Half Moon Bay City Council
March 5, 2024

BUSINESS OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HALF MOON BAY

AGENDA REPORT
For meeting of: March 5, 2024
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council
VIA: Matthew Chidester, City Manager
FROM: John Doughty, Assistant City Manager
Karen Decker, Economic and Community Vitality Manager
TITLE: DOWNTOWN STREETSCAPE MASTER PLAN - PROJECT UPDATE ______________________________________________________________________________ RECOMMENDATION:

Receive a presentation and provide feedback to staff and consultants on the Downtown Streetscape Master Plan.

FISCAL IMPACT:

The Downtown Streetscape Master Plan is included as a funded project in the FY 2023-24 Capital Improvement Program (CIP) and totals $264,730 in consultant services.

STRATEGIC ELEMENT:

This recommendation supports all Elements of the Strategic Plan.

BACKGROUND:

Downtown revitalization has been an area of interest for this Council and a topic of conversation during annual priority setting workshops. This concept was further explored by task force members of the Coastside Recovery Initiative, who identified Downtown Half Moon Bay as a business district with untapped potential for greater commercial and community vibrancy. The City has also updated its Local Coastal Land Use Plan, which defines a “Town Center” comprised of North, Heritage, and South Downtown and its policies support vitality through infill mixed-use development, historic preservation, and sustainable public infrastructure.

The recommendation to reimagine the downtown streetscape of Half Moon Bay resulted in the City Council’s inclusion of this project in the City’s Capital Improvement Program (CIP) and allocation of funds for FY 2023-24.

The goals of the project are to 1) create a more attractive, accessible, and economically vibrant downtown; 2) preserve and enhance the existing character of downtown; and 3) prioritize improvements that benefit residents and visitors alike. 188

The project’s broad geographic scope is Main Street from Highway 1 (North Main Street) to South Main Street with a concentrated focus on the four central blocks of downtown from the Main Street Bridge to Correas Street.

The Council unanimously approved a professional services agreement with Toole Design on April 18, 2023. The project schedule includes an existing conditions review, extensive community engagement process through charettes, open studios, and popups, and public meeting opportunities. The existing conditions review was conducted in the summer / fall of 2023. The community engagement process was divided into two phases: a “Discovery Week” and a “Design Week”. The Discovery Week solicited input from a wide range of community stakeholders on how Main Street is currently experienced and what can be enhanced to achieve the project’s goals. Design Week built on the ideas from the discovery workshops to generate preliminary design concepts and provide additional opportunities for community engagement.

Robust Community Engagement
In September 2023, the project kicked off with discovery workshops focused on general feedback of the current streetscape and “starter” ideas from over 150 community members.

The Architectural Advisory Committee, Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Committee, City Council, Planning Commission, and Community Stakeholder Group were all engaged in Discovery Week. The Toole Design team returned in October to conduct a second convening of the Community Stakeholder Group, public meeting, and open studio sessions where participants could drop by and have conversations with the design team. These activities engaged an additional 90 community members. Spanish-speaking staff were available for translation during all events.

Discovery and design engagement opportunities were heavily promoted. City staff distributed over 205 flyers to local businesses and organizations and spread the word to over 4,580 subscribers through the City’s weekly eNews listserv. Additionally, over 24 social media posts were generated to promote the project and invite input. Media coverage included a radio ad on KHMB and print media coverage from the San Mateo Daily Journal, Coastside Buzz, and Half Moon Bay Review.

The Toole Design team held six open design studio drop-in sessions and facilitated 25 focus group discussions. These engagement opportunities resulted in feedback from 240 community members. A complete schedule of events and community engagement activities can be found in Attachments One and Two.

The City provided an additional opportunity for community input on priorities and design elements through a community survey. The survey was open for three weeks and was accessible online via social media, QR code, and the City’s website. Hard copies were also provided during strategic popups like a recent visit from the Mexican Consulate and at a newly formed Youth Advisory Committee. There were 164 respondents to the survey who were asked questions about how they experienced downtown, getting to and around downtown, their 189

ideas for special downtown locations (e.g., Kitty Fernandez Park) as well as their ideas about shorter-term opportunities to enhance downtown. To learn more about the survey results, please refer to Attachment 3.

City staff made presentations at a joint meeting of the Architectural Advisory Committee and Planning Commission on February 27 and at a joint meeting of the Parks and Recreation Commission and Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Committee on February 28. Commissioners and Committee members received a refresh on the project’s status and received updates on the direction of overall aesthetics, safety, parking, sustainability, pedestrian and bicycle improvements, and potential for more park space and less hardscape.

DISCUSSION:

The purpose of this update is to keep Council informed about the status of the project. Staff are pleased to report that the project schedule is on time and on budget. A broad range of people who live, work, play, and do business in downtown Half Moon Bay as well as community members who do not typically engage and / or have been historically left out of the decisionmaking process have contributed meaningful ideas that have informed the project. In addition, subject matter experts, such as architects, planners, engineers, age-friendly initiative advocates, and many others have also contributed ideas.

Overall, there is overwhelming support for safer crossings like added curb extensions to slow vehicular turning movements and shorten crossing distances. There is also strong support for gateway signage both south of Hwy 92 on Main Street and at the north end of the bridge.

Another popular opinion supports better connections from downtown to the high school and consolidation of driveways, especially at Ace Hardware where three come together with many left turning movements. A widening of the sidewalks along Heritage Main Street to balance great spaces for people, café, and retail spill out space, and parking is also emphasized. Parallel parking ranks as the biggest compromise to achieve this additional sidewalk real estate.

Community preferences for furnishing palettes lean toward textured and natural and community members noted this option better reflected the essence of the Coast and the more traditional atmosphere of downtown. More playful and bold colors are preferred for signs, art, murals, and business frontages.

For landscaping, there is a slight preference for colorful and agrarian concepts primarily for the more vibrant color. Many likened this concept to the hanging baskets that were largely affirmed in the community survey. Overall, there is a desire to combine the drought-resistant, lowmaintenance elements of the muted and coastal option with the colorful component of the colorful and agrarian concept.

Given its large size and key frontage on Main Street, the design team explored options for redesigning Kitty Fernandez Park to be a more integrated and activated part of the public realm. All design concepts prioritized the need to address the existing private driveways and access points along the western edge of the park. Participants at all workshop events expressed 190

enthusiasm for a reimagined Kitty Fernandez Park and emphasized the potential impact this area could have if it were transformed to be a more public-facing space.

There is overall support for the incorporation of lawn-like areas for children and families (amidst maintenance concerns), a “flex area” that can accommodate pop-up events and food trucks, and excitement around the potential for a “signature element” in the Park.

The Downtown Streetscape Master Plan document is expected to be delivered in May of 2024.

ATTACHMENTS:
1) Discovery Workshop Summary
2) Design Workshop Summary
3) Community Survey Results
191

MEMORANDUM
To: The City of Half Moon Bay
From: Cindy Zerger and Anjulie Palta, Toole Design
Project: Half Moon Bay Downtown Streetscape Master Plan Date: October 5, 2023
Re: Discovery Workshop Summary
Background and Purpose
This memorandum describes the outreach and engagement efforts and outcomes for the Half Moon Bay Downtown Streetscape Master Plan Discovery Workshop.

Goals
The goals of the outreach and engagement process are to:

1. Conduct outreach and engagement to a broad range of people who live, work, play, and do business in downtown Half Moon Bay

2. Solicit input from community members who do not typically engage and/or have historically been left out of the decision-making process

3. Extract meaningful ideas to inform the concepts developed during the plan

4. Create a feedback loop whereby participants see and understand how their contributions were incorporated into the final design and plan

5. Apply national best practices for transparent, representative, and responsive engagement.

Timeline
The table below summarizes the engagement approach for the Half Moon Bay Downtown Streetscape Master Plan which is organized around the Discovery and Design Workshop process.

Pre-Discovery
Workshop Discovery Workshop Intermediate Design Workshop Post-Design Workshop June –
August 2023
Week of
September 11th 2023
September –
October 2023
Week of
October 23rd 2023
November 2023 – May
2024
 Stakeholder
Mapping
 Informational
Outreach
 Promote Discovery
Workshop
 Explore Issue &
opportunities
 Identify Priorities &
Challenges
 Draft “starter ideas”
 Evaluate
Outreach
Process
 Promote
Discovery
Workshop
 Design Iteration
and Evolution
 Evaluate Outreach
Process
 Refine Design
Concepts
 Develop Draft Plan
 Public Review of Plan
 Final Plan
192
2 Discovery Workshop Summary
The summary below outlines the Discovery Workshop that took place from Tuesday, September 12th to Thursday, September 14th, 2023. During the Discovery Workshop, the project team promoted awareness of the study, asked for input on existing conditions and desires, and established an understanding of opportunities and constraints.

The themes generated through the Discovery Workshop will form the foundation of ideas that will be developed during the Design Workshop.

Discovery Workshop Schedule of Events
Over the course of the three-day workshop, the team held focused conversations with a broad range of participants. The team held a two-hour-long public workshop, open studio sessions for the public to stop by and discuss their desires for downtown, and a series of focus groups. Focus groups included representation from nonprofits, local businesses, property owners, advocacy and youth groups, faith-based organizations, and city staff.

The project team also met with ALAS, the Planning Commission, BPAC, and the Parks and Recreation Commission.

Discovery Workshop by the Numbers
The following is a snapshot of key outreach and engagement successes:

Engagement Successes:
• In total, approximately 150 community members participated in the September Discovery Workshop. • 4 Open Design Studio Sessions
• 25 Focus Group Discussions
• Public Meeting at IDES Hall (25 participants)
193
3 • Meeting with ALAS (12 participants)
• Community Stakeholder Group Session #1 (12 representatives) • Planning Commission Meeting (4 representatives)
• Special Session with BPAC and Parks & Recreation Commission (10 representatives) • Spanish-speaking staff were available for live translation during all events.

Outreach Successes:
• 150 Flyers distributed to local businesses which provided information on the project and Discovery Workshop
• 80 Emails distributed to promote the project and encourage participation in the Discovery Workshop • 15 Social media posts advertising the Discovery Workshop • All outreach materials were distributed in both English and Spanish.

The City of Half Moon Bay distributed flyers advertising the Discovery Workshop to businesses along Main Street and encouraged business owners to post the flyer in their storefront windows.

Public Workshop (left). Focus Group Discussion (right). 194
4 What We Heard
During the Discovery Workshop, participants shared their experiences, their likes, and dislikes, and what they hoped to see improved in Half Moon Bay. Conversations were organized around three questions which are used as a framework to summarize feedback and key themes below.

What do you like and want to see retained?
Many community members expressed that Downtown Half Moon Bay is a wonderful place to be. The walkable, small-town character of the Downtown should be preserved, and the city’s rich and layered history should inspire ideas for design interventions, particularly art, furnishings, and fixtures. Additional characteristics participants wanted to see preserved were:
• Unique, small-town character
• Walkability of the downtown area
• Places and spaces for both residents and visitors
• Promotion and inclusion of local businesses
• Murals (especially the Cunha mural) and public art
• Acknowledgement of the rich and varied history of Half Moon Bay • Historic landmarks, storefronts, and historic building plaque program • Half Moon Bay parades, festivals, and market events
What do you dislike and want to see changed?
When asked what participants disliked many comments were related to narrow sidewalks, angled parking, driver behavior, and street trees. Participants also noted that the Downtown and Main Street streetscape and open spaces have a lot of hardscape and could be softened with more landscape or plantings. Additional comments are summarized below:
• Diagonal parking on Main Street is not ideal, large vehicles cut into travel lanes and hinder visibility • Narrow sidewalks with obstacles and clutter including trees, bike racks, benches, and other furnishings • Street trees obscure historic facades and drop debris onto sidewalk • There is too much hardscape, particularly in Mac Dutra and Kitty Fernandez Park • Wayfinding needs to be improved, often visitors are not aware there is a downtown Main Street • Crossing Highway 1 and 92 along Main Street as a pedestrian or bicyclist feels unsafe • Vehicles do not obey traffic laws and often don’t stop at stop signs and make illegal U-turns • Traffic back-ups along Main Street on weekends
• North, Heritage, and South Main Street do not feel connected • The Bank of America parking lot is underutilized
What is missing that you would like to see created?
When asked what is missing and what participants would like to see created, many noted that there needs to be more spaces for youth and families in the public realm. Wider sidewalks, improved signage, more streetscape amenities, and a reconfiguration of street parking were also identified as opportunities to make Half Moon Bay a memorable experience for residents and visitors alike. The following provides a sampling of the comments:
• Wider sidewalks
• A reconfiguration of Heritage Main Street to potentially change traffic to one-way or a temporary and/or permanent closure of the street (or part of the street) to vehicles 195
5 • More warmth and vibrancy in the streetscape through colors, materials, and/or public art • A strengthened town “center”
• More greenery and vegetation
• Street trees that don’t obscure building facades and don’t drop debris on the sidewalk • More seating, bike racks, public art, water bottle filling stations, and dog waste stations • More public restrooms that are easily identifiable/are signed to • Public/outdoor spaces that are comfortable during cold weather days (ie: they provide wind protection, heat, etc.)
• Places to linger/hang out
• Spaces for youth
• A public art and/or history “walk” with QR codes and/or map • A banner or archway over the Main Street Bridge that announces entry • Better signage and wayfinding directing vehicles on Highway 1 and 92 into Half Moon Bay • Trolley or shuttle from the beach to Main Street/Downtown • An improved parking management strategy
• Parking garage (if parking is removed from Downtown streets) • Acknowledgement of indigenous and other underrepresented communities in the built environment • Restoration of Pilarcitos Creek/Creek Trail
• Better connection and cohesion from Heritage Main Street to North and South Main Street • Strategies for how to improve circulation and ADA access over the Main Street Bridge • Town kiosk or bulletin board in Mac Dutra that advertises festivals and events 196

HALF MOON BAY STREETSCAPE MASTER PLAN
October 2023

DESIGN WORKSHOP SUMMARY

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE
This document provides an overview of the outreach and engagement efforts and outcomes for the Half Moon Bay Downtown Streetscape Master Plan Design Workshop.

GOALS
The goals of the outreach and engagement process are to:

1. Conduct outreach and engagement to a broad range of people who live, work, play, and do business in downtown Half Moon Bay

2. Solicit input from community members who do not typically engage and/or have historically been left out of the decision-making process

3. Extract meaningful ideas to inform the concepts developed during the plan

4. Create a feedback loop whereby participants see and understand how their contributions were incorporated into the final design and plan

5. Apply national best practices for transparent, representative, and responsive engagement.

TIMELINE
The table below summarizes the engagement approach for the Half Moon Bay Downtown Streetscape Master Plan which is organized around the Discovery and Design Workshop process.

