Agenda — Hillsborough City Council, August 14, 2023 (part 1 of 2)

TOWN OF HILLSBOROUGH
San Mateo County
Christine Krolik, Mayor 1600 Floribunda Avenue
Sophie Cole, Vice Mayor Hillsborough, CA 94010
Marie Chuang, Councilmember www.hillsborough.net
Leslie Marden Ragsdale, Councilmember Phone 650-375-7400 Alvin L. Royse, Councilmember

A G E N D A
MONDAY, AUGUST 14, 2023
5:00 PM CLOSED SESSION
6:00 PM CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Hillsborough Town Hall and Zoom Video Conference
Meetings of the City Council are held in-person. As a courtesy, and in compliance with applicable state law, staff and members of the public may participate in the meeting in person at Town Hall or virtually via Zoom Video Conference.

To attend the meeting in person:
1600 Floribunda Avenue, Hillsborough, CA 94010.

To provide Public Comment in person:

Members of the public wishing to speak are requested to complete a yellow speaker card and submit it to the City Clerk.

To participate in the meeting via Zoom Video Conference:
• Log in to the meeting at https://us06web.zoom.us/j/82485256807?pwd=ZzFsc3pHODNBNnVnYXd3Q21JNGJhdz09 • Dial-in via phone:
+1 669 444 9171 US
+1 253 205 0468 US
+1 720 707 2699 US (Denver)
+1 253 215 8782 US (Tacoma)
+1 346 248 7799 US (Houston)
+1 646 558 8656 US (New York)
+1 301 715 8592 US (Washington DC)
+1 312 626 6799 US (Chicago)
Meeting ID: 824 8525 6807
Passcode: 490703
To provide Public Comment via Zoom Video Conference:

Live verbal public comments may be made by requesting to speak using the “raise hand” feature in Zoom or, if calling in by phone, by pressing *9 on the telephone keypad prior to the close of the public comment period for the item. In response, the Town will unmute the speaker and allow them to speak up to three minutes.

CLOSED SESSION (5:00 pm)

CALL TO ORDER

ROLL CALL

ANNOUNCEMENT OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST
This portion of the agenda is for Councilmembers to disclose any conflict of interest related to any item on the Closed Session agenda.

Any Councilmember who has confirmed a conflict of interest or has reason to believe they have a conflict of interest should disclose the conflict for the record and abide by the disqualification requirements contained in FPPC regulations.

Agenda – Hillsborough City Council
Monday, August 14, 2023

Page 2 ends

CLOSED SESSION ITEMS
A. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL – EXISTING LITIGATION
Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(d)(1)
Stroud v. Town of Hillsborough, Field, et al.

San Mateo County Superior Court Case No. 23CLJ01914
B. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL – ANTICIPATED LITIGATION Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(d)(2)
Town as Defendant – One Potential Case (see legal threat document in agenda packet)

PUBLIC COMMENT
Members of the public may provide public comments on any item on the Closed Session agenda. Members of the public participating in person are requested to complete a yellow speaker card and submit it to the City Clerk before addressing the City Council. Members of the public participating via the Zoom platform may use the “raise hand” feature or, if calling in by phone, press *9 on the telephone keypad. Speakers are limited to one comment per Closed Session item.

ADJOURN CLOSED SESSION
REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING (6:00 pm)
I. CALL TO ORDER
II. ROLL CALL
III. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
IV. REPORT FROM CLOSED SESSION
V. MINUTES: Special Meetings of January 30, 2023, February 7, 2023 and March 21, 2023 and Regular Meetings of March 13, 2023 and April 10, 2023
VI. RECOGNITION
• RECOGNITION OF FIRE MARSHALL CHRISTINE REED ON HER RETIREMENT VII. PRESENTATIONS
• BURLINGAME-HILLSBOROUGH YOUTH POET LAUREATE LAUREN LIN • MAYOR'S APPLAUSE
VIII. PUBLIC COMMENT I
This portion of the meeting is reserved for persons wishing to address the City Council on any matter not on the agenda.

Members of the public participating in person are requested to complete a yellow speaker card and submit it to the City Clerk before addressing the City Council. Members of the public may provide comments via the Zoom platform by using the “raise hand” feature or, if calling in by phone, by pressing *9 on the telephone keypad. In response, the Town will unmute the speaker and allow them to speak on any topic for up to three minutes. If there appears to be a large number of speakers, speaking time may be reduced to no less than 2 minutes, at the discretion of the Mayor. Members of the public are limited to Agenda – Hillsborough City Council
Monday, August 14, 2023

Page 3 ends

one comment at this time. State law prohibits the Council from discussing or acting on non-agenda items, and generally limits the ability of the Council to respond to any public comments made regarding non-agenda items.

VIX. ANNOUNCEMENT OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST
This portion of the agenda is for Councilmembers to disclose any conflict of interest related to any item on the agenda. Any Councilmember who has confirmed a conflict of interest or has reason to believe they have a conflict of interest should disclose the conflict for the record and abide by the disqualification requirements contained in FPPC regulations.

X. CONSENT CALENDAR
The Consent Calendar includes routine items, which do not require discussion. A Councilmember may remove an item for discussion, and any member of the audience may request a Councilmember to remove an item for discussion. The items are approved in one motion.

1. MONTHLY CLAIMS: JULY 1 THROUGH JULY 31, 2023 PURSUANT TO CEQA GUIDELINE 15378

2. APPROVAL OF FUNDRAISING EVENT PERMIT APPLICATION 23-07 FOR THE

HILLSBOROUGH SCHOOLS FOUNDATION HILLSBOROUGH CLASSIC EVENT PURSUANT TO CEQA GUIDELINES 15378 AND 15301

3. RESOLUTION ACCEPTING THE GRANT OF A TEN-FOOT-WIDE INGRESS AND EGRESS EASEMENT AT 440 PINEHILL ROAD PURSUANT TO CEQA GUIDELINE 15301

4. RESOLUTION RATIFYING THE EMERGENCY CONTRACT WITH FARALLON COMPANY FOR EMERGENCY RETAINING WALL WORK AT 2095 RALSTON AVENUE IN THE AMOUNT OF $215,450.00 PLUS A 10% CONTINGENCY IN THE AMOUNT OF $21,545.00, FOR A TOTAL PROJECT COST OF $236,995.00 PURSUANT TO CEQA GUIDELINE 15301

5. RESOLUTION APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT WITH HALEY & ALDRICH, INC. FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES

TO PROVIDE THE GEOTECHNICAL AND ENGINEERING DESIGN SERVICES FOR THE MACADAMIA ACCESS ROAD REPAIR IN THE AMOUNT OF $68,394.00 PURSUANT TO CEQA GUIDELINE 15301

6. RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PURCHASE OF THREE PUBLIC WORKS ELECTRIC VEHICLES AT $59,514.41 EACH FOR A GRAND TOTAL OF $178,543.23 PURSUANT TO CEQA GUIDELINE 15378

7. RESOLUTION APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE A TWO-YEAR AGREEMENT WITH CSG CONSULTANTS, INC. FOR AS-NEEDED

MUNICIPAL ENGINEERING AND PROJECT MANAGEMENT SERVICES IN AN ANNUAL NOT-TO-EXCEED AMOUNT OF $800,000 PURSUANT TO CEQA GUIDELINE 15378

8. RESOLUTION APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE A TWO-YEAR AGREEMENT WITH EKI ENVIRONMENT & WATER, INC. FOR ASNEEDED GENERAL ENGINEERING SERVICES IN AN ANNUAL NOT-TO-EXCEED AMOUNT OF $250,000 PURSUANT TO CEQA GUIDELINE 15378
Agenda – Hillsborough City Council
Monday, August 14, 2023

Page 4 ends

9. RESOLUTION APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE A TWO-YEAR AGREEMENT WITH CSG CONSULTANTS, INC. FOR AS-NEEDED

GENERAL ENGINEERING SERVICES IN AN ANNUAL NOT-TO-EXCEED AMOUNT OF $200,000 PURSUANT TO CEQA GUIDELINE 15378

10. RESOLUTION APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE A TWO-YEAR AGREEMENT WITH PAKPOUR CONSULTING GROUP, INC. FOR ASNEEDED GENERAL ENGINEERING SERVICES IN AN ANNUAL NOT-TO-EXCEED AMOUNT OF $200,000 PURSUANT TO CEQA GUIDELINE 15378

11. RESOLUTION APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE A TWO-YEAR AGREEMENT WITH FREYER & LAURETA, INC. FOR AS-NEEDED

GENERAL ENGINEERING SERVICES IN AN ANNUAL NOT-TO-EXCEED AMOUNT OF $90,000 PURSUANT TO CEQA GUIDELINE 15378

12. RESOLUTION APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE

A TWO-YEAR AGREEMENT WITH NINYO & MOORE GEOTECHNICAL AND

ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES CONSULTANTS FOR AS-NEEDED GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING AND MATERIAL TESTING SERVICES IN AN ANNUAL NOT-TOEXCEED AMOUNT OF $90,000 PURSUANT TO CEQA GUIDELINE 15378

13. RESOLUTION APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE A TWO-YEAR AGREEMENT WITH WRA, INC. FOR AS-NEEDED ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES IN AN ANNUAL NOT-TO-EXCEED AMOUNT OF $50,000 PURSUANT TO CEQA GUIDELINE 15378

14. RESOLUTION APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE A TWO-YEAR AGREEMENT WITH CONSOLIDATED CM, INC. FOR AS-NEEDED PROJECT MANAGEMENT AND INSPECTION SERVICES IN AN ANNUAL NOT-TOEXCEED AMOUNT OF $50,000 PURSUANT TO CEQA GUIDELINE 15378

15. RESOLUTION APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE A TWO-YEAR AGREEMENT WITH R.E.Y. ENGINEERS, INC. FOR AS-NEEDED SURVEYING SERVICES IN AN ANNUAL NOT-TO-EXCEED AMOUNT OF $15,000 PURSUANT TO CEQA GUIDELINE 15378

16. REVIEW AND APPROVE THE TOWN’S RESPONSE TO THE SAN MATEO COUNTY GRAND JURY REPORT, “ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS: AFFORDABLE HOUSING’S PANACEA OR PREVARICATION?” PURSUANT TO CEQA GUIDELINE 15378
XI. NEW BUSINESS

17. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING SOUTH BAYSIDE WASTE MANAGEMENT AUTHORITY TO ACQUIRE REAL PROPERTY LOCATED AT 1245 SAN CARLOS AVENUE, UNIT E, SAN CARLOS PURSUANT TO CEQA GUIDELINE 15378 Agenda – Hillsborough City Council
Monday, August 14, 2023

Page 5 ends

18. DESIGNATION OF A VOTING DELEGATE AND ALTERNATE VOTING DELEGATE(S) TO THE 2023 LEAGUE OF CALIFORNIA CITIES ANNUAL CONFERENCE SEPTEMBER 20-22, 2023 PURSUANT TO CEQA GUIDELINE 15378 XII. DISCUSSION

19. OVERVIEW OF GAS-POWERED LEAF BLOWER REGULATIONS IN SAN

MATEO COUNTY AND CONSIDERATION OF POTENTIAL DIRECTION TO STAFF ON

ANY MODIFICATIONS TO THE HILLSBOROUGH MUNICIPAL CODE
XIII. PUBLIC COMMENT II
This portion of the meeting is reserved for persons wishing to address the City Council on any matter not on the agenda.

Members of the public participating in person are requested to complete a yellow speaker card and submit it to the City Clerk before addressing the City Council. Members of the public may provide comments via the Zoom platform by using the “raise hand” feature or, if calling in by phone, by pressing *9 on the telephone keypad. In response, the Town will unmute the speaker and allow them to speak on any topic for up to three minutes. If there appears to be a large number of speakers, speaking time may be reduced to no less than 2 minutes, at the discretion of the Mayor. Members of the public are limited to one comment at this time. State law prohibits the Council from discussing or acting on non-agenda items, and generally limits the ability of the Council to respond to any public comments made regarding non-agenda items.

XIV. CITY COUNCIL ITEMS
This section of the agenda provides the City Council an opportunity to report their participation in activities related to any intergovernmental committee assignments. No action can be taken on any item not on the agenda.

XV. CITY MANAGER'S UPDATE
XVI. ADJOURNMENT
SPECIAL ACCOMMODATIONS:

If you need a disability-related modification or accommodation, including auxiliary aids or services, to participate in the City Council meeting, or if you need an agenda in an alternate form, please contact the City Clerk’s Office at 375-7412 at least 24 hours before the scheduled City Council meeting.

ADDRESSING THE CITY COUNCIL:

Members of the public may provide written comments to the City Council regarding any item on the agenda up to two hours before the meeting to [email protected] or by mail/in person at 1600 Floribunda Avenue, Hillsborough, CA 94010. Any writings or documents provided to a majority of the City Council regarding any item on this agenda prior to the deadline, except as exempt from public disclosure under applicable law, will be available for public inspection on the Town website, and in the City Clerk’s Office at 1600 Floribunda Avenue, Hillsborough, CA 94010, during regular business hours. All oral comments made at public meetings, including a speaker’s name, are recorded and included as part of the public record in the meeting minutes. Meeting minutes are publicly accessible via the Town website and via various internet search engines. Written comments, including a commenter’s name, are a public record and subject to disclosure on the Town website and/or upon request pursuant to the California Public Records Act (with personal contact information including personal email addresses and personal phone numbers redacted).

AUDIO / VISUAL ADVISORY:

Those persons who wish to use PowerPoint or other mediums when presenting to the City Council will be required to submit media items to the City Clerk by 12:00 p.m. on the day of the meeting. Media items can be emailed to [email protected].

AUDIO OR VIDEO RECORDINGS:

Please be advised that under the Brown Act, any person has the right to record the City Council meeting, including the audience in attendance, using an audio or video recording device subject to certain exceptions. Please be aware that by attending a City Council meeting, you may be audio or video recorded.

Legal Threat Document for Justification
I am memorializing my conversation with an attorney, who called me regarding a resident located at 100 Stonehedge Road, Hillsborough and his discussions with her. The attorney wanted to open discussions regarding claims that may exist on behalf of the resident due to the Town’s issuance of a permit for development of neighboring property located at 118 Baywood Avenue, Hillsborough and damages she may have incurred resulting therefrom. The attorney indicated that he would like to settle this matter before a formal lawsuit is filed and would like the opportunity to discuss in a mediation type format for now.

Al Royse
Councilmember

CLOSED SESSION ITEM B
-1-

UNAPPROVED MINUTES
MONDAY, JANUARY 30, 2023
4:30 PM CLOSED SESSION
6:00 PM SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Hillsborough Town Hall and Zoom Video Conference
This Special City Council meeting was conducted pursuant to Government Code Section 54953(e) (and without compliance with section 54953(b)(3)) related to conducting public meetings during the COVID-19 pandemic. The City Council, staff and members of the public participated in the meeting virtually via Zoom Video Conference or in person at Town Hall.

CLOSED SESSION

CALL TO ORDER
Mayor Krolik called the meeting to order at 4:30 p.m.

ROLL CALL

Present: Chuang (via Zoom Video Conference), Ragsdale, Royse (via Zoom Video Conference), Cole, Krolik

PUBLIC COMMENT ON CLOSED SESSION ITEMS
There were no public comments.

ANNOUNCEMENT OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST
There were no announcements of conflict of interest.

CLOSED SESSION ITEMS
A. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL – ANTICIPATED LITIGATION Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(d)(2)
Town as Defendant – One Potential Case (see documents in agenda packet) B. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL – INITIATION OF LITIGATION Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(d)(4)
Town as Plaintiff – One Potential Case
C. PUBLIC EMPLOYEE PERFORMANCE EVALUATION
Pursuant to Government Code Section 54957(b)(1)
Title: City Manager

ADJOURN CLOSED SESSION
The Closed Session adjourned at 6:00 p.m.

REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING
I. CALL TO ORDER
Mayor Krolik called the meeting to order at 6:05 p.m.

II. ROLL CALL

Present: Chuang (via Zoom Video Conference), Ragsdale, Royse (via Zoom Video Conference), Cole, Krolik
-3-
Unapproved Minutes – Hillsborough City Council
Monday, January 30, 2023

Page 2 ends

III. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Mayor Krolik led the Pledge of Allegiance.

IV. REPORT FROM CLOSED SESSION
City Attorney Christopher Diaz stated that the City Council met in Closed Session and reported regarding Item A, Anticipated Litigation, there was no reportable action; regarding Item B, Initiation of Litigation, the City Council voted unanimously to initiate a validation action, the particulars of which would be disclosed upon request on the filing of that action; and regarding Item C, Public Employee Performance Evaluation, there was no reportable action.

V. ANNOUNCEMENT OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST
Councilmember Royse disclosed that he engaged in ex parte communications, the substance of which was included in letters sent to the City Council and part of the public record, and that he spoke with the owner of the Callan property.

Councilmember Ragsdale disclosed she met with the owners of the Callan property, reviewed the map, and walked the property.

Vice Mayor Cole disclosed she reviewed the emails received and has had multiple conversations with residents, and disclosed she has a conflict regarding the Callan site, for which she would recuse herself from participation in the discussion.

Mayor Krolik stated she would recuse herself from participation in the discussion of the Strawberry Hill site because her home is within 1,000 feet of the property and that she would recuse herself from participation in discussion of the Burlingame Country Club because her husband is a member. Mayor Krolik stated she walked the Callan property with the owners and had a phone call with them.

Councilmember Chuang stated she was absent from the January 23, 2023 City Council meeting but has watched the video recording.

VI. CONSENT CALENDAR
On motion by Vice Mayor Cole, seconded by Councilmember Chuang and unanimous on roll call vote, the Consent Calendar was approved.

1. RECONFIRM FINDINGS AND DETERMINATIONS UNDER RESOLUTION NO. 21-87 PURSUANT TO ASSEMBLY BILL 361 AND CEQA GUIDELINE 15378 The motion to reconfirm the findings and determinations made in Resolution No. 21-87 pursuant to Assembly Bill 361, with acknowledgment that the California Department of Public Health has updated the definition of “close contact” in Regulation 3205 from being within six feet of another person to sharing the same indoor space with another person for 15 minutes or more, which further supports the findings, was approved.

VII. OLD BUSINESS

2. DISCUSS AND CONFIRM DIRECTION ON THE HOUSING ELEMENT SITES BEFORE

THE PLAN IS SUBMITTED TO THE CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND

COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT (HCD)
Mayor Krolik provided introductory comments and an overview of the process.

At 6:18 p.m., Vice Mayor Cole recused herself from participation in discussion of the Callan property due to proximity of her home and left the room.

City Attorney Christopher Diaz, City Manager Ann Ritzma, Planning Manager Liz Ruess and Attorney Barbara Kautz, Partner, Goldfarb & Lipman LLP, responded to City Council questions.

Mayor Krolik opened public comment on the Callan property at 6:18 p.m. -4-
Unapproved Minutes – Hillsborough City Council
Monday, January 30, 2023

Page 3 ends

Lionel Foster, 135 Rizal Drive, suggested the RHNA numbers can be met without upzoning any specific area of the town and expressed concerns regarding spot zoning and outreach to neighbors in the area.

Jadra Muhawieh, 1260 Tartan Trail, spoke in opposition to SB 9 due to loss of local control.

Dennis Moore, 2770 Churchill Drive, requested more detail regarding the proposed developments at the Strawberry Hill and Callan sites and provided comments regarding spot zoning.

Mayor Krolik closed public comment on the Callan property at 6:44 p.m.

On motion by Councilmember Royse, seconded by Councilmember Ragsdale and unanimous on roll call vote with Vice Mayor Cole recused, the City Council provided direction to continue with the original approval of eight units at the Callan property with the understanding that there is an option for ADUs and JADUs.

Following discussion of the Callan property, Vice Mayor Cole returned to the room and took her seat at the dais at 6:53 p.m.

Mayor Krolik opened public comment on the Strawberry Hill site and the Burlingame Country Club site.

At 7:17 p.m., Mayor Krolik recused herself and left the room. Vice Mayor Cole presided over the meeting.

Michelle Dee, 2 Fern Court, requested information regarding the process for approval of units at the Strawberry Hill site, the access points for the subdivision, the responsibility for the infrastructure and the locations of each unit.

Dan Capon, 90 Woodridge, requested responses to the questions that have been asked regarding the Strawberry Hill site.

Dennis Moore requested more information regarding the Strawberry Hill project.

Laith Salma inquired as to whether the number of units specified for a particular site can be reduced if units are exceeded in another area.

Larry Friedberg expressed concerns regarding a lack of information regarding the Strawberry Hill site.

Ted Ullyot provided comments regarding guidance from California Department of Housing and Community Development regarding Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing.

Mehran Farid suggested housing at Nueva School and the Burlingame Country Club be assigned to low-income housing.

Vice Mayor Cole closed public comment on Strawberry Hill and the Burlingame Country Club at 7:32 p.m.

Vice Mayor Cole moved to assigned 5 units to Strawberry Hill. The motion died due to lack of second.

On motion by Councilmember Chuang, seconded by Vice Mayor Cole and unanimous on roll call vote with Mayor Krolik recused, the City Council specified 35 units at Strawberry Hill per the property owner’s subdivision application.

On motion by Councilmember Ragsdale, seconded by Councilmember Chuang and unanimous on roll call vote with Mayor Krolik recused, the City Council specified five units at the Burlingame Country Club under very low/low income for employee housing.

At 7:59 p.m., Mayor Krolik returned to the room, took her seat at the dais, and presided over the remainder of the meeting.
-5-
Unapproved Minutes – Hillsborough City Council
Monday, January 30, 2023

Page 4 ends

Mayor Krolik opened public comment on the Housing Element at 7:59 p.m.

Peter Chartz, 25 Highgate Lane, expressed concerns regarding the development of housing at the Town Hall site.

Mana Jamali, 1425 Carlton Road, inquired about the requirements of the next RHNA cycle if the Town meets or exceeds the numbers in this RHNA cycle, and requested clarification regarding the commitment to build an ADU.

Gib Papazian, 325 Pepper Avenue, suggested that the very low and low-income housing categories be used for special needs housing.

Paul Rochester encouraged the City Council to keep the numbers as low as possible and to ensure the staffing is in place during the next RHNA cycle to begin the process earlier.

Laith Salma spoke in opposition to inclusion of housing units at Town Hall.

Katie Haggarty, Darrell Road, spoke in support of a resident-focused site at Town Hall, requested more information about the infrastructure requirements for the next eight years and suggested annexing a portion of a neighboring city meet the housing requirements.

Jadra Muhawieh spoke in support of legislation to reverse SB 9 and offered his assistance.

Jeff Ford, Fairway Circle, spoke in opposition to adding 16 units at Town Hall in the Housing Element and spoke in support of a public dialogue regarding the use of the Town Hall site.

Subra Narayan, Floribunda Avenue, spoke in support of reducing the number of units at Town Hall to zero and of use of the Town Hall site as a Community Center.

Arlene Rosenberg, 15 McCreery Drive, Housing Element Advisory Committee member, spoke in support of following the guidance provided by HCD and inclusion of a conservative number of housing units at the Town Hall site.

Elizabeth Jeffords, Fairway Circle, spoke in support of reducing the number of units at the Town Hall site and provided comments regarding the income categories for Accessory Dwelling Units.

Mehran Farid, 10 Highgate, spoke in support of adding units at Tobin Clark and removing the Town Hall site from the Housing Element.

Dennis Moore, Churchill Road, provided comments regarding renting ADUs to family members.

Gregory Hampton, Elmwood Road, provided comments regarding HCD’s guidance related to Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing.

Larry Friedberg, Longview, expressed concerns regarding the housing element process and recommended a postmortem to determine what should have been done better and expressed concerns regarding the handling of a speaker at a prior meeting.

Mike Swire, Southdown Road, expressed concern regarding offensive comments made by prior speakers.

Mike Amaroli spoke in support of the town remaining a single-family community and partnering with other similar cities to learn how they are handling the housing requirements.

Ted Ullyot provided comments regarding AB 686 and HCD’s guidance related to Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing.
-6-
Unapproved Minutes – Hillsborough City Council
Monday, January 30, 2023

Page 5 ends

Riyad Salma, Eucalyptus Avenue, spoke in support of focusing the on the statute and in support of not including housing on the Town Hall site in this submittal if it is not needed.

Josh Cooperman, 15 Creekwood Way, spoke in support of retaining the Town Hall building if the Town Hall site must be redeveloped to include housing.

Aaron Zornes expressed concerns regarding the Hayne Road development citing safety concerns and thanked volunteers who participated in the Housing Element process and those who have taken a citizen-led survey.

Jeff Brady, Robin Road, spoke in opposition to housing on the Town Hall site and in support of a postmortem of the housing element process as suggested by a prior speaker.

Mike Swire, speaking again following technical difficulties during his prior comments, spoke in support of transparency related to the costs of all of the options presented.

Swire spoke in support of housing at the Town Hall site due to proximity to transit and in opposition to housing at the Tobin Clark site.

Laith Salma inquired as to the process if HCD does not accept the housing element and the Town’s ability to self-certify.

Rekha Hemrajani inquired as to whether the Town has coordinated an approach with other towns.

Mayor Krolik closed public comment at 8:55 p.m.

Following discussion, Mayor Krolik summarized the allocation of units, noting that the numbers for the Callan site, Strawberry Hill and Burlingame Country Club were voted on earlier in the meeting.

Ms. Kautz suggested moving some of the moderate income ADUs into the above moderate category and to move the units at Nueva School and Burlingame Country Club to the moderate-income category.

On motion by Councilmember Royse, seconded by Councilmember Chuang and unanimous on roll call vote, the City Council approved the allocation of 605 units including the Callan site, Strawberry Hill and Burlingame Country Club voted on earlier in the meeting, and provided staff leeway to work with Ms. Kautz on the income levels to adjust the numbers as needed:

ADUs: 400
Tobin Clark: 100
Town Hall: 16
Pipeline projects: 4
Vacant sites: 23
Brooke Court: 3
Hayne Road: 5
Nueva School: 6
Mayor Krolik summarized the timeline and next steps in the process.

VIII. ADJOURNMENT
Mayor Krolik adjourned the meeting at 9:44 p.m.
-7-

UNAPPROVED MINUTES
TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 7, 2023
9:00 A.M. SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING - CITY COUNCIL GOAL

SETTING
1:00 P.M. CLOSED SESSION
This Special City Council meeting was conducted pursuant to Government Code Section 54953(e) (and without compliance with section 54953(b)(3)) related to conducting public meetings during the COVID-19 pandemic. The City Council, staff and members of the public participated in the meeting virtually via Zoom Video Conference or in person at Town Hall.

SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING
I. CALL TO ORDER
Mayor Krolik called the meeting to order at 9:00 a.m. and provided introductory comments.

