standards for Sidewalk Repair.
As required by law, the property owner was given until June 5, 2024, to commence repairs and was notified that if he/she did not commence repairs by that date, or if he/she commenced repairs but did not diligently and without interruption prosecute such repair work to completion, the Public Works Director for the City of Foster City would make the required repairs to the sidewalk and that the costs incurred by the City in making the repairs to the sidewalk would become a lien against the property.
The property owner did not commence repairs by the date specified, did not prosecute such repairs to completion, or requested that the City perform the repairs. As authorized by California Streets and Highways Code Sections §5600-5630, Foster City Municipal Code Section and the City of Foster City Standards for Sidewalk Repair, the Public Works Director for the City of Foster City undertook the required repairs. Repairs to the sidewalk on Regulus Street and Polaris Avenue adjacent to the property located at 800 Regulus Street, Foster City, CA were completed on June 19, 2024. The following repairs were made and the costs of the repairs are as follows:
• Removal and replacement of 55 square feet of driveway apron at $30.00 per square foot (subtotal $1,650.00);
• Removal and replacement of 310 square feet of sidewalk in driveway area at $25.00 per square foot (subtotal $7,750.00);
• Tier 2 Administrative Fee of $419.00 per the FY 2023-2024 City of Foster City Master Fee and Service Charges Schedule.
• Late fee accrued after the due date of August 28, 2024, of $981.90 Cost of repairs: $9,400.00
Administrative Fee $419.00
Late penalty (10%): $981.90
Total Amount Due: $10,800.90
Report Dated: June 16, 2025
Prepared by: Andrew Brozyna, Public Works Director, City of Foster City
8.3 Attachment 4 - Report on Cost of Repairs
443
NOTICE OF LIEN
Pursuant to the Improvement Act of 1911, I did, on the 19 th day of June, 2024, cause the sidewalk, curb, and gutter adjacent to the real property hereinafter described, to be repaired and improved, and the City Council for· the City of Foster City did, on the 2nd day of June, 2025, by Resolution No. ___assess the actual cost of such repair upon the real property hereinafter described, and the same has not been paid nor any part thereof, and Foster City, does hereby claim a lien on said real in the sum of Ten Thousand, Eight Hundred dollars and Ninety cents ($10,800.90), and the same shall be a lien upon said real property until the said sum, with interest at the rate of 10% percent per annum, from the said day of June 2, 2025, has been paid in full and discharged of record.
The real property hereinbefore mentioned and upon which a lien is claimed, is that certain piece or parcel of land lying and being in the City of Foster City, the County of San Mateo, State of California, and particularly described as follows:
800 Regulus Street, Foster City California (Assessor’s Parcel Number 094-422-080) Dated this 2nd day of June, 2025.
_________________________________________
Andrew Brozyna
Public Works Director
City of Foster City
8.3 Attachment 5 - Notice of Lien
444
800 Regulus Street - Sidewalk before
8.3 Attachment 6 - Photographs of repairs at 800 Regulus Street
445
800 Regulus Street - Tree root under sidewalk
800 Regulus Street - Repaired
8.3 Attachment 6 - Photographs of repairs at 800 Regulus Street
446
DATE: June 16, 2025
TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council
VIA: Stefan Chatwin, City Manager
Marlene Subhashini, Assistant City Manager
FROM: Sofia Mangalam, Community Development Director
Helen Gannon Telfer, Senior Planner
DEPARTMENT: Community Development
SUBJECT: PROPOSED GILEAD CAMPUS EXPANSION PROJECT IN THE
CHESS DRIVE/HATCH DRIVE AREA INCLUDING PHASED
DEMOLITION OF TWELVE (12) EXISTING OFFICE BUILDINGS
(TOTALING 191,507 SQUARE FEET (SF)), TOGETHER WITH
THE CONSTRUCTION OF UP TO A MAXIMUM OF 800,000 SF
BIOTECHNOLOGY OR RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT USES,
IN ADDITION TO A SINGLE, STANDALONE, MULTI-STORY
PARKING GARAGE AT 1155, 1165, 1185 CHESS DRIVE
INTRODUCTION
Pursuant to Chapter 17.72, Development Project Preliminary Review Procedures, of Title 17, Zoning, of the Foster City Municipal Code (FCMC), the purpose of this meeting is to introduce the proposed Gilead Campus Expansion Project in the Chess Drive/Hatch Drive area to the City Council and public and receive feedback prior to initiating the entitlement process. The Gilead Campus Expansion Project proposes phased demolition of twelve (12) existing office buildings (totaling 191,507 SF), together with the construction of up to a maximum of 800,000 SF biotechnology or research and development uses, in addition to a single, standalone, multi-story parking garage at 1155, 1165, 1185 Chess Drive. No formal action will be taken at this meeting.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
On February 14, 2025, Gilead Science, Inc. (“applicant”) submitted a Preliminary Review application (PR2025-0003) for the proposed Gilead Campus Expansion project (“project”) on
9.1 9.1 Staff Report
447
the subject property located at 1155, 1165, and 1185 Chess Drive to support its long-term expansion in the City.