MEMORANDUM
To: The City of Half Moon Bay
From: Cindy Zerger and Anjulie Palta, Toole Design
Project: Half Moon Bay Downtown Streetscape Master Plan Date: October 9, 2023
Re: Discovery Workshop Summary
Background and Purpose
This memorandum describes the outreach and engagement efforts and outcomes for the Half Moon Bay Downtown Streetscape Master Plan Discovery Workshop.

Goals
The goals of the outreach and engagement process are to:

1. Conduct outreach and engagement to a broad range of people who live, work, play, and do business in downtown Half Moon Bay

2. Solicit input from community members who do not typically engage and/or have historically been left out of the decision-making process

3. Extract meaningful ideas to inform the concepts developed during the plan

4. Create a feedback loop whereby participants see and understand how their contributions were incorporated into the final design and plan

5. Apply national best practices for transparent, representative, and responsive engagement.

Timeline
The table below summarizes the engagement approach for the Half Moon Bay Downtown Streetscape Master Plan which is organized around the Discovery and Design Workshop process.

Pre-Discovery
Workshop Discovery Workshop Intermediate Design Workshop Post-Design Workshop June –
August 2023
Week of
September 11th 2023
September –
October 2023
Week of
October 23rd 2023
November 2023 – May
2024
 Stakeholder
Mapping
 Informational
Outreach
 Promote Discovery
Workshop
 Explore Issue &
opportunities
 Identify Priorities &
Challenges
 Draft “starter ideas”
 Evaluate
Outreach
Process
 Promote
Discovery
Workshop
 Design Iteration
and Evolution
 Evaluate Outreach
Process
 Refine Design
Concepts
 Develop Draft Plan
 Public Review of Plan
 Final Plan
197
DOWNTOWN STREETSCAPE DESIGN WORKSHOP SUMMARY Page 2 of 7

DESIGN WORKSHOP SUMMARY
The Design Workshop took place from Monday, October 23rd to Tuesday, October 24th 2023. During the workshop, the design team advanced the starter ideas from the Discovery Workshop into design concepts and provided additional opportunities for community engagement.

DESIGN WORKSHOP SCHEDULE OF EVENTS
The two-day Design Workshop included open studio sessions with the design team, the second convening of the Community Stakeholder Group (CSG), and a public meeting at IDES Hall. Open studio sessions were open to the public on both Monday and Tuesday at the Half Moon Bay Public Library.

Design Workshop schedule (left). Photo of Open Studio (upper right) and the Public Meeting (bottom right).

Monday October 23rd
Open Studio
Half Moon Bay Library
1-5pm
Tuesday, October 24th
Open Studio
Half Moon Bay Library
9-12pm
Community Stakeholder Group
Half Moon Bay Library
3-4pm
Public Meeting
IDES Hall
6-7:30pm

DISCOVERY WORKSHOP BY THE NUMBERS
The following is a snapshot of key outreach and engagement touchpoints:

Engagement Successes:
• In total, over 90 community members participated in the October Design Workshop. • Public Meeting at IDES Hall (30 participants)
• 2 Open Design Studio Sessions (55 participants)
• Community Stakeholder Group Session #2 (10 representatives) • Spanish-speaking staff were available for live translation during all events.

Outreach Successes:
• 55 Flyers distributed to local businesses and organizations • 4500 Emails sent via the eNews subscribers list serv and 3 eNews Advertisements (October 5, 12, and 19) • 9 Social media posts
• Promotional Banner on City Website
• Radio ad played on KHMB for over one week
198
DOWNTOWN STREETSCAPE DESIGN WORKSHOP SUMMARY Page 3 of 7 During the Design Workshop the design team gathered public feedback on preliminary concepts for Main Street, landscape and furnishing palettes, wayfinding and signage, and a reimagined Kitty Fernandez Park. The design team incorporated and documented feedback in realtime during each Workshop event while helping community members:
• Understand tradeoffs between different design options • Indicate their preferences and priorities between different concepts • Set expectations on how projects get built and when these concepts may become a reality The following pages provides a high-level summary of proposed concepts and feedback gathered.

WHAT WE HEARD

MAIN STREET
As the design team developed and illustrated draft concepts for Main Street, participants were encouraged to give their feedback on draft concepts while indicating preferences and priorities on various streetscape treatments. The design team solicited feedback through one-on-one and group
conversations with participants during each workshop event.

North Main Street: From Highway 1 to the Main
Street Bridge
Design Concepts:
• Reduced corner radii and added curb extensions (with bike ramps where applicable) to slow vehicular turning movements and shorten crossing distances.
• Lane width reduction and/or removal (road diet) where possible to reduce vehicular speeds and widen sidewalks. • Updated tree pit locations for improved walking experience. • Tee up intersection at Lewis Foster Drive by removing slip lane to provide a better line of sight to the crossing and to stop vehicles before turning right. Also to reclaim pedestrian space and shorten the crossing.

Community Feedback:
• Overwhelming support for safer crossings including design interventions like reduced corner radii and curb extensions at intersections. Support for lane width reduction, widened sidewalks, and tree pit relocation.
• Varied level of support for removal of right turn lanes at Hwy 92 and slip lane at Lewis Foster Drive intersections. Some participants worried that lane removal would remove queuing space and cause increased congestion.
• Strong support for consolidation of driveways, especially at Ace Hardware driveway where three come together with many left turning movements. Some participants open to
restricting turning movements such as right-in, right-out only. • Strong support for gateway signage both south of Hwy 92 on Main St and at the north end of the bridge.
• Interest in adding paver mosaics at smaller intersections north of the bridge on Main St, such as at Stone Pine Rd.
• Strong support for aiding in better connections from
Downtown to the high school via improved crossings and
bicycle and pedestrian facilities.

Illustrative concept plans for North Main Street.

MAIN STREET
HWY 92 STONE PINE
ROAD

MAIN STREET
HWY 1

LEWIS FOSTER
DRIVE
199
DOWNTOWN STREETSCAPE DESIGN WORKSHOP SUMMARY Page 4 of 7 Heritage Main Street: Between Main Street Bridge and
Correas Street.

These four blocks of Main Street are 70’ in width from building face to building face. The existing space includes 6’ sidewalks, including tree plantings which creates an effective 4’ sidewalk at times. The angle and the depth of parking stalls allows for ample parking but creates challenging parking and visibility issues. The street trees provide a wonderful sense of enclosure, though the trees are near the end of their life cycle in this urban condition.

The design team explored two options in effort to balance great spaces for people, cafe and retail spillout space, and parking.

Design Concepts:
• Concept A: Parallel parking on both sides of the street which allows for widened sidewalks and ample room for café and retail spillover space. Widened sidewalk space provides opportunities to incorporate better street tree planting conditions, and additional vegetation such as green infrastructure plantings or planters at curb extensions near intersections or driveway aprons.
• Concept B: Parallel parking on one side and angled on the other side of the street. Parallel parking would switch from the north side to the south side every block from the bridge through Correas Street. Angled parking allows for more parking spaces to be maintained (than in Concept A) at the expense of sidewalk space.

Parallel parking on one side of the street does allow for wider sidewalks, although not as spacious as those in Concept A. • Both concepts feature A flush/curbless street configuration. A flush street provides exceptional flexibility for street closures and festivals - the entire space can function like a plaza. Both concepts also propose parking on perpendicular streets (Mill, Kelly, Miramontes, and Correas) shifts to (or remains) angled parking - formalized through curb extensions and striping.

Community Feedback:
• Overall, workshop participants indicated a strong preference for Concept A which features sidewalks widened from 6’ to 16’ and parallel parking.
• Participants indicated support for a flush street concept, recognizing the flexibility it presents for street closures, festivals, and flexible spaces.
• Participants discussed the potential need for a structured parking garage to accommodate parking spaces that would be eliminated (for both concepts).

Examples of a fully flushed/curbless street with parallel parking.

Illustrative plan of Concept A for Heritage Main Street (parallel parking on both sides of the street).

Illustrative cross sections of Concept A for Heritage Main Street (parallel parking on both sides of the street).

MAIN STREET
KELLY
AVENUE
200
DOWNTOWN STREETSCAPE DESIGN WORKSHOP SUMMARY Page 5 of 7

FURNISHING AND LANDSCAPE PALETTE
Two concepts or “mood boards” (a collage of images, textures, colors, and other elements) for both a furnishing and landscape palette were prominently featured throughout open studio, the Community Stakeholder Group session, and the Public Meeting. Participants were encouraged to place a sticker next to the concept they preferred. Post-its were provided to elaborate on selections and add comments directly onto the boards. In addition to the activities and materials above, the design team solicited informal feedback through one-on-one conversations with participants.

HALF MOON BAY STREETSCAPE MASTER PLAN
FURNISHING PALETTE OPTION A: PLAYFUL + BOLD
Comments? Leave a post-it to let us know what you think of this palette! Inspirational imagery
Example images of streetscape furnishings
Do you like Option A more than Option B? If so, place a sticker dot below! Planter
Pop planter partition
by Vestre
Seat
Bloc Seat bench
by Vestre
Bench
Bloc Seat bench
by Vestre
Adaptable Seating
Fortunato air
by Escofet
Waste Receptacle
Steel Nanuk Bins
by MMCITE
Signage that incorporates color
and movement
Retractable Bollard
at key locations for street
closures by Postcard
Bike Rack URack by thepark (L) and
Looper by Vestre (R)
Street Light
Chara Series
by Neri
Paving
in a cool/gray
color range
PLAYFUL + BOLD This palette emphasizes the use of color in local cultural traditions and reflects the eclectic mix of architecture in the Downtown. It combines vibrant colors and unique elements to create a visually striking, dynamic furnishing family.

We will be developing a cohesive furnishing palette that includes recommendations for seating, planters, bike racks, and trash receptacles, among others.

The following is not a finalized palette but rather images and inspiration for you to provide feedback.

HALF MOON BAY STREETSCAPE MASTER PLAN
FURNISHING PALETTE OPTION B: TEXTURED + NATURAL
Comments? Leave a post-it to let us know what you think of this palette! Do you like Option B more than Option A? If so, place a sticker dot below! Inspiration from Half Moon Bay
Planter
Corten Steel Shrubtub
by Streetlife
Lighting
Acorn Globe
by Brandon Ind.

Signage
that incorporates
multiple materials
Paving
in a warm/tan
color range
Example images of streetscape furnishings
Seat
Hardwood Vltau by
chair by MMCITE
Bench
Hardwood Vltau
bench by MMCITE
Adaptable Seating
Stonebench by artform
Urban Furniture
Waste Receptacle
Steel Elodie Bin by
Citysi Urban Design
Retractable Bollards
at key locations for street
closures by Parklio
Bike Rack
Steel Urban Post
by Vestre
TEXTURED + NATURAL This palette focuses on raw, organic elements. It draws inspiration from the coast, hills, and local cultural handicrafts. It incorporates a variety of materials and textures, and features warm, earthy colors.

We will be developing a cohesive furnishing palette that includes recommendations for seating, planters, bike racks, and trash receptacles, among others.

The following is not a finalized palette but rather images and inspiration for you to provide feedback.

Furnishing Palette
Includes recommendations for seating, planters, bike racks, and trash receptacles, among others.

Design Concepts:
• Playful + Bold: Vibrant colors, unusual shapes, and unique elements create a visually striking, dynamic furnishing family. • Textured + Natural: Features warm and earthy colors, organic forms, raw materials, and a variety of textures.

Community Feedback:
• The majority of participants were in favor of the Textured and Natural concept noting that this option better reflected the essence of the coast and more traditional atmosphere of downtown.
• Desire to incorporate elements of the Playful and Bold concept into the Textured and Natural concept by integrating strategic pops of color. Color was suggested to be reserved for signs art, murals, and business frontages.
• Suggestions to prioritize furnishings that incorporate sustainable and recycled materials.

Landscape Palette
Plants and trees that could be included in the “furnishing zone”, and in elements like medians, curb extensions, and planters.

Design Concepts:
• Colorful + Agrarian: Various types of edible, native, and ornamental plants work together to reflect Half Moon Bay’s agricultural heritage.
• Textured + Natural: Emphasizes the environment of the coast with grasses, soft, subtle colors, and a mix of native, droughtresistant species.

Community Feedback:
• Slight preference for the Colorful and Agrarian concept primarily for the more vibrant color included in this option.

Many likened this concept to the hanging baskets that used to be in downtown which incorporated colorful ornamental flowers. Participants also noted this concept would pair nicely and add needed color to the Textured and Natural furnishing palette, if selected.
• Overall there was a desire to combine the drought-resistant, low-maintenance elements of the Muted and Coastal option with the colorful components of the Colorful and Agrarian Concept.

HALF MOON BAY STREETSCAPE MASTER PLAN
LANDSCAPE PALETTE OPTION A: COLORFUL + AGRARIAN
We will be developing recommendations for a cohesive landscape palette that could be included in elements like landscape medians, curb extension areas, and planters.

The following is not a finalized palette but rather images and inspiration for you to provide feedback.

Comments? Leave a post-it to let us know what you think of this palette! Do you like Option A more than Option B? If so, place a sticker dot below! Under 30” height, partially native species, and low water use Strawberry (Arbutus unedo)
Shrub-like evergreen tree existing in Half Moon Bay.

Narrow with wide crown. Native to the Mediterranean.

Chinese pistache (Pistacia chinensis)
Larger, rounded shade tree. Deciduous with foliage turning yellow to orange/red in the fall. Native to China.

Brisbane box (Lophostemon confertus)
Narrow, evergreen tree. Dense canopy, reddish
bark, and dark green leaves. Native to Australia.

Sweetshade (Hymenosporum flavum)
Narrow, evergreen tree, with light bark and shiny
green leaves. Native to Australia.

Street trees options (do not differ between landscape options) COLORFUL + AGRARIAN This palette combines both aesthetic and practical utility. It includes various types of edible, native, and ornamental plants which work together to reflect Half Moon Bay’s agricultural heritage.

HALF MOON BAY STREETSCAPE MASTER PLAN
LANDSCAPE PALETTE OPTION B: MUTED + COASTAL
Comments? Leave a post-it to let us know what you think of this palette! Do you like Option B more than Option A? If so, place sticker a dot below! Under 30” height, partially native species, and drought tolerant MUTED + COASTAL This palette emphasize the unique plant life and environmental conditions of the coast. It includes grasses, soft, subtle colors and a mix of native, drought-resistant species.