II. ROLL CALL

Present: Chuang, Ragsdale, Royse, Cole, Krolik
III. CITY COUNCIL GOAL SETTING
City Manager Ann Ritzma presented the foundational principles. Councilmember Royse presented the Town Values Statement.

City Manager Ann Ritzma, Police Chief Doug Davis, Assistant Director of Building & Planning Tim Anderson and Public Works Director Paul Willis presented the FY 2022-23 accomplishments and FY 2023-24 goals for their departments and responded to City Council questions. Planning Manager Liz Ruess, Senior Planner Linda Roberson, Fire Marshal Christine Reed, Police Captain Nelson Corteway and Senior Management Analyst Mandy Brown provided additional information.

Mayor Krolik opened public comment.

David Weinberg requested prioritization of review of the Municipal Code related to fire safety with urgency around review of code sections related to responsibility of homeowners for the area around their homes and offered the assistance of Firewise. Weinberg requested coordination with the Public Works Department for Firewise chipping of open space areas and requested review of California Code Chapter 7a to consider applying it to the entire town.

The City Council recessed at 11:57 a.m.

The City Council reconvened at 12:03 p.m. with all Councilmembers present.

City Manager Ann Ritzma presented the proposed Work Plan for FY 2023-24.

Mayor Krolik re-opened public comment.

Ann O’Brien Keighran, Center for Age Friendly Excellence (CAFE), encouraged the City Council to prioritize the process to become a certified Age-Friendly City.

Dennis Moore expressed concerns regarding lack of strategic planning in the goal setting process, inquired as to how departments measure performance, expressed disappointment regarding the Values Statement, stated that certification of the housing element should be the number one goal, and provided comments regarding water rates. -9-
Unapproved Minutes – Hillsborough City Council
Tuesday, February 7, 2023

Page 2 ends

Mayor Krolik closed public comment.

The City Council discussed the proposed work plan and potential new items to include for consideration: leaf blower education and programs, a review of the fundraising permit process and fees, Firewise – Chapter 7a, park/dog park opportunities, employee housing, and a debrief on the Housing Element process.

Ann O’Brien Keighran responded to City Council questions regarding the Age-Friendly City program.

Mayor Krolik asked the City Council to consider whether they would like to serve on a subcommittee for any of the items.

On motion by Councilmember Royse, seconded by Vice Mayor Cole and unanimous on roll call vote, the Goal Setting discussion was continued to February 13, 2023 at a time preceding the regular City Council meeting.

IV. ADJOURNMENT OF SPECIAL MEETING
Mayor Krolik adjourned the meeting at 12:56 p.m.

CLOSED SESSION

CALL TO ORDER
Mayor Krolik called the meeting to order at 1:00 p.m.

ROLL CALL

Present: Chuang, Ragsdale, Royse, Cole, Krolik

PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENT OF CLOSED SESSION ITEMS
A. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL – ANTICIPATED LITIGATION Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(d)(2)
Town as Defendant – One Potential Case (see documents in agenda packet) B. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL – INITIATION OF LITIGATION Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(d)(4)
Town as Plaintiff – One Potential Case
C. PUBLIC EMPLOYEE PERFORMANCE EVALUATION
Pursuant to Government Code Section 54957(b)(1)
Title: City Manager

PUBLIC COMMENT
There were no public comments.

ADJOURN TO CLOSED SESSION
The City Council adjourned to Closed Session at 1:01 p.m.

RECONVENE OPEN MEETING
Mayor Krolik reconvened the open meeting at 3:40 p.m. with all Councilmembers present.

CLOSED SESSION REPORT
City Attorney Christopher Diaz reported regarding Item C, Performance Evaluation of the City Manager, that the City Council voted unanimously to appoint a subcommittee comprised of Councilmember Royse and Councilmember Ragsdale to work on the evaluation process and that there was no other reportable action.
-10-
Unapproved Minutes – Hillsborough City Council
Tuesday, February 7, 2023

Page 3 ends

ADJOURNMENT
Mayor Krolik adjourned the meeting at 3:40 p.m.
-11-

UNAPPROVED MINUTES
TUESDAY, MARCH 21, 2023
11:00 AM SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING – CLOSED SESSION
Hillsborough Town Hall and Zoom Video Conference
This special meeting was held in-person at Town Hall. As a courtesy, and in compliance with applicable state law, staff and members of the public participated in the meeting in person at Town Hall and virtually via Zoom Video Conference.

CALL TO ORDER
Mayor Krolik called the meeting to order at 11:01 a.m.

ROLL CALL

Present: Chuang, Ragsdale, Royse, Cole, Krolik

PUBLIC COMMENT ON CLOSED SESSION ITEM
Joe Pfeister requested the City Council take steps to correct the record and fix the problem related to the collapsed wall at his property.

ANNOUNCEMENT OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST
Councilmember Ragsdale disclosed that Dr. Maricar Pacquing has been her primary care physician in the past, but she recently changed her primary care physician, has no financial connection to Dr. Pacquing and does not feel that the past relationship would impact her to be fair and impartial in considering the Closed Session item. Councilmember Ragsdale offered to recuse herself should the City Council or the parties feel otherwise. Without any financial connection, Councilmember Ragsdale does not have a disqualifying conflict of interest requiring her recusal and she can participate in the Closed Session item.

Vice Mayor Cole disclosed that she and Dr. Maricar Pacquing have worked together in the past as professional colleagues, and that she has no financial connection to Dr. Pacquing. Without any financial connection, Vice Mayor Cole does not have a disqualifying conflict of interest requiring her recusal and she can participate in the Closed Session item.

CLOSED SESSION ITEM
A. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL – ANTICIPATED LITIGATION Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(d)(2)
Town as Defendant – One Potential Case (see legal threat document in agenda packet)

ADJOURN TO CLOSED SESSION
The City Council adjourned to Closed Session at 11:06 a.m.

RECONVENE OPEN MEETING
The City Council reconvened at 12:07 p.m. with all Councilmember Chuang absent.

REPORT FROM CLOSED SESSION
Mayor Krolik reported the City Council met in Closed Session and directed the City Attorney to contact the attorney for Joseph Pfeister and Maricar Pacquing.

ADJOURNMENT
Mayor Krolik adjourned the meeting at 12:08 p.m.
-13-

UNAPPROVED MINUTES
MONDAY, MARCH 13, 2023
4:00 PM STUDY SESSION
4:30 PM CLOSED SESSION
6:00 PM CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Hillsborough Town Hall and Zoom Video Conference
This meeting was held in-person at Town Hall. As a courtesy, and in compliance with applicable state law, staff and members of the public participated in the meeting in person at Town Hall and virtually via Zoom Video Conference.

STUDY SESSION

CALL TO ORDER
Mayor Krolik called the meeting to order at 4:00 p.m.

ROLL CALL

Present: Chuang, Ragsdale, Royse, Cole, Krolik
A. STUDY SESSION: PENSION UPDATE PURSUANT TO CEQA GUIDELINE 15378 Finance Director Jan Cooke and Actuary Ira Summer presented the pension update.

ADJOURN STUDY SESSION
Mayor Krolik adjourned the study session at 4:40 p.m.

CLOSED SESSION

CALL TO ORDER
Mayor Krolik called the meeting to order at 4:41 p.m.

ROLL CALL

Present: Chuang, Ragsdale, Royse, Cole, Krolik

PUBLIC COMMENT ON CLOSED SESSION ITEMS
There were no public comments.

ANNOUNCEMENT OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST
There were no announcements of conflict of interest.

PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENT OF CLOSED SESSION ITEMS
A. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL – EXISTING LITIGATION
Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(d)(1)
Hillsborough Citizens Alliance v. Town of Hillsborough
San Mateo Superior Court Case No. 21CIV04709
B. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL – EXISTING LITIGATION
Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(d)(1)
-15-
Unapproved Minutes – Hillsborough City Council
Monday, March 13, 2023

Page 2 ends

Town of Hillsborough v. All Persons Interested in the Matter of the Proceedings for Resolution No. 22-83 Adopting Maximum Rates for Water Service Charges San Mateo Superior Court Case No. 23CIV01028
C. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL – ANTICIPATED LITIGATION Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(d)(2)
Town as Defendant – Two Potential Cases (see legal threat documents in agenda packet)

D. PUBLIC EMPLOYEE PERFORMANCE EVALUATION
Pursuant to Government Code Section 54957(b)(1)
Title: City Manager

ADJOURN CLOSED SESSION
The Closed Session adjourned at 6:08 p.m.

REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING
I. CALL TO ORDER
Mayor Krolik called the meeting to order at 6:10 p.m.

II. ROLL CALL

Present: Chuang, Ragsdale, Royse, Cole, Krolik
III. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Mayor Krolik led the Pledge of Allegiance.

IV. REPORT FROM CLOSED SESSION
Mayor Krolik stated there was Closed Session report and that Closed Session would be continued after the regular meeting.

V. MINUTES: February 27, 2023
On motion by Councilmember Chuang, seconded by Vice Mayor Cole and unanimous on roll call vote, the minutes of the February 27, 2023 City Council meeting were approved.

VI. PRESENTATION
• MAYOR'S APPLAUSE
Mayor Krolik recognized Mike Chuang, Community Emergency Response Team (CERT) Volunteer Coordinator, with Mayor’s Applause for his service to the Hillsborough Neighborhood Network and Mandarin translation of CERT materials.

Mr. Chuang provided comments.

Councilmember Chuang announced upcoming CERT training dates.

VII. PUBLIC COMMENT I
Dr. Maricar Pacquing, 2095 Ralston Avenue, provided comments regarding a failed retaining wall on her property and requested the City Council work with them to resolve the situation, and submitted written materials.

Michael Glynn, engineer and contractor for 2095 Ralston Avenue, provided comments regarding the ownership and status of the retaining wall and recommended repairing it in the spring or summer.

VIII. ANNOUNCEMENT OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST
-16-
Unapproved Minutes – Hillsborough City Council
Monday, March 13, 2023

Page 3 ends

Councilmember Ragsdale disclosed that she would recuse herself from participation in Items 7 and 9 as she has stock in companies associated with both of the items.

Councilmember Royse and Mayor Krolik disclosed they are Xfinity and Comcast customers.

IX. CONSENT CALENDAR:

Councilmember Chuang and Vice Mayor Cole requested to remove Item 6 from the Consent Calendar.

There were no requests from the public to remove an item from the Consent Calendar.

On motion by Councilmember Chuang, seconded by Councilmember Ragsdale, Consent Calendar Items 1 through 5 were approved unanimously.

1. MONTHLY CLAIMS: FEBRUARY 1 THROUGH FEBRUARY 28, 2023 PURSUANT TO CEQA GUIDELINE 15378
The monthly claims for February 2023 in the amount of $4,152,168.81 were approved as submitted.

2. RECEIVE FY 2022-23 MID-YEAR FINANCIAL AND FY 2023-24 BUDGET PLANNING REPORT PURSUANT TO CEQA GUIDELINE 15378
The FY 2022-23 Mid-Year Financial and FY 2023-24 Budget Planning Report was received.

3. RESOLUTION APPROVING DESIGNATION OF APPLICANT’S AGENTS FOR NONSTATE AGENCIES AND FINDING THIS ACTION EXEMPT FROM CEQA PURSUANT TO CEQA GUIDELINE 15378
The resolution approving designation of applicant’s agents for nonstate agencies pursuant to CEQA Guideline 15378 was adopted.

4. ADOPTION OF AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTERS 8.16, 8.28, 14.04, 16.44, AND 17.56 OF THE HILLSBOROUGH MUNICIPAL CODE RELATED TO TREE

PROTECTION AND PRESERVATION PURSUANT TO CEQA GUIDELINES SECTIONS 15061(b)(3), 15307, 15308, 15378(b)(2) AND (b)(5)
The ordinance titled “An Ordinance of the City Council of the Town of Hillsborough Amending Chapters 8.16, 8.28, 14.04, 16.44, 17.56 of the Hillsborough Municipal Code Relating Tree Protection and Preservation” Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Sections 15061(b)(3), 15307, 15308, 15378(b)(2) and (b)(5) was adopted.

5. RESOLUTION TERMINATING THE LOCAL EMERGENCY RELATED TO THE

DECEMBER/EARLY JANUARY WINTER STORMS/FLOODING EVENT AND FINDING THIS ACTION EXEMPT FROM CEQA PURSUANT TO CEQA GUIDELINE 15378 The resolution terminating the local emergency related to the December/ January winter storms/flooding event and find the action exempt from CEQA pursuant to CEQA Guideline 15378 was adopted.

6. RESOLUTION ADOPTING REVISED TOWN POLICY 401: CHANGE OF ADDRESS PURSUANT TO CEQA GUIDELINE 15378
Public Works Director Paul Willis provided a brief overview of the item and responded to City Council questions.

Mayor Krolik opened public comment. There were no speakers. Mayor Krolik closed public comment.

On motion by Councilmember Chuang, seconded by Vice Mayor Cole, the resolution adopting revised Town Policy 401: Change of Address was adopted unanimously. -17-
Unapproved Minutes – Hillsborough City Council
Monday, March 13, 2023

Page 4 ends

X. PUBLIC HEARING:

7. PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER AND ADOPT RESOLUTION APPROVING (A) COMCAST’S PERMIT APPLICATIONS FOR THE INSTALLATION OF SEVEN (7)

BATTERY CABINETS (UTILITY BOX OUTDOOR FIXTURES) AT LOCATIONS IN THE PUBLIC RIGHT OF-WAY (TWO (2) CABINETS NEAR1025 VISTA ROAD, TWO (2) CABINETS NEAR 1305 HAYNE ROAD, ONE (1) CABINET NEAR 1025 TOURNAMENT DRIVE, AND TWO (2) CABINETS NEARS 1020 CRYSTAL SPRINGS ROAD); AND (B) THE CITY ENGINEER’S RECOMMENDATION TO GRANT COMCAST’S REQUEST FOR AN EXCEPTION TO POLICY NO. 19-01 FOR THESE INSTALLATIONS,

PURSUANT TO CEQA DETERMINATIONS
At 6:41 p.m., based on her prior announcement of conflict of interest, Councilmember Ragsdale recused herself and left the room.

City Attorney Christopher Diaz outlined the process for the hearing.

Public Works Director Paul Willis introduced the item. Applicant Dillon Auyoung, Director of Government Affairs, Comcast, and Billy Glisson, Area Construction Manager, Comcast, provided a presentation.

City Attorney Christopher Diaz and attorney Telecommunications Counsel Gail Karish responded to questions.

Public Works Director Paul Willis provided the staff presentation.

Mayor Krolik opened the public hearing at 7:34 p.m.

Abhi Sawant, 1020 Crystal Springs Road, objected to the installation of the cabinets citing impacts to property value, potential health impacts, aesthetics, and noise.

Larry Friedberg inquired as to how the locations were chosen, why existing locations were not chosen and if they would be upgraded at a later time, how many homes the battery cabinets would support, if other cabinet types were considered, if the cabinets safe, if other communities reported problems with the cabinets and batteries, the potential for painting and landscaping, and any obligation on Comcast to swap out the units should smaller units become available.

Gagan Palrecha, 1120 Crystal Springs Road, spoke in opposition to the proposal citing concerns with existing conditions and safety on Crystal Springs Road, in support of adhering to existing Town laws and policies and in support of undergrounding the cabinets.

Norm Torello, 541 Craig, stated that expense should not be a reason to not underground the cabinets, and requested the City Council consider adding design review to the criteria and maintenance of the appearance of the cabinets.

Mayor Krolik closed the public hearing at 7:45 p.m.

Mayor Krolik re-opened the public hearing at 7:46 p.m.

Josh Burns, Marlborough Road, spoke in support of comments made by other speakers regarding minimizing the size and improving the appearance of the cabinets and consideration of relocating the equipment to areas that are less impactful.

Mayor Krolik closed the public hearing at 7:48 p.m.

Area Construction Manager Glisson provided comments in response to questions and comments made during public comment.

On motion by Councilmember Chuang, seconded by Vice Mayor Cole and unanimous on roll call vote with Councilmember Ragsdale recused, the resolution Approving (A) Comcast’s Permit Applications for the Installation of Seven (7) Battery Cabinets (Utility -18-
Unapproved Minutes – Hillsborough City Council
Monday, March 13, 2023

Page 5 ends

Box Outdoor Fixtures) at Locations in the Public Right of-Way (Two (2) Cabinets Near 1025 Vista Road, Two (2) Cabinets Near 1305 Hayne Road, One (1) Cabinet Near 1025 Tournament Drive, and Two (2) Cabinets Near 1020 Crystal Springs Road); and (B) the City Engineer’s Recommendation to Grant Comcast’s Request for an Exception to Policy No. 19-01 for these Installations, pursuant to CEQA Determinations, with modifications to the title as presented to strike “Seven (7)” battery cabinets in favor of “Five (5)” and strike “Two (2) Cabinets Near 1025 Vista Road,” and in the body of the resolution, to strike Section 1 entirely and all references throughout the resolution to any approval associated with 1025 Vista Road, and with the addition of conditions: 1) the permittee shall install bollards or a retaining wall at the Crystal Springs location in consultation with and to the reasonable satisfaction of the City Engineer/Public Works Director and shall maintain the bollards for the life of the permit to the reasonable satisfaction of the Town, and 2) the permittee shall paint the cabinets a dark green color and install screening landscaping to the reasonable satisfaction of the City Engineer/Public Works Director and maintain the paint and landscaping for the life of the permit to the reasonable satisfaction of the Town, and 3) to include the code requirement to enter into an agreement, was adopted.

At 8:40 p.m., Councilmember Ragsdale returned to the room and took her seat at the dais.

8. RESOLUTION APPROVING A REVOCABLE ENCROACHMENT PERMIT APPLICATION FOR 690 FAIRWAY CIRCLE PURSUANT TO CEQA GUIDELINE 15303 Acting Senior Civil Engineer Doug Belcik provided the staff report. Public Works Director Paul Willis provided additional information.

Mayor Krolik opened the public hearing at 8:48 p.m.

Norm Torello, 672 Fairway Circle, spoke in support of the project.

Mayor Krolik closed the public hearing at 8:49 p.m.

On motion by Councilmember Royse, seconded by Councilmember Ragsdale and unanimous on roll call vote, the resolution approving a Revocable Encroachment Permit Application for 690 Fairway Circle was adopted.

XI. DISCUSSION

9. DISCUSSION ON REFINANCING OF TOWN OF HILLSBOROUGH’S CERTIFICATES

OF PARTICIPATION AND INTEREST RATE SWAPS PURSUANT TO CEQA GUIDELINE 15378
At 8:50 p.m., based on her prior announcement of conflict of interest, Councilmember Ragsdale recused herself and left the room.

Finance Director Jan Cooke introduced the item. Pete Nissen, Managing Director, Acacia Financial Group, and Josh Cooperman, Senior Project Advisor, Acacia Financial Group, provided the report. Financial Advisory Committee Chair Chick Adams provided additional information.

Without objection (Councilmember Ragsdale recused), the City Council directed staff to proceed with bond refunding and swap unwinding and authorized the City Manager to review and execute addendums to existing agreements with BB&K and Acacia Financial Group for bond transaction services.

At 9:46 p.m., Councilmember Ragsdale returned to the room and took her seat at the dais.

XII. INFORMATIONAL

10. CITY MANAGER'S UPDATE
City Manager Ann Ritza provided an informational update. -19-
Unapproved Minutes – Hillsborough City Council
Monday, March 13, 2023

Page 6 ends

XIII. PUBLIC COMMENT II
There were no public comments.

XIV. CITY COUNCIL ITEMS
Councilmember Chuang encouraged the City Council and the community to attend upcoming CERT training sessions in Hillsborough.

Councilmember Royse announced an upcoming meeting of the SFO/Airport Community Roundtable Ground-Based Noise Subcommittee and reported his attendance at a meeting of the SBWMA Board in which funding for a new Shoreline Environmental Center was discussed.

Mayor Krolik reported her attendance at a Memorial Day Parade kick-off meeting and a meeting of the C/CAG Board of Directors.

Councilmember Royse reported that the Town hosted the February San Mateo County Council of Cities meeting.

XV. ADJOURNMENT
Mayor Krolik adjourned the meeting to Closed Session at 9:56 p.m.

RECONVENE OPEN MEETING
Mayor Krolik reconvened the open meeting at 10:25 p.m. with all Councilmembers present.

CLOSED SESSION REPORT
Mayor Krolik stated that there was no Closed Session report.

ADJOURNMENT
Mayor Krolik adjourned the meeting at 10:25 p.m.
-20-

UNAPPROVED MINUTES
MONDAY, APRIL 10, 2023
4:30 PM CLOSED SESSION
6:00 PM CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Hillsborough Town Hall and Zoom Video Conference
Meetings of the City Council are held in-person. As a courtesy, and in compliance with applicable state law, staff and members of the public participated in the meeting in person at Town Hall or virtually via Zoom Video Conference.

CLOSED SESSION

CALL TO ORDER
Mayor Krolik called the meeting to order at 4:30 p.m.

ROLL CALL

Present: Chuang, Ragsdale, Cole, Krolik

Absent: Royse

PUBLIC COMMENT ON CLOSED SESSION ITEMS
There were no public comments on Closed Session items.

ANNOUNCEMENT OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST
Councilmember Ragsdale disclosed regarding Closed Session Item A that she has a small amount of stock in Verizon and Crown Castle, and related to Item 7, a small amount of stock in Comcast; however, the amounts are such that they are considered non-interests in terms of contracts under Government Code Section 1090 and also meet the small shareholder exception under the Political Reform Act. Councilmember Ragsdale’s stock interests are subject to exceptions and are not disqualifying conflicts of interests requiring her recusal and she may participate in Closed Session Item A and Item 7.

CLOSED SESSION ITEMS
A. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL – EXISTING LITIGATION
Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(d)(1)
Crown Castle NG West LLC v. Town of Hillsborough, et al.

San Mateo County Superior Court, Case No. 18CIV05650
B. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL – ANTICIPATED LITIGATION Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(d)(4)
Initiation of Litigation
C. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL – ANTICIPATED LITIGATION Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(d)(2)
Town as Defendant – Two Potential Cases (see legal threat documents in agenda packet)

ADJOURN CLOSED SESSION
The Closed Session adjourned at 5:50 p.m.

REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING
I. CALL TO ORDER
-21-
Unapproved Minutes – Hillsborough City Council
Monday, April 10, 2023

Page 2 ends

Mayor Krolik called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m.

II. ROLL CALL

Present: Chuang, Ragsdale, Cole, Krolik

Absent: Royse
III. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Mayor Krolik led the Pledge of Allegiance.

IV. REPORT FROM CLOSED SESSION
Mayor Krolik stated that there was no report from Closed Session.

V. MINUTES: January 11, 2023, February 13, 2023 and March 30, 2023 On motion by Councilmember Chuang, seconded by Councilmember Ragsdale and unanimous on roll call vote with Councilmember Royse absent, the minutes of the meeting of January 11, 2023, the minutes of the meeting of February 13, 2023 as amended on page 6, Item 8, to correct “Vice Mayor Krolik” to “Vice Mayor Cole,” and the minutes of the meeting of March 30, 2023 were approved.

VI. PRESENTATION
• MAYOR'S APPLAUSE
Mayor Krolik recognized Inspector Christopher Smith and staff in the Police Department and Public Works Superintendent Rick Piña and staff in the Public Works Department with Mayor’s Applause for their significant work on the winter storm response.

Inspector Smith and Superintendent Piña provided brief comments.

VII. PUBLIC COMMENT I
There were no public comments.

VIII. ANNOUNCEMENT OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST
Councilmember Ragsdale repeated her earlier disclosure regarding Item 7, that she owns a small amount of stock in Comcast, but the amount is not a material amount and falls under the non-interest exception and small shareholder exception.

Mayor Krolik stated regarding Item 7 that the City Council received written comments from residents of Crystal Springs Road, and regarding Item 14, that she visited a home on Downey Way and viewed the Fagan property from their backyard, and interacted with residents on Fagan Drive for listening purposes.

IX. CONSENT CALENDAR
Councilmember Chuang requested to remove Item 6 from the Consent Calendar.

Mayor Krolik removed Items 9 and 10 from the Consent Calendar.

There were no requests from the public to remove an item from the Consent Calendar.

On motion by Councilmember Chuang, seconded by Vice Mayor Cole and unanimous on roll call vote with Councilmember Royse absent, Consent Calendar items 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 11, 12 and 13 were approved.

1. MONTHLY CLAIMS: MARCH 1 THROUGH MARCH 31, 2023 PURSUANT TO CEQA GUIDELINE 15378
-22-
Unapproved Minutes – Hillsborough City Council
Monday, April 10, 2023

Page 3 ends

The monthly claims for March 1 through March 31, 2023 were approved as submitted.

2. QUARTERLY INTEREST RATE PRODUCTS (SWAP) REPORT PURSUANT TO CEQA GUIDELINE 15378
The Quarterly Interest Rate Products (swap) Report was accepted.

3. QUARTERLY TREASURER'S REPORT FOR THE QUARTER ENDING MARCH 31, 2023 PURSUANT TO CEQA GUIDELINE 15378
The Quarterly Treasurer's Report for the Quarter Ending March 31, 2023 was approved.

4. APPROVAL OF FUNDRAISING EVENT PERMIT APPLICATION 23-03 FOR THE HILLSBOROUGH BEAUTIFICATION FOUNDATION'S CELEBRATE MAY! EVENT PURSUANT TO CEQA GUIDELINES 15378 AND 15301
Fundraising Event Permit Application 23-03 for the Hillsborough Beautification Foundation's Celebrate May! Event pursuant to CEQA Guidelines 15378 and 15301 was approved.

5. APPROVAL OF FUNDRAISING EVENT PERMIT APPLICATION 23-04 FOR THE HILLSBOROUGH SCHOOLS FOUNDATION'S 2023 FUN RUN PURSUANT TO CEQA GUIDELINE 15378 AND 15301
Fundraising Event Permit Application 23-04 for the Hillsborough Schools Foundation's 2023 Fun Run pursuant to CEQA Guideline 15378 and 15301 was approved.

6. APPROVAL OF FUNDRAISING EVENT PERMIT APPLICATION 23-05 AND

APPLICATION FOR A NEW SIGN FOR THE SOLMATEO SIGNATURE KITCHEN TOUR PURSUANT TO CEQA GUIDELINES 15378 AND 15301
Councilmember Chuang provided comments.

Sara Furrer, Kitchen Tour Chair, provided comments regarding the event.

Mayor Krolik opened public comment. There were no speakers. Mayor Krolik closed public comment.

On motion by Councilmember Chuang, seconded by Councilmember Ragsdale and unanimous on roll call vote with Councilmember Royse absent, Fundraising Event Permit Application 23-05 and the application for a new sign for the SolMateo Signature Kitchen Tour pursuant to CEQA Guidelines 15378 and 15301 were approved.