The subject property is designated as Chess/Hatch Office Research in the General Plan and zoned as CM/PD (Commercial Mix/Planned Development) with a Chess Hatch General Development Plan (GDP) via Ordinance No. 573.
The proposed project would proceed in two (2) phases (see pages 3-5 of the staff report).
The applicant is requesting the following entitlements:
•An Amendment to the GDP for the Chess-Hatch Master Plan •A Vesting Tentative Map
•A Use Permit/Specific Development Plan for only Phase #1.
Chapter 17.72, Development Project Preliminary Review Procedures, of FCMC, establishes preliminary screening of development projects involving proposed general plan, general development plan, or zoning ordinance amendments (“prescreening”). The proposed project includes an amendment to the GDP (zoning ordinance amendment) in addition to other land use actions. Therefore, the proposed project is being presented to the City Council in a study session to solicit initial comments/ feedback. No formal action will be taken at this meeting. Nothing in this current review procedure grants in any binding determination of the rights, interests, or entitlements of the City, project proponent, or any interested person with respect to this project upon which preliminary review is conducted.
BACKGROUND
The subject site is approximately 11.9 acres in size and has a long history, as it relates to the current land use designation, established in 2006, and the GDP, which was established via Ordinance No. 573 in 2013.
A full, comprehensive history of the site/project (from 2006-2024) can be reviewed in Attachment 1.
ANALYSIS
The subject site is made up of three (3) parcels as follows: 094-010-500 (4 acres), 094-010- 510 (5 acres), and 094-010-100 (2.90 acres). Together, the three (3) sites make up the Chess Hatch property, totaling approximately 11.9 acres of land bounded by Chess Drive, Foster City Boulevard, and State Route 92. The current site includes 12 vacant one-and-two-story commercial/light industrial buildings (totaling approximately 191,500 SF) and surface parking.
9.1 9.1 Staff Report
448
Figure 1. Chess Hatch Property (Nearmap, 2025)
On February 14, 2025, the applicant submitted a Preliminary Review application (PR2025- 0003) for the Gilead Campus Expansion project on the subject property located at 1155, 1165, and 1185 Chess Hatch Drive.
The proposed project would proceed in two (2) phases:
•Phase #1: Demolition of eight (8) of the 12 existing office buildings (approximately 123,536 SF) and construction of a two-story building up to approximately 200,000 SF in size with surface parking.
Chess Drive
State Route 92
Foster City Blvd
094-010-500
4 acres
094-010-510
5 acres
094-010-100
2.9 acres
9.1 9.1 Staff Report
449
Figure 2. Graphic of Phase One (Gilead Conceptual Plans) Figure 3. Graphic of Phase One (Gilead Conceptual Plans) •Phase #2: This phase would consist of the demolition of the remaining four (4) existing buildings (approximately 67,971 SF) and the construction of one (1) R&D building up to a maximum of approximately 600,000 SF and up to 190 feet in height, together with one (1) multi-story parking garage. The new building would replace some of the surface parking used in Phase #1.
9.1 9.1 Staff Report
450
Figure 4. Graphic of full build out including Phase 2 (Gilead Conceptual Plans) Figure 5. Graphic of full build out including Phase 2 (Gilead Conceptual Plans) See Attachment 2 for the detailed project description from the applicant.