We will be developing recommendations for a cohesive landscape palette that could be included in elements like landscape medians, curb extension areas, and planters.

The following is not a finalized palette but rather images and inspiration for you to provide feedback.

Strawberry (Arbutus unedo)
Shrub-like evergreen tree existing in Half Moon Bay.

Narrow with wide crown. Native to the Mediterranean.

Chinese pistache (Pistacia chinensis)
Larger, rounded shade tree. Deciduous with foliage turning yellow to orange/red in the fall. Native to China.

Brisbane box (Lophostemon confertus)
Narrow, evergreen tree. Dense canopy, reddish
bark, and dark green leaves. Native to Australia.

Sweetshade (Hymenosporum flavum)
Narrow, evergreen tree, with light bark and shiny
green leaves. Native to Australia.

Street trees options (do not differ between landscape options) Furnishing Palette Concepts (above).

Landscape Palette Concepts (above).
201
DOWNTOWN STREETSCAPE DESIGN WORKSHOP SUMMARY Page 6 of 7 SIGNAGE + WAYFINDING
During the Workshop the design team developed preliminary placements for different signage types. The design team also developed high level wayfinding goals and strategies. Facilitators sought feedback on ideas for wayfinding and signage strategies through both one-on-one and group conversations with participants at each Workshop event.

Design Concepts:
• New gateway and monument signage at key locations to
provide a sense of arrival and orientation including monument signage at HWY 1 and Kelly Avenue and HWY 1 and South
Main Street and a new gateway at HWY 92 and North Main
Street.
• Additional pedestrian-scale directional signage along Main Street and at the corners of Heritage Main Street to direct visitors toward community institutions and businesses.
• Improve clarity of regulatory signage for vehicular traffic by providing legible direction towards Main Street and giving vehicles clear choices: this way to the beach, and this way to Main Street.
• Create visual cohesion between all signage types and tie into other Downtown branding efforts.

Community Feedback:
• Overall support for the proposed strategy of gateways, improved regulatory signage, and increased directional signage • Broad support for the idea of a gateway element at the intersection of HWY 92 and Main Street.
• Mixed feedback on the perspective sketch of new arch signage at 92 and Main Street. Some community members felt the arch might be too large and were more comfortable with a half arch or tall pillars. Some preferred something less modern and mentioned the old historic sign before the bridge.
• General support for pedestrian scale directional signage along Main Street
• Some thought directional signage should only include
community institutions and businesses should not be
included.
• Concern about responsibility for maintenance.
• Concern about signs being oriented towards visitors in a way that is detractive to local character.
• Support for signage on Poplar St. at Coastal Trail
pointing towards Main Street and on Main Street
pointing towards Coastal Trail.
• Other ideas included:
• Signage for downtown along the Coastal Trail and at
the beach.
• Integrating QR codes into signage.
• Adding signage in the median before the intersection
of Kelly Avenue and HWY 1 to give people a chance
to get over into the turn lane to go downtown.

Conceptual map showing proposed locations for gateway,
monument, regulatory, and directional signage.

Conceptual rendering showing a new arch gateway at HWY 92 and Main Street.

MAIN ST

KELLY AVE
HWY 1
HWY 92
202
DOWNTOWN STREETSCAPE DESIGN WORKSHOP SUMMARY Page 7 of 7

KITTY FERNANDEZ PARK
Given its large size and key frontage on Main Street, the design team explored options for redesiging Kitty Fernandez Park to be a more integrated and activated part of the public realm. All design concepts prioritized the need to address the existing private driveways and access points along the western edge of the park.

Design Concepts:
• Front Porch: Centers around the idea of the front porch and incorporates a wood-paneled deck and brightly colored porch swings. The opposite end of the park, is designed to be a versatile open space that can accommodate food trucks, special events, and art exhibitions, among others. A hip-height wall with landscaping is incorporated between the existing private driveways and park space.
• Undulating Greenscape: A series of grassy mounds of varying heights and shapes. These mounds add visual interest and provide opportunities for various activities. Throughout the park, flexible furniture areas are strategically placed to accommodate various activities and group sizes. Equally spaced trees are placed between the current private driveways and the park area, defining the boundary between private and public
spaces.
• Distinctive Plaza: This concept capitalizes on the Park’s location to serve as a gateway to the south end of Main Street. A new street is proposed on the western edge of the park which creates new one-way circular traffic flow around the Park. The plaza becomes an extension of the urban fabric, by connecting paving and design elements into surrounding streets.

Community Feedback:
• Participants at all Workshop events expressed enthusiasm for a reimagined Kitty Fernandez and emphasized the potential impact this area could have if it were transformed to be more public-facing.
• Wide support for various aspects of all concepts. A desire to integrate the “best parts” of each option was expressed by many participants.
• Overall support for the incorporation of lawn-like areas for children and families, though concerns for maintenance and the potential for slipping on grass given the rainy climate of Half Moon Bay.
• Overall support for a “flex area” that can accommodate pop-up events and food trucks.
• Excitement around the potential for a “signature element” in the Park.
• Concern that oversized or sculptural seating elements would not be ADA or senior-friendly.
• Support for the new/proposed road created in the “Distinctive Plaza” concept and its effectiveness in addressing the private driveways on the western edge of the park, but concern about traffic impacts, emergency vehicle access, and turning radii. • Some concerned that example images look too modern and do not align with the more traditional aesthetic of Half Moon Bay. • Desire to incorporate wifi and/or charging kiosks in the park.

Collage of illustrative concepts and precedent photos for reimagined Kitty Fernandez Park
Distinctive Plaza
Front Porch
Undulating Greenscape
203
1 v. 02.29.24
Streetscape Master Plan Survey – Summary of Findings
In April 2023, the Half Moon Bay City Council unanimously approved the Main Street Revitalization Project and an allocation of funds from the Capital Improvement Program to support this important effort. Downtown revitalization has been a topic of interest for the Council and community alike and was identified as one of 15 strategic recommendations resulting from the Coastside Recovery Initiative.

The goals of the project are to create a more attractive, accessible, and economically vibrant downtown through a Streetscape Master Plan. Toole Design was selected to create the Streetscape Master Plan based on existing conditions review and extensive community engagement through charettes, open studios, focus groups, popups, and public meetings. The Streetscape Master Plan survey was identified as an important tool to gather additional community feedback, particularly from community members who were not able to participate in the previous Toole-led engagement opportunities.

Methodology
The survey was designed to follow similar areas of inquiry as those explored through the charettes, open studios, focus groups, popups, and public meetings. It included questions related to downtown identity and experience, getting to and around downtown as well as ideas for improving key locations such as Kitty Fernandez Park. Another important objective of the survey was to gather input on ideas for improvements that could be accomplished in the short-term, recognizing that implementation of the Streetscape Master Plan is a multi-phase, multi-year effort.

Wood Consulting Services developed the survey with input from City staff and the Toole Design team. A draft of the survey was first developed as a word document for ease of review and then finalized as a google form. The google form was pre- tested with two city staff to fine-tune questions and response options, check skip pattern logic and assess the overall ease of completing the survey.

The survey was launched on January 8, 2024, and closed on February 2, 2024. Five additional surveys were received after the February 2 deadline and included in the analysis. The survey was accessible online via social media, QR code, and the City’s website in English and Spanish. Hard copies were also provided during a visit from the Mexican Consulate and at a newly formed Youth Advisory Committee. A total of 164 respondents completed the survey. Demographics collected as part of the survey are summarized on pages 3-5 of this report.

Additional Notes
The consultant exported all the raw data captured from the google form into an Excel spreadsheet for analysis. Response rates were verified for each survey question by determining the number of blank and non-blank cells. Frequencies and percentages were calculated for all close-ended survey questions.

Charts and graphs were then created to illustrate the distribution of responses across the different response options for each survey question.
204
2 v. 02.29.24
For open-ended questions, the consultant used thematic analysis to identify common themes for responses. Tables were created to show counts of responses for each theme category.

Key Takeaways
• Respondents greatly appreciate the City’s charm, quaintness, and small-town feel. They also value the shops and restaurants downtown, and that many are locally owned small businesses.

The downtown aesthetic, including tree lighting, murals and historic buildings were also important to respondents.
• Parking was most frequently cited as something respondents disliked about downtown and wanted to see changed with several respondents mentioning angled parking specifically. Traffic congestion, lack of signage and the need for better cross walks along Main Street were other dislikes that respondents noted. The business mix and need for more retail versus professional service-oriented businesses along Main Street was a concern as well as the condition / underutilization of buildings and the bridge.
• Recognizing that the Streetscape Master Plan is a multi-phase, multi-year effort, City leadership was interested in the community’s feedback for improvements that could be made in the shorter-term and with minimal investment. “Hanging flower baskets that are replenished and maintained”, “street pole banners with seasonal themes or events”, and a “banner north of the bridge next to Stone Pine Road that identifies the entrance to downtown”, were the top three improvements based on total responses falling into a “first” or “second choice” option. • An overwhelming majority of respondents supported the ideas for more furnishing and landscaping along Main Street, 79.8 percent, and 86.2 percent respectively. They also supported a textured and natural landscaping and furniture palette in keeping with Half Moon Bay’s coastal aesthetic.
• When asked about ways that Main Street could be made safer for drivers, “improve key intersections to increase visibility”, “street improvements to reduce traffic”, “a gateway sign north of the Main Street bridge to provide a sense of arrival into downtown”, and “improve wayfinding from highway 92 to downtown”, were the improvements with the highest responses.
• When asked about ways that Main Street could be made safer for pedestrians, “make sidewalks easier to walk by removing obstructions”, “make existing crosswalks safer”, “make sidewalks wider”, and “add more lighting”, were the improvements with the highest responses. • A nearly equal percentage of respondents either “strongly supported” (27.8 percent) or “strongly opposed” (30.2 percent) parallel parking to increase sidewalk space along Main Street. • When asked about ways to improve Kitty Fernandez Park, “create more green space”, “create spaces for children and youth”, “create flex areas for pop-ups and food trucks”, were the design features rated as most important based on total responses falling into the “first”, “second” or “third choice” options.

205
3 v. 02.29.24
About You

1. Do you live or work in Half Moon Bay or both? (Please choose one option) Values shown as a percentage of respondents, n=163.

2. Where do you currently reside? (Please choose one option) Values shown as a percentage of respondents, n=161

49.1%

6.1%

39.3%

5.5%
Live
Work
Both
Neither

74.5%

5.6%

18.6%

1.2%
Half Moon Bay (within the city
limits)
Half Moon Bay (outside the city
limits - unincorporated area)
Mid-Coast (Miramar, Montara,
Moss Beach and Princeton)
South Coast (La Honda, Loma Mar,
Pescadero and San Gregorio)
206
4 v. 02.29.24

3. How long have you been a resident here? (Please choose one option) Values shown as a percentage of respondents, n=163

4. What gender do you identify as? (Please choose one option) Values shown as a percentage of respondents, n=163

8. 2.5%

12.9%

23.9%

60.7%
Less than 1 year
1 – 3 years
4 – 10 years
More than 11 years

65.0%

27.6%

7.4%
Female
Male
Prefer not to say
207
5 v. 02.29.24

5. Which of the following best describes your race or ethnicity? (Please choose all that apply) Values shown as a percentage of responses, n=170

6. Which of the following best describes your age? (Please choose one option) Values shown as a percentage of respondents, n=164

4.7%% 1.2%

11.2% 0.0%

71.8%

11.2% Asian, Pacific Islander
Black, African American
Hispanic, Latinx, Spanish
White
Prefer not to answer

0.6%

8.5%

20.7%

23.2%

13.4%

15.9%

11.6%

6.1%
0 5
10 15
20 25
20 or
younger
21 – 30 31 – 40 41-50 51-60 61-70 71 or older Prefer not to answer
208
6 v. 02.29.24
Short-Term Opportunities

7. Which of the following short-term improvements would you most like to see on Main Street / downtown? (Please select your top three options). Values shown as a frequency (count) of responses.

Downtown Identity and Experience

8. What do you like about downtown Half Moon Bay and want to see maintained? Values shown as a frequency (count) of responses.

Response Option Frequency
Charm, quaintness, small town feel 36
Shops 28
Décor, tree lights 24
Restaurants, dining 21
Small, local businesses 20
Historic buildings, bridge, plaza 17
Arts, entertainment, and events 16
Free parking 12
Accessibility (walking, biking) 10
Clean, safe, and quiet 10
Plants 9
Furnishings 7
Other 15
Total 225
0 20 40 60 80 100
A banner that identifies the entrance to downtown
Street pole banners
Hanging flower baskets
A map of downtown businesses
A walking tour map with points of interest
Plaques to identify historic landmarks and buildings
Another mural
Water bottle filling stations
Informational kiosk or bulletin board at Mac Dutra or…
First choice Second choice Third choice
n=44
n=50
n=37
n=40
n=63
n=37
n=91
n=58
n=53
209
7 v. 02.29.24

9. What do you dislike and want to see changed? Values shown as a frequency (count) of responses.

Response Option Frequency
Parking 31
Traffic flow, signage, cross walks 20
Business mix 17
Buildings, new construction, bridge 17
Pedestrian, bike access 15
Sidewalks, street 14
Dining 12
Limited business activity and hours 10
Garbage, cleanliness 10
Areas to gather 6
Other 21
Total 173

10. Which of the following features would you most like to see on Main Street? (Please select your top three options). Values shown as a frequency (count) of responses. 0 20 40 60 80 100
Angled parking
Parallel parking
Green infrastructure to better manage stormwater
Trees and landscaping
Benches
Gathering places
Bike lanes on street
Bike racks
Decorative paving
Public art
Lighting
Mid-block crossings
Curbless street
Public Wi-Fi
First choice Second choice Third choice
n=48
n=24
n=40
n=79
n=42
n=51
n=30
n=21
n=16
n=38
n=35
n=11
n=16
n=25
210
8 v. 02.29.24

11. Which of the following activities would you most like to do when you are downtown? (Please select your top three options). Values shown as a frequency (count) of responses.

12. Do you support more furnishings along Main Street? Examples of street furniture include banners, public art, benches and seating, bicycle racks, restrooms, trash bins, community kiosks and signage.