7. RECONSIDER RESOLUTION NO. 23-23 APPROVING COMCAST’S PERMIT APPLICATIONS FOR THE INSTALLATION OF TWO (2) BATTERY CABINETS (UTILITY BOX OUTDOOR FIXTURES) AT 1020 CRYSTAL SPRINGS ROAD AND DIRECT STAFF TO SCHEDULE A PUBLIC HEARING AT THE MAY 8, 2023 CITY COUNCIL MEETING TO CONSIDER NEW LOCATION(S) FOR THE TWO (2) CABINETS NEAR 1020 CRYSTAL SPRINGS ROAD PURSUANT TO CEQA GUIDELINE 15303
The resolution reconsidering Resolution No. 23-23 approving Comcast’s Permit Applications for the installation of two (2) battery cabinets (Utility Box Outdoor Fixtures) at 1020 Crystal Springs Road and directing staff to schedule a Public Hearing at the May 8, 2023 City Council Meeting to consider new location(s) for the two (2) cabinets near 1020 Crystal Springs Road pursuant to CEQA Guideline 15303 was adopted.

8. OPT INTO THE SETTLEMENT AGREEMENTS WITH WALGREENS CO., WALMART, INC., CVS HEALTH CORPORATION/CVS PHARMACY INC., TEVA
PHARMACEUTICAL INDUSTRIALS LTD., AND ALLERGAN FINANCE LLC/ALLERGAN

LIMITED, AGREE TO THE TERMS OF THE STATE-SUBDIVISION AGREEMENTS,

AND AUTHORIZE ENTRY INTO THE STATE-SUBDIVISION AGREEMENTS WITH

THE ATTORNEY GENERAL PURSUANT TO CEQA GUIDELINES SECTIONS 15061(B)(3) AND 15378(B)(4)
-23-
Unapproved Minutes – Hillsborough City Council
Monday, April 10, 2023

Page 4 ends

The City Council Opted into the Settlement Agreements with Walgreens Co., Walmart, Inc., CVS Health Corporation/CVS Pharmacy Inc., Teva Pharmaceutical Industrials Ltd., and Allergan Finance LLC/Allergan Limited, Agreed to the Terms of the StateSubdivision Agreements, and authorized entry into the State-subdivision agreements with the Attorney General pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Sections 15061(B)(3) and 15378(B)(4).

9. RESOLUTION APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE

A SECOND AMENDMENT TO THE EXISTING AGREEMENT WITH FREYER & LAURETA, INC. FOR CEQA COMPLIANCE SERVICES FOR THE DESIGN OF THE HIGHLINE WATER PIPELINE PROJECT IN THE AMOUNT OF $181,200.00, FOR A TOTAL CONTRACT AMOUNT OF $752,800.00 PURSUANT TO CEQA GUIDELINE 15306
This item was considered with Item 10.

Public Works Director Paul Willis responded to City Council questions.

Mayor Krolik opened public comment. There were no speakers. Mayor Krolik closed public comment.

On motion by Councilmember Chuang, seconded by Vice Mayor Cole and unanimous on roll call vote with Councilmember Royse absent, the resolution approving and authorizing the City Manager to execute a second amendment to the existing agreement with Freyer & Laureta, Inc. for CEQA compliance services for the design of the Highline Water Pipeline Project in the amount of $181,200.00, for a total contract amount of $752,800.00 pursuant to CEQA Guideline 15306 was adopted.

10. RESOLUTION AWARDING TO AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE A CONTRACT WITH G. BORTOLOTTO & COMPANY, INC. FOR THE 2023 STREET RESURFACING PROJECT IN THE AMOUNT OF $3,842,864.40, WITH A 10% CONTINGENCY IN THE AMOUNT OF $384,286.44, FOR A TOTAL COST OF $4,227,150.84; APPROVE FY 2022-23 BUDGET AMENDMENT IN THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FUND (CIP #401.47) IN THE AMOUNT OF $4,061,791.80; AND

AUTHORIZE THE FINANCE DIRECTOR TO MAKE AN INTER-FUND BORROWING FOR CASH FLOW PURPOSES PURSUANT TO CEQA GUIDELINE SECTION 15301 This item was considered with Item 9.

Public Works Director Paul Willis responded to City Council questions.

Mayor Krolik opened public comment. There were no speakers. Mayor Krolik closed public comment.

On motion by Councilmember Chuang, seconded by Vice Mayor Cole and unanimous on roll call vote with Councilmember Royse absent, the resolution awarding to and authorizing the City Manager to execute a contract with G. Bortolotto & Company, Inc. for the 2023 Street Resurfacing Project in the Amount of $3,842,864.40, with a 10% contingency in the amount of $384,286.44, for a total cost of $4,227,150.84 was adopted; a FY 2022-23 budget amendment in the Capital Improvement Fund (CIP #401.47) in the amount of $4,061,791.80 was approved and the Finance Director was authorized to make an Inter-Fund Borrowing for cash flow purposes pursuant to CEQA Guideline Section 15301.

11. RESOLUTION RESCINDING RESOLUTION NO. 22-14 AND RESOLUTION NO. 22-63 AND APPROVING THE PURCHASE OF ONE REPLACEMENT PUBLIC WORKS WATER MAINTENANCE VEHICLE IN THE AMOUNT OF $69,978.83 PURSUANT TO CEQA GUIDELINE 15378
The resolution rescinding Resolution No. 22-14 and Resolution No. 22-63 and approving the purchase of one replacement Public Works Water Maintenance Vehicle in the amount of $69,978.83 pursuant to CEQA Guideline 15378 was adopted. -24-
Unapproved Minutes – Hillsborough City Council
Monday, April 10, 2023

Page 5 ends

12. RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PURCHASE OF ONE REPLACEMENT PUBLIC WORKS SEWER MAINTENANCE VEHICLE IN THE AMOUNT OF $287,362.69 PURSUANT TO CEQA GUIDELINE 15378
The resolution approving the purchase of one replacement Public Works Sewer Maintenance Vehicle in the amount of $287,362.69 pursuant to CEQA Guideline 15378 was adopted.

13. ACCEPTANCE OF THE 2022 GENERAL PLAN ANNUAL PROGRESS REPORT PURSUANT TO CEQA GUIDELINE 15378
The 2022 General Plan Annual Progress Report pursuant to CEQA Guideline 15378 was accepted.

X. PUBLIC HEARING

14. RESOLUTION APPROVING THE VESTING TENTATIVE MAP FOR THE PROPOSED SUBDIVISION OF 85 FAGAN DRIVE AND ADJACENT VACANT LOT PURSUANT TO CEQA CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION SECTION 15315 MINOR LAND DIVISIONS Doug Belcik, Acting Senior Civil Engineer, provided the staff report. Public Works Director Paul Willis and City Attorney Christopher Diaz provided additional information.

Mayor Krolik opened the public hearing at 6:55 p.m.

Applicant engineer Ben McVeigh provided information regarding the proposed project.

Charlie Bullock, 35 Fagan Drive, expressed concerns regarding disruption and noise of the potential subdivision and extension of Fagan Drive.

Morton Newman, 45 Fagan Drive, stated the revised plan is a better solution than the original plan.

Michael Lagen provided comments regarding the wall on Oakdale and inquired as to whether the wall is historic.

James McDowell provided comments in opposition to the subdivision citing concerns with safety, the impacts of construction on the neighbors, impacts on property values, and potential violations of the Hillsborough Municipal Code.

Peter Boutin, 35 Downey Way, spoke in opposition to the extension of the cul-de-sac citing concerns with safety and security.

Caryn McDowell expressed concerns regarding multiple changes to the proposal, safety issues with construction vehicles and prior behavior by the developer and requested the City Council consider the safety matters when making a decision on the project.

Suzanne Boutin expressed concerns regarding the extension of the cul-de-sac and requested additional time to review the alternatives presented this evening.

Mike Folgner provided comments regarding the wall and requested additional research regarding the spike strip. Folgner stated he prefers the single lot.

Emily Patterson, property manager, 55 Fagan Drive, spoke in support of the comments made by other speakers and provided comments regarding experiences with the construction workers and property owner at 85 Fagan Drive and expressed concerns regarding the potential future construction along the shared property line. Patterson spoke in opposition to the plans and requested additional time to review the changes proposed this evening.

Applicant engineer Ben McVeigh provided brief comments.

Mayor Krolik closed the public hearing at 7:33 p.m.
-25-
Unapproved Minutes – Hillsborough City Council
Monday, April 10, 2023

Page 6 ends

Mr. McVeigh provided additional brief comments.

On motion by Councilmember Chuang, seconded by Vice Mayor Cole and unanimous on roll call vote with Councilmember Royse absent, the City Council continued the item to the next available City Council meeting at City Engineer staff discretion and with notice to the public, to bring back answers to questions that have been asked related to WUI, public health, safety and welfare and flag lots, and to bring back a resolution potentially approving one of the alternatives with the required legal findings that the City Engineer needs to make to the City Council, and a resolution denying the original proposal for the extension of the roadway.

XI. OLD BUSINESS

15. CONSIDER APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE A

LICENSE AGREEMENT WITH THE BURLINGAME COUNTRY CLUB TO CONSTRUCT

A PATHWAY PROJECT WITH MODIFICATIONS REQUESTED BY THE BURLINGAME COUNTRY CLUB PURSUANT TO CEQA GUIDELINE 15301
At 8:05 p.m., Mayor Krolik recused herself from participation in the item and left the room as her husband is a member of the Burlingame Country Club.

Vice Mayor Cole presided over the item.

City Christopher Attorney Diaz presented the staff report. City Attorney Diaz read a statement from Councilmember Royse in support of waiving the requirement that the Burlingame Country Club agree to the Town’s Values Statement. City Manager Ann Ritzma and Public Works Director Paul Willis provided additional information.

Vice Mayor Cole opened public comment. There were no speakers. Vice Mayor Cole closed public comment.

On motion by Councilmember Chuang, seconded by Councilmember Ragsdale and unanimous on roll call vote with Councilmember Royse absent and Mayor Krolik recused, the City Council approved and authorized the City Manager to execute a License Agreement with the Burlingame Country Club to construct the Pathway Project with modifications requested by the BCC pursuant to CEQA Guideline 15301.

Mayor Krolik returned to the room and took her seat at the dais at 8:13 p.m. Mayor Krolik presided over the remainder of the meeting.

XII. NEW BUSINESS

16. RESOLUTION APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT WITH MIG, INC. FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES TO CONDUCT ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW FOR THE TOWN OF HILLSBOROUGH 6TH CYCLE HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE 2023-2031 AND ASSOCIATED GENERAL PLAN ELEMENTS IN THE NOT-TO-EXCEED AMOUNT OF $248,745.00 PURSUANT TO CEQA GUIDELINE 15306
Planning Manager Liz Ruess presented the staff report. Attorney Barbara Kautz, Partner, Goldfarb & Lipman LLP and City Attorney Christopher Diaz provided additional information.

Mayor Krolik opened public comment. There were no speakers. Mayor Krolik closed public comment.

On motion by Vice Mayor Cole, seconded by Councilmember Chuang and unanimous on roll call vote with Councilmember Royse absent, the resolution approving and authorizing the City Manager to execute an agreement with MIG, Inc. for professional services to conduct environmental review for the 6th Cycle Housing Element Update 2023-2031 and associated general plan elements in the not-to-exceed amount of $248,745.00.

XIII. INFORMATIONAL
-26-
Unapproved Minutes – Hillsborough City Council
Monday, April 10, 2023

Page 7 ends

17. CITY MANAGER'S UPDATE
City Manager Ann Ritzma provided an informational update.

XIV. PUBLIC COMMENT II
There were no public comments.

XV. CITY COUNCIL ITEMS
Councilmember Chuang encouraged the City Council and the community to attend upcoming CERT training.

Councilmember Ragsdale reported her attendance at a meeting of the Peninsula Clean Energy Board of Directors and the CERT kickoff and announced an upcoming meeting of commute.org.

Vice Mayor Cole reported her attendance at a meeting of the Firewise Board.

Mayor Krolik reported on the Memorial Day Parade planning and announced an upcoming meeting of C/CAG.

XVI. ADJOURNMENT
Mayor Krolik adjourned the meeting at 8:38 p.m.
-27-

TOWN OF HILLSBOROUGH
San Mateo County
1600 Floribunda Avenue
Hillsborough, CA 94010
1 CONSENT CALENDAR

CITY COUNCIL MEETING
AUGUST 14, 2023

AGENDA STAFF REPORT
ITEM SUBJECT: MONTHLY CLAIMS: JULY 1 THROUGH JULY 31, 2023 PURSUANT TO CEQA GUIDELINE 15378
SUMMARY: The monthly claims for the month of July 2023 in the amount of $9,217,835.17 are submitted for approval.

FISCAL IMPACT: Claims have been expended pursuant to the approved budget.

ATTACHMENTS: Monthly Claims Listing
PREPARED BY: Richard Santiago, Assistant Finance Director RECOMMENDATION: Approve the monthly claims for July 2023 as submitted. -31-

TOWN OF HILLSBOROUGH

REPORT OF GOODS & SERVICES PURCHASED
DURING THE MONTH OF JULY 2023
PREPARED BY:

Alan Singh

-32-

TOWN OF HILLSBOROUGH

SUMMARY OF PURCHASES
DURING THE MONTH OF JULY 2023
GOODS & SERVICES PURCHASED $5,537,484.99
NET SALARIES & TAXES PAID 934,644.41
HEALTH BENEFIT PREMIUMS 173,540.31
CCFD FUNDING 1,844,337.00
SAN FRANCISCO WATER PAYMENTS 727,828.46
TOTAL COST OF GOODS & SERVICES TO BE APPROVED $9,217,835.17

FINANCE DIRECTOR DATE

CITY MANAGER DATE

-33-

COMPARATIVE SUMMARY
For the Month of JULY 2023
Jul-23 Jul-22 Jul-21
Goods & Services Purchased: Operations 5,049,186.92 6,501,869.64 4,466,862.81 Capital 488,298.07 999,001.44 768,703.08Net Salaries & Taxes Paid 934,644.41 938,430.85 888,714.48Health Benefit Premiums 173,540.31 160,796.62 145,530.57Bond Payments 0.00 30,063.63 48,513.07CCFD Funding 1,844,337.00 1,828,359.50 1,713,679.00San Francisco Water Payments 727,828.46 688,565.53 721,231.45 Total $9,217,835.17 $11,147,087.21 $8,753,234.46 NOTES:

Operations - Capital - Debt Service
outstanding Certificates of Participation and to terminate the related interest rate swaps.

Interest on the new bonds is paid in December and June each year.

CCFD -
share of the annual CalPERS UAAL payment.

Water -
attributed to the SFPUC rate increase, somewhat offset by lower units purchased.FY 22/23 contribution is based on budget/contract. July payment includes the Town's There was an SFPUC wholesale water rate increase on July 1, 2023 to $5.21 (fromFY 23/24 spending is consistent with FY$4.75, a 9.6 % increase). The increase in FY 23/24 as compared to FY 22/23 is primarily 22/23 spending except for the July 2022
Capital project spending in July 2023 is primarily for the Storm Drain A-1 Improvementsproject, Sewer Priority Basins I & I Rehab, and the Scada Improvements project.In June 2023, the Revenue Refunding Bond Series 2023 was issued to refinance the Town's payment to the City of San Mateo for the Clean Water Program project ($2.4 Million).

-34-

TOWN OF HILLSBOROUGH
PURCHASES MADE DURING JULY 2023
CK # VENDOR DESCRIPTION AMOUNT
12144 AGUILAR & SONS REPAIR - INSTALL ASPHALT VARIOUS LOCATIONS PW 19,360.00 12145 AKEL ENGINEERING GROUP, INC. 2022 WASTEWATER MASTER PLAN PW 6,229.25 12146 ANN STAR FORMAN FEE - NOTARY SERVICES JUNE '23 BP 900.00 12147 ARAMARK SERVICES, INC COFFEE & SUPPLIES BP 174.65 12148 ARAMARK UNIFORM & CAREER UNIFORM CLEANING SERVICE PW 824.70 12149 BAY AREA WATER SUPPLY & CONSERVE WATERS LOSS CONTROL PROGRAM ADMIN FEE 22/23 PW 318.00 12150 BAYSIDE BUILDING MATERIALS INC MATERIALS - BLADES/SCREWS PW 69.02 12151 BEST BEST & KRIEGER LLP FEE - MAY '23 LEGAL SERVICE 78,368.10 12152 BIG STATE INDUSTRIAL SUPPLY, INC SUPPLIES - GLOVES PW 437.28 12153 BOSCO OIL COMPANY GAS/DIESEL PW/PD 4,251.31
12154 CHEMSEARCH SUPPLIES - ZYME PW 2,743.31
12155 CINTAS CORPORATION NO 3 UNIFORM CLEANING SERVICE PW 352.46 12156 CITY OF FOSTER CITY COUNCIL OF CITIES MEETING 6/23/23 CO 60.00 12157 GRISWOLD INDUSTRIES MAINT - PUMP CONTROL CONCAR CLARK PW 17,338.86 12158 CORE & MAIN LP PARTS - COUPLERS/PIPES AVONDALE EASEMENT PW 392.26 12159 CSG CONSULTANTS, INC. WATER ADMIN & VARIOUS PRJ PW 34,029.50 12160 DAILY JOURNAL CORPORATION LEGAL NOTICE 7/10/23 HEARING 23/24 TAX ROLL CL 811.77 12161 DANIEL RICHARD CHARLES INSTALL - OUTLET/RECEPTICLE VARIOUS LOCATIONS PW 656.77 12162 DU-ALL SAFETY, LLC APR '23/MAY '23 SAFETY CONSULT PW 8,657.50 12163 EPS, INC. INSTALL - FAUCET PD PW 420.00
12164 ERLER & KALINOWSKI, INC SANITARY SEWER DESIGN 23A/SANDRA DRAIN PRJ PW 22,992.65 12165 FLOWATER EQUIP - JUN '23 WATER REFILL STATION PW 108.28 12166 GOLDFARB LIPMAN ATTORNEYS FEB '23-MAY '23 LEGAL SERVICE HOUSING ELEMENT BP 17,422.50 12167 GRAINGER UNIFORM - RAIN JACKETS/HARD HATS PW 2,928.70 12168 HACH COMPANY WATER QUALITY SUPPLIES PW 2,638.84
12169 HIP HOUSING 2023-2024 HOME SHARE GRANT CM 2,500.00 12170 INFINITY TECHNOLOGIES MAY '23 GIS SERVICE PW 562.50 12171 REBECCA BURNSIDE APR '23 HR SERVICES CM 13,682.57 12172 JOANNE M. AKAY CATERING - APR'23 MANAGEMENT MEETING CM 420.00 12173 KELLY MOORE PAINT CO., INC SUPPLIES - BRUSHES/PAIL CROSSROADS PARK PW 78.68 12174 NAPA AUTO PARTS - BURLINGAME PARTS - WIPERS '06 FORD F150 PW 35.06 12175 NO-DES, INC INSPECT - REVISED NO-DES TRUCK PW 16,630.57 12176 ODYSSEY POWER CORPORATION MAINT - GENERATOR MULTIPLE LOCATIONS PW 21,115.96 12177 CALLAN TRUST AGREEMENT REFUND - ENVIRONMENTAL DESIGN REVIEW BP 5,725.96 12178 DUANE KANAYA REFUND - BUILD DEPOSIT BP 11,739.00
12179 MICHAEL McBRIDE REFUND - BUILD DEPOSIT BP 11,000.00 12180 JERILYN MARDER REBATE - LAWN BE GONE PROGRAM PW 1,452.00 12181 STEVEN KOURY REBATE - LAWN BE GONE PROGRAM PW 3,068.00 12182 PENINSULA TRUCK REPAIR INC MAINT - BRAKES/BELT/TIRES MULTIPLE VEHICLES PW 5,012.92 12183 PG & E 5/6/23-6/6/23 MULTIPLE ACCOUNTS 186.08
12184 ROBERT HALF INTERNATIONAL INC TEMP SERVICE - W/E 6/16/23 & 6/23/23 FN/CM 9,647.38 12185 SAN MATEO LUMBER CO., INC MATERIALS - GRINDER BLADES PW 16.72 12186 SFPUC FINANCIAL SERVICES FEB '23/ MAR '23 - WATER QUALITY ANALYSIS PW 2,795.00 12187 SIEMENS INDUSTRY, INC INSTALL - SMOKE DETECTORS PD PW 2,556.72 12188 STAPLES ADVANTAGE OFFICE SUPPLIES - ALL DEPARTMENTS 616.72 12189 TOOLAND EQUIP - SMALL COMPRESSOR TRUCK #177 PW 207.81 12190 TOTAL FLOW INC INSTALL - FLOWMETER POLHEMUS PW 36,475.74 12191 TYLER TECHNOLOGIES, INC. TRAIN - ERP SYSTEM UB 5/5/23, 6/6/23-6/9/23 FN 4,860.00 12192 UNDERGROUND REPUBLIC WATER WORKS PARTS - VALVE KEYS/AUGER PW 1,557.64 12193 UNITED LABORATORIES SUPPLIES - SEWER LIFT-ZYME PW 2,980.15 12194 WILSEY HAM SEWER CIP 1D DESIGN PRJ PARROTT PW 2,103.93 12195 WRA, INC SANDRA/HAYNE DRAIN REPLACE/EL CERRITO PRJ PW 3,527.00 12196 ACACIA FINANCIAL GROUP, INC ADVISORY SERVICES - SBPA/LIBOR FN 36,246.25 12197 ALLIANT INSURANCE INSURANCE - CITY MANAGER RECEPTION EVENT 7/12/23 320.00 12198 PLAN JPA 2023-24 PLAN PREMIUMS 663,989.00
12199 AIXTEK EQUIP - LAPTOP PW IT 4,488.28
12200 ALERT DOOR SERVICE, INC. REPAIR - GATE ROLLERS STATION #33 PW 980.00 12201 AMAZON WEB SERVICES, INC JUN '23 BACKUP STORAGE IT 6,303.24

-35-

TOWN OF HILLSBOROUGH
PURCHASES MADE DURING JULY 2023
12202 ARAMARK UNIFORM & CAREER UNIFORM CLEANING SERVICE MULTIPLE INVOICES PW 578.71 12203 AT&T 5/24/23-6/23/23 MULTIPLE ACCOUNTS 1,723.00
12204 BAY AREA WATER SUPPLY & CONSERVE WATER LOSS CONTROL PROGRAM MAY '23 PW 5,435.00 12205 BAY PRO JUN'23/JUL'23 LANDSCAPE MAINT VARIOUS SITES HBF 5,032.00 12206 BOSCO OIL COMPANY GAS/DIESEL PW 340.40
12207 CAL-STEAM, INC. #2504 PARTS - FAUCET/HOSES/SINK KIT PD BATHROOM PW 533.23 12208 CENTRAL COUNTY FIRE DEPARTMENT REMIT - Q4 FY 22/23 FIRE REVIEW FEE FN 7,511.50 12209 CENTRAL COUNTY FIRE DEPARTMENT JUL'23 FISCAL CONTRIBUTION & CALPERS UAAL SUM FN 1,844,337.00 12210 CITY OF BURLINGAME JUN '23 LIBRARY SERVICES CM 62,333.00 12211 CITY OF SAN MATEO Q1 23-24 CLEAN WATER PROGRAM PRJ PW 487,249.50 12212 CLEANSWEEP SERVICES, INC. STREET SWEEPING SERVICE MULTIPLE INVOICES PW 12,032.00 12213 CROWN CASTLE- WTA PROPERTY REPLACE CHECK- BUILD DEPOSIT FN 8,647.10 12214 CSG CONSULTANTS, INC. CIP SEWER ADMIN & VARIOUS PRJ PW 70,715.61 12215 DANIEL RICHARD CHARLES MAINT - RECONNECT CIRCUIT/PUMP VOLTAGE ISSUE PW 839.98 12216 EPS, INC. SEWER PHASE 1C CONSTRUCTION PRJ PW 223,674.50 12217 FINANCIAL CREDIT NETWORK DEBT COLLECTION CHARGE FN 219.16 12218 FLOWATER SUPPLIES-WATER FILTER AD/EQUIP-JUN'23 STATION BP 492.19 12219 FRANCHISE TAX BOARD WITHHOLD ORDER PAYMENT FN 218.94 12220 FRANK M BOOTH INC MAINT - HVAC FIRE STATION 33 PW 2,230.00 12221 GRANITE ROCK COMPANY MATERIALS - ASPHALT PW 728.60 12222 INFOSEND, INC. APR '23-JUN '23 UTILITY BILLING FN 4,939.12 12223 KRONOS SAASHR, INC. MAY'23/JUN'23 PAYROLL PROCESSING FN 3,854.20 12224 LANDTEK LANDSCAPE INC INSTALL - IRRIGATION/TREE NEW PLACE GATES HBF 500.00 12225 LEADERSHIP COUNCIL SAN MATEO COUNTYFEE - 2023 CLASS TUITION STAFF BP 2,800.00 12226 METROPOLITAN PLANNING GROUP INC CONSULT - JUN '23 PLANNER SERVICES BP 11,302.50 12227 NORGO ENGINEERING REPLACE - SEWER MAIN EMERGENCY BOWHILL PW 79,800.00 12228 ODYSSEY POWER CORPORATION MAINT - GENERATOR TOURNAMENT PW 5,782.00 12229 ALEXANDER BEILIN REFUND - BUILD STREET/CURB DEPOSIT FN 500.00 12230 ALEXANDER BEILIN REFUND - BUILD STREET/CURB DEPOSIT FN 5,000.00 12231 CONSTRUCTION & MORE REFUND - PERMIT FEE VOID BP 1,388.65 12232 CRYSTAL SPRINGS UPLANDS SCHOOL REFUND - GRADE DEPOSIT BP 22,500.00 12233 MARK SINCLAIR REFUND - GRADE DEPOSIT FN 5,000.00
12234 MEEKS B & JANE F VAUGHAN REFUND - GRADE DEPOSIT BP 7,500.00 12235 OLGA BEILIN REFUND - BUILD STREET/CURB DEPOSIT FN 500.00 12236 OLGA BEILIN REFUND - BUILD STREET/CURB DEPOSIT FN 15,000.00 12237 RICHARD DWYER REFUND - BUILD STREET/CURB DEPOSIT FN 1,500.00 12238 ROBIN EK REFUND - BUILD STREET/CURB DEPOSIT FN 2,000.00 12239 WINNIE LI REIMB - FOOD INTERVIEW PANEL 6/12/23 HR 69.86 12240 BLOOMING VASE 2023 PARADE WREATH REMEMBERANCE CEREMONY 367.66 12241 PODESTA CONSTRUCTION INC REIMB - DUPLICATE BUSINESS LICENSE FEE FY 24/24 FN 104.00 12242 ALBERTO RINON REFUND - WATER DEPOSIT FN 339.92
12243 CLAUDIA & DOUG RENERT REFUND - WATER DEPOSIT FN 112.16 12244 DENISE & JOHN ORWIN REFUND - WATER DEPOSIT FN 401.52 12245 DIVYA RACHAKONDA REFUND - WATER DEPOSIT FN 376.88 12246 ERLINDA DIZON REFUND - WATER DEPOSIT FN 416.62
12247 GUO LIANG YU REFUND - WATER DEPOSIT FN 55.20
12248 JASON DOREN REFUND - WATER OVERPAYMENT FN 86.16
12249 LEONARDO SALGADO REFUND - WATER DEPOSIT FN 204.16 12250 MICHAEL & LORI MARTIN REFUND - WATER DEPOSIT FN 327.60 12251 RITA SOHLICH REFUND - WATER DEPOSIT FN 188.98
12252 ROBERT & ESTER BERGER REFUND - WATER DEPOSIT FN 246.24 12253 SANG ROHM REFUND - WATER DEPOSIT FN 210.64
12254 SCOTT D. COOPER REFUND - WATER DEPOSIT FN 311.90
12255 STUART HICKS REFUND - WATER OVERPAYMENT FN 110.30 12256 THOMAS FRANK REFUND - WATER DEPOSIT FN 247.60
12257 WEI LIU REFUND - WATER DEPOSIT FN 278.40
12258 WEI LIU REFUND - WATER OVERPAYMENT FN 221.60
12259 PENINSULA TRUCK REPAIR INC MAINT - FORD F150 #230/F550 #307 PW 4,210.01 12260 PG & E 6/1/23-6/29/23 MULTIPLE ACCOUNTS 1,942.19
12261 RECOLOGY SAN MATEO COUNTY SMCO GARBAGE FEES FY22-23 2ND/3RD PERIOD FN 468,880.50 12262 RICE TRUCKING-SOIL FARM SUPPLIES - CRUSHED ROCK PW 1,338.60