The proposal was scheduled for an Interdepartmental Evaluation Committee (IDEC) Meeting on March 5, 2025, to provide some preliminary feedback to the applicant from various departments. On April 3, 2025, IDEC comments were sent to the applicant. Given the preliminary nature of the proposal, the IDEC comment letter (Attachment 3) included unfulfilled submittal requirements, required supplemental studies and documents, and comments/project considerations from staff.
9.1 9.1 Staff Report
451
NOTICING/PUBLIC OUTREACH
The public was advised of this meeting in the following ways:
•Notice of the study session in the Foster City Islander – June 4, 2025 •Electronic mailing to the project applicant – June 3, 2025 •Foster City website: www.fostercity.org – May 29, 2025 •Posting at all Public Posting Places – May 30, 2025
•Noticing to Planning Listserv – May 30, 2025
•Mailing to property owners who own property within a 1,000-foot radius – May 30, 2025
GENERAL PLAN - LAND USE
General Plan Land Use Designation: The Property is designated as Chess/Hatch Office Research in the General Plan Land Use and Circulation Element as described below:
“Areas with this designation allow commercial, office, industrial, biotechnology, and other such compatible uses, including vehicle parking in both parking structures and at-grade parking lots on the project site. Incompatible uses such as housing, schools, day care, and other uses serving primarily children are prohibited. Vertically and horizontally mixed-use developments that maximize the use of land, organize land uses and pedestrian/vehicular circulation in a safe, logical and functional manner and establish a safe, logical and functional design relationship with adjacent land uses is allowed within this designation. Uses must meet the requirements of Chapter 17.68, General Performance Standards, of Title 17, Zoning, of the Foster City Municipal Code. FARs for developments in this area would range from 0.6 to
1.55 FAR.” (page 3-18 of General Plan adopted on February 1, 2016).
Staff Comments: The proposed project request to allow biotechnology (R&D) uses, and the proposed revision to the GDP to remove “office” use, is consistent with the General Plan land use designation for the subject site. In addition, the applicant is proposing, at complete build- out, a total Floor Area Ratio (FAR) of 1.54, which is within the allowable limits of the General Plan FAR of 1.55.
Zoning: The subject site is zoned C-M/PD (Commercial Mix/Planned Development), and the GDP for the subject site was approved via Ordinance No. 573 with the following attached exhibits. The applicant is proposing the amendments to the GDP (Attachment 2) and further described below:
•Exhibit A – GDP Narrative for the Chess Hatch Master Plan as follows:
“The City of Foster City Zoning Map is hereby amended to reclassify the +/- 11.9-acre land bounded by Chess Drive, Foster City Boulevard, and State Route 92 (APNs: 094- 010-100, -500, -510) to change the Zoning designation from M-1/PD (Light Industrial/Planned Development) to C-M/PD (Commercial Mix/Planned Development) with a General Development Plan to allow up to 800,000 square feet of office, biotechnology, or research and development uses and parking structures and at-grade
9.1 9.1 Staff Report
452
parking lots; accessory uses, such as commercial, industrial or light assembly uses which are incidental or supportive to the primary office, biotechnology or research and development uses; or other uses which, in the opinion of the planning director, are similar to and no more offensive than the above-listed uses; with up to 5,000 sq. ft. of the total Project square footage to be used for retail, restaurant or other business-supporting ancillary commercial amenities; except that the following uses are excluded: housing, schools, day care, and other uses primarily serving children.” The applicant is requesting the proposed changes to the Chess Hatch GDP to remove office use from the allowable uses. The total developable square footage will remain unchanged. •Exhibit B: GDP graphic for the Chess Hatch Master Plan. A site plan for the proposed development with general height and setbacks.
The applicant is requesting to delete this Exhibit and include a new/updated site plan since the graphic on this Exhibit pertains to the original project plans approved by the City in 2013.
•Exhibit C: GDP Limitations for the Chess Hatch Master Plan. This exhibit includes language to ensure compliance with mitigation measures included in the Supplemental EIR and other conditions in the Chess Hatch Master DA.