Values shown as a percentage of respondents, n=163.
0 30 60 90 120 150
Participate in an event
Work (employment opportunities)
Socialize with friends
Shop in local stores
Eat a meal
Go for a walk
Go for a bike ride
First choice Second choice Third choice
n=54
n=14
n=81
n=104
n=142
n=67
n=22

79.8%

9.8%

10.4%
Yes
No
Not sure
211
9 v. 02.29.24

13. If yes, please review the following examples of furniture style and tell us what you like best (Please choose one option) Values shown as a percentage of respondents, n=130.

14. Do you support more landscaping along Main Street?
Values shown as a percentage of respondents, n=164.

86.2%

13.8%
Texture and natural
Playful and bold

81.1%

9.8%

9.1%
Yes
No
Not sure
212
10 v. 02.29.24

15. If yes, please review the following examples of landscaping and tell us what you like best (Please choose one option). Values shown as a percentage of respondents, n=129.

Getting To and Around Downtown

16. There could be ways to make Main Street safer for people driving and improve access to downtown locations. Which of the following are most important to you? (Please check all that apply).

Values shown as a frequency (count) of responses

62.0%

38.0%
Colorful and agrarian
Textured and natural
67 51
67 83
55 74
21 0 20 40 60 80 100
Provide improved wayfinding from Highway 92 to downtown Provide improved wayfinding from Highway 1 to downtown
Create a gateway sign north of the Main Street bridge to provide a sense of arrival into downtown
Improve key intersections to increase visibility
Provide street improvements to slow vehicular traffic
Provide street improvements to reduce traffic
Other
213
11 v. 02.29.24

17. There could be ways to make Main Street safer, easier, and more enjoyable for people walking.

Which of the following are most important to you? (Please check all that apply) Values shown as a frequency (count)of responses.

18. Parallel parking could increase sidewalk space on Main Street. Please tell us your level of support to change the current angled parking along the four blocks of Heritage Main Street to parallel parking.

Values shown as a percentage of respondents, n=162.
18 75
65 61
65 25
27 83
0 20 40 60 80 100
Reduce wait times at traffic signals to cross the street Make existing crosswalks safer
More lighting
Add more benches
Make the existing sidewalks wider
Create mid-block crossings
More signage
Make existing sidewalks easier to walk by removing
obstructions

27.8%

11.7%

14.8%

15.4%

30.2%
Strongly support
Somewhat support
Neutral
Somewhat oppose
Strongly oppose
214
12 v. 02.29.24
Important Locations – Kitty Fernandez Park

19. Given its large size and key location on Main Street, we would like your ideas about ways to improve Kitty Fernandez Park. Which of the following design features are more important to you? (Please select your top three choices) Values shown as a frequency (count) of responses.

Conclusion

20. Are there any other ideas you would like to share as the City moves forward with the Streetscape Master Planning project? Values shown as a frequency (count) of responses.

Response Option Frequency
Access, including for bikes and pedestrians 15
Maintaining angled parking, parking garage 13
Street closures, sidewalk and cross walk improvements, traffic calming 13 Trees, landscaping, park improvements 13
Focus on sustainable, environmentally friendly improvements 12 Trash cans, cleanliness, public safety 11
Business mix (more shops) and longer hours 8
Restaurants, more outdoor dining 7
Overall plan and design, balance visitor and resident needs 7 Bridge, building improvements 6
More murals, entertainment, and activities 6
Family, kid, and pet-friendly places 6
More gathering places 4
Other 13
Total 134
0 20 40 60 80 100
Create more green space
Consider the addition of community gardens in raised beds Create spaces for children and youth
Create a flex area for pop-ups and food trucks
Provide Wi-Fi or charging stations
Create space for health and wellness activities
Create connections to nature
Create welcoming community gathering spaces
Remove walls that create visual and physical barriers to… Restructure driveways to reduce or eliminate vehicle…
Establish amenities and program for arts classes,…
Improve crosswalks within the vicinity of the park
Provide improved wayfinding from downtown to the park
First choice Second choice Third choice
n=67
n=26
n=57
n=63
n=20
n=22
n=20
n=52
n=39
n=23
n=36
n=16
n=18
215

BUSINESS OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HALF MOON BAY

AGENDA REPORT
For meeting of: March 5, 2024
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council
VIA: Matthew Chidester, City Manager
FROM: Karen Decker, Economic and Community Vitality Manager TITLE: Introduction to Coastside Venture Studio
______________________________________________________________________________ RECOMMENDATION:

Receive an update on a new business incubator, Coastside Venture Studio.

FISCAL IMPACT:

There is no net fiscal impact to the City. The total amount of the professional services agreement is funded through a $2,500,000 grant from the County of San Mateo.

STRATEGIC ELEMENT:

This recommendation supports the Fiscal Sustainability, Healthy Communities and Public Safety, and Inclusive Governance Elements of the Strategic Plan.

BACKGROUND:

Despite its beauty and abundance of natural assets, the Coastside region has limited industry and job growth. It lacks economic diversity, which undermines its prospects for long-term economic growth and makes it vulnerable to external shocks. This is especially true for tourism, with Transient Occupancy Tax (TOT) contributing about 40-percent of the City’s General Fund.

TOT for the City plummeted between fiscal years 2019-20 and 2020-21 and the Ritz Carlton, one of the largest hotels on the Coast, had to cut back on 138 jobs. Agriculture has suffered too with a 30-percent drop in total production value between 2019 and 2020, and production values have remained flat throughout 2022, according to the most recent San Mateo County Annual Crop Report.

The lack of a diverse economy limits residents’ prospects for local job opportunities. More affluent residents tend to commute to jobs (or have the option to work from home) that provide higher wages, better benefits, and opportunities for advancement while less affluent residents are stuck in low-wage jobs that dominate the Coastside economy and find it difficult to afford the region’s high cost of living.
216

Limited industry and higher-paying job opportunities make the region less competitive and attractive to the next generation of workers who are more likely to leave the area after they finish high school.

In response to these challenges, the Coastside Recovery Initiative produced a set of strategic recommendations detailed in a public report, Building a More Equitable, Vibrant and Resilient Coastside Economy. One of the recommendations called for the creation of a business incubator for new start-up and early-stage companies aligned with the Coastside’s unique natural assets. The extraordinary coastal environment is poised for innovation and growth in key opportunity industries such as ag-tech and regenerative farming, sustainable fishing, renewable energy, disaster mitigation and natural resource conservation, among others. This effort is well timed as climate science, consumer, and corporate interests, decreasing technology costs, and the policy environment all point toward opportunity for innovative climate technology projects. The City and its partners believe this incubator is uniquely positioned to be the only incubator-through-accelerator program in the nation entirely dedicated to climate resiliency and resiliency tech.

Since the release of the report in March 2022, the San Mateo County Board of Supervisors approved a $2.5 million funding allocation to support the development of an economic advancement center (the Opportunity Cetner of the Coastside) to provide supportive services for job seekers, small businesses, and entrepreneurs.

A physical location has been acquired for the Opportunity Center in the heart of downtown (637 Main Street) with access to public transit and proximity to City Hall, local nonprofits, and the College of San Mateo’s upcoming new facility. A lease agreement has been signed with the property owners, tenant improvements are underway, and the Half Moon Bay Coastside Chamber of Commerce and Renaissance Entrepreneurship Center have been conducting some services at the new location. Job Train will soon be joining the team, pending the hiring of new staff who will be dedicated specifically to serving this location. A ribbon-cutting event is being planned for March, pending completion of tenant improvements.

DISCUSSION:

The City released a Request for Qualifications inviting qualified individuals and organizations to develop and operate a business incubator that would serve Half Moon Bay and the surrounding Coastside communities. Three proposals were received in early January, and the review committee unanimously approved American Energy Society (AES) to lead this important effort.

AES is a professional association for innovators and experts that provides news and information, events, and business development services for those working to solve the most urgent challenges in human history. The organization has more than 135,000 members and is the largest professional society for energy and sustainability in the world. Eric Vettel is the President of AES, a resident of Half Moon Bay, and a volunteer for the Half Moon Bay History Association.
217

AES will work with an advisory board to select six startups as the inaugural cohort of CSVS.

These startups will focus on solutions that help communities become more resilient to disruptions caused by changing climate in the areas of food, water, and the built environment.

These three subsectors align directly with the region's natural assets – agriculture, harbor and waterways, and coastline infrastructure. AES will encourage and actively recruit underrepresented startup founders including women and people of color.

Each year, a new cohort of startups chosen through a competitive process will be invited to participate in Coastside Venture Studio. The cohorts will consist of startups in each of the three focus areas (food, water, and the built environment), with some slots set aside for local startups with Coastside ties. Entrepreneurs and start-up founders will be selected based on shared values around a social ethos of people, planet, and profit – a triple bottom line.

Recognizing that 80-90 percent of startups and small businesses fail in the first 10 years of operation, Coastside Venture Studio will address the challenges that all entrepreneurs face with a sharp focus on women, immigrants and minority-led start-up and early-stage businesses.

These businesses are not yet competitive for venture funding, but still have needs that go beyond capital such as workspace, legal, accounting, human resource, marketing, and other business planning services. Our model will also provide industry-specific programming and services keeping work adjacent issues in mind like the need for flexible scheduling and childcare.

CSVS’s physical address is 633 Main Street, which includes a suite in the Opportunity Center.

With prior authorization from Council, the City entered into an Agreement with AES in February, and the recruitment of advisory board members, startups, and investors is underway.

ATTACHMENT:

Scope of Work
218
AES for CSVS
Scope of Work and Budget
Phase 1: Planning (February - March, 2024)
Operations
Startups - prepare strategic plan and target startups to recruit.

Advisory Board - prepare stratgic categories and targeted advisors to recruit.

Sponsors - prepare targeted sponsors in industry and venture capital for contributions.

Workforce Development - prepare platform and services to support upskilling and professional training.

Staff/hiring - conduct search and interviews; make selection.

Marketing
Website - design UX/UI, architecture and layout, and language; conduct QA/QC Marketing collateral - includes recruitment material, logo, signage, etc.

SMEs
Meetings with advisors (investors, entrepreneurs, etc.) - includes travel and meetings SUBTOTAL - Planning phase $ 21,000
Phase 2: Implementation (March - April 2024)
Recruitment
Startups - build network of 4 subcategories; includes outreach and recruitment Advisory Board - build network for 5 subcategories, includes outreach and recruitment.

Sponsors - build network of industry and investment sponors.

Workforce Development - promote program, collaborate with parallel programs (OCC, etc.) Staff - includes but not limited to onboarding
Office space
Signage - includes third-party public relations and strategic communication experts.

Technology - includes computer(s), copier, Internet access, etc.

Marketing
Launch website
Publish marketing collateral
SUBTOTAL - Implementation phase $ 43,000
Phase 3: Operations (May - September, 2024)
KPI
Startups - target: 12 - 15 in-person and/or virtual participating startups.

Advisory Board - target: 5 boards, including oversite.

Sponsors - target: $20,000 revenue in year 1 as proof-of-concept.

Workforce Development - target: an operating program including active support.

Support staff - office personnel.

Marketing and promotion - includes public speaking events and stakeholder engagement.

Travel
Assessment and Reporting
SUBTOTAL - Operations phase $ 136,000
219
TOTAL $ 200,000
This is our scope of work and budget/cost estimate to run CSVS through September 30, 2024.

It should be noted that AES's process for working with partners is collaborative.

We offer an expansive network, professional expertise, and years for experience, but we value, respect, and rely on the expertise of our partners to ensure that our work is appropriate and grounded in the community.

The first step in this process is always relationship building, where we collaboratively discuss and solidify goals, objectives, activities, methodology, and timing of the work.

Indeed, AES is flexible and will create, adapt, or incorporate new approaches based on further conversations including additional services or publications to share and disseminate information and services in a way that is culturally and linguistically accessible.

Therefore, some aspects of the scope of work and budget are tentative and will be finalized based on our collaborative work with our partners. AES looks forward to this opportunity to launch the CSVS incubator to accelerate resiliency. Our committed team is excited to get to work on this project. We are happy to answer any questions about this Scope of Work and Budget. 220

BUSINESS OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HALF MOON BAY

AGENDA REPORT
For meeting of: March 5, 2024
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council
VIA: Matthew Chidester, City Manager
FROM: Maz Bozorginia, Public Works Director/City Engineer TITLE: SEWER AUTHORITY MID-COASTSIDE (SAM) OPERATIONS BUDGET AMENDMENT REQUEST – PRINCETON PUMP STATION CAPITAL PROJECT ______________________________________________________________________________ RECOMMENDATION:

Adopt a resolution approving, under protest, the requested budget augmentation increasing the previously approved Princeton Pump Station Capital Replacement Project in the amount of $823,849, and repeal Resolution 2024-08 approved on February 12, 2024.

If the Council takes no action on this item, staff will proceed pursuant to Resolution 2024-08 and continue to seek a renewed stipulation of the parties.

FISCAL IMPACT:

The fiscal impact to the City’s sewer enterprise fund associated with this action is $823,849.

This payment will be made under protest pending the outcome of the City’s court action seeking declaratory relief.

STRATEGIC PLAN:

This action supports the Fiscal Sustainability and Inclusive Governance Elements of the Strategic Plan.

BACKGROUND:

SAM is preparing to replace the Princeton Pump Station, which is part of the Intertie Pipeline System (IPS), a series of force mains, pump stations and wet weather storage facilities that convey effluent from sewer customers within the Montara Water and Sanitary District (MWSD) and Granada Community Services District (GCSD), to the SAM-operated treatment plant.

In Fiscal Year 2017-18, the City filed a lawsuit to protect City sewer rate payers from covering expenses related to the IPS, as it does not directly benefit them, and named the other SAM member agencies as parties. Under a subsequent Stipulation and Order entered by the court on September 13, 2017, the City agreed to fund IPS projects in the FY 2017-18 budget, under protest, pending the outcome of the City’s request for declaratory relief. MWSD/GCSD have 221

not been willing to agree to a renewed Stipulation and Order, which has caused a pause in SAM’s ability to move forward on critical repairs that impact Granada and Montara Districts.

The California Appellate Court recently considered the City’s appeal of the Santa Clara Superior Court decision in City of Half Moon Bay v. Granada Community Services District et al.

Unfortunately, the decision of the Appellate Court will require further Superior Court hearings, which will delay the outcome. In the event the City ultimately prevails, MWSD/GCSD would refund IPS capital costs previously paid under protest.