-36-

TOWN OF HILLSBOROUGH
PURCHASES MADE DURING JULY 2023
12263 ROBERT HALF INTERNATIONAL INC TEMP SERVICE - W/E 6/30/23 & 7/7/23 FN/CM 6,859.25 12264 SAN MATEO LUMBER CO., INC MATERIALS - DRYWALL ADMIN OFFICE PW 84.72 12265 SHARP ELECTRONICS CORPORATION APR '23 COPIER CHARGES 3,612.35 12266 SMHS MUSIC BOOSTERS 2023 PARADE BAND CONTRIBUTION 500.00 12267 STAPLES ADVANTAGE OFFICE SUPPLIES - ALL DEPARTMENTS 2,535.24 12268 SUTTER HEALTH APR-JUN '23 EMPLOYEE ASSIST YOU HR 782.85 12269 TESCO CONTROLS, INC MAINT - SCADA SUPPORT SERVICE PW 78,600.00 12270 TIMBERLINE TREE SERVICE, INC. MAINT - TREE REMOVAL WOODLAND PW 2,300.00 12271 TYLER TECHNOLOGIES, INC. FORM SET UP ERP SYSTEM UB FN 2,800.00 12272 ULINE, INC. PARTS - SAFETY RAILINGS PW 1,065.65
12273 VERIZON WIRELESS 8/3/22-1/2/23 MULTIPLE INVOICES PW 8,798.16 12274 WEST COAST SAFETY SUPPLY INC SUPPLIES - HARD HAT LIGHTS PW 981.18 12275 CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF TAX APR-JUN '23 Q2 SALES AND USE TAX FN 552.00 12276 COMCAST JUL '23 PW 437.09
12277 DIVISION OF STATE ARCHITECT APR-JUN '23 DISABILITY ACCESS & EDU FEE 308.00 12278 ONE-TIME VENDOR (HOWARD) CLAIMS EXPENSE 7/25/23 35,487.00 TOTAL GOODS & SERVICES FOR THE MONTH PAID BY CHECK $4,601,267.42 CALPERS RETIREMENT CONTRIBUTIONS 206,169.13
VISA PAYMENTS 0.00
RETIREE HEALTH REIMBURSEMENTS 81,759.44
OTHER ELECTRONIC PAYMENTS 2,492,626.00
TOTAL GOODS & SERVICES FOR THE MONTH $ 7,381,821.99

-37-

TOWN OF HILLSBOROUGH
San Mateo County
1600 Floribunda Avenue
Hillsborough, CA 94010
2 CONSENT CALENDAR

CITY COUNCIL MEETING
AUGUST 14, 2023

AGENDA STAFF REPORT
ITEM SUBJECT: APPROVAL OF FUNDRAISING EVENT PERMIT APPLICATION 23-07 FOR

THE HILLSBOROUGH SCHOOLS FOUNDATION HILLSBOROUGH CLASSIC EVENT PURSUANT TO CEQA GUIDELINES 15378 AND 15301
SUMMARY: The Hillsborough Schools Foundation (HSF) submitted an application to conduct its Hillsborough Classic event on Friday, October 13, 2023. The proposed hours of operation are 10:00 a.m. to 9:30 p.m. The total number of participants expected during the event is approximately 400.

Hillsborough Municipal Code Section 5.16.080 requires City Council approval for a fundraising event permit where more than 200 people will be in attendance during any one day at any one property. The Police, Fire, Building and Planning Departments have reviewed the application and submitted comments and recommendations, which are attached to this staff report.

FISCAL IMPACT: There is no fiscal impact associated with this agenda item.

ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES: The proposed action is exempt from environmental review pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines sections 15378(b)(2) and 15378(b)(5) as ongoing administrative or organizational activities that will not result in direct or indirect physical changes in the environment. The proposed action is also exempt pursuant to CEQA Guideline 15301 as the permitting of an existing facility involving a temporary negligible expansion of use with no corresponding construction or expansion of existing structures.

ATTACHMENTS: Fundraising Event Permit Application 23-07 and Police Department, Fire Department and Building & Planning Department Comments and Recommendations PREPARED BY: Lisa Natusch, City Clerk
RECOMMENDATION: Approve Fundraising Event Permit Application 23-07 for the Hillsborough Schools Foundation Hillsborough Classic event subject to the conditions recommended by staff. -39-
6/28/2023 23-07 II
X
-40-
-41-
-42-
-43-
-44-
07/26/2023
Business Professional Insurance Associates
1519 South B Street
San Mateo, CA 94402
License #: 0D69286
Cindi Watson
(650)341-4484 (650)341-4465
[email protected]
00005800-830671 18
Hillsborough Schools Foundation
300 El Cerrito Ave
Hillsborough, CA 94010-6818
Nonprofits Insurance Alliance of CA 01184
A X 2022-01860 07/01/2022 09/01/2023
X
X
1,000,000
500,000
20,000
1,000,000
3,000,000
3,000,000
Nonprofits Insurance Alliance of CA 01184
A 2022-01860 07/01/2022 09/01/2023
X X
1,000,000
Nonprofits Insurance Alliance of CA 01184
A X 2022-01860-UMB 07/01/2022 09/01/2023
X
X None
2,000,000
2,000,000
RE: Hillsborough Classic luncheon event 10/13/23 at Vanessa & Cayman Seacrest, 1840 Brookvale Road, Hillsborough, CA 94010.

Proof of coverage only since the event is after the policy's expiration date of 09/01/23.

Town of Hillsborough
1600 Floribunda Avenue
Hillsborough, CA 94010
(CLW)
Printed by CLW on 07/26/2023 at 05:17PM
ANY PROPRIETOR/PARTNER/EXECUTIVE OFFICER/MEMBER EXCLUDED?

INSR ADDL SUBR

LTR INSD WVD

DATE (MM/DD/YYYY)
PRODUCER CONTACT NAME: PHONE FAX
(A/C, No, Ext): (A/C, No): E-MAIL ADDRESS:

INSURER A :

INSURED INSURER B :

INSURER C :

INSURER D :

INSURER E :

INSURER F :

POLICY NUMBER

POLICY EFF POLICY EXP TYPE OF INSURANCE (MM/DD/YYYY) (MM/DD/YYYY) LIMITS

AUTOMOBILE LIABILITY

UMBRELLA LIAB

EXCESS LIAB WORKERS COMPENSATION

AND EMPLOYERS' LIABILITY
DESCRIPTION OF OPERATIONS / LOCATIONS / VEHICLES (ACORD 101, Additional Remarks Schedule, may be attached if more space is required)

AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE
EACH OCCURRENCE $ DAMAGE TO RENTED
CLAIMS-MADE OCCUR PREMISES (Ea occurrence) $
MED EXP (Any one person) $
PERSONAL & ADV INJURY $ GEN'L AGGREGATE LIMIT APPLIES PER: GENERAL AGGREGATE $ PRO- POLICY JECT LOC PRODUCTS - COMP/OP AGG $ OTHER: $ COMBINED SINGLE LIMIT $ (Ea accident) ANY AUTO BODILY INJURY (Per person) $ OWNED SCHEDULED BODILY INJURY (Per accident) $ AUTOS ONLY AUTOS HIRED NON-OWNED PROPERTY DAMAGE $ AUTOS ONLY AUTOS ONLY (Per accident) $ OCCUR EACH OCCURRENCE $ CLAIMS-MADE AGGREGATE $
DED RETENTION $ $ PER OTH- STATUTE ER
E.L. EACH ACCIDENT $
E.L. DISEASE - EA EMPLOYEE $
If yes, describe under DESCRIPTION OF OPERATIONS below E.L. DISEASE - POLICY LIMIT $ INSURER(S) AFFORDING COVERAGE NAIC #

COMMERCIAL GENERAL LIABILITY
Y / N
N / A
(Mandatory in NH)

SHOULD ANY OF THE ABOVE DESCRIBED POLICIES BE CANCELLED BEFORE

THE EXPIRATION DATE THEREOF, NOTICE WILL BE DELIVERED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE POLICY PROVISIONS.

THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THE POLICIES OF INSURANCE LISTED BELOW HAVE BEEN ISSUED TO THE INSURED NAMED ABOVE FOR THE POLICY PERIOD INDICATED. NOTWITHSTANDING ANY REQUIREMENT, TERM OR CONDITION OF ANY CONTRACT OR OTHER DOCUMENT WITH RESPECT TO WHICH THIS

CERTIFICATE MAY BE ISSUED OR MAY PERTAIN, THE INSURANCE AFFORDED BY THE POLICIES DESCRIBED HEREIN IS SUBJECT TO ALL THE TERMS, EXCLUSIONS AND CONDITIONS OF SUCH POLICIES. LIMITS SHOWN MAY HAVE BEEN REDUCED BY PAID CLAIMS.

THIS CERTIFICATE IS ISSUED AS A MATTER OF INFORMATION ONLY AND CONFERS NO RIGHTS UPON THE CERTIFICATE HOLDER. THIS

CERTIFICATE DOES NOT AFFIRMATIVELY OR NEGATIVELY AMEND, EXTEND OR ALTER THE COVERAGE AFFORDED BY THE POLICIES BELOW. THIS CERTIFICATE OF INSURANCE DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A CONTRACT BETWEEN THE ISSUING INSURER(S), AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE OR PRODUCER, AND THE CERTIFICATE HOLDER.

IMPORTANT: If the certificate holder is an ADDITIONAL INSURED, the policy(ies) must have ADDITIONAL INSURED provisions or be endorsed.

If SUBROGATION IS WAIVED, subject to the terms and conditions of the policy, certain policies may require an endorsement. A statement on this certificate does not confer rights to the certificate holder in lieu of such endorsement(s).

COVERAGES CERTIFICATE NUMBER: REVISION NUMBER:

CERTIFICATE HOLDER CANCELLATION
© 1988-2015 ACORD CORPORATION. All rights reserved.

ACORD 25 (2016/03) The ACORD name and logo are registered marks of ACORD

CERTIFICATE OF LIABILITY INSURANCE
-45-
-46-

Page 1 of 2 ends

DATE: July 18, 2023
TO: Lisa Natusch, City Clerk
FROM: Julie Parenti, Fire Inspector
SUBJECT: HSF Classic 2023
The following list is a typical set of conditions the fire department utilizes to ensure a minimum standard of fire and life safety. We recommend that arrangements be made by the applicant for a tour of the event site to receive more detailed comments. This tour should be conducted at least 14 days prior to the event.

Final conditions of approval are subject to review of floor plans, proposed routes of travel for public viewing, and a field inspection prior to opening. Temporary conversion of this space for public attendance will be acceptable, provided the applicant addresses the following concerns.

1. Provide a floor plan with site dimensions, exits, and proposed foot traffic pattern for the public. Floor plan shall be emailed to Inspector Julie Parenti at [email protected]. A review of the floor plan and arrangement of contents will be used by the Fire Department to determine a maximum occupancy load. Maximum occupancy load shall not exceed this limit. In addition to the overall limit, secondary floor areas served by a single stairway will be further restricted based on a review of floor plans. Event volunteers are to be provided in sufficient numbers to ensure enforcement of the limits. The standby fire watch has the authority to restrict additional visitors and/or order the number of people in the venue to be reduced if overcrowding exists at any time. Foot traffic flow pattern shall be designed to minimize overcrowding in any area. Traffic flow shall be continually monitored and regulated by the volunteers.

2. If applicable, a standby fire watch shall be on duty during the time the fair is open to the public. The primary responsibility is enforcement of fire and life safety provisions of the California Fire Code. Duties are limited to those activities, except for medical emergencies, or other unusual, or hazardous conditions that may arise. Standby costs are paid by the applicant and are negotiated with the awarded security company.
-47-

Page 2 of 2 ends

3. Exterior exit pathways shall be a hard surface walkway free from tripping hazards.

Exterior exit pathways shall be illuminated at night at any time the event is open to the public. Exterior gates shall be kept unlocked at all times.

4. Portable fire extinguishers with a minimum UL rating of 2A10BC shall be provided so that travel distance to an extinguisher does not exceed 75’. A fire extinguisher shall be provided for each 3000 square feet of floor area and at least one fire extinguisher shall be provided for each level. Extinguishers shall be accessible and visible. Or their location clearly marked.

5. Building Department approval and permits shall be obtained, if necessary, for remodeling and electrical work. The applicant is responsible to ensure compliance with all Town of Hillsborough requirements.

6. Light duty extension cords are prohibited. UL approved multi-outlet power taps may be acceptable provided they are connected directly to a permanent outlet.

Power tap cords shall be protected from physical damage and must be located so as not to present a tripping hazard.

7. No smoking signs shall be posted throughout event space.

8. Candles, open flame, and other sources of ignition are prohibited.

9. Flammable liquids, propane, or other highly flammable materials or decorations are prohibited.

10. The driveway shall be maintained clear for emergency vehicle access during the hours the event is open to the public. Parking related to the event shall not restrict emergency vehicle access.

11. If applicable, tent and canopy installations shall comply with Article 31 of the California Fire Code and Town of Hillsborough requirements. A tent permit shall be obtained at least 14 business days prior to the event from the Fire Department. An inspection is required for tent installations prior to occupancy. -48-
-49-
-50-

TOWN OF HILLSBOROUGH
San Mateo County
1600 Floribunda Avenue
Hillsborough, CA 94010
3 CONSENT CALENDAR

CITY COUNCIL MEETING
AUGUST 14, 2023

AGENDA STAFF REPORT
ITEM SUBJECT: RESOLUTION ACCEPTING THE GRANT OF A TEN-FOOT-WIDE INGRESS AND EGRESS EASEMENT AT 440 PINEHILL ROAD PURSUANT TO CEQA GUIDELINE 15301
SUMMARY: A portion of San Raymundo Road, located behind Boroughwood Place and Hayne Road properties, was never dedicated as public right-of-way and remains a private road. Existing Town sanitary sewer and storm drain infrastructure is located along this private segment of San Raymundo Road. Access to this road begins between 440 Pinehill Road’s and the back of 1320 Hayne Road. Currently, Town staff requires regular access through the 440 Pinehill Road property gate and driveway to conduct routine maintenance on the existing Town infrastructure. However, no formal easement for ingress and egress exists within the 440 Pinehill Road property.

The owners of 440 Pinehill Road recently made private property improvements which required Town permits. As a condition of the permit, the owners were required to formally dedicate a ten-foot-wide ingress and egress easement along the private segment of San Raymundo Road that runs through their property to provide access rights to operate and maintain the existing Town infrastructure.

The owners of 440 Pinehill Road, have prepared a grant of a ten-foot-wide ingress and egress easement to the Town of Hillsborough. The subject easement documents have been checked for accuracy and staff recommends that the grant of the easement be accepted by the Town. Upon acceptance of the easement by the Council, the City Engineer can then complete the recordation process. The easement area is as shown and described in the attachment to this report.

FISCAL IMPACT: This action will not create any new financial responsibility to the Town and may relieve the Town of future maintenance costs.

ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES: The proposed action accepting the easement is exempt from environmental review as the operation of an existing facility with no expansion of use, pursuant to CEQA Guideline 15301.

ATTACHMENTS:

1. Resolution and Exhibits A and B

2. Grant of Easement
PREPARED BY: Paul Willis, Director of Public Works
-51-
Agenda Staff Report - Hillsborough City Council
August 14, 2023

Page 2 ends

RECOMMENDATION: Adopt the resolution accepting the grant of a ten-foot-wide ingress and egress easement at 440 Pinehill Road pursuant to CEQA Guideline 15301. -52-
RESOLUTION NO. 23-

RESOLUTION ACCEPTING THE GRANT OF A TEN-FOOT-WIDE INGRESS AND EGRESS EASEMENT AT 440 PINEHILL ROAD PURSUANT TO CEQA GUIDELINE 15301
WHEREAS, a portion of San Raymundo Road was never dedicated as public right-ofway and remains a private road; and WHEREAS, the Town of Hillsborough (“Town”) operates and maintains public utilities along this private road; and
WHEREAS, the Town has determined a ten-foot-wide ingress and egress easement is required for access to operate and maintain the public utilities within the private road; and
WHEREAS, the Property owners desire to grant a ten-foot-wide ingress and egress easement to the Town, the Town desires to accept this easement as more specifically described and depicted in Exhibits A and B; and WHEREAS, upon the acceptance of the grant of a ten-foot-wide ingress and egress easement, the Town will have access to operate and maintain the infrastructure within this private road.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the Town of Hillsborough as follows:

1. The grant of the ten-foot-wide ingress and egress easement located at 440 Pinehill Road, depicted and described in Exhibits A and B, is hereby accepted.

2. The City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to record a certified copy of this resolution with the County Recorder of the County of San Mateo.

3. The City Manager is hereby authorized to take any and all actions necessary, and execute any and all documents required to effectuate the purposes of this Resolution including, without limitation, recordation of the grant of the easement, along with execution of a certificate of acceptance of the ten-foot-wide ingress and egress easement.

Mayor of the Town of Hillsborough
Attest: City Clerk
This resolution was adopted by the City Council of the Town of Hillsborough at its regular meeting held on the 14th day of August 2023, by the following vote of the members thereof:

ATTACHMENT 1
-53-
2 AYES: Councilmembers
NOES: Councilmembers
ABSENT: Councilmembers
ABSTAIN: Councilmembers
-54-
871 Woodside Way
San Mateo, CA 94401
(650) 21 2-1 030

Page 1 of 3 ends

EXHIBIT A - LEGAL DESCRIPTION
New 10’ Ingress/Egress Easement within 440 Pinehill Road Situate in the Town of Hillsborough, County of San Mateo, State of California, and being a portion of the “Adjusted Lands of Rahmatullah,” as described in the Lot Line Adjustment “LLA 2022-01” recorded September 27, 2022 and filed in Document #2022- 069758, Official Records of San Mateo County (a portion of which being shown on the Record of Survey No. 3765 which was filed for record in Volume 51 of LLS Maps page 82 on October 13, 2021, San Mateo County records), being more particularly described as follows:

BEGINNING at the point on the centerline of San Raymundo Road, at the most southwesterly corner of said “Adjusted Lands of Rahmatullah” as described in LLA 2022- 01;

1. Thence leaving said southwesterly corner, North 05°19’18” West, a distance of

15.19 feet;

2. Thence South 46°30'00" East, a distance of 68.84 feet, to the beginning of a tangent curve to the left;

3. Thence along said curve, having a radius of 240.00 feet, through a central angle of 23°02'00", an arc length of 96.48 feet, to a point of tangency;

4. Thence South 69°32'00" East, a distance of 40.36 feet, to the beginning of a tangent curve to the right;

5. Thence along said curve, having a radius of 280.00 feet, through a central angle of 18°00'00", an arc length of 87.96 feet, to a point of tangency;

6. Thence South 51°32'00" East, a distance of 85.64 feet, to the centerline of Pinehill Road, being a point on the curved southeasterly line of said Rahmatullah, being a point of nontangency, to which point a radial line bears South 08°01’54” East;

7. Thence along said curve, being a curve to the right, concave northerly, having a radius of 32.09 feet, through a central angle of 46°29’54”, an arc length of 26.04 feet, to a point of tangency, on the general southwesterly line of said Rahmatullah, as shown on said Record of Survey No. 3765 (51 LLS 82);

8. Thence along the general southwesterly lines of said Lands as shown on said Record of Survey No. 3765, the following courses:
-55-

Page 2 of 3 ends

A. North 51°32'00" West, a distance of 62.36 feet, to the beginning of a tangent curve to the left;
B. Thence along said curve, having a radius of 270.00 feet, through a central angle of 18°00'00", an arc length of 84.82 feet, to a point of tangency; C. Thence North 69°32'00" West, a distance of 40.36 feet, to the beginning of a tangent curve to the right;
D. Thence along said curve, having a radius of 250.00 feet, through a central angle of 23°02'00", an arc length of 100.50 feet, to a point of tangency; E. Thence North 46°30'00" West, a distance of 57.41 feet, to the POINT OF BEGINNING.

Containing an area of 3,668 square feet, more or less.

END OF DESCRIPTION
The herein described parcel is shown on the attached map, Exhibit B, of this legal description, and is made a part hereof.
____________________________
Bryan G. Taylor, PLS Date: 06/20/2023
License No. 7551, Expires 12/31/23
12/31/23
-56-
-57-
10' EASEMENT Fri Jun 16 10:10:53 2023
Northing Easting Bearing Distance
5327.71 9608.42
N 05°19'18" W 15.19
5342.83 9607.02
S 46°30'00" E 68.84
5295.45 9656.95
Radius: 240.00 Chord: 95.83 Degree: 23°52'24" Dir: Left Length: 96.48 Delta: 23°02'00" Tangent: 48.90
Chord BRG: S 58°01'00" E Rad-In: N 43°30'00" E Rad-Out: N 20°28'00" E Radius Point: 5469.54,9822.16
5244.69 9738.24
S 69°32'00" E 40.36
5230.57 9776.05
Radius: 280.00 Chord: 87.60 Degree: 20°27'46" Dir: Right Length: 87.96 Delta: 18°00'00" Tangent: 44.35
Chord BRG: S 60°32'00" E Rad-In: S 20°28'00" W Rad-Out: S 38°28'00" W Radius Point: 4968.25,9678.14
5187.48 9852.32
S 51°32'00" E 85.64
5134.21 9919.37
Radius: 32.09 Chord: 25.33 Degree: 178°32'50" Dir: Right Length: 26.04 Delta: 46°29'54" Tangent: 13.79
Chord BRG: N 74°46'57" W Rad-In: N 08°01'54" W Rad-Out: N 38°28'00" E Radius Point: 5165.99,9914.89
5140.86 9894.93
N 51°32'00" W 62.36
5179.65 9846.10
Radius: 270.00 Chord: 84.47 Degree: 21°13'14" Dir: Left Length: 84.82 Delta: 18°00'00" Tangent: 42.76
Chord BRG: N 60°32'00" W Rad-In: S 38°28'00" W Rad-Out: S 20°28'00" W Radius Point: 4968.25,9678.14
5221.21 9772.55
N 69°32'00" W 40.36
5235.32 9734.74
Radius: 250.00 Chord: 99.83 Degree: 22°55'06" Dir: Right Length: 100.50 Delta: 23°02'00" Tangent: 50.94
Chord BRG: N 58°01'00" W Rad-In: N 20°28'00" E Rad-Out: N 43°30'00" E Radius Point: 5469.54,9822.16
5288.19 9650.07
N 46°30'00" W 57.41
5327.71 9608.42
Closure Error Distance> 0.0000
Total Distance> 765.97
Polyline Area: 3668 sq ft, 0.08421 acres
-58-
61236.02000\41552634.1
1 RECORDING REQUESTED BY:

When Recorded Mail Document
and Tax Statement To:

Attn: Town Manager
Town of Hillsborough
1600 Floribunda Ave.

Hillsborough, CA 94010
No recordation fee required per
Government Code Section 27383
APN: 030-093-010 SPACE ABOVE THIS LINE FOR RECORDER’S USE

GRANT OF EASEMENT
Samira Rahmatullah, (“Grantor”) is the owner of certain real property located in the Town of Hillsborough, County of San Mateo, State of California more fully described in Exhibit “1” attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference (hereinafter referred to as “Grantor’s Property”).

FOR VALUABLE CONSIDERATION, receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, Grantor does hereby GRANT and CONVEY to TOWN OF HILLSBOROUGH, a California municipal corporation (“Grantee”), and its successors and assigns, those easements described in Paragraphs 1 below, all of which are collectively referred to hereafter as the “Easements” and the areas affected by such Easements are referred to as the “Easement Areas” more fully described and depicted in Exhibit “2”.

1. Easements. A permanent, perpetual and exclusive easement for public utility purposes over, under, along and across portions of the Property, as described and depicted in Exhibit “2”, together with all necessary and convenient means of ingress and egress to and from said Property. This easement shall include, without limitation, an easement for purposes of ingress and egress, and construction, reconstruction, repair, maintenance and replacement of all improvements in the Easement Areas.

1.1 Grantor’s Restrictions. Grantor shall not to place or construct, nor allow a third party to place or construct, any building, wall, fence or other structure (either permanent or temporary), or store any flammable substance, or drill or operate any well, to plant or permit any trees, shrubs or landscaping, or construct any reservoir or other obstruction within or about the Easement Area, or diminish or substantially add to the ground level within the Easement Area; and Grantor agrees not to grant any easement or other consensual rights to third parties which may unreasonably interfere with the rights granted under this Agreement, without the prior written consent of Grantee.

ATTACHMENT 2
-59-
61236.02000\41552634.1
2 1.2 Included Rights. Subject to the terms and conditions contained in this Grant of Easements, the Easements shall include, without limitation, the right and privilege of Grantee and its employees, agents, representatives, contractors, subcontrators, and workmen to:
(i) perform all activities as may be reasonably necessary to facilitate the purposes of the Easements; (ii) use, control and occupy the Easement Areas; (iii) have reasonable access to, ingress to, and egress from the Easement Areas; (iv) use and temporarily place and operate tools, equipment, machinery, and materials on the Easement Areas and (v) remove any building, wall, fence, structure (either permanent or temporary), well, trees, shrubs, landscaping, well or reservoir which may interfere with the rights granted under this Agreement.