The applicant is requesting to remove reference to the expired DA and update language as necessary pertaining to Mitigation Measures, since the Initial Study has been initiated for the proposed project, and it might amend existing measures or add new measures. •Exhibit D: Project Phasing Exhibits.
The applicant is requesting to replace the previous site plan and phasing as it pertains to the original project approved by the City in 2013 with an updated phasing graphic.
Staff comments: The proposed changes to the GDP as explained above, while maintaining the same full buildout at the subject site will require approval of the GDP amendment and associated CEQA documents.
Foster City Municipal Code
Chapter 17.78 General Performance Standards
General Plan land use designation for the subject site, Chess/Hatch Office Research, includes that the uses in this designation shall comply with the requirements of FCMC Chapter 17.68, General Performance Standards.
Staff comments: The applicant will be required to meet the City’s standards related to:
transportation, storage and disposal of all inflammable and hazardous materials; noise; vibration; air pollution; and other performance standards during the construction of the project
9.1 9.1 Staff Report
453
and throughout the operation of the proposed buildings. On May 19, 2025, the City Council approved a Task Order with PlaceWorks, Inc. to provide environmental review and documentation (Initial Study) for the proposed 800,000 SF of biotechnology or research and development uses at the subject site. PlaceWorks in their proposal has included preparing the following technical studies: Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, and Energy; Cultural Resources; Hydrology and Water Supply; Noise and Vibration; Shadow and Transportation.
These technical studies will guide staff in evaluating the project for the applicable performance standards.
POLICY CONSIDERATIONS
Based on the goals and vision of the General Plan, the project description and other documents submitted to date, staff identified the following General Plan policies and other topics which need to be considered during the review and analysis of the project.
1. Periodic Monitoring of Land Uses Throughout the City General Plan Policy LUC-C includes
“Periodically monitor land uses throughout the City to determine when changes in land use may be appropriate, actual land use practices, economic practicality of maintaining current land uses and level of property maintenance. Specific future actions might include:
a. Revitalization of older neighborhood retail centers. b. Changes in land use designations and zoning where necessary to respond to changes in economic conditions and/or City needs.
c. Meeting with property owners to discuss possible redevelopment opportunities and constraints, especially in the Chess Drive/Hatch Drive area and along the northeast side of Foster City Boulevard.
General Plan policy LUC-K includes:
Encourage the aggregation and redevelopment of under-utilized properties and/or outdated buildings under multiple ownerships in the older commercial/industrial areas of the City, specifically the Chess Drive/Hatch Drive area.
Staff Comments: The proposed project will redevelop an underutilized site by demolishing long-vacant buildings and constructing a new R&D facility, which is consistent with the subject site’s land use designation. This proposal conforms with the Land Use and Circulation Element policies noted above by replacing vacant and deteriorating structures with modern R&D buildings and bringing economic vitality to the Chess Hatch area and surrounding neighborhood.
2. Jobs/Housing Balance
General Plan Policy LUC-C-2 includes:
The City will continue to strive to maintain a balance between the number of jobs in the City and the number of housing units available to house workers. To achieve and maintain such a balance, the City will encourage and support, through other policies and programs
9.1 9.1 Staff Report
454
of this Element and the Housing Element, mixed use projects which provide both housing and employment opportunities, and whenever possible, the development of affordable housing.
Staff comments: The 2009 Chess Hatch Master Plan Fiscal Impact Analysis Final Report prepared by Economics Research Associates (ERA) estimated square footage per employee at build-out using industry standards for office commercial space (one employee per 350 SF of space). The original project estimated total number of employees on-site to increase substantially from 380 to approximately 2,290 persons.
It is implied that an office use tends to generate more employees per square foot than an R&D use because R&D space requires more space for labs, specialized equipment etc. (typically one employee per 500 SF of space). However, staff would like to see a comparison of jobs as well as total employee count between the two (2) scenarios, including option 1: 800,000 SF of office, biotechnology, or research and development uses; vs option 2: 800,000 SF of office use only.
On June 5, 2025, staff requested an updated Fiscal Impact Analysis from qualified consulting firms for the proposed project.