The Appellate Court heard the arguments in October 2023. On December 15, 2023, the Court issued its opinion reversing the grant of summary judgment to the Districts and remanding the action back to the trial court. This was positive news for City rate payers but means further delay as there is no date set for trial.

At the regular SAM Board meeting of January 22, 2024, a number of capital project related items were presented by staff, including deferral of low-priority capital improvements and approvals to move forward with significant replacements of infrastructure at the wastewater treatment plant. The final item approved authorized the SAM General Manager to submit a budget amendment for Fiscal Year 2023-24 to member agencies for approval (Attachment 2).

On February 6, 2024, the City Council adopted a resolution (Resolution 2024-08) approving SAM’s requested budget augmentation to increase funding for the previously approved IPS capital replacement projects (Princeton Pump Station & Montara Force Main), subject to a renewed stipulation authorizing the City to pay under protest while reserving its rights for final resolution in the court action. The City’s attempts at seeking a renewed stipulation have thus far been rejected by GCSD and MWSD.

DISCUSSION:

At the regular SAM Board meeting of February 26, 2024, the SAM Board met to consider a recommendation from the General Manager to place a hold on the Princeton Pump Station Capital Rehabilitation Project for an indefinite period of time. This was due to the current budget amendment impasse and would have a fiscal impact of approximately $50,000 to pause the contractor mobilization for three months. The SAM Board chose not to approve the requested action.

The Princeton Pump Station Capital Replacement Project construction commenced under a contract authorized by SAM although adequate funding was not available to fulfill the entirety of the scope. This project was originally approved as part of the FY 2022-23 with a budget of $1,263,181. The current estimate to complete the work is now estimated to be $2,602,773, which requires an additional $1,339,592. Of this total, the City’s flow-based share (61.5%) is $823,849.
222

Granada and Montara have chosen not to participate in establishing a renewed Stipulation. This issue became a source of contention with the adoption of the FY 2023-24 SAM operating budget.

Meanwhile, SAM’s General Counsel has advised the parties the law is clear that the City is entitled to pay under protest, even absent a stipulation or court order. In addition, SAM staff has indicated that there are eminent occupational hazards associated with the existing Princeton Pump Station. In reliance on SAM counsel’s statements and in consideration for the operational safety of SAM staff, the City Council may consider authorizing the requested budget amendment even in the absence of a stipulation of the parties. If the Council takes no action, staff will proceed pursuant to the Council’s February 12, 2024, action.

ATTACHMENTS:
1) Resolution
2) SAM Staff Report – Princeton Pump Station Capital Project February 26, 2024 3) SAM Staff Report – Budget Amendment Request FY 2023/24 January 22, 2024 223
Resolution No. C-2024-

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HALF MOON BAY

APPROVING UNDER PROTEST THE REQUESTED BUDGET AUGMENTATION TO INCREASE THE

PREVIOUSLY APPROVED PRINCETON PUMP STATION CAPITAL REPLACEMENT PROJECT IN THE AMOUNT OF $823,849
WHEREAS, City of Half Moon Bay representatives reviewed and provided input on the General Budget of the Sewer Authority Mid-Coast (SAM) Budget for Fiscal Year (FY) 2023-24; and WHEREAS, on May 3, 2022, the City Council of the City of Half Moon Bay approved the General (O&M) Budget of SAM for FY 2022-23 of $8,195,626 which included the Princeton Pump Station Replacement Capital Project with an estimated cost of $1,263,181; and WHEREAS, the City previously approved the Princeton Pump Station Replacement Project under protest per the then approved per the Superior Court of the County of San Mateo Stipulation and Order Regarding Expenses and Assessments for the Sewer Authority MidCoastside in the matter of City of Half Moon Bay v. Granada Community Services District et al. (Case No. 17 CV 03092) approved on September 13, 2017. Among other things, the Stipulation and Order provided that the City shall be deemed to have approved under protest that part of SAM’s 2022-23 General Budget characterized as the “Infrastructure Division”; and WHEREAS, the City requested and Granada CSD and Montara WSD denied the City’s request for extension or restatement of the Stipulation and Order as part of the FY 2023-24 General Operating Budget approval; and
WHEREAS, on June 20, 2023, the City Council of the City of Half Moon Bay approved the General (O&M) Budget of SAM for FY 2023-24 of $9,109,686 which included the carryover Princeton Pump Station Replacement Capital Project with an estimated budget of $1,263,181; and
WHEREAS, on January 22, 2024, the SAM General Manager presented a number of capital project related items to the SAM Board, including deferral of low-priority capital improvements and approvals to move forward with significant replacements of infrastructure at the wastewater treatment plant and IPS related work (Princeton Pump Station and Montara Force Main); and WHEREAS, the SAM General Manager has submitted a revised budget request which includes capital improvements and contract project delivery costsrelating to the Princeton Pump Station Capital Replacement Project totaling $1,263,181 and raising the total capital budget to $2,602,773; and
WHEREAS, on February 6, 2024, the City Council adopted Resolution 2024-08 approving the requested budget augmentation increasing the prior approved IPS capital replacement 224
projects (Princeton Pump Station & Montara Force Main) conditioned on a renewed stipulation to pay under protest or final resolution in the court action; and WHEREAS, the City’s flow-based requested budget amendment is $823,849; and WHEREAS, SAM’s General Counsel has since advised the parties the law is clear that the City is entitled to pay under protest, even absent a stipulation or court order; and WHEREAS, in reliance on SAM counsel’s statements and in consideration for the operational safety of SAM staff, the City Council may consider authorizing the requested budget amendment even in the absence of a stipulation of the parties.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT the City Council of the City of Half Moon Bay repeals Resolution 2024-08 and approves, under protest, the requested budget augmentation to increase the previously approved Intertie Pipeline System (IPS) Princeton Pump Station Capital Replacement Project in the amount of $823,849.
***************************************************************** I, the undersigned, hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly passed and adopted on the 5th day of March 2024, by the City Council of Half Moon Bay by the following vote:

AYES, Councilmembers:

NOES, Councilmembers:

ABSENT, Councilmembers:

ABSTAIN, Councilmembers:

ATTEST: APPROVED:
___________________________ ______________________________ Jessica Blair, City Clerk Joaquin Jimenez, Mayor
225
February 26, 2024
Agenda Item No: 4B

BOARD MEMBERS: M. Clark B. Dye P. Dekker
D. Penrose D. Ruddock K. Slater-Carter
ALTERNATE MEMBERS: S. Boyd B. Softky J. Randle
J. Grant H. Rarback

SEWER AUTHORITY MID-COASTSIDE
Staff Report
TO: Honorable Board of Directors
FROM: Kishen Prathivadi, General Manager
SUBJECT: Authorize General Manager to Place a Hold on Princeton Pump Station Rehabilitation Project for an Indefinite Period of Time Executive Summary
The purpose of this report is to authorize the General Manager to place a hold on the Princeton Pump Station Rehabilitation Project for an indefinite period of time.

Fiscal Impact
The fiscal impact for this action item is estimated to be approximately $50,000 for a hold period of 3 months.

Strategic Plan Compliance
The recommendation complies with Goal 5 of the SAM Strategic Plan, “Infrastructure, Operations, and Maintenance,” Goal 5.3 – “Develop a longest-term reasonable perspective in concrete spending terms of potential alternative approaches to managing the system with the objective of decreasing long term costs and environmental impacts and increasing safety.”
Background and Discussion/Report
The Princeton Pump Station (PPS) project is part of the Capital Improvement Program for Fiscal Year 2022 (CIP 4.01) and replaces the existing PPS with a buried package pump station. This project is a required component of the 2019 Consent Decree in the case of Ecological Rights Foundation v. Sewer Authority Mid-Coastside (Case No. 3:18- CV-04413) (“Consent Decree”), which settled a Clean Water Act Citizen suit against SAM, and which is a binding legal obligation, enforceable in federal court, against SAM 49 226
February 26, 2024
Agenda Item No: 4B

BOARD MEMBERS: M. Clark B. Dye P. Dekker
D. Penrose D. Ruddock K. Slater-Carter
ALTERNATE MEMBERS: S. Boyd B. Softky J. Randle
J. Grant H. Rarback
and its member agencies. The Consent Decree was approved by the Federal District Court for the Northern District of California and the court retained continuing jurisdiction to enforce the terms of the Consent Decree. In March 2021, per the Consent Decree, Section 2.c.2, SAM is required to complete a feasibility study on the PPS by June 30, 2021, and is further required to implement the feasible recommendations of the PPS feasibility study by no later than June 30, 2024. SAM completed the required feasibility study on the PPS in a timely fashion and submitted the feasibility study to ERF. The PPS feasibility study determined that replacement/rehabilitation of the PPS was feasible, identified a proposed approach to replacing/rehabilitating the PPS, and identified at least three significant existing vulnerabilities at the existing pump station facility: Tsunami, Seismic Fault Rupture, and Soil Liquefaction Potential. As noted, per the Consent Decree, SAM is required to implement the recommendations of the PPS feasibility study, and replace the PPS, by June 30, 2024.

The PPS is located on West Point Avenue within the Granada Community Services District service area. PPS was originally constructed in the 1950s to convey sewage collected from the community in Princeton-by-the-Sea to a small local wastewater treatment plant. In 1979, the PPS flows were redirected to the new Intertie Pipeline System (IPS) that conveys all wastewater from the northern communities of Montara, Moss Beach, Princeton-by-the-Sea, and El Granada to the SAM Regional WWTP in Half Moon Bay. PPS has not been upgraded in over 40 years and has exceeded its useful life. The reliability of the pumps is diminishing as they continue to age, and replacement parts are more difficult to obtain. In addition, the existing pump station requires high-risk, confined space entry whenever the pumps or valves need maintenance.

At the September 25, 2023 Board meeting, the SAM Board authorized SAM to contract with JMB Construction for the Princeton Pump Station Rehabilitation Project in the amount of $1,637,650 with additional funds to be provided later at the previously referenced Mid-Year Budget Amendment on or around January 2024.

Per the Board’s direction, the project has commenced using funds on-hand per the Board’s direction that the balance of the funds required to complete the PPS work would be provided in a Mid-Year Budget Amendment. The Contractor has many submittals approved for the PPS and is ready to commence construction. Construction is scheduled to start by the end of February, which must occur to meet the June 30, 2024, deadline imposed by the ERF Consent Decree. Electrical items are ordered and there is 50 227
February 26, 2024
Agenda Item No: 4B

BOARD MEMBERS: M. Clark B. Dye P. Dekker
D. Penrose D. Ruddock K. Slater-Carter
ALTERNATE MEMBERS: S. Boyd B. Softky J. Randle
J. Grant H. Rarback
good progress on the project, which is anticipated to be completed, as per the required ERF Consent Decree Latest Date, by June 30, 2024.

A budget of $1,263,181 was approved as a part of the General Budget in Fiscal Year 2022/23 for the PPS work. The total cost estimated for completing the project is $2,602,773, details of which have been provided as attachment A. Additional funds are needed to permit the contractor to finish the PPS work by June 30, 2024.

The balance required for Mid-Year Budget Amendment for this project is $1,339,592 and was sent to the Member Agencies on January 23, 2024 to seek approval from their respective boards/council. MWSD has adopted a resolution approving a Mid-Year Budget Amendment for funding their share of the extra amount. GCSD has also adopted a resolution approving a Mid-Year Budget Amendment for funding their share of the extra amount. HMB has indicated that the Mid-Year Budget Amendment will be approved pending a stipulation agreement being agreed upon and signed by all the Member agencies.

At the February 12, 2024, Board meeting, the SAM Board authorized the General Manager to place the project on hold for two weeks.

It appears that the districts have, to date, been unwilling to agree to a stipulation as requested by the City.

Therefore, the Project needs to be placed on hold for an indefinite period of time, due to lack of sufficient funds. The contractor has indicated an estimate of approximately $50,000 for a hold period of 3 months.

Staff Recommendation:

Staff recommends the Board to authorize the General Manager to place hold on Princeton Pump station Rehabilitation Project for an indefinite period of time.

Supporting Documents
Attachment A: Adjustment Calculation for Princeton Pump Station Rehabilitation Project 51 228
48 229
230
231
232
233
234

BUSINESS OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HALF MOON BAY

AGENDA REPORT
For meeting of: March 5, 2024
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council
VIA: Matthew Chidester, City Manager
FROM: Lisa Rossi, Administrative Services Director
Kenneth Stiles, Finance Manager
TITLE: MID-YEAR OPERATING BUDGET REVIEW AND ADOPTION OF RESOLUTION TO AMEND THE FISCAL YEAR 2023-24 BUDGET
RECOMMENDATION:

Accept the Financial Report for the quarter ended on December 31, 2023; Adopt the attached Resolution to amend the FY 2023-24 Operating and Capital Budget.

FISCAL IMPACT:

General Fund revenues will be amended to $20,454,229; a decrease of $805,312 and General Fund expenditures is amended to $25,446,173, an increase of $500,000 over the Adopted FY 2023-24 budget. In addition, Staff is recommending the total revenue of Non-General Funds be amended to $34,550,597 and Non-General Expenditures amended to $42,897,178.

STRATEGIC ELEMENT:

This recommendation supports the Fiscal Sustainability and Inclusive Governance Elements of the Strategic Plan.

BACKGROUND:

One of the City Council strategic priorities includes planning for and implementing long-term financial stability. A key component of this goal includes preparing a quarterly financial report that provide readers with an executive summary of the City’s current financial conditions as it relates to the annual operating budget to ensure accountability and transparency in managing public funds. This report can be found in Attachment #1. Additionally, Finance Department staff completed a Mid-Year Budget Analysis and is proposing adjustments to the FY 2023-24 Adopted Budget.

As part of the typical mid-year budget review, Department Heads were directed to review their expenditures and revenues in FY 2023-24 and to provide projections (and any proposed modifications) in order to identify significant variances which may necessitate amendments. The City Manager and Finance staff met with each department to discuss and 235
finalize the Revised FY 2023-24 Budget recommendations. In contrast to prior years, departments have refrained from requesting any additional staff or expanded programs, in recognition of the City’s fiscal situation.

Year-end estimates in operating expenditures exceeding 5% and $10,000 of the adopted budget are considered material in nature and are proposed for a budget adjustment. Revenue adjustments are described in the body of this staff report and an itemized version is attached (Attachment #4). The estimates in the Mid-Year Financial Analysis will be revisited in the development of the FY 2024-25 budget and significant and material changes will be presented as part of the annual financial presentation.