2. General Provisions. By acceptance of this Grant of Easement, Grantee is deemed to have agreed to be bound by the covenants, terms and conditions described herein. The covenants, terms and conditions contained herein shall run with the land. These Grant of Easements shall inure to the benefit of and be binding upon the Grantor and Grantee and their respective assigns, heirs and voluntary and involuntary successors in interest with respect to the Property. All Exhibits attached hereto are incorporated herein by reference.

Dated: , 2023 GRANTOR:
__________________________
Samira Rahmatullah
-60-
61236.02000\41552634.1
EXHIBIT “1”
-61-
61236.02000\41552634.1
EXHIBIT “2”
-62-
61236.02000\41552634.1

TOWN OF HILLSBOROUGH

CERTIFICATE OF ACCEPTANCE
This Certificate of Acceptance pertains to the interests in real property conveyed by the Grant of Easement to which this Certificate of Acceptance is attached, from: _____________________________ (“Grantor”)
to: THE TOWN OF HILLSBOROUGH, a California municipal corporation (“Grantee”)
Said Grant of Easements is hereby accepted by the undersigned officer on behalf of Grantee pursuant to authority conferred by the Grantee’s governing board, and Grantee hereby consents to recordation of said Grant of Easement.

Dated: ______________, 2023 TOWN OF HILLSBOROUGH,
a California municipal corporation
By:
_____________________
City Manager
ATTEST:
____________________________
_____________________
City Clerk
-63-

TOWN OF HILLSBOROUGH
San Mateo County
1600 Floribunda Avenue
Hillsborough, CA 94010
4 CONSENT CALENDAR

CITY COUNCIL MEETING
AUGUST 14, 2023

AGENDA STAFF REPORT
ITEM SUBJECT: RESOLUTION RATIFYING THE EMERGENCY CONTRACT WITH FARALLON COMPANY FOR EMERGENCY RETAINING WALL WORK AT 2095 RALSTON AVENUE IN THE AMOUNT OF $215,450.00 PLUS A 10% CONTINGENCY IN THE AMOUNT OF $21,545.00, FOR A TOTAL PROJECT COST OF $236,995.00 PURSUANT TO CEQA GUIDELINE 15301 SUMMARY: An existing retaining wall adjacent to 2095 Ralston Avenue was damaged during a storm event. It was determined a new soldier pile and lagging wall was required in order to protect the structural integrity of Ralston Avenue. Staff solicited qualified contractors for quotes to complete the work. Staff received three written responses below.

Farallon Company $215,450.00
Norgo Engineering $263,255.00
JMB Construction, Inc. $386,000.00
The Town’s Engineering Division reviewed the proposal and the scope of services appropriate.

Staff verified that Farallon’s qualifications and experience levels are satisfactory. Farallon Company has previously completed projects similar to this within the Town in a timely manner, with positive results, and staff recommends approval of this emergency work.

Pursuant to Public Contract Code section 22035, the Town can elect to forgo strict competitive bidding in the event of an emergency provided the Town complies with the procedures set forth in Public Contract Code section 22050. On September 9, 2021, by Resolution 21-77, the City Council unanimously delegated the City Manager the authority to make specified emergency findings and enter into any contracts for the procurement of necessary equipment, services, and supplies without engaging in a competitive procurement process. Whenever the City Manager, or his or her designee, takes emergency action under Public Contract Code section 22050, the City Manager, or his or her designee, shall report to the City Council within seven days or at the next regularly scheduled meeting of the City Council if that meeting will occur no later than fourteen days after the action and at every regularly scheduled meeting thereafter until the action is terminated to determine by a four-fifths vote of the City Council if there is a need to continue the action or until the action is completed.

On July 27, 2023, the Public Works Director/City Engineer, as designee to the City Manager, took emergency action under Public Contract Code section 22050 and authorized Farallon Company to move forward with scheduling the work. The Public Works Director/City Engineer has determined that further delays resulting from a typical competitive solicitation with formal bids would endanger the public health, safety and welfare of residents and the general public traveling this section of Ralston Avenue. Timely installation of this new wall is necessary to protect the structural integrity of Ralston Avenue. The property owner has paid the Town for the cost of the wall construction, -65-
Agenda Staff Report - Hillsborough City Council
August 14, 2023

Page 2 ends

and any additional costs beyond $215,000 will be paid by the Town, not limited to project management, record drawings, and additional roadway frontage improvements.

FISCAL IMPACT: It is recommended funding be allocated from the General Fund budget in the amount of $215,450.00, with a 10% contingency in the amount of $21,545.00, if needed, for a total allocation of $236,995.00. The owner of the property at 2095 Ralston has reimbursed the Town for the cost of the retaining wall as bid, and has submitted a check to the Town for $215,000.00.

ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES: The action is categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act according to Section 15301 of the California Code of Regulations.

ATTACHMENTS: Resolution
PREPARED BY: Paul Willis, Director of Public Works/City Engineer RECOMMENDATION: Adopt the resolution ratifying the emergency contract with Farallon Company for emergency retaining wall work at 2095 Ralston Avenue in the amount of $215,450.00 plus a 10% contingency in the amount of $21,545.00 for a total project cost of $236,995.00. -66-
RESOLUTION NO. 23-

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF HILLSBOROUGH

RATIFYING THE EMERGENCY CONTRACT WITH FARALLON COMPANY FOR EMERGENCY RETAINING WALL WORK AT 2095 RALSTON AVENUE IN THE AMOUNT OF $215,450.00 PLUS A 10% CONTINGENCY IN THE AMOUNT OF $21,545.00, FOR A TOTAL PROJECT COST OF $236,995.00 PURSUANT TO CEQA GUIDELINE 15301
WHEREAS, the City Council of the Town of Hillsborough (“Town”) maintains the Town’s roadway system; and
WHEREAS, an existing retaining wall adjacent to 2095 Ralston Avenue was damaged during a storm event and was in need of repair to protect the integrity of Ralston Avenue; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Public Contract Code section 22050, the Town, by four-fifths vote of its governing body, may enter into a public works contract without engaging in competitive bidding if it finds that an emergency situation exists that poses a threat to public health, safety and welfare or property and that the emergency will not permit a delay resulting from a competitive solicitation for bids; and
WHEREAS, the City Council delegated authority to the City Manager, or designee, to take emergency action in accordance with Public Contract Code Section 22050; and
WHEREAS, based on the emergency conditions that would not allow the delay resulting from a traditional competitive solicitation of bids, staff immediately solicited qualified contractors to install the new wall; and WHEREAS, staff received three written response and the lowest response was from Farallon Company in the amount of $ $215,450.00; and
WHEREAS, on July 27, 2023, the Public Works Director/City Engineer, as designee to the City Manager, took emergency action to enter into a contract with Farallon Company to address the emergency condition resulting from the damaged retaining wall; and
WHEREAS, the 2095 Ralston Retaining Wall Project (“Project”) proposes new solider pile and lagging wall; and
WHEREAS, funding will be allocated from the operations budget for General Fund budget in the amount of $215,450.00, with a 10% contingency in the amount of $21,545.00, if needed, for a total allocation of $236,995.00; and,
-67-
2 WHEREAS, the owner of the property at 2095 Ralston has reimbursed the Town for the cost of the retaining wall and has submitted a check to the Town for $215,000.00.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the Town of Hillsborough hereby:

1. Finds the foregoing recitals to be true and correct and incorporated as if fully set forth herein.

2. Determines, pursuant to Public Contract Code section 22050, that the damaged retaining wall constitutes an emergency condition that poses a threat to public health, safety and welfare and property and that such condition did not permit a delay resulting from a competitive solicitation of bids.

3. Ratifies the Director of Public Works’, as designee of the City Manager, emergency action to enter into an emergency contract on behalf of the Town with Farallon Company for the Project in the amount of $215,450.00, with a 10% Town owned/controlled contingency in the amount of $21,545.00, if needed, for a total allocation of $236,995.00, allocating funds from the General Fund budget.

4. Authorizes and directs Town staff to take any actions necessary to complete the Project and remediate the emergency conditions.

5. Directs Town staff to report to the City Council at the next regularly scheduled meeting and at every meeting thereafter until this emergency action is terminated to determine if there is a need to continue the action.

AYES: Councilmembers
NOES: Councilmembers
ABSENT: Councilmembers
ABSTAIN: Councilmembers
-68-

TOWN OF HILLSBOROUGH
San Mateo County
1600 Floribunda Avenue
Hillsborough, CA 94010
5 CONSENT CALENDAR

CITY COUNCIL MEETING
AUGUST 14, 2023

AGENDA STAFF REPORT
ITEM SUBJECT: RESOLUTION APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT WITH HALEY & ALDRICH, INC. FOR PROFESSIONAL

SERVICES TO PROVIDE THE GEOTECHNICAL AND ENGINEERING DESIGN SERVICES FOR THE MACADAMIA ACCESS ROAD REPAIR IN THE AMOUNT OF $68,394.00 PURSUANT TO CEQA GUIDELINE 15301
SUMMARY: The 2022-2023 winter storms caused several slip-outs along the Macadamia access road which is located in the Macadamia and Crocker open space area and behind private properties in Skyfarm Drive. These access roads contain Town-owned sanitary sewer mainlines that serve the properties above. The Town’s on-call geotechnical engineering firm, Haley & Aldrich, was available to assess the severity of the slip-outs and provide a recommendation for repair.

After an initial site visit and assessment, Haley & Aldrich determined that repairs would likely range from geogrid reinforcement to new soldier pile walls, depending on the depth of the slip outs or slides, and location along the road. Timely repair of the access road is necessary to maintain access to the Town’s public utilities located within the easement and maintain utility service to Town residents. Additionally, these repairs will protect the existing sewer infrastructure located under the roadway, preventing any potential shift or collapse of the pipelines which would result in sewage discharges.

Haley & Aldrich submitted a cost proposal for complete repair design for each location damaged by the storm. The services include geotechnical engineering, structural engineering design, and civil engineering design to develop project repair plans, specifications, and engineer’s estimates. The cost proposal for these services is $68,394.00 and exceeds the authorized limit of the existing oncall contract, and therefore this scope of services requires City Council approval. Haley & Aldrich is the most qualified firm that was available immediately to perform these services.

FISCAL IMPACT: Staff carefully reviewed Haley & Aldrich fee proposal and determined that the cost and level of effort is reasonable. It is recommended that funding be allocated from the General Government fund under GL Code 10011000-5460 for a total allocation of $68,394.00.

ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES: The action is categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act according to Section 15301 of the California Code of Regulations.

ATTACHMENTS:

1. Resolution

2. Agreement
PREPARED BY: Paul Willis, Director of Public Works
-69-
Agenda Staff Report - Hillsborough City Council
August 14, 2023

Page 2 ends

RECOMMENDATION: Adopt the resolution approving and authorizing the city manager to execute an agreement with Haley & Aldrich, Inc. for professional services to provide the geotechnical and engineering design services for the Macadamia Access Road Repair in the amount of $68,394.00 pursuant to CEQA Guideline 15301.
-70-
RESOLUTION NO. 23-

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF HILLSBOROUGH

APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT WITH HALEY & ALDRICH, INC. FOR PROFESSIONAL

GEOTECHNICAL AND ENGINEERING DESIGN SERVICES FOR THE MACADAMIA ACCESS ROAD REPAIR IN THE AMOUNT OF $68,394.00 PURSUANT TO CEQA GUIDELINE 15301
WHEREAS, The Town of Hillsborough (the Town) maintains access roads within the Town open space areas; and
WHEREAS, the 2022-23 winter storms caused several slip-outs along the Macadamia access road located which is located in the Macadamia and Crocker open space areas; and
WHEREAS, timely repair of the access road is necessary to maintain access to the Town’s public utilities, maintain utility service to Town residents, and protect existing infrastructure; and
WHEREAS, the Town current has an existing on call contract with Haley and Aldrich, Inc. (“Haley & Aldrich”) who is immediately available to provide repair design services; and
WHEREAS, Haley & Aldrich submitted a cost proposal in the amount of $68,394.00, which exceeds the authorized amount in the current on call contract; and WHEREAS, the staff reviewed the cost proposal submitted by Haley & Aldrich and determined that the cost and level of effort is reasonable; and WHEREAS, funding for these services will be allocated from the General Government fund under GL Code 10011000-5460 in the amount of $68,394.00.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the Town of Hillsborough hereby approves and authorizes the City Manager to execute an agreement with Haley and Aldrich, Inc. for professional geotechnical and engineering design services for the Macadamia access road repair in the amount of $68,394.00.

TOWN OF HILLSBOROUGH
San Mateo County
1600 Floribunda Avenue
Hillsborough, CA 94010
6 CONSENT CALENDAR

CITY COUNCIL MEETING
AUGUST 14, 2023

AGENDA STAFF REPORT
ITEM SUBJECT: RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PURCHASE OF THREE PUBLIC WORKS ELECTRIC VEHICLES AT $59,514.41 EACH FOR A GRAND TOTAL OF $178,543.23 PURSUANT TO CEQA GUIDELINE 15378
SUMMARY: The Public Works Department was scheduled to replace four Ford F-150 Trucks FY 2021-22. The vehicles are between 8 to 14 years old and have met their planned service life.

On July 12, 2021, the City Council approved this purchase. Due to the current supply chain shortages of goods and services, Ford was not able to guarantee a timely production and delivery date, and only two of the four trucks ordered were delivered. As the 2021 and 2022 Ford F-150 lightning model years are no longer being produced and two of the orders are unfulfilled, staff is requesting to renew those remaining two vehicle orders, along with one additional vehicle for the upcoming year replacement to the 2023 model year.

The proposed replacement vehicles will be three Ford Electric F-150 Lighting Trucks. The State of California has a goal of electrifying government fleets by 2025 to help reduce greenhouse gases and transportation emissions by 40% by 2030. Furthermore, California would like 100% Electric Vehicle sales by 2035. This purchase continues our plan with the Town to go green, and further reduce our carbon footprint. Electric vehicles are an essential part of a clean energy future, and studies have shown that they may play a key role in arresting climate change. The Town last reviewed electric vehicles in 2018 during a County of San Mateo Grand Jury report, when electric vehicles were initially being adopted into local government fleets within the County. Vehicle technology, and incentives have improved since then, and the most common purchase of vehicle for municipal maintenance, the F-150 will be all electric. The orders, if authorized, could take up to six to nine months for delivery, and will be made directly with Ford Motor Company, through the local dealer with no additional mark up. A $500 deposit is required at this time for each order placed.

Based on the dollar value of this purchase, the Town’s Purchasing Policy does require an RFP or other competitive procurement process. A legal exception to this requirement exists for contracts where a public agency determines, based on the facts and circumstances of the contract in question, that public bidding would produce no competitive advantage for the public agency or would be futile because the nature of the procurement. See Graydon v. Pasadena Redevelopment Agency, et al. (1980) 104 Cal. App 3d 631, 635. Based on ongoing supply issues and shortages that auto dealers around the nation have faced, including Ford, the Town does not believe it will gain any competitive advantage by using a formal solicitation process primarily because any solicitation process is unlikely to yield any results based on the supply issues. The Town will be contracting directly with Ford for this purchase and the Town believes it is obtaining the best pricing. Town staff did inquire with local Ford dealerships to provide -73-
Agenda Staff Report - Hillsborough City Council
August 14, 2023

Page 2 ends

competitive quotes. Local Ford dealers were not able to provide competitive quotes or even guarantee vehicle delivery. Their prices were over $10,000 higher than factory direct prices.

Orders made directly through Ford eliminate additional dealer mark-up including this $10,000 mark up.

Dealer Price per Ford Electric F-150 Truck: $59,514.41
FISCAL IMPACT: There are existing funds in the Public Works Vehicle Capital Replacement Fund for the replacement vehicles. The total purchase before taxes, and tax credits and grants are $178,543.23. Ford electric vehicles may be eligible to receive a Federal Tax Credit of up to $7,500 each.

ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES: The City Council’s adoption of the resolution approving the purchase of five electric vehicles is not a “project” subject to the California Environmental Quality Act pursuant to CEQA Guideline 15378(b)(2) as continuing administrative type activities, which includes the purchase of supplies to ensure the Town continues to operate, are not a project and are exempt from CEQA review. Further, each vehicle being purchased is an electric vehicle anticipated to reduce CO2 emissions.

ATTACHMENTS: Resolution
PREPARED BY: Rick Piña, Superintendent
RECOMMENDATION: Adopt the resolution approving the purchase of three Public Works Electric Vehicles at $59,514.41 each for a grand total of $178,543.23, allocating funds from the Public Works Vehicle Capital Replacement Fund.
-74-
RESOLUTION NO. 23-

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF HILLSBOROUGH

APPROVING THE PURCHASE OF THREE PUBLIC WORKS ELECTRIC VEHICLES AT $59,514.41 EACH FOR A GRAND TOTAL OF $178,543.23 PURSUANT TO CEQA GUIDELINE 15378

WHEREAS, the City Council approved Public Works vehicle capital replacement funding for FY 2021-22 in the amount of $1,518,000; and WHEREAS, the City Council approved capital Public Works vehicle capital replacement funding for FY 2023-24 in the amount of $770,000; and

WHEREAS, on Jul 12, 2021, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 21-63 approving the purchase of five electric vehicles, including the purchase of four Ford Electric F-150 trucks; and
WHEREAS, after the City Council adopted Resolution No. 21-63, and as a result of ongoing supply issues, only two (2) of the four (4) Ford Electric F-150 trucks were delivered; and
WHEREAS, staff is now seeking authority to purchase the two (2) Ford Electric F-150 trucks previously authorized pursuant to Resolution No. 21-63 along with one additional truck to replace it for a current 2023 model year.

WHEREAS, based on the dollar value of this purchase, the Town’s Purchasing Policy does require an RFP or other competitive procurement process. A legal exception to this requirement exists for contracts where a public agency determines, based on the facts and circumstances of the contract in question, that public bidding would produce no competitive advantage for the public agency or would be futile because the nature of the procurement. See Graydon v. Pasadena Redevelopment Agency, et al. (1980) 104 Cal. App 3d 631, 635; and
WHEREAS, based on ongoing supply issues and shortages that auto dealers around the nation have faced, including Ford, the Town does not believe it will gain any competitive advantage by using a formal solicitation process primarily because any solicitation process is unlikely to yield any results based on the supply issues; and
WHEREAS, Town staff did inquire with local Ford dealerships to provide competitive quotes and no dealer was able to provide competitive quotes with some quoting prices $10,000 higher than factory direct prices; and -75-
2 WHEREAS, the Public Works Department will purchase the vehicles directly from Ford Motor Company, delivered through a local dealer with no additional markup; and

WHEREAS, Ford Motor Company will provide three Ford Electric F-150 Trucks for a total of $178,543.23.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the Town of Hillsborough hereby approves the purchase of three Public Works vehicles, three Ford Electric F-150 Trucks, allocating funds from the Public Works Vehicle Capital Replacement Fund.

Mayor of the Town of Hillsborough

Attest: City Clerk

This resolution was adopted by the City Council of the Town of Hillsborough at its regular meeting held on the 12th day of August 2023, by the following vote of the members thereof:

AYES: Councilmembers
NOES: Councilmembers
ABSENT: Councilmembers
ABSTAIN: Councilmembers
-76-

TOWN OF HILLSBOROUGH
San Mateo County
1600 Floribunda Avenue
Hillsborough, CA 94010
7 CONSENT CALENDAR

CITY COUNCIL MEETING
AUGUST 14, 2023

AGENDA STAFF REPORT
ITEM SUBJECT: RESOLUTION APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE A TWO-YEAR AGREEMENT WITH CSG CONSULTANTS, INC. FOR AS-NEEDED MUNICIPAL ENGINEERING AND PROJECT MANAGEMENT SERVICES IN AN ANNUAL NOTTO-EXCEED AMOUNT OF $800,000 PURSUANT TO CEQA GUIDELINE 15378 SUMMARY: Currently, the Town contracts with nine different firms to provide as-needed engineering and consulting services in a variety of disciplines to support the Town’s Capital Improvement Program. These current three-year agreements will expire on August 31, 2023.

In May 2023, the Town issued a Request for Proposal to engage qualified firms interested in providing as-needed engineering and consulting services to the Town in a variety of disciplines.

The disciplines include municipal engineering and project management, general engineering, geotechnical engineering, construction management and inspection, environmental, surveying, and materials testing services. After a detailed review of the proposal, a four-person evaluation committee determined that CSG is qualified to provide municipal engineering and project management services based on their past project experience, technical methodology and approach, client-oriented approach, and their demonstrated ability to provide the requested services to other comparable municipalities.

Under this proposed agreement, CSG will provide as-needed Capital Improvement Program (CIP) municipal engineering and project management services on a project-by-project basis. Staff evaluated the actual need for these services in the previous three years, and the anticipated needs of the future CIP budget to determine the contract amount. The services provided under the agreement will be limited to an annual not-to-exceed amount of $800,000.

The term of the proposed agreement is two years with the ability to extend the agreement for one additional year upon written mutual consent of both parties. The proposed agreement may be terminated by the Town at any time.

FISCAL IMPACT: The as-needed municipal engineering and project management services support the combined Capital Improvement Program, which has a soft cost budget of $3,589,380 in Fiscal Year 2023-24 and $2,654,600 in Fiscal Year 2024-25.

ATTACHMENTS: Resolution
-77-
Agenda Staff Report - Hillsborough City Council
August 14, 2023

Page 2 ends

PREPARED BY: Paul Willis, Director of Public Works
RECOMMENDATION: Adopt the resolution authorizing and authorizing the City Manager to execute a two-year agreement with CSG Consultants, Inc. for as-needed municipal engineering and project management services in an annual not-to-exceed amount of $800,000. -78-
RESOLUTION NO. 23-

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF HILLSBOROUGH AUTHORIZING AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE A TWOYEAR AGREEMENT WITH CSG CONSULTANTS, INC. FOR AS-NEEDED

MUNICIPAL ENGINEERING AND PROJECT MANAGEMENT SERVICES IN AN ANNUAL NOT-TO-EXCEED AMOUNT OF $800,000 PURSUANT TO CEQA GUIDELINE 15378
WHEREAS, the Town of Hillsborough desires (“Town”) to secure as-needed engineering and consulting services necessary for the Town’s engineering and public works functions; and
WHEREAS, a Request for Proposals was publicly advertised in May 2023 to engage qualified firms interested in providing as-needed engineering and consulting services to the Town; and
WHEREAS, staff conducted analyses of the proposals received and reviewed the qualifications of each firm; and
WHEREAS, CSG Consultants, Inc. was determined to be qualified to provide asneeded municipal engineering and project management services on a project-by-project basis to the Town to support the Town’s Capital Improvement Program; and
WHEREAS, the term of the proposed agreement is two years with the ability to extend the agreement for one additional year upon written mutual consent.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the Town of Hillsborough hereby approves and authorizes the City Manager to execute a two-year agreement with CSG Consultants, Inc. for as-needed municipal engineering and project management services in the total annual not-to-exceed amount of $800,000 for a maximum two year agreement total of $1,600,000.

Mayor of the Town of Hillsborough

Attest: City Clerk
This resolution was adopted by the City Council of the Town of Hillsborough at its regular meeting held on the 14th of August 2023, by the following vote of the members thereof:

AYES: Councilmembers
NOES: Councilmembers
-79-
2 ABSENT: Councilmembers
ABSTAIN: Councilmembers
-80-

TOWN OF HILLSBOROUGH
San Mateo County
1600 Floribunda Avenue
Hillsborough, CA 94010
8 CONSENT CALENDAR

CITY COUNCIL MEETING
AUGUST 14, 2023

AGENDA STAFF REPORT
ITEM SUBJECT: RESOLUTION APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE A TWO-YEAR AGREEMENT WITH EKI ENVIRONMENT & WATER, INC. FOR ASNEEDED GENERAL ENGINEERING SERVICES IN AN ANNUAL NOT-TO-EXCEED AMOUNT OF $250,000 PURSUANT TO CEQA GUIDELINE 15378
SUMMARY: Currently, the Town contracts with nine different firms to provide as-needed engineering and consulting services in a variety of disciplines to support the Town’s Capital Improvement Program. These current three-year agreements will expire on August 31, 2023.

In May 2023, the Town issued a Request for Proposal to engage qualified firms interested in providing as-needed engineering and consulting services to the Town in a variety of disciplines.

The disciplines include municipal engineering and project management, general engineering, geotechnical engineering, construction management and inspection, environmental, surveying, and materials testing services. After a detailed review of the proposal, a four-person evaluation committee determined that EKI is qualified to provide general engineering services based on their past project experience, technical methodology and approach, client-oriented approach, and their demonstrated ability to provide the requested services to other comparable municipalities.

Under this proposed agreement, EKI will provide as-needed Capital Improvement Program (CIP) general engineering services on a project-by-project basis. Staff evaluated the actual need for these services in the previous three years, and the anticipated needs of the future CIP budget to determine the contract amount. The services provided under the agreement will be limited to an annual not-to-exceed amount of $250,000.

FISCAL IMPACT: The as-needed general engineering services support the combined Capital Improvement Program, which has a soft cost budget of $3,589,380 in Fiscal Year 2023-24 and $2,654,600 in Fiscal Year 2024-25.

ATTACHMENTS: Resolution
-81-
Agenda Staff Report - Hillsborough City Council
August 14, 2023

Page 2 ends

PREPARED BY: Paul Willis, Director of Public Works
RECOMMENDATION: Adopt the resolution approving and authorizing the City Manager to execute a two-year agreement with EKI Environment & Water, Inc. for as-needed general engineering services in an annual not-to-exceed amount of $250,000. -82-
RESOLUTION NO. 23-

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF HILLSBOROUGH APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE A TWOYEAR AGREEMENT WITH EKI ENVIRONMENT & WATER, INC. FOR AS-NEEDED

GENERAL ENGINEERING SERVICES IN AN ANNUAL NOT-TO-EXCEED AMOUNT OF $250,000 PURSUANT TO CEQA GUIDELINE 15378
WHEREAS, the Town of Hillsborough (“Town”) desires to secure as-needed engineering and consulting services necessary for the Town’s engineering and public works functions; and
WHEREAS, a Request for Proposals was publicly advertised in May 2023 to engage qualified firms interested in providing as-needed engineering and consulting services to the Town; and
WHEREAS, staff conducted analyses of the proposals received and reviewed the qualifications of each firm; and
WHEREAS, EKI Environment & Water, Inc. was determined to be qualified to provide as-needed general engineering services on a project-by-project basis to the Town to support the Town’s Capital Improvement Program; and WHEREAS, the term of the proposed agreement is two years with the ability to extend the agreement for one additional year upon written mutual consent.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the Town of Hillsborough hereby approves and authorizes the City Manager to execute a two-year agreement with EKI Environment & Water, Inc. for as-needed general engineering services in the total annual not-to-exceed amount of $250,000 for a maximum two year agreement total of $500,000.