3. Assure Safe Commercial and Industrial Uses
General Plan Policy LUC-F includes that:
Assure Safe Commercial and Industrial Uses Ensure that commercial and industrial uses are safe and strictly control any industrial by-products, odors or emissions which may adversely affect the health or safety of Foster City residents or workers and the overall environment in Foster City, as provided in Chapter 17.68, General Performance Standards of the Foster City Municipal Code.”
Staff comments: As noted earlier, the applicant will be required to meet the City’s standards related to: transportation, storage and disposal of all inflammable and hazardous materials; noise; vibration; air pollution; and other performance standards during the construction of the project and throughout the operation of the proposed buildings. The technical studies prepared for the Initial Study will guide staff in evaluating the proposed project for the applicable performance standards.
4. Traffic and Transportation Impacts
The Land Use and Circulation Element evaluated several intersections during morning and evening off-peak hours under existing conditions and cumulative plus General Plan buildout conditions, including the intersection of State Route 92 ramps and Chess Drive.
General Plan Policy LUC-F includes that:
The City shall seek to achieve a traffic service level of “C” or better on City streets and level of “D” or better during peak traffic hours, although it will be necessary to accept level of service “E” or “F” at the SR 92 Westbound Ramps/Chess Drive, the Foster City
9.1 9.1 Staff Report
455
Blvd./Metro Center Blvd./Triton Drive, Vintage Park Drive/Chess Drive, and the Foster City Boulevard/Chess intersections due to their role as access points to the freeway system. The level of service standard will be maintained through the following means:
a. Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS)
b. Transportation Demand Management (TDM) for development projects c. Capital Improvement Program and coordination with federal, state, county and district funding programs for street
and other transportation improvements.
d. Developer payment of pro rata fair share of traffic improvement costs for new developments.
The LOS of an intersection is a qualitative measure used to describe operational conditions. LOS ranges from “A” (best), which represents minimal delays experienced by roadway users, to “F” (worst), which represents heavy delays experienced by roadway users and a facility that is operating at or near its functional capacity.
The applicant has provided a “Preliminary Transportation Impact Study Results” prepared by Kimely-Horn (Attachment 4). For the purpose of the study, the traffic consultant used custom (project-specific) trip rates provided by Gilead, derived and utilized in the Gilead Sciences Integrated Corporate Campus Master Plan Subsequent Environmental Impact Report (Gilead Campus Master Plan SEIR). A trip reduction of 23.3% was applied to the Project to reflect the implementation of the Gilead Integrated Campus TDM program.
The Study concludes that all study intersections operate at LOS standards that are consistent with Foster City standards and plans (as shown in Table 1).
9.1 9.1 Staff Report
456
Table 1: LOS Analysis
Staff comments: Staff will engage a Traffic Engineer to peer review the study prepared by Kimley-Horn and confirm whether the approach of using ‘custom trip rates from Gilead Campus Master Plan SEIR’ is valid for the proposed project.
Public Works (PW) staff in the initial IDEC response letter dated April 3, 2025, has noted that the existing level of service at the Foster City Blvd. and Chess Dr. intersections at PM peak is LOS E. The existing plus Phase 1 project conditions at the same intersection at PM peak will still have LOS E with an increase in average delay times. However, both the cumulative conditions through 2040, and the full project buildout conditions will have LOS F with a significant increase in the overall average delay times. A study that provides an evaluation of both the LOS and average delay data with the required and recommended TDM measures implemented at each condition is needed for review. As part of the study, future roadway improvements may be identified to mitigate any adverse traffic impacts associated with the project at these key intersections. Such mitigation measures will be incorporated into the conditions of approval for the project.
5. On-Site Vehicular Circulation
General Plan Policy LUC-E-5 includes that:
New commercial and industrial developments shall be designed so that, wherever necessary and possible, entrance to the projects can be gained by way of left- or right- turn only lanes. Only the minimum number of entrance or exit points shall be allowed as are needed to ensure safe and efficient internal traffic flow and to reduce through traffic delays on public roads serving the project.