DISCUSSION:

This mid-year budget report will focus on the following key objectives:

1. Updating Council on General Fund revenues and expenditures including adjustments

2. Updating Council on all other fund revenues and expenditures including adjustments

3. Updating Council on the Five-Year Forecast and Fiscal Year 2024-25 projected Deficit

GENERAL FUND
The General Fund is the City’s main operating fund, covering day-to-day activities such as administration, law enforcement and public safety, public works, and community development.

It receives various revenues, including transient occupancy tax (TOT), sales tax, property tax, business registration fees, and service fees.

Transient Occupancy Tax
Transient Occupancy Tax (TOT) makes up 40% of all general fund revenues and represents the City’s primary source of revenue. This revenue stream is also the most sensitive to changes in the local, national, and global economy, requiring careful monitoring throughout the year.

During the final five months of Fiscal Year 2022-23, TOT actual revenues were less than the conservative projections included in the budget. In June 2023, the City conservatively set its TOT budget at $9.6 million under the assumption that the drop in TOT was temporary, and revenues would rebound to FY 2021-22 levels. These projections were made in consultation with the City’s consultant and based on review and analysis of local, state, and national data trends. These negative trends have continued, and revenues in FY 2023-24 have continued to underperform.

For this fiscal year, TOT has deviated from the adopted budget at an average of 6% per month.

The table below highlights the budget vs actuals for these revenues by the month:

Transient Occupancy Tax: Budget to Actuals by Month
Budget Actuals % Change $ Change
July 972,400 961,607 -1% (10,793)
August 970,634 1,006,209 4% 35,575
September 974,658 946,898 -3% (27,760)
October 982,145 875,669 -11% (106,476)
236
November 738,781 621,437 -16% (117,344)
December 626,321 518,843 -17% (107,478)
Totals 5,264,939 4,930,663 -6% (334,276)
Given the performance in the first half of the fiscal year, staff now projects TOT revenue to be $8.6 million for the year, a $982 thousand (10%) decrease from the adopted budget.

Drawing on the City’s history with these revenues and observing similar declines in TOT among other coastal cities, Staff considers this decrease a permanent adjustment and the new baseline for future projections. While there is hope that revenues could rebound, it is prudent to adopt a revised, conservative approach in financial projections. This revision has been factored into the financial outlook, which will be discussed in more detail later in this report.

Revenues
The total revised estimates for General Fund revenues are projected to be $20,454,299 or $805,312 (4%) lower than the Adopted Budget of $21,259,541. The following table illustrates the FY 2023-24 adopted and revised budget recommendations.

General Fund Revenues Adopted
Budget
Mid-Year
Proposal
Revised
Budget % Change
Transient Occupancy Tax 9,608,500 (982,187) 8,626,313 -10% Property Taxes 3,911,500 (162,762) 3,748,738 -4%
Sales & Use Taxes 3,268,200 (29,000) 3,239,200 -1%
Other Revenues 4,471,341 368,637 4,839,978 8%
Total 21,259,541 (805,312) 20,454,229 -4%
• Transient Occupancy Tax As mentioned above, TOT revenues are underperforming in both budgetary expectations and versus prior year actuals. The City now estimates revenues will be $8.6 million, a decrease adjustment of $982 thousand or 10%. • Property Taxes On December 31, 2023, the City received $1.6 million or 43% of budget.

Considering property taxes are mostly received in two equal payments in December and April, this revenue stream is underperforming. This is primarily due to a decrease in Vehicle In-Lieu fees. Staff is requesting a decrease adjustment of $162 thousand. • Sales & Use Taxes As seen in the 2nd Quarter financial report, the City has received 34% of budget compared to the prior year’s 36%, a slight underperformance. Staff is requesting an adjustment to this line-item of $29 thousand or 1% decrease. • Other Revenues This category includes revenues such as business license, golf facilities fees, parking fees, and grant funding. Specifically, the City was awarded an extension of a public safety grant for operation of the CARES mental health response program, which will provide sufficient funding for the program through FY 2024-25. Some line-items are requesting to be increased while others to be decreased (Attachment #4). In total, the City estimates it will receive $4.8 million, which is a $368 thousand or 8% increase from the adopted budget.

Expenditures
Due to the shortfalls in major revenues, operating departments were advised against budget 237
increases unless absolutely necessary. The table below highlights the only General Fund expenditure appropriation adjustment for Council consideration:

Actions Request
Operating Expenditures for City Attorney 500,000
• Operating Expenditures for City Attorney
In the City Attorney Division, Staff is requesting an additional $500,000. While general City legal matters have not changed significantly, litigation costs have risen substantially.

Unfortunately, the City cannot control the nature of timing of suits and the City must ultimately defend itself as appropriate. This increase is not programmatic in nature or necessarily ongoing but may extend into the next fiscal year.

Projected General Fund Balance
Should the Council approve the recommendations listed above, the ending General Fund balance as of June 30, 2024, is projected to be approximately $11,235,960 which includes $11 million in reserves and $144 thousand in unassigned. The projected fund balance for the General Fund is shown below:

The decrease in unassigned fund balance from adopted to revised budget is directly attributable to the fall in revenues and the increase in legal costs.

NON-GENERAL FUNDS
Non-General Funds include the following categories:

Adopted Budget
FY 2023-24
Before Audit
Adopted Budget
FY 2023-24
after Audit
Revised Budget
FY 2023-24
Beginning Fund Balance* $ 14,963,555 $ 16,227,904 $ 16,227,904 Total Revenues 21,259,541 21,259,541 20,454,229
Expenditures
Operating Expenditures 22,183,173 22,183,173 22,683,173 Capital Transfers 2,763,000 2,763,000 2,763,000
Total Expenditures 24,946,173 24,946,173 25,446,173
Ending Fund Balance 11,276,924 12,541,273 11,235,960
Reserves (Operating & Economic) 11,091,587 11,091,587 11,091,587 Unassigned Fund Balance 185,337 1,449,686 144,373
GENERAL FUND: FUND BALANCES
*At the time of budget adoption, the beginning fund balance was unavailable and estimated. With the completion of the audit in December, that number has been finalized. 238
• Special Revenue and Capital Funds, including Storm Drain, Main Street Bridge, Gas Tax, Streets and Roads, Measure A & W, Traffic Mitigation, Library Operating and Capital, Parks Development, Affordable Housing, Citizens’ Option for Public Safety (COPS) Grant, Public Facilities, General Capital and Land Assets funds. • Enterprise Funds, including Sewer Operating and Capital funds, and • Internal Service Funds, including Vehicle and Equipment Replacement, Risk Management, and Pension Stabilization funds.

Revenues
The revised estimates for all other fund revenues are projected to be $34.5 million or $4,874,303 (16%) higher than the Adopted Budget of $29,676,294. Full detail on itemized revenue changes can be found on Attachment #4.
• Enterprise Funds During budget adoption back in June 2023, staff estimated sewer rate charges for the fiscal year. After the completion of the final sewer rate charges in July 2023, staff requests an adjustment to the final amount. Staff is requesting a $130,873 adjustment.
• Special Revenue & Capital Funds Staff is requesting an additional $3,462,042 adjustment to these funds. This is primarily from the acceptance of state grants in the amount of $3,250,000 for affordable housing and farmworker housing efforts. • Internal Service Funds Due to rising interest rates, staff is anticipating slightly more interest to be received during the fiscal year. An adjustment of $93,134 is recommended.

Expenditures
Non-General Fund expenditures comprise $42.8 million of the City’s $68.3 million total adopted expenditure budget. These expenditures are proposed to be amended by an increase of $4,425,315 to $42,897,178 which includes $3.9 million previously approved by Council as outlined in Attachment #3. Staff is requesting one additional transfer adjustment to recognize the receipt of federal grants to fund the 555 Kelly project.

Actions Request
Transfer from Fund 136 – Federal Grants to 555 Kelly 500,000 Other Funds Adopted
Budget
Previously
Approved
Mid-Year
Proposal
Total
Adjustment
Revised
Budget
%
Change
Enterprise Funds 6,618,400 - (130,873) (130,873) 6,487,527 -2% Special Revenue & Capital 15,403,612 - 3,462,042 3,462,042 18,865,653 22% Internal Service 74,700 - 93,134 93,134 167,834 125%
Transfers in (various funds) 7,579,582 950,000 500,000 1,450,000 9,029,582 19% Total 29,676,294 950,000 3,924,303 4,874,303 34,550,597 16% Adjustments
239

GENERAL FUND FORECAST
Forecasting is a budgeting tool that is integral to the annual budgeting process. It is used to identify any significant fiscal issues in future years.

During the Fiscal Year 2023-24 budget development, staff prepared a five-year general fund forecast based on economic assumptions, known future costs, and historical information. This forecast estimated an ongoing $4 million structural deficit beginning in Fiscal Year 2024-25, caused by significant increases in existing public safety obligations and a decrease in revenues.

The forecast has since been updated with the most recent information and contains an annual structural deficit of approximately $5.4 million for Fiscal Year 2024-25, which will continue to grow with inflation. The increase is primarily due to the continuation of falling TOT revenues as mentioned above. This deficit is structural in nature and will require significant revenue enhancement and/or programmatic expenditure reductions to resolve.

If left without adjustments in either revenues or expenditures, the City would drain its reserves until it is in a negative fund balance position in approximately Fiscal Year 2026-27.

Strategies & Focus Areas
This presents a notably adverse financial scenario. Staff has been working since the prior year to address this in the following areas:
• Cost Allocation / Fee Study - Since March of 2023, Council approved the City to undergo a cost allocation and fee study, which is a process of identifying the cost of providing services and developing a fee structure to recoup those costs. Since the City’s last study was performed in 2017, staff anticipates some additional revenue generation. Staff hopes to have the fee study portion complete for Fiscal Year 2024-25. • Expenditure Review - Since the start of the fiscal year, Staff has been meeting regularly to review the entirety of the budget line-by-line to identify any areas of cost reduction that have minimal impact on service levels and the community. Staff has completed the first review and will start a second review in the coming weeks. • Identifying Revenue Enhancements - Staff has been working with the Finance Committee in identifying and quantifying all revenue enhancements available to the City. In a separate staff report and agenda item, staff will bring the details of these options to Council for discussion.
• Identifying One-Time Funds - Although, the deficit is structural in nature and will require permanent solutions, staff is identifying one-time funds. These funds may only be helpful in one fiscal year, but they can act as a bridge to more permanent solutions.

Overall, the deficit presents a critical challenge that will be the primary focus as we move into the next budget cycle, guiding our strategic planning and decision-making processes.

Preparing the FY 2024-25 Budget
In March 2024, Finance Staff will issue budget instructions for the FY 2024-25 Budget to all departments. Finance Staff is working closely with the City Manager and all departments to 240
develop budget factors and assumptions that will be used to prepare the FY 2024-25 Budget.

Each department will be provided with their Base Budget expenditure allotments consistent with the FY 2023-24 revised budget including any cost reductions as identified in the expenditure review study above.

Each department will be given an opportunity to submit prioritized program changes and any further possible reductions that have minimum impact in current service levels and the goals of the operational program.

With updated revenue forecasts and identification of one-time funds, staff will present budget balancing options to the Finance Committee for recommendations to incorporate in the draft budget. The draft budget will then be presented to Council for discussion in the first meeting in June.

The goal of this budget process is to identify cost reductions and put into focus clearer pathways to long-term fiscal sustainability. The staff recommendations will be based on several factors, including the City’s core services and priorities, the City’s strategic plan, and long-term fiscal health.

ATTACHMENTS:

1. Financial Report for the Quarter Ended on December 31, 2023

2. Resolution authorizing adjustments to the FY 2023-24 Operating and Capital Budget

3. FY 2023-24 City Council Previously Approved Budget Items

4. FY 2023-24 Itemized Revenues & Expenditure Adjustments

5. FY 2023-24 Summaries of Revenues, Expenditures and Fund Balances By Fund 241

CITY OF HALF MOON BAY
Quarterly Financial Report
December 31, 2023
Prepared By:

Administra�ve Services Department
242
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
General Fund
Special Revenue Funds
Sewer Operations
Sewer Capital
Internal Service Funds
Revenue & Expenditure Summary
Revenues to Budget Expenditures to Budget
Funds Actual % of Budget Actual % of Budget
General Fund 8,450,929 40% 8,601,933 34%
Special Revenue Funds 5,370,108 26% 4,349,386 15%
Sewer Operations 2,919,974 39% 2,798,321 37%
Sewer Capital 37,410 18% 25,861 1%
Internal Service Funds 33,581 2% 784,045 44%
Pension Stabilization Fund 6,189 1% 913,474 100%
TOTAL FOR ALL FUNDS 16,818,190 32% 17,473,020 26.6%
Revenues Expenditures
243
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Transient Occupancy Tax
Property Taxes
Sales & Use Tax
Franchise Tax
Business License Tax
Charges for Services
Interest and Investment
Other Revenues
General Fund Revenue Summary
Revenues to Budget
Department Budget Actual % of
Budget
Prior Year
Actual
Prior Year
% of Actuals
Transient Occupancy Tax 9,608,500 3,790,383 39% $3,961,966 45% Property Taxes 3,911,500 1,699,720 43% $1,931,913 47%
Sales & Use Tax 3,268,200 1,123,612 34% $1,130,624 36%
Franchise Tax 1,065,078 190,793 18% $ 183,169 19%
Business License Tax 305,000 288,472 95% $ 257,041 78%
Charges for Services 1,692,257 886,517 52% $ 964,208 47% Interest and Investment 242,000 144,662 60% $ 48,581 14% Other Revenues 629,721 326,770 52% $1,950,999 77%
Transfers in 537,285 - 0% $ - 0%
TOTAL 21,259,541 8,450,929 40% 10,428,502 46%
244
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Administrative Services
City Clerk / Communications
City Council
City Managers Office
Community Development
Public Works
Debt Service
General Fund Expenditure Summary
Expenditures to Budget
Department Budget Actual % of
Budget
Prior Year
Actual
Prior Year
% of Actuals
Administrative Services 1,520,384 666,113 44% $ 591,870 52% City Clerk / Communications 1,091,667 456,313 42% $ 438,972 50% City Council 239,642 74,040 31% $ 63,497 32%
City Managers Office 11,075,941 4,957,680 45% $ 3,991,424 49% Community Development 2,007,233 699,571 35% $ 774,810 43% Public Works 3,757,958 1,521,234 40% $ 1,433,074 44%
Debt Service 736,610 226,983 31% $ 338,811 50%
Non-Departmental - - $ - 0%
Operating Transfers 1,753,738 - 0% $ - 0%
Capital Transfers 2,763,000 - 0% $ - 0%
TOTAL 24,946,173 8,601,933 34.5% 7,632,458 34%
245
GENERAL FUND ANALYSIS:

The General Fund is the primary opera�ng fund of the City and is used to account for most opera�ng ac�vi�es. Table 1 below provides year-to-date through the second quarter comparable data for the current fiscal year and the prior year.