Mayor of the Town of Hillsborough
Attest: City Clerk
This resolution was adopted by the City Council of the Town of Hillsborough at its regular meeting held on the 14th of August 2023, by the following vote of the members thereof:

AYES: Councilmembers
NOES: Councilmembers
ABSENT: Councilmembers
-83-
2 ABSTAIN: Councilmembers
-84-

TOWN OF HILLSBOROUGH
San Mateo County
1600 Floribunda Avenue
Hillsborough, CA 94010
9 CONSENT CALENDAR

CITY COUNCIL MEETING
AUGUST 14, 2023

AGENDA STAFF REPORT
ITEM SUBJECT: RESOLUTION APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE A TWO-YEAR AGREEMENT WITH CSG CONSULTANTS, INC. FOR AS-NEEDED

GENERAL ENGINEERING SERVICES IN AN ANNUAL NOT-TO-EXCEED AMOUNT OF $200,000 PURSUANT TO CEQA GUIDELINE 15378
SUMMARY: Currently, the Town contracts with nine different firms to provide as-needed engineering and consulting services in a variety of disciplines to support the Town’s Capital Improvement Program. These current three-year agreements will expire on August 31, 2023.

In May 2023, the Town issued a Request for Proposal to engage qualified firms interested in providing as-needed engineering and consulting services to the Town in a variety of disciplines.

The disciplines include municipal engineering and project management, general engineering, geotechnical engineering, construction management and inspection, environmental, surveying, and materials testing services. After a detailed review of the proposal, a four-person evaluation committee determined that CSG is qualified to provide general engineering services based on their past project experience, technical methodology and approach, client-oriented approach, and their demonstrated ability to provide the requested services to other comparable municipalities.

Under this proposed agreement, CSG will provide as-needed Capital Improvement Program (CIP) general engineering services on a project-by-project basis. Staff evaluated the actual need for these services in the previous three years, and the anticipated needs of the future CIP budget to determine the contract amount. The services provided under the agreement will be limited to an annual not-to-exceed amount of $200,000.

ATTACHMENTS: Resolution
-85-
Agenda Staff Report - Hillsborough City Council
August 14, 2023

Page 2 ends

PREPARED BY: Paul Willis, Director of Public Works
RECOMMENDATION: Adopt the resolution approving and authorizing the City Manager to execute a two-year agreement with CSG Consultants, Inc. for as-needed general engineering services in an annual not-to-exceed amount of $200,000. -86-
RESOLUTION NO. 23-

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF HILLSBOROUGH APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE A TWOYEAR AGREEMENT WITH CSG CONSULTANTS, INC. FOR AS-NEEDED GENERAL

ENGINEERING SERVICES IN AN ANNUAL NOT-TO-EXCEED AMOUNT OF $200,000 PURSUANT TO CEQA GUIDELINE 15378
WHEREAS, the Town of Hillsborough (“Town”) desires to secure as-needed engineering and consulting services necessary for the Town’s engineering and public works functions; and
WHEREAS, a Request for Proposals was publicly advertised in May 2023 to engage qualified firms interested in providing as-needed engineering and consulting services to the Town; and
WHEREAS, staff conducted analyses of the proposals received and reviewed the qualifications of each firm; and
WHEREAS, CSG Consultants, Inc. was determined to be qualified to provide asneeded general engineering services on a project-by-project basis to the Town to support the Town’s Capital Improvement Program; and WHEREAS, the term of the proposed agreement is two years with the ability to extend the agreement for one additional year upon written mutual consent.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the Town of Hillsborough hereby approves and authorizes the City Manager execute a two-year agreement with CSG Consultants, Inc. for as-needed general engineering services in the total annual not-to-exceed amount of $200,000 for a maximum two year agreement total of $400,000.

Mayor of the Town of Hillsborough

Attest: City Clerk
This resolution was adopted by the City Council of the Town of Hillsborough at its regular meeting held on the 14th of August 2023, by the following vote of the members thereof:

AYES: Councilmembers
NOES: Councilmembers
ABSENT: Councilmembers
-87-
ABSTAIN: Councilmembers
-88-

TOWN OF HILLSBOROUGH
San Mateo County
1600 Floribunda Avenue
Hillsborough, CA 94010
10 CONSENT CALENDAR

CITY COUNCIL MEETING
AUGUST 14, 2023

AGENDA STAFF REPORT
ITEM SUBJECT: RESOLUTION APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE A TWO-YEAR AGREEMENT WITH PAKPOUR CONSULTING GROUP, INC. FOR

AS-NEEDED GENERAL ENGINEERING SERVICES IN AN ANNUAL NOT-TO-EXCEED AMOUNT OF $200,000 PURSUANT TO CEQA GUIDELINE 15378
SUMMARY: Currently, the Town contracts with nine different firms to provide as-needed engineering and consulting services in a variety of disciplines to support the Town’s Capital Improvement Program. These current three-year agreements will expire on August 31, 2023.

In May 2023, the Town issued a Request for Proposal to engage qualified firms interested in providing as-needed engineering and consulting services to the Town in a variety of disciplines.

The disciplines include municipal engineering and project management, general engineering, geotechnical engineering, construction management and inspection, environmental, surveying, and materials testing services. After a detailed review of the proposal, a four-person evaluation committee determined that Pakpour is qualified to provide general engineering services based on their past project experience, technical methodology and approach, client-oriented approach, and their demonstrated ability to provide the requested services to other comparable municipalities.

Under this proposed agreement, Pakpour will provide as-needed Capital Improvement Program (CIP) general engineering services on a project-by-project basis. Staff evaluated the actual need for these services in the previous three years, and the anticipated needs of the future CIP budget to determine the contract amount. The services provided under the agreement will be limited to an annual not-to-exceed amount of $200,000.

ATTACHMENTS: Resolution
PREPARED BY: Paul Willis, Director of Public Works
-89-
Agenda Staff Report - Hillsborough City Council
August 14, 2023

Page 2 ends

RECOMMENDATION: Adopt the resolution approving and authorizing the City Manager to execute a two-year agreement with Pakpour Consulting Group, Inc. for as-needed general engineering services in an annual not-to-exceed amount of $200,000. -90-
RESOLUTION NO. 23-

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF HILLSBOROUGH

AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE A TWO-YEAR AGREEMENT WITH PAKPOUR CONSULTING GROUP, INC. FOR AS-NEEDED GENERAL

ENGINEERING SERVICES IN AN ANNUAL NOT-TO-EXCEED AMOUNT OF $200,000 PURSUANT TO CEQA GUIDELINE 15378
WHEREAS, the Town of Hillsborough (“Town”) desires to secure as-needed engineering and consulting services necessary for the Town’s engineering and public works functions; and
WHEREAS, a Request for Proposals was publicly advertised in May 2023 to engage qualified firms interested in providing as-needed engineering and consulting services to the Town; and
WHEREAS, staff conducted analyses of the proposals received and reviewed the qualifications of each firm; and
WHEREAS, Pakpour Consulting Group, Inc. was determined to be qualified to provide as-needed general engineering services on a project-by-project basis to the Town to support the Town’s Capital Improvement Program; and WHEREAS, the term of the proposed agreement is two years with the ability to extend the agreement for one additional year upon written mutual consent.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the Town of Hillsborough hereby approves and authorizes the City Manager to execute a two-year agreement with Pakpour Consulting Group, Inc. for as-needed general engineering services in the total annual not-to-exceed amount of $200,000 for a maximum two year agreement total of $400,000.

Mayor of the Town of Hillsborough

Attest: City Clerk
This resolution was adopted by the City Council of the Town of Hillsborough at its regular meeting held on the 14th of August 2023, by the following vote of the members thereof:

AYES: Councilmembers
NOES: Councilmembers
ABSENT: Councilmembers
-91-
2 ABSTAIN: Councilmembers
-92-

TOWN OF HILLSBOROUGH
San Mateo County
1600 Floribunda Avenue
Hillsborough, CA 94010
11 CONSENT CALENDAR

CITY COUNCIL MEETING
AUGUST 14, 2023

AGENDA STAFF REPORT
ITEM SUBJECT: RESOLUTION APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE A TWO-YEAR AGREEMENT WITH FREYER & LAURETA, INC. FOR AS-NEEDED GENERAL ENGINEERING SERVICES IN AN ANNUAL NOT-TO-EXCEED AMOUNT OF $90,000 PURSUANT TO CEQA GUIDELINE 15378
SUMMARY: Currently, the Town contracts with nine different firms to provide as-needed engineering and consulting services in a variety of disciplines to support the Town’s Capital Improvement Program. These current three-year agreements will expire on August 31, 2023.

In May 2023, the Town issued a Request for Proposal to engage qualified firms interested in providing as-needed engineering and consulting services to the Town in a variety of disciplines.

The disciplines include municipal engineering and project management, general engineering, geotechnical engineering, construction management and inspection, environmental, surveying, and materials testing services. After a detailed review of the proposal, staff invited (“F&L”) for an interview based on criteria identified in the RFP, proposal detail and quality, and their demonstrated ability to provide the requested services to other comparable municipalities. A fourperson evaluation committee determined that F&L is qualified to provide general engineering services based on their past project experience, technical methodology and approach, and clientoriented approach.

Under this proposed agreement, F&L will provide as-needed Capital Improvement Program (CIP) general engineering services on a project-by-project basis. Staff evaluated the actual need for these services in the previous three years, and the anticipated needs of the future CIP budget to determine the contract amount. The services provided under the agreement will be limited to an annual not-to-exceed amount of $90,000.

ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES: The proposed action is exempt from environmental review pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines sections 15378(b)(2) and 15378(b)(5) as ongoing administrative or organizational activities that will not result in direct or indirect physical changes in the environment.
-93-
Agenda Staff Report - Hillsborough City Council
August 14, 2023

Page 2 ends

ATTACHMENTS: Resolution
PREPARED BY: Paul Willis, Director of Public Works
RECOMMENDATION: Adopt the resolution approving and authorizing the City Manager to execute a two-year agreement with Freyer & Laureta, Inc. for as-needed general engineering services in an annual not-to-exceed amount of $90,000.
-94-
RESOLUTION NO. 23-

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF HILLSBOROUGH APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE A TWOYEAR AGREEMENT WITH FREYER & LAURETA, INC. FOR AS-NEEDED GENERAL ENGINEERING SERVICES IN AN ANNUAL NOT-TO-EXCEED AMOUNT OF $90,000 PURSUANT TO CEQA GUIDELINE 15378
WHEREAS, the Town of Hillsborough (“Town”) desires to secure as-needed engineering and consulting services necessary for the Town’s engineering and public works functions; and
WHEREAS, a Request for Proposals was publicly advertised in May 2023 to engage qualified firms interested in providing as-needed engineering and consulting services to the Town; and
WHEREAS, staff conducted analyses of the proposals received and reviewed the qualifications of each firm; and
WHEREAS, Freyer & Laureta, Inc. was determined to be qualified to provide asneeded general engineering services on a project-by-project basis to the Town to support the Town’s Capital Improvement Program; and WHEREAS, the term of the proposed agreement is two years with the ability to extend the agreement for one additional year upon written mutual consent.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the Town of Hillsborough hereby approves and authorizes the City Manager to execute a two-year agreement with Freyer & Laureta, Inc. for as-needed general engineering services in the total annual not-to-exceed amount of $90,000 for a maximum two year agreement total $180,000.

Mayor of the Town of Hillsborough

Attest: City Clerk
This resolution was adopted by the City Council of the Town of Hillsborough at its regular meeting held on the 14th of August 2023, by the following vote of the members thereof:

AYES: Councilmembers
NOES: Councilmembers
ABSENT: Councilmembers
-95-
2 ABSTAIN: Councilmembers
-96-

TOWN OF HILLSBOROUGH
San Mateo County
1600 Floribunda Avenue
Hillsborough, CA 94010
12 CONSENT CALENDAR

CITY COUNCIL MEETING
AUGUST 14, 2023

AGENDA STAFF REPORT
ITEM SUBJECT: RESOLUTION APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO

EXECUTE A TWO-YEAR AGREEMENT WITH NINYO & MOORE GEOTECHNICAL AND

ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES CONSULTANTS FOR AS-NEEDED GEOTECHNICAL

ENGINEERING AND MATERIAL TESTING SERVICES IN AN ANNUAL NOT-TO-EXCEED AMOUNT OF $90,000 PURSUANT TO CEQA GUIDELINE 15378
SUMMARY: Currently, the Town contracts with nine different firms to provide as-needed engineering and consulting services in a variety of disciplines to support the Town’s Capital Improvement Program. These current three-year agreements will expire on August 31, 2023.

In May 2023, the Town issued a Request for Proposal to engage qualified firms interested in providing as-needed engineering and consulting services to the Town in a variety of disciplines.

The disciplines include municipal engineering and project management, general engineering, geotechnical engineering, construction management and inspection, environmental, surveying, and materials testing services. After a detailed review of the proposal, staff invited Ninyo & Moore Geotechnical and Environmental Sciences Consultants (“Ninyo & Moore”) for an interview based on criteria identified in the RFP, proposal detail and quality, and their demonstrated ability to provide the requested services to other comparable municipalities. A four-person evaluation committee determined that Ninyo & Moore is qualified to provide geotechnical engineering and material testing services based on their past project experience, technical methodology and approach, and client-oriented approach.

Under this proposed agreement, Ninyo & Moore will provide as-needed Capital Improvement Program (CIP) surveying services on a project-by-project basis. Staff evaluated the actual need for these services in the previous three years, and the anticipated needs of the future CIP budget to determine the contract amount. The services provided under the agreement will be limited to an annual not-to-exceed amount of $90,000.

FISCAL IMPACT: The as-needed geotechnical engineering and material testing services support the combined Capital Improvement Program, which has a soft cost budget of $3,589,380 in Fiscal Year 2023-24 and $2,654,600 in Fiscal Year 2024-25.

Page 2 ends

15378(b)(5) as ongoing administrative or organizational activities that will not result in direct or indirect physical changes in the environment.

ATTACHMENTS: Resolution
PREPARED BY: Paul Willis, Director of Public Works
RECOMMENDATION: Adopt the resolution approving and authorizing the City Manager to execute a two-year agreement with Ninyo & Moore Geotechnical and Environmental Sciences Consultants for as-needed geotechnical engineering and material testing services in an annual not-to-exceed amount of $90,000.
-98-
RESOLUTION NO. 23-

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF HILLSBOROUGH APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE A TWOYEAR AGREEMENT WITH NINYO & MOORE GEOTECHNICAL AND

ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES CONSULTANTS FOR AS-NEEDED GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING AND MATERIAL TESTING SERVICES IN AN ANNUAL NOT-TOEXCEED AMOUNT OF $90,000 PURSUANT TO CEQA GUIDELINE 15378 WHEREAS, the Town of Hillsborough (“Town”) desires to secure as-needed engineering and consulting services necessary for the Town’s engineering and public works functions; and
WHEREAS, a Request for Proposals was publicly advertised in May 2023 to engage qualified firms interested in providing as-needed engineering and consulting services to the Town; and
WHEREAS, staff conducted analyses of the proposals received and reviewed the qualifications of each firm; and
WHEREAS, Ninyo & Moore Geotechnical and Environmental Sciences Consultants was determined to be qualified to provide as-needed geotechnical engineering and material testing services on a project-by-project basis to the Town to support the Town’s Capital Improvement Program; and WHEREAS, the term of the proposed agreement is two years with the ability to extend the agreement for one additional year upon written mutual consent.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the Town of Hillsborough hereby approves and authorizes the City Manager to execute a two-year agreement with Ninyo & Moore Geotechnical and Environmental Sciences Consultants for as-needed geotechnical engineering and material testing services in the total annual not-to-exceed amount of $90,000 for a maximum two year agreement total of $180,000.

AYES: Councilmembers
NOES: Councilmembers
-99-
2 ABSENT: Councilmembers
ABSTAIN: Councilmembers
-100-

TOWN OF HILLSBOROUGH
San Mateo County
1600 Floribunda Avenue
Hillsborough, CA 94010
13 CONSENT CALENDAR

CITY COUNCIL MEETING
AUGUST 14, 2023

AGENDA STAFF REPORT
ITEM SUBJECT: RESOLUTION APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE A TWO-YEAR AGREEMENT WITH WRA, INC. FOR AS-NEEDED ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES IN AN ANNUAL NOT-TO-EXCEED AMOUNT OF $50,000 PURSUANT TO CEQA GUIDELINE 15378
SUMMARY: Currently, the Town contracts with nine different firms to provide as-needed engineering and consulting services in a variety of disciplines to support the Town’s Capital Improvement Program. These current three-year agreements will expire on August 31, 2023.

In May 2023, the Town issued a Request for Proposal to engage qualified firms interested in providing as-needed engineering and consulting services to the Town in a variety of disciplines.

The disciplines include municipal engineering and project management, general engineering, geotechnical engineering, construction management and inspection, environmental, surveying, and materials testing services. After a detailed review of the proposal, staff invited WRA, Inc. (“WRA”) for an interview based on criteria identified in the RFP, proposal detail and quality, and their demonstrated ability to provide the requested services to other comparable municipalities. A four-person evaluation committee determined that WRA is qualified to provide environmental services based on their past project experience, technical methodology and approach, and clientoriented approach.

Under this proposed agreement, WRA will provide as-needed Capital Improvement Program (CIP) environmental services on a project-by-project basis. Staff evaluated the actual need for these services in the previous three years, and the anticipated needs of the future CIP budget to determine the contract amount. The services provided under the agreement will be limited to an annual not-to-exceed amount of $50,000.

FISCAL IMPACT: The as-needed environmental services support the combined Capital Improvement Program, which has a soft cost budget of $3,589,380 in Fiscal Year 2023-24 and $2,654,600 in Fiscal Year 2024-25.

ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES: The proposed action is exempt from environmental review pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines sections 15378(b)(2) and 15378(b)(5) as ongoing administrative or organizational activities that will not result in direct or indirect physical changes in the environment.
-101-
Agenda Staff Report - Hillsborough City Council
August 14, 2023

Page 2 ends

ATTACHMENTS: Resolution
PREPARED BY: Paul Willis, Director of Public Works
RECOMMENDATION: Adopt the resolution approving and authorizing the City Manager to execute a two-year agreement with WRA, Inc. for as-needed environmental services in an annual not-to-exceed amount of $50,000.
-102-
RESOLUTION NO. 23-

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF HILLSBOROUGH APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE A TWOYEAR AGREEMENT WITH WRA, INC. FOR AS-NEEDED ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES IN AN ANNUAL NOT-TO-EXCEED AMOUNT OF $50,000 PURSUANT TO CEQA GUIDELINE 15378
WHEREAS, the Town of Hillsborough (“Town”) desires to secure as-needed engineering and consulting services necessary for the Town’s engineering and public works functions; and
WHEREAS, a Request for Proposals was publicly advertised in May 2023 to engage qualified firms interested in providing as-needed engineering and consulting services to the Town; and
WHEREAS, staff conducted analyses of the proposals received and reviewed the qualifications of each firm; and
WHEREAS, WRA, Inc. was determined to be qualified to provide as-needed environmental services on a project-by-project basis to the Town to support the Town’s Capital Improvement Program; and
WHEREAS, the term of the proposed agreement is two years with the ability to extend the agreement for one additional year upon written mutual consent.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the Town of Hillsborough hereby approves and authorizes the City Manager to execute a two-year agreement with WRA, Inc. for as-needed environmental services in the total annual notto-exceed amount of $50,000 for a maximum two year agreement total of $100,000.

Mayor of the Town of Hillsborough

Attest: City Clerk
This resolution was adopted by the City Council of the Town of Hillsborough at its regular meeting held on the 14th of August 2023, by the following vote of the members thereof:

AYES: Councilmembers
NOES: Councilmembers
ABSENT: Councilmembers
-103-
2 ABSTAIN: Councilmembers
-104-

TOWN OF HILLSBOROUGH
San Mateo County
1600 Floribunda Avenue
Hillsborough, CA 94010
14 CONSENT CALENDAR

CITY COUNCIL MEETING
AUGUST 14, 2023

AGENDA STAFF REPORT
ITEM SUBJECT: RESOLUTION APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE A TWO-YEAR AGREEMENT WITH CONSOLIDATED CM, INC. FOR AS-NEEDED

PROJECT MANAGEMENT AND INSPECTION SERVICES IN AN ANNUAL NOT-TO-EXCEED AMOUNT OF $50,000 PURSUANT TO CEQA GUIDELINE 15378
SUMMARY: Currently, the Town contracts with nine different firms to provide as-needed engineering and consulting services in a variety of disciplines to support the Town’s Capital Improvement Program. These current three-year agreements will expire on August 31, 2023.

In May 2023, the Town issued a Request for Proposal to engage qualified firms interested in providing as-needed engineering and consulting services to the Town in a variety of disciplines.

The disciplines include municipal engineering and project management, general engineering, geotechnical engineering, construction management and inspection, environmental, surveying, and materials testing services. After a detailed review of the proposal, staff invited Consolidated CM, Inc. (“CCM”) for an interview based on criteria identified in the RFP, proposal detail and quality, and their demonstrated ability to provide the requested services to other comparable municipalities. A four-person evaluation committee determined that CCM is qualified to provide project management and inspection services based on their past project experience, technical methodology and approach, and client-oriented approach.

Under this proposed agreement, CCM will provide as-needed Capital Improvement Program (CIP) project management and inspection services on a project-by-project basis. Staff evaluated the actual need for these services in the previous three years, and the anticipated needs of the future CIP budget to determine the contract amount. The services provided under the agreement will be limited to an annual not-to-exceed amount of $50,000.

FISCAL IMPACT: The as-needed project management and inspection services support the combined Capital Improvement Program, which has a soft cost budget of $3,589,380 in Fiscal Year 2023-24 and $2,654,600 in Fiscal Year 2024-25.

ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES: The proposed action is exempt from environmental review pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines sections 15378(b)(2) and 15378(b)(5) as ongoing administrative or organizational activities that will not result in direct or indirect physical changes in the environment.
-105-
Agenda Staff Report - Hillsborough City Council
August 14, 2023

Page 2 ends

ATTACHMENTS: Resolution
PREPARED BY: Paul Willis, Director of Public Works
RECOMMENDATION: Adopt the resolution approving and authorizing the City Manager to execute the two-year agreement with Consolidated CM, Inc. for as-needed project management and inspection services in an annual not-to-exceed amount of $50,000. -106-
RESOLUTION NO. 23-

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF HILLSBOROUGH APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE A TWOYEAR AGREEMENT WITH CONSOLIDATED CM, INC. FOR AS-NEEDED PROJECT

MANAGEMENT AND INSPECTION SERVICES IN AN ANNUAL NOT-TO-EXCEED AMOUNT OF $50,000 PURSUANT TO CEQA GUIDELINE 15378
WHEREAS, t the Town of Hillsborough (“Town”) desires to secure as-needed engineering and consulting services necessary for the Town’s engineering and public works functions; and
WHEREAS, a Request for Proposals was publicly advertised in May 2023 to engage qualified firms interested in providing as-needed engineering and consulting services to the Town; and
WHEREAS, staff conducted analyses of the proposals received and reviewed the qualifications of each firm; and
WHEREAS, Consolidated CM, Inc. was determined to be qualified to provide asneeded project management and inspection services on a project-byproject basis to the Town to support the Town’s Capital Improvement Program; and
WHEREAS, the term of the proposed agreement is two years with the ability to extend the agreement for one additional year upon written mutual consent.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the Town of Hillsborough hereby authorizes the City Manager to execute a two-year agreement with Consolidated CM, Inc. for as-needed project management and inspection services in the total annual not-to-exceed amount of $50,000 for a maximum two year agreement total of $100,000.

Mayor of the Town of Hillsborough

Attest: City Clerk
This resolution was adopted by the City Council of the Town of Hillsborough at its regular meeting held on the 14th of August 2023, by the following vote of the members thereof:

AYES: Councilmembers
NOES: Councilmembers
-107-
2 ABSENT: Councilmembers
ABSTAIN: Councilmembers
-108-

TOWN OF HILLSBOROUGH
San Mateo County
1600 Floribunda Avenue
Hillsborough, CA 94010
15 CONSENT CALENDAR

CITY COUNCIL MEETING
AUGUST 14, 2023

AGENDA STAFF REPORT
ITEM SUBJECT: RESOLUTION APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE A TWO-YEAR AGREEMENT WITH R.E.Y. ENGINEERS, INC. FOR AS-NEEDED SURVEYING SERVICES IN AN ANNUAL NOT-TO-EXCEED AMOUNT OF $15,000 PURSUANT TO CEQA GUIDELINE 15378
SUMMARY: Currently, the Town contracts with nine different firms to provide as-needed engineering and consulting services in a variety of disciplines to support the Town’s Capital Improvement Program. These current three-year agreements will expire on August 31, 2023.

In May 2023, the Town issued a Request for Proposal to engage qualified firms interested in providing as-needed engineering and consulting services to the Town in a variety of disciplines.

Engineers, Inc. (“REY”) for an interview based on criteria identified in the RFP, proposal detail and quality, and their demonstrated ability to provide the requested services to other comparable municipalities. A four-person evaluation committee determined that REY is qualified to provide surveying services based on their past project experience, technical methodology and approach, and client-oriented approach.

Under this proposed agreement, REY will provide as-needed Capital Improvement Program (CIP) surveying services on a project-by-project basis. Staff evaluated the actual need for these services in the previous three years, and the anticipated needs of the future CIP budget to determine the contract amount. The services provided under the agreement will be limited to an annual not-toexceed amount of $15,000.

FISCAL IMPACT: The as-needed surveying services support the combined Capital Improvement Program, which has a soft cost budget of $3,589,380 in Fiscal Year 2023-24 and $2,654,600 in Fiscal Year 2024-25.

ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES: The proposed action is exempt from environmental review pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines sections 15378(b)(2) and 15378(b)(5) as ongoing administrative or organizational activities that will not result in direct or indirect physical changes in the environment.
-109-
Agenda Staff Report - Hillsborough City Council
August 14, 2023

Page 2 ends

ATTACHMENTS: Resolution
PREPARED BY: Paul Willis, Director of Public Works
RECOMMENDATION: Adopt the resolution approving and authorizing the City Manager to execute the two-year agreement with R.E.Y. Engineers, Inc. for as-needed surveying services in an annual not-to-exceed amount of $15,000.
-110-
RESOLUTION NO. 23-

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF HILLSBOROUGH APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE A TWOYEAR AGREEMENT WITH R.E.Y. ENGINEERS, INC. FOR AS-NEEDED SURVEYING SERVICES IN AN ANNUAL NOT-TO-EXCEED AMOUNT OF $15,000 PURSUANT TO CEQA GUIDELINE 15378
WHEREAS, the Town of Hillsborough (“Town”) desires to secure as-needed engineering and consulting services necessary for the Town’s engineering and public works functions; and
WHEREAS, a Request for Proposals was publicly advertised in May 2023 to engage qualified firms interested in providing as-needed engineering and consulting services to the Town; and
WHEREAS, staff conducted analyses of the proposals received and reviewed the qualifications of each firm; and
WHEREAS, R.E.Y. Engineers, Inc. was determined to be qualified to provide asneeded surveying services on a project-by-project basis to the Town to support the Town’s Capital Improvement Program; and
WHEREAS, the term of the proposed agreement is two years with the ability to extend the agreement for one additional year upon written mutual consent.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the Town of Hillsborough hereby approves and authorizes the City Manager to execute a two-year agreement with R.E.Y. Engineers, Inc. for as-needed surveying services in the total annual not-to-exceed amount of $50,000 for a maximum two year agreement total of $100,000.

Mayor of the Town of Hillsborough

Attest: City Clerk
This resolution was adopted by the City Council of the Town of Hillsborough at its regular meeting held on the 14th of August 2023, by the following vote of the members thereof:

AYES: Councilmembers
NOES: Councilmembers
ABSENT: Councilmembers
-111-
2 ABSTAIN: Councilmembers
-112-

TOWN OF HILLSBOROUGH
San Mateo County
1600 Floribunda Avenue
Hillsborough, CA 94010
16 CONSENT CALENDAR

CITY COUNCIL MEETING
AUGUST 14, 2023

AGENDA STAFF REPORT
ITEM SUBJECT: REVIEW AND APPROVE THE TOWN’S RESPONSE TO THE SAN MATEO COUNTY GRAND JURY REPORT, “ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS: AFFORDABLE HOUSING’S PANACEA OR PREVARICATION?” PURSUANT TO CEQA GUIDELINE 15378 SUMMARY: The Town has been working for more than one and a half years to update to its Housing Element in response to the Town’s assigned RHNA Cycle 6 allocation, which spans 2023 to 2031. The Town has made two formal submissions to the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) and is currently working with HCD representatives to finalize a draft Housing Element and RHNA plan and achieve certification.

On June 12, 2023, the San Mateo County Grand Jury released a report titled “Accessory Dwelling Units: Affordable Housing’s Panacea or Prevarication?” The report generally expresses concern about the inclusion of Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) in each jurisdiction’s RHNA plan without mechanisms to monitor and verify that each ADU projected to be an affordable housing unit is ultimately created and rented at rate consistent with its projected affordability.

The Grand Jury’s report includes seven findings (Findings F1 through F7) and six recommendations (Recommendations R1 through R6). All jurisdictions within San Mateo County are required under the Penal Code to formally respond to each and every Finding and Recommendation.

The report requires that the Town’s response to each finding express either its agreement or disagreement (wholly or partially) with the finding and to provide an explanation in instances where the Town indicates that it does not agree.

The Town’s response to each of the recommendations must indicate whether the recommended action has been implemented, is planned for implementation, requires further analysis, or will not be implemented. If not implemented, the Town is required to provide an explanation for its response.

Staff prepared proposed responses which were reviewed by the City Council Housing Element subcommittee. Based on feedback from the subcommittee, staff prepared a draft response letter (Attachment 1) for the Council’s review and approval. The response is due no later than September 11, 2023.

FISCAL IMPACT: There is no fiscal impact associated with this agenda item.

Page 2 ends

15378(b)(5) as ongoing administrative or organizational activities that will not result in direct or indirect physical changes in the environment.

ATTACHMENTS:

1. Draft response to Grand Jury Report

2. Grand Jury Report titled “Accessory Dwelling Units: Affordable Housing’s Panacea or Prevarication?”
PREPARED BY: Liz Ruess, Planning Manager
RECOMMENDATION: Approve the response to the San Mateo County Grand Jury Report, “Accessory Dwelling Units: Affordable Housing’s Panacea or Prevarication?”. -114-

TOWN OF HILLSBOROUGH
California
Town Hall
Phone: 650-375-7400 | Fax: 650-375-7475 | 1600 Floribunda Avenue, Hillsborough, CA 94010 | www.hillsborough.net August 14, 2023
Hon. Nancy L. Fineman
Judge of the Superior Court
c/o Bianca Fasuescu
Hall of Justice
400 County Center; 2nd Floor
Redwood City, CA 94063-1655
Re: Grand Jury Report: “Accessory Dwelling Units: Affordable Housing’s Panacea or Prevarication?” Honorable Judge Fineman:

Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the report titled, “Accessory Dwelling Units: Affordable Housing’s Panacea or Prevarication?”
First, we want to note that the report failed to consider the most current information available. The report highlighted comments from the Town’s first HCD (State of California Housing and Community Development Department) review letter issued on January 10, 2023, however, this HCD letter was superseded by a second review letter from HCD issued on May 8, 2023, following submittal of a meaningfully revised Draft Housing Element to the State on March 9, 2023.

Please find our response to the findings and recommendations of the report below.

I. Response to Findings
F1. Due to recent changes in California ADU-related laws, local governments cannot condition ADU permits in San Mateo County on complying with affordability monitoring and verification.

The Town of Hillsborough agrees with this finding.

F2. San Mateo County and most of its municipalities rely on ADUs to meet their affordable housing commitments in their RHNA-6 plans.

The Town of Hillsborough partially disagrees with this finding. While 81.9% of the Town's very low and low income RHNA allocations are proposed to be addressed through ADUs (Accessory Dwelling Units), there are other strategies included to meet the requirements including specific multi-family residential opportunity sites distributed throughout Town. Additionally, the Housing Element includes an additional 16 very low-income units beyond what was required as part of RHNA 6.

F3. Atherton, Hillsborough, Portola Valley, and Woodside rely on ADUs to meet as much as 80 percent of their affordable housing commitments in their RHNA-6 plans.

ATTACHMENT 1
-115-
August 14, 2023
Page | 2
The Town of Hillsborough partially disagrees with this finding. The word choice of this finding implies that Hillsborough uses ADUs for 80% of the affordable housing commitments. In reality, it is 76.9% of the affordable housing commitments, which is appropriate based on the residential characteristics of the community.

ADUs are a reliable source of housing to meet the Town’s RHNA requirement for very low income, low income, and moderate-income units based on historic trends, positive responses to the 2022 ADU Survey, proposed modifications to ADU standards, and in the availability of land within the Town.

The Town has a strong track record of supporting and facilitating ADU development and this was a strategy enthusiastically supported by the community through public outreach, as part of the development of the housing element. Due to the high cost of land and construction, along with other factors that lead to the high cost of housing in Hillsborough, the construction of ADUs a lower-cost and sustainable way to encourage housing production in a way that is distributed throughout the community, since these are being built on land that is already paid for.

The practicality of ADUs as a solution to creating affordable housing in high-cost areas is one reason why the California state legislature has passed so much legislation encouraging their development.

F4. HCD has instructed San Mateo County jurisdictions to monitor and verify future ADU production and affordability every two years but has yet to specify how to verify whether very low-, low- or moderate-income households are occupying the ADUs as planned.

The Town of Hillsborough partially disagrees with this finding. We do not expect HCD to specify how to verify the income levels of ADU occupants. Additionally, HCD is only asking for verification at the initial time of occupancy. Hillsborough is planning on supporting a regional ADU monitoring effort through 21 Elements, a long-standing collaboration among the 21 jurisdictions of San Mateo County.

The Town's Draft Housing Element includes language committing the Town to "monitor ADU production and utilization and trigger mid-cycle adjustments as needed" (Goal 2.9), including an Action 2.9(a) to "establish an ADU monitoring program that tracks the number of ADUs permitted, the number of ADUs rented/used for housing in the community, and the rental rate ADUs are offered for." The Town has provided detail related to what information will be captured as well as committed to annual monitoring through a progress report for HCD and the City Council (Action 2.9(b)).

F5. Other than Brisbane and Redwood City, San Mateo County and its jurisdictions have yet to articulate how they will monitor and verify ADU production or affordability.

The Town of Hillsborough agrees with this finding. San Mateo County jurisdictions met on June 20, 2023, to discuss potential strategies for monitoring ADU affordability levels. As noted above, Hillsborough has included language in its Draft Housing Element committing to establishing a monitoring program, with associated consequences if the benchmarks are not met. We expect this monitoring effort to begin no later than two years after the Housing Element was due (early 2025).

Additionally, the Town of Hillsborough is planning to support a regional ADU monitoring effort through 21 Elements and the Shared Housing Team program. This program will provide coordinated knowledge-sharing and will also help to provide consistency across jurisdictions and the adoption of best practices countywide.

F6. Without effective ADU monitoring and verification, it will be impossible to evaluate whether the jurisdictions are meeting their RHNA-6 obligations for low-, very-low, and moderate-income housing units.

The Town of Hillsborough agrees with this finding. As stated above, Hillsborough is planning to support a regional approach to monitoring ADU affordability.
-116-
August 14, 2023
Page | 3
F7. ADU affordability and occupancy could be monitored by agencies such as HIP Housing which has proven systems and processes to verify occupancy of deed-restricted rental properties in San Mateo County.

The Town of Hillsborough agrees with this finding. HIP is one potential partner agency. The Town has an existing partnership with HIP Housing and successful participation in their Home Sharing program and other housing resources.

II. Response to Recommendations
R1. San Mateo County and each City should immediately stop using ADUs to meet their State-mandated very low-, low-, and moderate-income housing targets in their Housing Element submissions until they have also proposed an effective monitoring system that verifies how newly developed ADU’s will be used.

The recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted or is not reasonable. While Hillsborough shares the Civil Grand Jury’s goal to increase ADU affordability monitoring, it is not feasible to revise our Housing Element to eliminate the use of ADUs to meet affordable housing goals. The Housing Element was developed through a rigorous process of multiple years of public input and revisions. The Town of Hillsborough is close to a final submission to HCD; it simply is not feasible for us to make a major change to our housing policy this late in the process. However, Hillsborough is committed to following state housing law and to supporting the development of an effective regional ADU monitoring program which will be operated by 21 Elements or ABAG1.

The Town of Hillsborough is also supporting the development of a new ADU nonprofit that will have programs to incentivize the production of affordable ADUs in San Mateo County. The town will have this monitoring program in place for future Housing Element cycles. Any disincentive to ADUs would further aggravate and worsen the housing shortage.

R2. By February 1, 2024, San Mateo County and each City should develop, adopt, and implement a verification system capable of monitoring and verifying how newly developed ADU’s are being used.

Part of the recommendation has yet to be implemented but will be implemented in the future. However, part of the recommendation will not be implemented as it is not warranted. Hillsborough agrees that it is important to have high quality information about who is living in ADUs. The town will participate in the 21 Elements ADU monitoring system. The monitoring is projected to launch in January 2025 and will likely survey people about their plans for their ADU at the time permits are issued. Due to homeowner privacy concerns and the cost of engaging with thousands of homeowners every year, it would not be practical to have an ongoing verification system that checks the income of every resident of every ADU in the county. The Town is willing to continue to consider feasible regional solutions to the issue of ongoing affordability surveys, in coordination with ABAG and other local jurisdictions.

R3. By February 1, 2024, San Mateo County and each City should develop and adopt incentives for ADU owners which could be offered in exchange for deed restrictions that would include requirements for ADU tenants to participate in independent monitoring.

This recommendation has yet to be implemented but will be implemented in the future.

Hillsborough agrees with the goal of adopting an affordable ADU program that would include incentives for 1 As just one example of how this may be implemented successfully, the Southern California Association of Governments (a regional analogue to ABAG) conducted a collective ADU affordability analysis on behalf of each member jurisdiction, providing an affordability breakdown by income level based on real-time surveys and using available information to estimate occupation numbers within the confines of state law. See: https://scag.ca.gov/sites/main/files/fileattachments/adu_affordability_analysis_120120v2.pdf?1606868527. -117- August 14, 2023
Page | 4
ADU owners, however, in direct conversations with HCD, staff was told that deed restrictions often act as a barrier to ADU development. Any disincentive to ADUs would further aggravate and worsen the housing shortage.

The Town is actively involved in the creation of an ADU nonprofit to serve San Mateo County jurisdictions.

The draft work plan for the nonprofit includes programs to incentivize the production of affordable ADUs and support for homeowners constructing ADUs in exchange for agreeing to rent at affordable levels. The nonprofit is projected to launch in July 2024 and will be financially supported by San Mateo County jurisdictions as well as private philanthropy if possible.

As part of its Housing Element, the Town of Hillsborough has proposed action steps to promote the construction and affordability of ADUs. These include the continuance of the Town's ADU Specialist position to facilitate the ADU development process, annual review of the ADU application and approval process, analysis of the budget impacts and cost-benefit assessment of reducing or waiving ADU development review fees as well as permit streamlining. One of the proposed actions is to analyze incentives for deed restricted ADUs to encourage rental to very-low-income households (Goal 2.2, Action 2.2(a)).

Additionally, in the event that the Town is under producing ADUs based on the results of the ADU monitoring program, a Tier I mid-cycle adjustment is to increase the amount of Housing Choice Fund dollars available to subsidize the construction of qualifying affordable housing.

R4. By February 1, 2024, San Mateo County and each City should track the intended use of ADUs – rented or non-rented – during the permitting process and offer incentives in exchange for deed restrictions that require ADUs to be used as rentals.

This recommendation has yet to be implemented but will be implemented in the future.

As part of the monitoring program referenced in response to R2, the Town of Hillsborough will track the intended use of ADUs. Hillsborough is committed to evaluating the feasibility of the creation of an incentive program that offers incentives in exchange for affordability requirements, such as deed restrictions. However, in conversations directly with HCD, it was indicated to Town staff that deed restrictions can often serve as a barrier to development, rather than serve as an incentive.

R5. By April 1, 2024, San Mateo County and each City should develop and adopt a new ADU affordability distribution formula specific to each jurisdiction to the extent they are used for meeting the very low-, low-and moderate-income housing requirements in their RHNA housing elements.

The recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted or is not reasonable. While we agree with the importance of an accurate distribution formula, given the relatively small size of Hillsborough, a more meaningful distribution formula can be attained by collecting data on ADUs constructed across all San Mateo County jurisdictions, not limited to a Hillsborough-specific formula. Hillsborough is supporting the creation of an ADU monitoring program through 21 Elements or ABAG which will collect data that can be used to revise the distribution formula based on actual observed income levels.

The UC Berkeley study surveyed thousands of homeowners statewide with repeat mailing, so the data was aggregated to reduce the margins of errors. The margin of error would be too large if we are only surveying a dozen or couple of dozen households. There is also no evidence in the data to suggest significant variation from city to city. The recommendations of 30/30/30/10 had a significant cushion built in to ensure cities did not accidentally under-produce the amount of housing needed. -118-
August 14, 2023
Page | 5
R6. San Mateo County and each City should consider working together to address Recommendations 2 and 3.

This recommendation has been implemented.

San Mateo County jurisdictions work collaboratively through 21 Elements to develop, adopt, and implement housing policies and programs in the county. San Mateo County jurisdictions are already working together to address recommendations 2 and 3.

In closing, we encourage you to consider the 2022-2023 Marin County Civil Grand Jury Report released on June 15, 2023 – “Build More ADUs - An Rx to Increase Marin’s Housing Supply.” This report outlines the many benefits of ADUs and notes that because building these units does not require purchasing additional land, can be added to existing structures, and can have fewer construction requirements than traditional single-family houses on a square foot basis, they may be built less expensively. California’s new law recognizes that ADUs can help fulfill the state’s housing mandate and can do so affordably and with a lesser impact on land use and the environment.

The advantages of ADUs are numerous. ADUs are a complementary form of housing that are compatible with the character of the Town and are supported by our community. They allow older residents to age in place; they create options for multi-generational living; and they can provide a source of income for retired homeowners who don’t want to move.2
The Town of Hillsborough continues to work collaboratively with HCD to achieve compliance.

The Town’s Cycle 6 Draft Housing Element is the result of extensive community engagement, numerous public meetings, and revisions to the approach of addressing affordable housing concerns. The Town believes that it has made a good faith effort to address the Regional Housing Needs Allocation with a comprehensive plan that addresses the critical need for housing, while maintaining the Town’s unique and beloved character.

The draft plan creates opportunities for a variety of housing types at a variety of income levels, while protecting the community by recognizing the constraints of access, fire danger, topography, and preserving the Town’s development pattern.

The Town of Hillsborough recognizes the dire need for affordable housing in our area and embraces its responsibility. ADUs are literally a "Yes In My Backyard," practical, common sense solution towards solving this critical problem.

This response to the Grand Jury was approved by the Town of Hillsborough City Council at a public meeting on August 14, 2023. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact City Manager, Doug Davis at (650) 375- 7553 [email protected] or Planning Manager, Liz Ruess [email protected].

Respectfully,
Christine Krolik
Mayor, Town of Hillsborough
2 Washington Post Article, see: https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/got-a-granny-build-her-a-house-in-yourbackyard/2023/02/01/5d7d3dde-a227-11ed-8b47-9863fda8e494_story.html -119-
ATTACHMENT 2
-120-
-121-
Accessory Dwelling Units:

Affordable Housing’s Panacea or Prevarication?
Release Date: June 12, 2023
2022-2023 San Mateo County Grand Jury
-122-
2022-2023 San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury 1
“You can always count on Americans to do the right thing – after they’ve tried everything else.” Winston Churchill
“Every man must decide whether he will walk in the light of creative altruism or in the darkness of destructive selfishness.” Martin Luther King, Jr. -123-
2022-2023 San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury 2
ISSUE
Are some San Mateo County communities misusing Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) to avoid the construction of multifamily low-income housing over the next eight years?

SUMMARY
Anointed the “epicenter of America’s housing dysfunction” by Harvard Business Review this year, the San Francisco Bay Area has faced an acute housing shortage at all levels for decades, especially for those who have the least.

And it is no longer news that many of the workers that San Mateo County communities depend upon daily – first responders, teachers, nurses, city employees, gardeners, and housekeepers, to name just a few – cannot afford a decent place to live and raise their families close to their jobs.

To address the issue, the State Legislature in 1969 passed the Housing Element Law, which says all California cities, towns, and counties, every eight years, must plan for the housing needs of all their residents regardless of income, which effectively requires development of affordable housing. Many changes and additions have been made to the law over the years, most recently eliminating zoning restrictions governing ADUs – small homes or apartments that share a single-family lot of a larger primary residence – and allowing communities to count them as affordable housing in their Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) plans.

At issue:
● Although their intentions have been good, the State has neglected to include any form of regulation to ensure low-income tenants ultimately use these ADUs as planned. ● Because owners often rent their ADUs to family and friends, they can exacerbate patterns of segregation and exclusion.1
● And perhaps most importantly – counting ADUs as affordable housing will likely result in cities issuing permits for fewer deed-restricted low-, very low-, and moderate-income apartments and homes.

Without accountability through oversight and regulations, low-, very low-, and moderate-income housing now planned in some San Mateo County jurisdictions may end up existing solely on paper and never in operation.

This problem is most acute in Atherton, Hillsborough, Portola Valley, and Woodside, where some residents are up in arms over the State-mandated housing requirements, and the city governments, trying to appease them, are proposing counting on ADUs to meet as much as 80 percent of their affordable housing targets.

1 Association of Bay Area Governments, “Final Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) Plan, San Francisco Bay Area, 2023-2031”, accessed May 27, 2023, https://abag.ca.gov/sites/default/files/documents/2021- 12/Final_RHNA_Allocation_Report_2023-2031-approved_0.pdf -124-
2022-2023 San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury 3
Assembly Bill 72 (2017) gives the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) enforcement capability on local government’s land use, planning, and zoning requirements. In the current RHNA-6 (2023-2031) planning cycle, HCD demands that San Mateo County jurisdictions monitor and verify ADU affordability every two years. However, HCD has not specified how to prove the ADUs are rented to very low-, low- or moderate-income households, leaving it to the communities to find a solution.

So far, jurisdictions have yet to do so, even though local independent agencies such as HIP Housing have systems and services in place, which they use to verify affordability of deed-restricted affordable housing, and that could be adapted Countywide to monitor and verify ADUs’ affordability and occupancy in a manner that adheres to fair housing guidelines.

California needs to build 2.5 million homes by 2030 to meet current housing demands, according to the HCD. But the State averages only about 125,000 new homes annually – a shortfall by nearly two-thirds.

ADUs can, indeed, provide affordable housing. And to many citizens of affluent communities, they are an appealing alternative to multi-family, deed-restricted affordable housing projects. However, just because the law makes it possible to count ADUs as affordable housing, it does not exempt cities and towns from credibly planning for badly needed affordable housing.

BACKGROUND
One of the State’s long-standing priorities has been to increase the availability of affordable housing for all economic segments.

HCD – the California Department of Housing and Community Development – focuses on making this happen by working with local jurisdictions to create rental and homeownership opportunities for all Californians, including individuals and families who are experiencing homelessness.

Beginning in 1969, the State mandated that all California cities, towns, and counties must plan for the housing needs of all Californians, regardless of income. They meet this mandate by developing and updating a Housing Element, part of a local jurisdiction’s General Plan, which shows where they will allow new housing and describes the policies and strategies necessary to support building new housing.

The process of updating the Housing Element involves HCD working with various Councils of Governments (COG) to develop a RHNA plan that includes the Regional Housing Needs Determination (RHND), which assigns the number of housing units that each county and city are expected to facilitate being built in the subsequent eight years to accommodate projected growth.

In the case of the Bay Area, this Council of Governments is the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG), which represents all nine Bay Area counties, including San Mateo County and its 20 cities and towns. Components that ABAG considers in determining each Bay Area county’s and city’s allocation of housing units include population, employment potential, proximity to transportation centers, open space, inclusivity, and diversification, all of which are becoming increasingly important to the State, according to ABAG reports.
-125-
2022-2023 San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury 4
Multiple bills in both houses of the State Legislature have been proposed over the years to change the process and increase the amount of State control over housing development. Particularly significant changes occurred during the 2017 legislative session when senators and assembly members proposed approximately 150 housing bills. That year the Governor ultimately signed a package of 15 bills related to funding for housing, streamlining development approvals, and increasing accountability for meeting the requirements of the Housing Element Law. These included bills that significantly changed the RHNA process, requiring additional outreach and reporting, modifying how to calculate the RHND to reflect unmet housing needs better, increasing the number of topics to be considered in the allocation methodology, and giving HCD, on behalf of the State, the ability to sue individual counties or cities for not meeting requirements.

Updating the Housing Element every eight years is an iterative process involving HCD, the regional COGs, the State Department of Finance (DOF), and local jurisdictions. (See Appendix D.) But the ultimate authority for approval of the RHNA, the RHND, and the associated Housing Elements resides with HCD.

The current approved RHNA plan developed by ABAG is known as RHNA-6, which spans 2023 to 2031.

HCD requires each jurisdiction to submit its completed Housing Element for review and approval by a specific date. For RHNA-6, the due date for San Mateo County and its cities was January 31, 2023.

Before the due date, the jurisdictions were able to send their draft Housing Elements to HCD for preliminary review and comments and make necessary modifications that HCD highlights. Any jurisdiction which fails to meet the deadline for submission of their completed Housing Element is subject to a potential “builders remedy” action that forces a city to allow building projects regardless of whether they meet most of the local zoning restrictions.

Once Housing Elements are approved, HCD monitors the progress of approved RHNA plans by requiring each jurisdiction to report its building permit activities annually. If progress is below expectations, the jurisdiction must develop alternative strategies for review and approval by HCD.

During the RHNA-5 (2015-2023) progress reviews submissions, cities began including ADUs as part of the overall housing inventory in their annual reports because State legislation (Government Code section 65852.150) that became effective in January 2017 stated that ADUs are a valuable form of housing in California, which also "provide housing for family members, students, the elderly, in-home health care providers, the disabled, and others, at below market prices within existing neighborhoods." Numerous Senate and Assembly bills were enacted in 2018 and 2020, requiring local jurisdictions to streamline and allow for ease of ADU production to increase housing for all income categories. With these encouragements, ADUs being deemed a viable housing option, and facing stringent RHNA-6 requirements of approximately three times more housing units than in the RHNA-5 cycle, a few affluent San Mateo cities have proposed using ADUs to satisfy most of their plans to meet the required number of housing units in the various income categories.
“ADUs are not a panacea, but they’re a good tool in the toolbox,” said a planning consultant working for a San Mateo County city. “Most land on The Peninsula is single-family homes. ADUs are opening land that was not open before. But higher density housing near transit is better.” -126-
2022-2023 San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury 5
Added a city manager: “I think they (ADUs) are a piece of the solution, but not all of it. I think ADUs are an important way to provide opportunities for other things – where people want multigenerational living onsite, for caretakers, or other folks – they can reside in an ADU even if they’re not paying rent.”

DISCUSSION
While HCD-approved RHNA Housing Elements do not require the cities and counties to build affordable housing, the jurisdictions must adjust zoning ordinances, issue permits to allow construction of affordable housing, and initiate programs that incentivize such construction.

However, as shown in Chart 1 below, significant portions of San Mateo County's affordable housing in RHNA-5 (2015-2023) plans did not materialize – most likely due to a lack of permit applications.

With RHNA-5’s significantly lower targets, the less-than-expected performance during the RHNA-5 cycle foreshadows the enormous challenge the County’s cities and towns now face in meeting the RHNA-6 goals for the next eight years, which are approximately three times larger, as shown in Chart 2 below.

Chart 1: RHNA-5 Affordable Housing Required vs. Permitted -127-
2022-2023 San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury 6
Chart 2: RHNA-5 Affordable Housing Allocations vs RHNA-6 Besides increasing affordable housing targets by nearly 300 percent, the State has made other significant changes in the ADU laws to address the current housing crunch.

Law Year Impact
AB671 2019 Through Housing Elements, HCD to promote ADUs for affordable rent AB670 2019 Any local covenants and restrictions on new housing are void AB587 2019 Deed-restricted sale of ADU is allowed separately from the main house AB 68 2019 Removes local restrictions on minimum size, requirement of owner occupancy, parking requirements for garage conversion, and any impact fee.

AB 3182 2020 Permitting process within 60 days
SB9 2021 Facilitates lot split and allows more than1 ADU per property AB 345 2021 Allows owners to sell ADUs separately
AB 2221 2023 Pre-specific time permit frame for approval of ADU applications SB 897 2023 Increases the ADU height limit to 18’ and allows retro permitting of previous unauthorized ADUs.