There are three (3) existing driveways from Chess Drive to the subject property. The applicant proposes adding additional vehicular access from Chess Drive.
Staff comments: Staff will evaluate ingress/egress, vehicular circulation, and traffic safety, as well as the impact on City Streets, intersections, and the immediate neighborhood. PW staff, based on their preliminary review, included that the “driveway near intersection of
9.1 9.1 Staff Report
457
Foster City Boulevard & Chess Drive will need to be removed, if not as part of phase I but as part of phase II as it is too close to the intersection.”
6. On-Site Parking
Ensure that adequate off-street parking is incorporated into new and modified projects and designed for safe and effective circulation.
General Plan Policy LUC-G-1, includes:
The City shall continue to incorporate parking and internal circulation design into its overall review of project design. The review shall include compliance with City off-street parking design standards and ratios.
FCMC Section 17.62.600 Off-street parking requirements, list the amount of parking required for R&D at one parking stall for each 300 SF of gross floor area. The applicant is proposing the following parking for the proposed project as included in Table 2:
Table 2: Proposed Parking
Required Parking
per FCMC
section 17.62.600 Proposed Parking
Phase 1 parking
- estimated 180,000 sf to 200,000 sf; exact SF
per final Use Permit
- for this demonstration, 180,000 sf is used for
calculation.
600 157
Full build out - 800,000 sf 2667 694
The applicant has provided a parking study recommending that the Gilead Integrated Campus Master Plan parking rates be used to estimate demand for the proposed Gilead Campus Expansion at Chess/Hatch site. Using Gilead Integrated Campus Master Plan parking rates for the laboratory and applying a 15% reduction per FCMC Section
17.62.060.D.3 to reflect Gilead’s comprehensive TDM program, the expansion at the Chess/Hatch Property would need to provide a minimum of 694 parking spaces for a full build-out.
Staff comments: The Planning Commission may grant a deviation from the requirement of off-street parking. Staff will engage with a qualified Traffic Engineer to peer review the parking study. Upon completion of the peer review, staff will present the findings and recommendations to the Planning Commission and City Council for consideration and prior to making a final decision on the proposed project.
7. EMID Services (Water and Sewer)
9.1 9.1 Staff Report
458
The following factors need to be considered further in evaluating the feasibility of the proposed project on the subject site:
a. Potable Water: The availability of adequate potable water to serve the proposed project without causing a diminution of water for existing residents and businesses needs to be evaluated. A Water Supply Assessment study will need to be prepared to determine if there is sufficient infrastructure capacity to serve the project site. b. Sewer Capacity: The District’s existing sewer collection system capacity and its ability to meet additional sewage flow impacts without causing a diminution of service for existing residents and businesses need to be evaluated.
Staff comments: PW staff in the IDEC letter dated April 3, 2025, added a comment, “Water Supply Assessment and Water and Wastewater Capacity studies are required.” Staff will further evaluate the water supply assessment and wastewater/water capacity studies to determine if there is sufficient infrastructure capacity to serve the project site or if any system upgrades to increase capacity are necessary before approval of Use Permit.
8. Water Neutrality Ordinance
On May 1, 2023, the EMID Board of Directors adopted a Water Neutrality Ordinance to implement water reduction regulations for applicable future and new developments to ensure that new development(s) does not adversely affect the City's water supply. The Ordinance requires new development(s), redevelopment or changes in use within the EMID service area that will require a new water service or will increase water demand above the existing water demand level to offset the projected water demand with water efficiency/conservation/retrofit measures to create a neutral impact on the overall water use demand.
Staff comments: The applicant is required to complete the Water Neutrality Calculator to determine the initial new water demand/off set requirement. PW staff in the IDEC letter dated April 3, 2025, added a comment, “Water Neutrality Compliance will need to be achieved as part of the project, with offset calculations being submitted as part of the Use Permit.”
9. Updated Environmental Review
The Chess Hatch Master Plan was evaluated in an EIR that was certified in November 2009 (SCH No. 2008122065) and subsequently amended with an Addendum in 2013.