Through the second quarter, the city received $8.4 million in revenues for the fiscal year. Revenues have decreased from the prior years. While last year’s revenues were 46%, the current fiscal year revenues are 40% of the budget.

Expenditures through the second quarter total $8.6 million. Expenditures are tracking at 34% of budget.

Revised
Budget
Actuals as of
12/31/2023
% of
Budget
Final
Actuals
Actuals as of
12/31/2022
% of
Actuals
Revenues
Transient Occupancy Tax 9,608,500 3,790,383 39% 8,852,640 3,961,966 45% Property Taxes 3,911,500 1,699,720 43% 4,135,613 1,931,913 47% Sales & Use Tax 3,268,200 1,123,612 34% 3,160,478 1,130,624 36% Franchise Tax 1,065,078 190,793 18% 945,755 183,169 19% Business License Tax 305,000 288,472 95% 330,544 257,041 78% Charges for Services 1,692,257 886,517 52% 2,037,767 964,208 47% Interest and Investment 242,000 144,662 60% 353,945 48,581 14% Other Revenues 629,721 326,770 52% 2,529,259 1,950,999 77% Transfers in 537,285 - 0% 524,180 - 0%
Total Revenues 21,259,541 8,450,929 40% 22,870,180 10,428,502 46% Expenditures
Administrative Services 1,520,384 666,113 44% 1,149,168 591,870 52% City Clerk / Communications 1,091,667 456,313 42% 884,782 438,972 50% City Council 239,642 74,040 31% 197,756 63,497 32%
City Managers Office 11,075,941 4,957,680 45% 8,204,098 3,991,424 49% Community Development 2,007,233 699,571 35% 1,807,920 774,810 43% Public Works 3,757,958 1,521,234 40% 3,242,122 1,433,074 44% Debt Service 736,610 226,983 31% 675,302 338,811 50%
Non Departmental - - 95,926 -
Operating Transfers 1,753,738 - 0% 1,954,936 - 0%
Capital Transfers 2,763,000 - 0% 4,015,419 - 0%
Total Expenditures 24,946,173 8,601,933 34% 22,227,428 7,632,458 34% Table 1: Second Quarter Budget to Actual Comparison
FY 2023-24 FY 2022-23
246
Revenues
Table 2 below shows a year-to-date summary of actual revenues through the second quarter for the current fiscal year and the prior year.
• Transient Occupancy Tax: The City has received $3.7 million through the second quarter.

This is a decrease of $171 K from the prior year. This revenue stream is at 39% of the budget compared to the prior year’s 45%. This revenue is underperforming and has been since February of 2023. Although half the year remains to be collected and reviewed, the City is anticipating revenue to not meet the adopted budget. • Property Taxes: Most property tax funds are received in December and April. $1.6 million in revenues have been received thus far. Revenues are 43% of budget as compared to 47% in the prior year. Thisstream is underperforming primarily due to vehicle in-lieu fees. • Sales & Use Taxes: The City received $1.1 million in sales & use taxes. This is a minimal decrease from the prior year. The City has received 34% of the budget, which is slightly less than the prior year’s 36%, signaling an underperformance.

Revised
Budget
Actuals as of
12/31/2023
% of
Budget
Actuals as of
12/31/2022
% of
Actuals
Revenues
Transient Occupancy Tax 9,608,500 3,790,383 39% 3,961,966 45% Property Taxes 3,911,500 1,699,720 43% 1,931,913 47%
Sales & Use Tax 3,268,200 1,123,612 34% 1,130,624 36%
Franchise Tax 1,065,078 190,793 18% 183,169 19%
Business License Tax 305,000 288,472 95% 257,041 78%
Charges for Services 1,692,257 886,517 52% 964,208 47%
Interest and Investment 242,000 144,662 60% 48,581 14%
Other Revenues 629,721 326,770 52% 1,950,999 77%
Transfers in 537,285 - 0% - 0%
Total Revenues 21,259,541 8,450,929 40% 10,428,502 46%
Table 2: Second Quarter Revenues
FY 2023-24 FY 2022-23
247
Expenditures
Table 3 below shows a summary of second quarter budget-to-actual revenues for fiscal years 2023-24 and 2022-23.

General fund expenditures through the second quarter total $8.6 million or 34% of budget. Expenditures are tracking as an�cipated.

Budget Adjustments
Table 4 below shows a summary of council ac�ons with poten�al budgetary effects during the second quarter not reflected in the numbers above.

Revised
Budget
Actuals as of
12/31/2023
% of
Budget
Actuals as of
12/31/2022
% of
Actuals
Expenditures
Administrative Services 1,520,384 666,113 44% 591,870 52% City Clerk / Communications 1,091,667 456,313 42% 438,972 50% City Council 239,642 74,040 31% 63,497 32%
City Managers Office 11,075,941 4,957,680 45% 3,991,424 49% Community Development 2,007,233 699,571 35% 774,810 43% Public Works 3,757,958 1,521,234 40% 1,433,074 44%
Debt Service 736,610 226,983 31% 338,811 50%
Non-Departmental - - - 0%
Operating Transfers 1,753,738 - 0% - 0%
Capital Transfers 2,763,000 - 0% - 0%
Total Expenditures 24,946,173 8,601,933 34% 7,632,458 34% Table 3: Second Quarter Expenditures
FY 2023-24 FY 2022-23
Item Major Funding
Source
Total Fiscal
Impact
GF
Impact
CIP # 1008 - Smith Field Improvement Project Fund 125 $ 20,000 $ - Total $ 20,000 $ -
Table 4: Budget Adjustments
248
Conclusion
Table 5 below shows an updated summary of general fund balances for the fiscal year.

The adopted budget es�mated unassigned funds on June 30, 2024, to be $1.4 million. Due to falling revenues, primarily in Transient Occupancy Tax, the City now es�mates the unassigned fund balance to be $144 thousand. While the City has fully funded reserves, exis�ng obliga�ons and expenditures exceed ongoing revenues crea�ng longer-term fiscal challenges exist for the City. A full financial outlook can be found in the Mid-Year Review staff report from the March 5th City Council mee�ng.

Adopted Budget
FY 2023-24
after Audit
Revised Budget
FY 2023-24
Beginning Fund Balance* $ 16,227,904 $ 16,227,904
Total Revenues 21,259,541 20,454,229
Expenditures
Operating Expenditures 22,183,173 22,683,173
Capital Transfers 2,763,000 2,763,000
Total Expenditures 24,946,173 25,446,173
Ending Fund Balance 12,541,273 11,235,960
Reserves (Operating & Economic) 11,091,587 11,091,587
Unassigned Fund Balance 1,449,686 144,373
GENERAL FUND: FUND BALANCES
249
RESOLUTION NO. C-2024-

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HALF MOON BAY APPROVING ADJUSTMENTS TO THE FY 2023-24 OPERATING AND CAPITAL BUDGET WHEREAS, the City Council adopted the Fiscal Year 2023-24 Annual Operating and Capital Budget on June 20, 2023; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed the Mid-Year Budget analysis and requested adjustments; and
WHEREAS, the City Council desires to amend an appropriations limit, pursuant to California Constitution Article XII B, for fiscal year 2023-24 to $68,343,351; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Half Moon Bay hereby approves the budget adjustments needed for the City-wide revenues and expenditures to be as follows:

Revenue Expenditures
GENERAL FUND 20,454,229 25,446,173

ENTERPRISE FUNDS
Sewer Operating 7,335,602 7,529,974
Sewer Capital 274,199 2,252,777

SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS
Storm Drain Operating 5,100 100,000
Traffic Mitigation 205,702 37,033
Library Operation 200 -
Main Street Bridge 7,100 -
Gas Tax 670,415 566,432
Streets and Roads 5,639,650 6,313,163
Measures A 446,695 261,117
Park/Facilities Development 5,968,362 8,401,079
Affordable Housing 3,318,740 1,450,000
Public Facilities 189,402 1,742,398
Police Grants 214,688 -
Measure W 197,755 -
Lot Retirement/Acquisition 44,891 400,000
CZI Grant 4,000 289,401
Opportunity Coastside Center 1,870,177 2,470,000
Federal Grants 1,500,000 500,000
Judgement Bonds - B 100 -
Capital General 3,352,458 5,991,648
Drainage Capital 921,818 1,914,546
Library Capital 6,400 -

INTERNAL SERVICE FUNDS
Vehicle Replacement 69,067 69,067
Equipment Replacement 601,234 586,335
Risk Management 768,611 1,108,731
Pension Stabilization 938,230 913,474
55,004,826 68,343,351
Mid-Year Budget
250
******************************************************* I hereby certify that the foregoing is a full, true, and correct copy of a resolution duly passed and adopted on the 5th day of March 2024 by the City Council of the City of Half Moon Bay by the following vote:

AYES, Councilmembers:

NOES, Councilmembers:

ABSENT, Councilmembers:

ABSTAIN, Councilmembers:

ATTEST: APPROVED:

Jessica Blair, City Clerk Joaquin Jimenez, Mayor
251
Fund Description Council Date Revenue Expenditure
Various Final audited CIP funds carried over from prior years 1,555,315 125 CIP # 1008 ‐ Smith Field Improvement Project 12/5/2023 20,000 126 Emergency Housing Support for Farmworkers 1/16/2024 300,000 126 Start‐up Expenditures of Rental Registration Program 2/6/2024 150,000 125 CIP # 0611 ‐ Carter Park 2/20/2024 1,250,000
125 CIP #1009 ‐ Main Street Improvements to CIP # 611 2/20/2024 (300,000) 151 Transfer to fund CIP # 0611 ‐ Carter Park 2/20/2024 950,000 125 Transfer from General Capital Fund Balance for Carter Park 2/20/2024 950,000 950,000                  3,925,315
NET FISCAL IMPACT OF CURRENT YEAR ADJUSTMENTS (1,420,000) City of Half Moon Bay
FY 2023‐24 Revised Budget
Previously Approved Budget Items

FISCAL IMPACT
252
Approved
Budget
Actuals on
12/31 Ending Est.

Increase /
(Decrease)
General Fund Revenues
Transient Occupancy Tax 9,608,500               3,790,383       8,626,313                 (982,187) Property Taxes 3,655,000               1,678,394       3,229,000                 (426,000) Property Tax ‐ Eraf 150,000             ‐                            413,238                  263,238 Sales & Use Tax 3,238,000               1,108,603       3,209,000                   (29,000) Franchise Tax 355,000                       37,312          368,105                    13,105 Interest 242,000                     144,662          508,662                  266,662 Miscellaneous Revenue 150,000                       76,320          423,492                  273,492 Franchise Tax 710,078                     153,481          613,923                   (96,156) Engineering Fees 125,000                       20,755             36,533                   (88,467) General Fund Revenue Adjustment (805,312)
Approved
Budget
Actuals on
12/31 Ending Est.

Increase /
(Decrease)
Other Funds
[Fund 122] ‐ Gas Tax 348,192                     148,270          331,218                   (16,975) [Fund 124] ‐ Measure A Sales Tax 504,876                     206,007          398,552                 (106,324) [Fund 125] ‐ Grants 5,564,000          ‐                         4,589,895                 (974,105) [Fund 125] ‐ Park Facility Development Impact Fee 147,000             ‐                               66,890                   (80,111) [Fund 126] ‐ Grants                     ‐      3,250,000       3,250,000               3,250,000 [Fund 128] ‐ Cops Distribution 170,000                     138,060          186,408                    16,408 [Fund 132] ‐ Measure W Sales Tax 224,390                       59,892          177,124                   (47,266) [Fund 136] ‐ Grants                     ‐      1,000,000       1,500,000               1,500,000 [Fund 151] ‐ Grants                     ‐           15,000             15,000                    15,000 [Fund 151] ‐ Capital Grants 1,080,000          ‐                            580,000                 (500,000) [Fund 201] ‐ Sewer Service Charges 6,405,600               2,919,974       6,211,228                 (194,372) [Multiple Funds] ‐ Interest 488,700                     266,349       1,050,747                  562,047 Other Funds Revenue Adjustment 3,424,303
Approved
Budget
Actuals on
12/31 Ending Est.

Increase /
(Decrease)
Fund Transfers
Transfer to Capital General from Federal Grants for 555 Kelly                      ‐ ‐                            500,000                  500,000 Total Revenue Adjustments 3,118,991
City of Half Moon Bay
FY 2023‐24 Revised Budget
Proposed Revenue Adjustments
253
Approved
Budget
Actuals on
12/31 Ending Est.

Increase /
(Decrease)
General Fund Revenues
City Attorney            469,250         375,910          969,250                  500,000 General Fund Expenditure Adjustment 500,000
Approved
Budget
Actuals on
12/31 Ending Est.

Increase /
(Decrease)
Other Funds
General Fund Expenditure Adjustment                           ‐ Approved
Budget
Actuals on
12/31 Ending Est.