The Master Plan EIR analyzed the demolition of 190,000 SF of existing buildings and the development of 800,000 SF of new office uses (including flexible space for retail and other amenities), for a net new development of 610,000 SF. On September 3, 2013, the City Council approved GDP to allow up to 800,000 SF of office, biotechnology, or research and development on the Chess-Hatch property via Ordinance No. 573, followed by Planning Commission approval of the Use Permit for the original project.
It should be noted that the technical studies and other requirements for the EIR have changed over the years since the Master Plan EIR was prepared in 2009, particularly
9.1 9.1 Staff Report
459
those involving transportation impacts, which have transitioned from primarily relying on LOS standards to using Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) as a key metric for environmental analysis.
Staff comments: Based on the preliminary review of the current proposal, staff has determined that an Initial Study pursuant to CEQA is required to include updated technical studies pertaining to air quality, noise, hydrology and water assessment, visual quality, greenhouse gas emissions, transportation, cultural and paleontological resources, hazards and hazardous materials, and other environmental factors.
10. Fiscal Impact
Should the project continue forward towards Council approval, the project will generate revenue through Impact Fees (based on the current Master Fee Schedule). The approximate estimate is listed below in Table 3:
Table 3: Generated Impact Fees
Affordable Housing Impact
Fee/Commercial Linkage Fee
$18M
Parks Facilities Impact Fee
$2.175M
Public Safety Impact Fee
$229,000
Transportation Impact Fee
$743,000
Staff comments: In order to assess the complete fiscal impact, staff requested an updated Fiscal Impact Analysis from qualified consulting firms for the proposed project as well as a timeline from Gilead regarding the anticipated completion of full build-out, including Phase 2.
CONCLUSION
Foster City has been home to Gilead Sciences for over three decades. The biopharmaceutical campus headquartered in Foster City is one of the City’s top ten (10) employers. When the Chess Hatch Master Plan and Final EIR were originally approved, the maximum build-out parameters for office and biopharmaceutical laboratory were identified in the GDP. These maximum parameters were established to quantify the review of the EIR and the environmental impacts associated with the project at full buildout.
On the current Gilead campus, Gilead has been expanding its facilities by adding new lab and office buildings, as well as parking structures over the years. Within the Vintage Park area, Gilead recently completed a Wellbeing Center, a private park, adding employee amenities to their campus, as well as a new research and development building at 331
9.1 9.1 Staff Report
460
Lakeside Drive and a proposal for a similar lab building at 335 Lakeside Drive is currently under review. As noted in the project description submitted by Gilead on June 6, 2025 (Attachment 2), to continue buildout of the campus and fulfill long-term expansion in the City, Gilead is proposing an amendment to the Chess Hatch GDP, which aims to enhance Gilead’s research capabilities to support its growing pipeline.
NEXT STEPS
In order to review and ultimately approve the proposed amendment to the Chess Hatch GDP, a Planning Commission Study Session will be scheduled where the Planning Commission will consider the following actions:
1) Environmental Assessment (File No. EA2025-0001)
2) Rezoning/General Development Plan Amendment to remove office use 3) Use Permit/Specific Development Plan Application(s) for Phase 1 only.
California Environmental Quality Act
See #9 under Policy Considerations (Analysis) above.
FISCAL IMPACT
See #10 under Policy Considerations (Analysis) above.
CITY COUNCIL VISION, MISSION, AND VALUE/PRIORITY AREA
Smart Planning, Development, and the Local Economy
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment 1 – Project History
Attachment 2 – Project Description
Attachment 3 – IDEC Letter
Attachment 4 – Preliminary Transportation Impact Study Results
9.1 9.1 Staff Report
461
History/Timeline of the Chess Hatch Site
2006
In February 2006, the City Council via Minute Order No. 970 approved the Land Use and Circulation Element Goals, Policies and Implementation Measures relevant to the Chess Drive/Hatch Drive Commercial–Industrial Areas to encourage:
• Redevelopment of underutilized properties with increased density and intensity of uses;
• Allow and encourage change that responds to the current and potential market and employee needs of businesses and that results in greater density and intensity of land uses and a broad array of land uses including commercial, office, industrial, biotechnology and compatible uses, but prohibiting uses that would be incompatible with any of these uses, such as housing, schools, day care and other uses serving primarily children;
• Allow and encourage vertically and horizontally mixed -use developments that maximize the use of land, organize land uses and pedestrian/vehicular circulation in a safe, logical and functional manner and establish a safe, logical design relationship with adjacent land uses;
• Ensure that all new buildings, whether free- standing or multi -building developments and all expansions of existing buildings demonstrate consistency with the City’s infrastructure, including sewer, storm water, and street system capacity; and
• Ensure that all existing and new businesses and land uses allowed met the requirements of Chapter 17.68, General Performance Standards, of Title 17, Zoning, of the Foster City Municipal Code.
2007
On October 23, 2007, Northwestern Mutual Life and Sea Cliff Properties ( “prior applicant/original owners”) submitted an application for a General Plan Amendment to adopt the Chess Drive/Hatch Drive Commercial/Industrial Area Policies into the General Plan, a GDP/Rezoning from M -1/PD (Light Industrial/Planned Development) to CM/PD (Commercial Mix/Planned Development District) with a GDP and a Development Agreement to redevelop 190,000 SF of one and two-story commercial/industrial buildings on 11.89 acres with up to 800,000 SF of office use in three (3) multi-story buildings up to 10 stories in height above four levels of parking served by a combination of at -grade parking lots and a shared parking structure (“original project”).
2009
On March 5, 2009, the application was amended to include a General Plan Amendment to create a new General Plan land use designation of “Chess/Hatch Research/Office” to be consistent with the Chess Drive/Hatch Drive Commercial/Industrial Area policies and uses.
On November 2, 2009, the City Council certified the Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) (SCH #2008122065, EA -07-001) and adopted a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) for the o riginal project pursuant to the California
9.1 Attachment 1 - Project History
462
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Additionally, on November 2, 2009, the City Council approved an amend ment to its General Plan to designate the land use for the site as Chess/Hatch Office Research.
2011
On January 24, 2011, the prior applicant submitted a proposal to revise the o riginal project, substituting five (5) multi-story structures and one (1) single-story structure for the three (3) previously proposed multi-story structures.
2013
On August 19, 2013, the City Council adopted an Addendum to the original FEIR dated February 19, 2013 pursuant to CEQA via Resolution No. 2013-64.
On September 3, 2013, the City Council approved a Master Development Agreement (“Master DA”) to develop the Chess Hatch Master Plan on the Chess/Hatch Property via City Ordinance No. 574.
Additionally, on September 3, 2013, the City Council approved an amendment to the zoning map for the Chess Hatch Property, changing the zoning designation to CM/PD (Commercial Mix/Planned Development). The Council also approved a GDP to allow up to 800,000 SF of office, biotechnology, or research and development uses on the Chess- Hatch Property via City Ordinance No. 573.
2014
On September 11, 2014, the Master DA was recorded with the County of San Mateo, as Document No. 2014-082572, with an initial term of five (5) years through 2019.
On April 17, 2014, the Planning Commission approved the Use Permit/Specific Development Plan (UP-13-004 and EA-07-001B) to allow the demolition of nine (9) office buildings comprising 146,000 SF of development and construction of 600,000 SF of office development area and up to 5,000 SF of business supporting use in two (2) towers and a connector building, and construction of two (2) multi-story parking garages. 2015
On September 1, 2015, the original owners assigned their interest as Developers in the Development Agreement to Gilead.
2019
On January 8, 2019, Gilead paid the Extension Option Payment to the City in the amount of $4.3M and have vested development rights extended through 2024. The City signed a Memorandum of Extension, extending the Initial Term of the Master DA to expire on September 7, 2024.
2023
On June 23, 2023, Gilead submitted an application to extend the Chess Hatch DA without making any changes to the GDP. Staff engaged in some preliminary discussions with the
9.1 Attachment 1 - Project History
463
Gilead team regarding the terms of the extension. However, Gilead decided not to pursue the extension to the DA, and on February 28, 2024, Gilead withdrew its application. They indicated that they’d like to move forward with the project instead. 2024
On September 7, 2024, both the Use Permit as well as the Master DA expired.
9.1 Attachment 1 - Project History
464