Increase /
(Decrease)
Fund Transfers
Transfer from Fund 136 ‐ Federal Grants to 555 Kelly                      ‐ ‐                            500,000                  500,000 Total Expenditure Adjustments 1,000,000
Proposed Expenditures Adjustments
City of Half Moon Bay
FY 2023‐24 Revised Budget
254
Actual  Adopted  Previously  Mid‐Year  Revised % Change over Fund Name 2022‐23 2023‐24 Approved Adjustments 2023‐24 Adopted GENERAL FUND 22,870,180 $         $         ‐ 21,259,541 $                                   (805,312) $      ‐ 20,454,229 3.8%

ENTERPRISE FUNDS
Sewer Operating $          7,071,505               ‐ 7,529,974                                 (194,372)           ‐ 7,335,602 2.6% Sewer Capital 452,392                                   ‐ 210,700                                     63,499              274,199 30.1% TOTAL ENTERPRISE FUNDS 7,523,898                            ‐ 7,740,674                                      (130,873)           ‐ 7,609,801 1.7%

SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS
Storm Drain Operating 7,637                                            ‐ 5,100                       ‐                                            5,100 0.0% Traffic Mitigation 226,307                                   ‐ 129,700                                     76,002              205,702 58.6% Library Operation 350                                                   ‐ 200                       ‐                                                200 0.0% Main Street Bridge 39,367                                          ‐ 7,100                       ‐                                            7,100 0.0% Gas Tax                 598,951                  ‐ 653,946                                     16,469              670,415 2.5% Streets and Roads 247,030                                ‐ 5,600,600                                     39,050          5,639,650 0.7% Measures A                 454,696                  ‐ 523,276                                    (76,581)               ‐ 446,695 14.6% Park/Facilities Development 1,570,732                            6,051,500              950,000        (1,033,138)           ‐ 5,968,362 1.4% Affordable Housing 47,034                                       ‐ 31,400                               3,287,340          3,318,740 10469.2% Public Facilities 3,012,796                                ‐ 167,600                                     21,802              189,402 13.0% Police Grants 183,236                                   ‐ 181,200                                     33,488              214,688 18.5% Measure W 196,378                                   ‐ 231,590                                    (33,835)               ‐ 197,755 14.6% Lot Retirement/Acquisition 36,645                                       ‐ 27,100                                     17,791                44,891 65.6% CZI Grant 506,701                                        ‐ 4,000                       ‐                                            4,000 0.0% Opportunity Coastside Center 651,347                                ‐ 1,850,000                                     20,177          1,870,177 1.1% Federal Grants                           ‐ ‐                                ‐                               1,500,000          1,500,000 Capital General 1,813,130                             ‐ 3,280,800                                     71,658          3,352,458 2.2% Drainage Capital 410,836                                   ‐ 900,000                                     21,818              921,818 2.4% Library Capital 9,581                                            ‐ 6,400                       ‐                                            6,400 0.0% 10,012,755           19,651,512              950,000         3,962,042        24,563,553 25.0% Vehicle Replacement 70,680                                       ‐ 69,067                       ‐                                          69,067 0.0% Equipment Replacement 558,673                                   ‐ 586,335                                     14,899              601,234 2.5% Risk Management 730,927                                   ‐ 708,731                                     59,879              768,611 8.4% Pension Stabilization 1,170,695                                ‐ 919,874                                     18,356              938,230 2.0% INTERNAL SERVICE FUNDS 2,530,975                            ‐ 2,284,008                                          93,134          2,377,142 4.1% Judgement Bonds ‐ B 136                                                   ‐ 100                       ‐                                                100 DEBT SERVICE FUNDS 136                                                   ‐ 100                            ‐                                               100 20,067,764           29,676,294              950,000         3,924,303        34,550,597 16.4% Total All Funds 42,937,945 $         $        50,935,836 $          950,000 $      3,118,991 $     55,004,826 8%

TOTAL SPECIAL REVENUE AND
City of Half Moon Bay
FY 2023‐24 Revised Budget
Summary of Revenue & Transfers by Fund
Budget Adjustments
Total Other Funds
255
Actual  Adopted  Previously  Mid‐Year  Revised % Change over Fund Name 2022‐23 2023‐24 Approved Adjustments 2023‐24 Adopted GENERAL FUND 24,946,173 $         $        24,946,173                           ‐             500,000 $     25,446,173 2.0%

ENTERPRISE FUNDS
Sewer Operating              7,529,974               ‐ 7,529,974                       ‐                                    7,529,974 0.0% Sewer Capital 2,212,877                            2,212,877                 ‐ 39,900                                    2,252,777 1.8% TOTAL ENTERPRISE FUNDS 9,742,851                           9,742,851                 ‐ 39,900                                    9,782,751 0.4%

SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS
Storm Drain Operating 100,000                                   ‐ 100,000                       ‐                                        100,000 0.0% Traffic Mitigation 37,033                                       ‐ 37,033                       ‐                                          37,033 0.0% Library Operation                           ‐ ‐                                ‐                       ‐                           ‐ Main Street Bridge                           ‐ ‐                                ‐                       ‐                           ‐ Gas Tax                 566,432                  ‐ 566,432                       ‐                                        566,432 0.0% Streets and Roads 6,263,566                            6,263,566                 ‐ 49,597                                    6,313,163 0.8% Measures A                 261,117                  ‐ 261,117                       ‐                                        261,117 0.0% Park/Facilities Development 6,197,117                            6,197,117           ‐ 2,203,962                                    8,401,079 35.6% Affordable Housing 1,000,000                            1,000,000               ‐ 450,000                                    1,450,000 45.0% Public Facilities 1,932,516                            1,932,516             ‐ (190,118)                                     ‐ 1,742,398 9.8% Police Grants                           ‐ ‐                                ‐                       ‐                           ‐ Measure W                           ‐ ‐                                ‐                       ‐                           ‐ Lot Retirement/Acquisition 400,000                                   ‐ 400,000                       ‐                                        400,000 0.0% CZI Grant 330,000                                  330,000                ‐ (40,599)                                         ‐ 289,401 12.3% Opportunity Coastside Center 2,470,000                             ‐ 2,470,000                       ‐                                    2,470,000 0.0% Federal Grants                           ‐ ‐                                ‐                                   500,000              500,000 Capital General 4,737,593                            4,737,593           ‐ 1,254,055                                    5,991,648 26.5% Drainage Capital 1,756,028                            1,756,028               ‐ 158,518                                    1,914,546 9.0% Library Capital                           ‐ ‐                                ‐                       ‐                           ‐ 26,051,403           26,051,403          3,885,415             500,000        30,436,818 16.8% Vehicle Replacement 69,067                                       ‐ 69,067                       ‐                                          69,067 0.0% Equipment Replacement 586,335                                   ‐ 586,335                       ‐                                        586,335 0.0% Risk Management 1,108,731                             ‐ 1,108,731                       ‐                                    1,108,731 0.0% Pension Stabilization 913,474                                   ‐ 913,474                       ‐                                        913,474 0.0% INTERNAL SERVICE FUNDS 2,677,608                            ‐ 2,677,608                            ‐                                    2,677,608 0.0% Judgement Bonds ‐ B                           ‐ ‐                                ‐                       ‐                           ‐ DEBT SERVICE FUNDS                               ‐ ‐                               ‐                            ‐                           ‐ 38,471,863           38,471,863          3,925,315             500,000        42,897,178 11.5% Total All Funds 63,418,036 $         $        63,418,036 $       3,925,315 $      1,000,000 $     68,343,351 8% City of Half Moon Bay
FY 2023‐24 Revised Budget
Summary of Expenditures & Transfers by Fund
Budget Adjustments

TOTAL SPECIAL REVENUE AND
Total Other Funds
256
Audited Revenues & Expenditures Revenue Projected
Fund Balance Trsfrs In & Trsfrs Out Over(Under)    Fund Balance 7/1/2023 Budget Budget Expenditures 6/30/2024

GENERAL FUND
101 General Fund $        16,227,904 $     20,454,229 $  (25,446,173) $     (4,991,944) $      11,235,960

ENTERPRISE FUNDS
201 Sewer Operating 0                                        7,335,602        (7,529,974)            (194,372)              (194,372) 202 Sewer Capital 1              4,637,048              274,199        (2,252,777)         (1,978,578)           2,658,470 Total Enterprise Funds 4,637,048                        7,609,801        (9,782,751)         (2,172,950)           2,464,098

SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS
111 Storm Drain Operating 351,477                                   5,100           (100,000)               (94,900)               256,577 112 Traffic Mitigation 4,365,486                            205,702              (37,033)              168,669           4,534,155 113 Library Operation 110,155                                        ‐ 200                                                200               110,355 121 Main Street Bridge 42,270                                      ‐ 7,100                                            7,100                 49,370 122 Gas Tax              1,746,211              670,415           (566,432)              103,983           1,850,194 123 Streets and Roads 2,501,219                        5,639,650        (6,313,163)            (673,513)           1,827,706 124 Measure A              1,472,949              446,695           (261,117)              185,578           1,658,526 125 Park/Facilities Development 2,479,538                        5,968,362        (8,401,079)         (2,432,717)                 46,821 126 Affordable Housing 2,164,621                        3,318,740        (1,450,000)          1,868,740           4,033,361 127 Public Facilities 2,069,571                            189,402        (1,742,398)         (1,552,996)               516,574 128 Police Grants 871,855                                ‐ 214,688                                        214,688           1,086,543 132 Measure W 664,576                                ‐ 197,755                                        197,755               862,332 133 Lot Retirement/Acquisition 1,348,210                              44,891           (400,000)            (355,109)               993,100 134 CZI Grant 285,401                                   4,000           (289,401)             ‐ (285,401) 135 Opportunity Coastside Center 651,347                           1,870,177        (2,470,000)            (599,823)                 51,523 136 Federal Grants                          ‐          1,500,000           (500,000)          1,000,000           1,000,000 151 Capital General 2,788,919                        3,352,458        (5,991,648)         (2,639,190)               149,729 152 Drainage Capital 1,126,879                            921,818        (1,914,546)            (992,728)               134,150 153 Library Capital 426,155                                    ‐ 6,400                                            6,400               432,555 Total Special Revenue and Capital Funds 25,466,836                   24,563,553      (30,436,818)         (5,873,265)         19,593,572

INTERNAL SERVICE FUNDS
301 Vehicle Replacement 371,578                                 69,067               ‐ (69,067)                                          371,578 302 Equipment Replacement 944,115                               601,234           (586,335)                14,899               959,014 303 Risk Management 2,609,717                            768,611        (1,108,731)            (340,121)           2,269,596 304 Pension Stabilization 1,458,810                            938,230           (913,474)                24,756           1,483,566 Total Internal Service Funds 5,384,220                        2,377,142        (2,677,608)            (300,466)           5,083,754

DEBT SERVICE FUNDS
142 Judgement Bonds ‐ B 6,267                                             ‐ 100                                                100                   6,367 Total Debt Service Funds 6,267                                            ‐ 100                                               100                   6,367 Total Other Funds 35,494,371 $         $     34,550,597 $  (42,897,178) $     (8,346,581) $      27,147,790 Total All Funds 51,722,275 $         $     55,004,826 $  (68,343,351) $   (13,338,525) $      38,383,750 City of Half Moon Bay
FY 2023‐24 Revised Budget
Summary of Fund Balances by Fund
257

BUSINESS OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HALF MOON BAY

AGENDA REPORT
For meeting of: March 5, 2024
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council
VIA: Matthew Chidester, City Manager
FROM: Jessica Blair, Communications Director / City Clerk Kenneth Stiles, Finance Manager
Heather Minner, Assistant City Attorney

TITLE: DISCUSSION OF POTENTIAL REVENUE ENHANCEMENT MEASURES FOR THE NOVEMBER 5, 2024, GENERAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION
______________________________________________________________________________ RECOMMENDATION:

Receive a presentation from staff on potential revenue enhancement measures for the November 5, 2024, General Municipal Election, direct staff accordingly.

FISCAL IMPACT:

There is no fiscal impact associated with this discussion, however, if directed to move forward with a tax measure, there will be costs associated with consultant agreements for polling and feasibility analyses as well as election costs if a measure is placed on the ballot.

BACKGROUND:

Last spring, the City was informed by the County of San Mateo that following an internal audit of its programs and services, contracts with the Sheriff’s Office and 911 Dispatch would be increased. For Half Moon Bay, total public safety costs increased approximately 43% heading into the current fiscal year. This increase, along with other increased expenses and lagging tourism revenues, resulted in a multimillion-dollar annual structural deficit that is projected to continue into the foreseeable future. Staff immediately began meeting internally to develop a strategy and identify areas in the budget for cost-cutting measures to narrow the gap. A number of modifications are being planned and will be presented to the City Council as part of the FY 2024-25 budget process. In addition to looking for ways to reduce expenses, Staff explored ways to increase revenue as well.

In November 2023, an internal team was formed to assess potential revenue enhancement measures, looking toward the November 2024 general election. After research and information-gathering, staff scheduled a City Council Finance Subcommittee meeting to discuss the potential measures and seek direction. The Finance Subcommittee met on December 20, 258

2023, provided feedback to staff, and met again on February 6, 2024, and provided a final recommendation.

DISCUSSION:

After considering options for potential revenue enhancement measures, the Finance Subcommittee ultimately suggested exploring a potential Parcel Tax, with an emphasis on the revenue being used to offset public safety costs and maintain services, and / or a Sales Tax Increase.

Parcel Tax
A Parcel Tax is considered a “special tax” and would require a super majority (two-thirds vote) to pass. The Finance Subcommittee initially suggests the tax be formulated to be charged by square footage at $0.10 per square foot. Setting the tax by square footage versus a flat rate for each parcel would be more equitable across property types.

The table below highlights a sample fee structure and the estimate revenue generated from each:

Sales & Use Tax
An increase to Sales Tax could be a general tax requiring a simple majority (50% +1) to pass.

Currently, the City’s sales tax is 9.375% and the highest in the county is 9.875%. Staff is working with the City's sales tax consultant to determine whether it is feasible to consider increasing our sales tax rate beyond the current highest rate in the county.

The table below highlights the estimated revenue generation at each ¼ cent increase:
% Increase Estimated
Additional Revenue
+.25%
(9.625%) $1,005,400
+.50%
(9.875%) $2,010,800
Class Square
Feet $0.10 $0.12 $0.15
Residential 28.20 M 2.82 M 3.38 M 4.23 M
Commercial 15.54 M 1.55 M 1.87 M 2.33 M
Residential & Commercial 43.74 M 4.37 M 5.25 M 6.56 M
Average tax for SFH lot 5,000 sqft $ 500 $ 600 $ 750
Per Square Footage
259

The following table show the all the current sales tax rates in the County:

Current Sales Tax Rates in San Mateo County

9.375% 9.625% 9.875%
Atherton
Colma
Foster City
Half Moon Bay
Hillsborough
Menlo Park
Millbrae
Portola
Valley
San Carlos
San Mateo
County
Woodside
Burlingame
San Mateo
Belmont
Brisbane
Daly City
East Palo Alto
Pacifica
Redwood City
San Bruno
South San Francisco
For either tax, consultants should be secured to advise on feasibility and conduct polling. Staff is aware that this year’s election will contain multiple revenue and tax measures both locally and across the state as many agencies are struggling with structural challenges.

Staff is seeking direction from the City Council as to whether staff should continue to explore either or both of these revenue enhancement options. If directed to do so, staff will engage with consultants and begin polling work. Once that stage is complete, staff would return to the City Council to present the information obtained and the City Council would ultimately then make a final decision on what measures to place on the ballot, if any. 260