The net effect of these changes was to minimize municipal-level regulations on ADUs – such as parking requirements, property line setbacks, height limits, or the number of ADUs on one property – and make -128-
2022-2023 San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury 7
ADUs an acceptable means to meet affordable housing obligations. Given these changes, namely high mandatory targets for affordable housing, enthusiastic support by the State of ADUs as affordable housing, and requiring zero land use rezoning for ADUs, nearly all San Mateo County cities and towns include ADUs in their RHNA-6 Housing Elements.

The issue, however, is that for every ADU included in a Housing Element – regardless of whether the ADU is built and rented to very low-, low-, or moderate-income tenants – one verifiable, deed-restricted affordable housing unit will not be built in that jurisdiction by a developer.

So, How Did We Get Here?
California cities and counties can now use ADUs to help satisfy their RHNA requirements. But calculating how many ADUs to put into a Housing Element and how to distribute them into each income category, differ from other housing options.

ABAG instructs San Mateo County jurisdictions that the standard method is first to estimate the number of ADUs that homeowners will build in a planning period, which is 2023 through 2031 for RHNA-6.

In its technical memo “Using ADUs to Satisfy RHNA,” ABAG advises members that the estimate should be based on the average number of ADU building permits issued each year, multiplied by eight, because there are eight years in a housing element cycle.
“Most cities base their determination of annual ADU permits by averaging the building permits approved each year since 2019 when State law made it easier to construct the units,” the technical memo explains:
“There is a small amount of flexibility in the calculations,” the memo continues. “If numbers were low in 2019 but were high in 2020, 2021, and 2022, a jurisdiction could potentially use 2020-2022 as the baseline. This rationale would be bolstered if there was a logical explanation for the change, e.g., the jurisdiction further loosened regulations in 2020. Projecting a higher number of ADUs than what has been demonstrated through permit approvals in recent years may be possible, but more challenging. A slightly larger number may be warranted if a robust, funded, and clear plan to increase production has been put in place. However, you are strongly encouraged to coordinate with HCD before deviating from the standard methodology.”
Once cities complete their estimate, they must distribute those units into each income category.

To help its members, ABAG analyzed ADU affordability. Using data from a 2020 statewide survey of homeowners who had constructed ADUs in 2018 or 2019, ABAG concluded that the assumptions in the chart below are generally applicable in most jurisdictions. Many Bay Area jurisdictions chose to use these numbers instead of conducting their own affordability analysis.

Percent Income Category
30% Very Low Income
30% Low Income
30% Moderate Income
10% Above Moderate
-129-
2022-2023 San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury 8
“UC Berkeley Terner Center did a statewide survey of ADU affordability, and they worked with ABAG to adjust it for the Bay Area specifically,” said a San Mateo County planner. “So those (numbers) are based on surveys and data analysis of actual ADUs that have been produced, and the rents that are being offered to tenants. We are just accepting their analysis as is.” San Mateo County jurisdictions have almost unanimously adopted ABAG’s 30-30-30-10 formula.

However, a 2021 report and recommendations for RHNA-6 prepared by ABAG’s Housing Technical Assistance Team, titled “DRAFT Affordability of Accessory Dwelling Units,” says that although ADUs are often affordable, jurisdictions should be cautious about relying on them too heavily because of fair housing concerns:
“Many ADUs are affordable to lower and moderate-income households because they are rented to family and friends of the homeowners,” the report states. “If minorities are underrepresented among homeowners, the families and potentially friends of the homeowners will be primarily white. Therefore, relying too heavily on ADUs could inadvertently exacerbate patterns of segregation and exclusion.” The report also acknowledges that ADUs often do not serve large families, another critical fair housing concern.

And while ADUs accomplish an essential fair housing goal by adding new homes in parts of the municipality that are more likely to be areas of opportunity, the report recommends that jurisdictions with fair housing concerns "may want to use more conservative assumptions based on open market rentals, excluding units made available to family and friends," as summarized below:

Percent Income Category
5% Very Low Income
30% Low Income
50% Moderate Income
15% Above Moderate
So far, 16 San Mateo County cities have chosen the 30-30-30-10 formula, implying there are no fair housing concerns in their jurisdictions.

Only two cities – San Carlos and San Mateo – use ABAG’s more conservative formula of 5-30-50-15 in their plans. One city – Belmont – used its own judgment.2 And one – Colma – does not use ADUs in their plans at all to meet State requirements.

But in all cases, these statistical estimates may not reflect the actual usage of constructed ADUs.

Determining that would require actual verification by each local jurisdiction.

2 City of Belmont, “General Housing Element Draft 2023-2031”, p. 25, accessed May 27, 2023, https://www.belmont.gov/home/showpublisheddocument/21721/637968613354630000 -130-
2022-2023 San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury 9
ADUs planned in RHNA-6
(May 11, 2023)
City Very Low Low Moderate Above
Moderate
Total ADUs Total
RHNA-6
Requirement
Atherton 56 56 56 112 280 348
Belmont 0 0 80 0 80 1785
Brisbane 12 12 12 4 40 1588
Burlingame 50 50 50 17 167 3257
Colma - - - - 0 202
Daly City 151 151 151 50 503 4838
East Palo Alto 35 34 34 12 115 829
Foster City 7 7 7 3 24 1896
Hillsborough 84 84 84 28 280 554
Menlo Park 26 25 26 8 85 2946
Millbrae 34 34 33 11 112 2199
Pacifica 56 56 56 19 187 1892
Portola Valley 28 28 28 8 92 253
Redwood City 152 152 152 50 506 4588
San Bruno 72 72 72 24 240 3165
San Carlos 10 61 102 30 203 2735
San Mateo 22 132 220 66 440 7015
South San
Francisco
113 113 113 38 377 3956
Unincorporated
San Mateo
107 107 107 36 357 2833
Woodside 36 36 36 12 120 328
(This table includes all San Mateo County jurisdictions that have submitted Housing Element plans to HCD for review. As of June 1, 2023, Half Moon Bay and Daly City have not submitted RHNA-6 plans for HCD review.) Accordingly, if HCD approves cities and towns' current Housing Elements, San Mateo County may end up with many affordable housing units that exist only on paper because they are counted as affordable units by the State but never made available or occupied by people who need affordable housing:
“BMR (below market rate) unit displacement is a legitimate issue,” said a city planning consultant. “RHNA looks at (the number of) units, not the number of people being housed. For the State, they’re all counted the same – an ADU or three-bedroom apartment, five vs. one or two people. In the eyes of the State, they’re all the same.”
-131-
2022-2023 San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury 10
Finally, the cities and towns relying primarily on ADUs to meet their RHNA-6 housing targets do not meet the overall objectives required by HCD and RHNA of:
● Increasing the housing supply and mix of housing types, tenure, and affordability ● Promoting infill development and socioeconomic equity, protecting environmental and agricultural resources, and encouraging efficient development patterns ● Promoting an improved intraregional relationship between jobs and housing ● Balancing disproportionate household income distributions ● Affirmatively furthering fair housing
Housing and Community Development Pushes Back
Four San Mateo County municipalities – Atherton, Hillsborough, Portola Valley, and Woodside – rely heavily on ADUs to meet low-income housing requirements in their RHNA-6 Housing Elements.

May 17, 2023
While HCD does not single out those four cities for their heavy reliance on ADUs to meet their affordable housing needs, throughout the process of submission and review of draft RHNA-6 plans, HCD consistently instructed San Mateo County cities and towns that they must monitor and verify ADU production and affordability at least every two years but has not specified an acceptable process for verifying the affordability level of ADUs as planned.

Should San Mateo County and its cities seek outside help on this issue, there are a handful of independent non-profit agencies and for-profit real estate management companies operating today in the Bay Area that have established systems and processes for monitoring and verifying rented occupied housing for continued affordability and adherence to fair housing guidelines while maintaining tenant and owner privacy – which was an issue continually raised by City Managers and other officials during Grand Jury interviews.
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
ADUs as Percent of RHNA6 Affordable Housing
-132-
2022-2023 San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury 11
ADU Affordability Monitoring Emphasized in HCD Review Letters to Jurisdictions Atherton (4-4-23)
Program 3.812 (New Construction of Affordable Accessory Dwelling Units): While the element was revised to include timing of each action, it is unclear how affordability will be established. The program should be revised to clarify actions to establish and track affordability.

East Palo Alto (4-25-23)
Accessory Dwelling Units (ADU): As noted in the prior review, the element should include a program that commits to frequent monitoring (every other year) for production and affordability, and specific commitment to adopt alternative measures such as rezoning or amending the element within a specific time (e.g., six months) as needed.

Foster City (4-24-23)
Program H-D-4-h (ADU Monitoring): While the program commits to evaluating alternative actions by the end of 2026, it must commit to specific alternative actions and monitor production and affordability of ADUs more than once in the planning period (e.g., every two years).

Hillsborough (1-10-23
This analysis should specifically address whether the ADU strategy to accommodate lower-income households contributes to continued exclusion and disparities in access to opportunity and how the strategy promotes housing choice for a variety of households including lower-income households, and large families.

To support assumptions for ADUs in the planning period, the element should reduce the number of ADUs assumed per year and reconcile trends with HCD records, including additional information such as more recent permitted units and inquiries, resources and incentives, other relevant factors, and modify policies and programs as appropriate. Further, programs should commit to additional incentives and strategies, frequent monitoring (every other year), and specific commitment to adopt alternative measures such as rezoning or amending the element within a specific time (e.g., six months) if ADU production assumptions are not being achieved.

Millbrae (1-24-23)
Accessory Dwelling Units (ADU): To support assumptions for ADUs in the planning period, programs should commit to additional incentives and strategies, frequent monitoring (every other year) of production and affordability and specific commitment to adopt alternative measures such as rezoning or amending the element within a specific time (e.g., 6 months) if needed.

Depending on the analysis, the element must commit to monitor ADU production and affordability throughout the planning period and implement additional actions if not meeting target numbers within a specified time period (e.g., within six months).

Redwood City (7-8-22)
Programs must be expanded to include incentives to promote the creation and affordability of Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs).

Examples include exploring and pursuing funding, modifying development standards and reducing fees beyond State law, increasing awareness, pre-approved plans and homeowner/applicant assistance tools. In addition, given the city’s assumptions for ADUs, the element should include a program to monitor permitted ADUs and affordability every other year and take appropriate action such as adjusting assumptions or rezoning within a specified time period (e.g., 6 months).

San Bruno (3-29-23)
Accessory Dwelling Units (ADU): While the element revised the ADU assumptions, Program 4-P must be revised to commit to additional incentives and strategies, frequent monitoring (every other year) and specific commitment to adopt alternative measures such as rezoning or amending the element within a specific time (e.g., 6 months) if needed. The element must also address affordability assumptions for ADU projections.

San Mateo (3-27-23)
Accessory Dwelling Units (ADU): Program 1.4 must commit to also monitoring affordability of the ADU units that are permitted as well as provide additional incentives or identify additional sites if production and affordability assumptions are not met.

County of San Mateo (4-20-23)
Accessory Dwelling Units (ADU): Further, programs should commit to additional incentives and strategies, frequent monitoring for production and affordability (every other year) and specific commitment to adopt alternative measures such as rezoning or amending the element within a specific time (e.g., 6 months) if needed. The element must also address affordability assumptions for ADU projections, by clarifying what ABAG assumptions are utilized.

South San Francisco (3-30-23)
The element should include a commitment to reconcile trends with reported units within the Cities submitted annual progress report. Further, as Stated in the previous review, programs should commit to additional incentives and strategies, frequent monitoring (every other year) and specific commitment to adopt alternative measures such as rezoning or amending the element within a specific time (e.g., six months) if number and affordability assumptions are not met.

Woodside (10-14-22)
Depending on the analysis, the element must commit to monitor ADU production and affordability throughout the planning period and implement additional actions if not meeting target numbers within a specified time period (e.g., within six months).

-133-
2022-2023 San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury 12
In their HCD approved housing plans, Brisbane and Redwood City aren’t definitive about how they will monitor ADU affordability but imply they will use surveys to comply with HCD instructions.

Redwood City plans to collect ADU rental data during its permitting process. And Brisbane says, if available, it will participate in a regional forgivable ADU construction loan program in exchange for limiting rentals of the ADUs to extremely low-income households for 15 years. Brisbane said it is also exploring a possible city forgivable loan program if the regional program doesn’t materialize. “We can’t force people to report to us or to be honest with us,” said one jurisdiction’s planner.

Another city’s chief planner concluded that a deed restriction – any limitation on a property that affects the ability of the property owner to utilize the property as they wish, such as a requirement to verify a tenant’s income and rent charged – “is the best way to (enforce) affordability.” Alternatively, one city planning official suggested the formation of a Countywide nonprofit to income-qualify and match renters to available ADUs, thereby monitoring and enforcing affordability because the smaller towns and cities don't have the resources to perform that function on their own.

Finally, a fourth city planner offered an alternative view: “We’re not a city hiding behind ADUs. ABAG gave us a formula. We plopped it in. If the State said you can’t count ADUs at all, that would be fine.” A Long, Long Way to Go
The Superior Court of California requires all San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury investigation reports to be completed and published by June 30 annually.

And although the law required San Mateo County cities and towns to submit their housing plans by January 31, 2023, as of June 1, Daly City has yet to adopt and submit a draft plan to HCD for review and approval.

Meanwhile, plans from Foster City, Half Moon Bay, Millbrae and Pacifica are now under HCD review.

So far, HCD has reviewed and rejected plans from 14 jurisdictions: Atherton, Belmont, Burlingame, Colma, East Palo Alto, Hillsborough, Menlo Park, Portola Valley, San Bruno, San Carlos, San Mateo, South San Francisco, Woodside, and San Mateo County, which is responsible for unincorporated areas.

As of the publication of this report, only Redwood City and Brisbane had completed the process and received the green light from HCD to proceed.

One reason cited for the delay is most San Mateo County cities and towns don’t have a large enough staff to manage the workload that RHNA planning represents, so they outsource. And many could not find timely help because the consultants were busy preparing RHNA-6 plans for Southern California cities, which were due before San Mateo County municipalities. That caused many communities here to fall behind and are now out of compliance with the timing of their Housing Element submissions.

These delays, coupled with citizen objections to multifamily housing in their communities, almost guarantee RHNA-6 disputes will end up in the courts and remain unresolved for many years to come and postpone the building of sorely needed affordable housing indefinitely. -134-
2022-2023 San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury 13

FINDINGS
F1. Due to recent changes in California ADU-related laws, local governments cannot condition ADU permits in San Mateo County on complying with affordability monitoring and verification.

F2. San Mateo County and most of its municipalities rely on ADUs to meet their affordable housing commitments in their RHNA-6 plans.

F3. Atherton, Hillsborough, Portola Valley, and Woodside rely on ADUs to meet as much as 80 percent of their affordable housing commitments in their RHNA-6 plans.

F5. Other than Brisbane and Redwood City, San Mateo County and its jurisdictions have yet to articulate how they will monitor and verify ADU production or affordability.

F7. ADU affordability and occupancy could be monitored by agencies such as HIP Housing which has proven systems and processes to verify occupancy of deed-restricted rental properties in San Mateo County.

RECOMMENDATIONS
R1. San Mateo County and each City should immediately stop using ADUs to meet their Statemandated very low-, low-, and moderate-income housing targets in their Housing Element submissions until they have also proposed an effective monitoring system that verifies how newly developed ADU’s will be used.

R2. By February 1, 2024, San Mateo County and each City should develop, adopt, and implement a verification system capable of monitoring and verifying how newly developed ADU’s are being used.

R5. By April 1, 2024, San Mateo County and each City should develop and adopt a new ADU affordability distribution formula specific to each jurisdiction to the extent they are used for meeting the very low-, low-, and moderate-income housing requirements in their RHNA housing elements.

R6. San Mateo County and each City should consider working together to address Recommendations 2 and 3.
-135-
2022-2023 San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury 14

REQUEST FOR RESPONSES
Pursuant to Penal Code Section 933.05, the Civil Grand Jury requests responses from San Mateo County and all 20 cities’ governing bodies for each and every Finding and Recommendation.

The governing bodies should be aware that their comments or responses must be conducted subject to the Brown Act's notice, agenda, and open meeting requirements.

RESPONSE REQUIREMENTS
California Penal Code Section 933.05 provides: For purposes of subdivision of Section 933, as to each Grand Jury finding, the responding person or entity shall report one of the following:
(1) The respondent agrees with the finding.
(2) The respondent disagrees wholly or partially with the finding; in which case the response shall specify the portion of the disputed finding and shall include an explanation of the reasons.

For purposes of subdivision of Section 933, as to each Grand Jury recommendation, the responding person or entity shall report one of the following actions:
(1) The recommendation has been implemented, with a summary regarding the implemented action. (2) The recommendation has yet to be implemented but will be implemented in the future, with a timeframe for implementation.
(3) The recommendation requires further analysis, with an explanation and the scope and parameters of an analysis or study and a timeframe for the matter to be prepared for discussion by the officer or head of the agency or department being investigated or reviewed, including the governing body of the public agency when applicable. This time frame shall be at most six months from the Grand Jury report's publication date.
(4) The recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted or is not reasonable, with an explanation therefore.

METHODOLOGY
The San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury used numerous approaches to develop this report. ● Preliminary Research
The Grand Jury studied RHNA-5 historical information and RHNA-6 Housing Elements submitted to HCD by the cities and towns in San Mateo County as they became available.

Before conducting in-depth research, the Grand Jury studied ABAG's reports on RHNA-6 housing allocations, introducing numerous issues and a means to understand how jurisdictions establish housing allocations. Additionally, the Grand Jury reviewed a 2021 ABAG report on ADU affordability for RHNA-6 and RHNA-5 annual progress reports to understand history. -136-
2022-2023 San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury 15
The Grand Jury also reviewed a report on ADUs titled “A Solution on the Ground: Assessing the Feasibility of Second Units in Unincorporated San Mateo County, Implementing the Backyard Revolution: Perspectives of California's ADU Owners,” April 22, 2021, Karen Chapple, Dori Ganetsos, Emmanuel Lopez, UC Berkeley Center for Community Innovation.

An additional resource for Preliminary Research has been the press. Particularly following the January 31, 2023 deadline for RHNA-6 submissions, nearly 60 articles provided insights and analysis the Grand Jury could not find elsewhere.

For a complete list of sources, see the Bibliography below. ● Survey
After conducting its Preliminary Research, the Grand Jury sent an eight-question survey in October 2022 to the city managers of the 20 San Mateo County cities and towns and the San Mateo County planning and building department responsible for the County's unincorporated areas.

See Appendix A for survey results.
● Interviews
Much of the time spent by the Grand Jury on this investigation was in more than 30 interviews with 21 city managers and planning managers, five heads of nonprofit housing entities in San Mateo County, and executives at ABAG, HCD, and several other government bodies. ● Continued Research
Because RHNA-6 submissions and HCD replies are ongoing, the Grand Jury has continued to monitor the status of RHNA-6 submissions and HCD responses.

This report reflects submissions received prior to the report's due date of June 30, 2023.

GLOSSARY
Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs)
An accessory dwelling unit (ADU) is a legal and regulatory term for a secondary house or apartment that shares the building lot of a larger primary home. The unit is often used to provide additional income through rent or to house a family member. For example, an elderly parent could live in a small unit and avoid having to move to an assisted living facility. (Source: Investopedia) Affordable Housing: Very Low Income; Low Income; Moderate Income; Above Moderate Income Affordable housing is generally defined as housing on which the occupant is paying no more than 30 percent of gross income for housing costs, including utilities. (Source: www.hud.gov) -137-
2022-2023 San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury 16
Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG)
The Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) is the Council of Governments (COG) for the ninecounty Bay Area. One of California’s earliest COGs, ABAG was founded to protect regional assets from State control. ABAG continues to serve the Bay Area by providing a regional venue for collaboration and problem-solving. ABAG’s work program includes management over key regional assets, such as the San Francisco Estuary and the Bay Trail Project. It also offers a variety of cost-effective member services programs such as Pooled Liability Assurance Network (PLAN) Corporation (offering affordable liability, property insurance, claims management, risk management, and bond coverage to 30 municipalities) and financial services (offering tax-exempt capital financing for the acquisition, construction, and rehabilitation of affordable multifamily housing, health care facilities, schools, and other community facilities). ABAG POWER Natural Gas Pool conducts pooled purchasing of natural gas on behalf of 38 local governments and special districts. ABAG is also the COG that allocates the regional housing needs assessment (RHNA). (Source: CALCOG)
Below Market Rate (BMR)
A BMR unit is a housing unit that is priced to be affordable to households that are of moderate income or below. These housing units are often built by local government, nonprofits, or as a requirement of the developer (Inclusionary Affordable Housing Ordinance). As a result, these homes have certain deed restrictions recorded on the property, ensuring the home remains affordable for future generations. (Source: County of San Mateo)
California Department of Finance (DOF)
The California Department of Finance is a state cabinet-level agency within the government of California.

The Department of Finance is responsible for preparing, explaining, and administering the state's annual financial plan, which the Governor of California is required under the California Constitution to present by January 10 of each year to the public. The Department of Finance's other duties include analyzing the budgets of proposed laws in the California State Legislature, creating, and monitoring current and future economic forecasts of the state, estimating population demographics and enrollment projections, and maintaining the state's accounting and financial reporting systems.

California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) The California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) develops housing policy and building codes (i.e., the California Building Standards Code), regulates manufactured homes and mobile home parks, and administers housing finance, economic development, and community development programs. (Source: https://www.hcd.ca.gov/about-hcd)
-138-
2022-2023 San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury 17
Council of Governments (COG)
Councils of Governments (COGs) are voluntary associations representing member local governments, mainly cities, and counties, that seek to provide cooperative planning, coordination, and technical assistance on issues of mutual concern that cross jurisdictional lines. (Source: WRCOG) Deed Restrictions
A deed restriction is a term widely used in real estate to refer to any limitation on a property that limits the ability of the property owner to utilize the property as they wish. (Source: CA Realty Training) General Plan
State law requires every city and county in California to prepare a General Plan for its future growth and development. A General Plan covers land use, transportation, housing, open space, natural resources, and public services. Local General Plans have been mandatory in California since the 1950s. State law also requires the cities and counties to periodically update their General Plans in response to changing conditions. Each General Plan includes maps expressing the community's vision of how and where it will grow and change. The General Plan typically has a time horizon of about 20 years. Once a General Plan is adopted, it is used by the City Council, local commissions, and City Staff as they make day-to-day decisions about the community's future. (Source: City of San Rafael) Housing Element
Since 1969, California has required that all local governments (cities and counties) adequately plan to meet the housing needs of everyone in the community. California's local governments meet this requirement by adopting housing plans as part of their General Plan (also required by the State). General Plans serve as the local government's blueprint for how the city or county will grow and develop and include eight elements: land use, transportation, conservation, noise, open space, safety, environmental justice, and housing. California's Housing Element Law acknowledges that, for the private market to address Californians' housing needs and demand, local governments must adopt plans and regulatory systems that provide opportunities for (and do not unduly constrain) housing development. As a result, housing policy in California rests mainly on the effective implementation of local General Plans and, in particular, local Housing Elements. (Source: California Department of Housing and Community Development)
Jurisdiction (city, town, or county)
1: the power, right, or authority to interpret and apply the law; a matter that falls within the court’s jurisdiction
2: a: the authority of a sovereign power to govern or legislate b: the power or right to exercise authority: CONTROL
3: the limits or territory within which authority may be exercised (Source: Merriam-Webster) Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA)
Every eight years, ABAG develops the Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) plan approved by HCD and used to assign each city and county in the Bay Area their fair share of new housing units to build. These housing units are intended to accommodate existing needs and projected growth in the region. The RHNA process is critical because it requires all cities and counties to plan for the region's housing needs, regardless of income, to prepare for future growth and ease the California's acute housing crisis. (Source: ABAG)
-139-
2022-2023 San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury 18
Regional Housing Needs Determination (RHND)
The California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) identifies the total number of homes each region in California must plan to meet the housing needs of people at all income levels. They base the number on population projections produced by the California Department of Finance and adjustments incorporating the region's current housing needs. The jurisdictions separate the total number of housing units from HCD into four income categories that cover everything from housing for very lowincome households to market-rate housing. ABAG is responsible for developing a methodology to allocate a portion of this housing need to every local government in the Bay Area. (Source: ABAG)

BIBLIOGRAPHY
Government Agencies
● Department of Housing and Urban Development Office of Policy Development and Research. “U.S Accessory Dwelling Units: Case Study”. https://www.huduser.gov/portal/publications/adu.pdf. June 2008
● U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. “Glossary of Terms to Affordable Housing”. https://archives.hud.gov/local/nv/goodstories/2006-04-06glos.cfm. August 18, 2011 ● Department of Housing and Community Development Division of Housing Policy. “ADU Law Amendments Memorandum”. https://www.hcd.ca.gov/community-development/housingelement/housing-element-memos/docs/Accessory-Dwelling-Unit-Legislation.pdf. May 29, 2018 ● California Legislative Information. “Assembly Bill No. 68”. https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=201920200AB68. 2019-2020 ● OpenStates. “California Senate Bill SB 13”. https://openStates.org/ca/bills/20192020/SB13/. 2019- 2020
● 21 Elements. “Second Units and Junior Second Units”. http://www.21elements.com/second-units. 2020
● Department of Housing and Community Development Division of Housing Policy. “Local Agency Accessory Dwelling Units, Memorandum”. https://www.hcd.ca.gov/community-development/housingelement/docs/ADU_TA_Memo_Final_01-10-20.pdf. January 10, 2020 ● Department of Housing and Community Development Division of Housing Policy. “Final Regional Housing Need Determination”. https://www.hcd.ca.gov/community-development/housingelement/docs/ABAGRHNA-Final060920(r).pdf. June 9, 2020 ● Association of Bay Area Governments. “Housing Element Law. Changes from 1969 to the Present”. https://abag.ca.gov/sites/default/files/rhna_background.pdf. August 1, 2020 ● California Legislative Information. “Assembly Bill No. 3182”. https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=201920200AB3182. September 28, 2020
-140-
2022-2023 San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury 19
● Southern California Association of Governments. “SCAG Regional Accessory Dwelling Unit Affordability Analysis”. https://scag.ca.gov/sites/main/files/fileattachments/adu_affordability_analysis_120120v2.pdf?1606868527. December 1, 2020 ● Association of Bay Area Governments. “DRAFT Affordability of Accessory Dwelling Units”. http://21elements.com/documents-mainmenu-3/housing-elements/rhna-6-2022-2030/1327-draft-aduaffordability-report-sep-8-2021-1/file. September 8, 2021 ● California Legislative Information. “Assembly Bill No. 345”. https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=202120220AB345. September 28, 2021
● Association of Bay Area Governments. “Using ADUs to Satisfy RHNA”. https://abag.ca.gov/technicalassistance/using-adus-satisfy-rhna. March 10, 2022 ● Auditor of the State of California. “Regional Housing Needs Assessments”. https://www.auditor.ca.gov/pdfs/reports/2021-125.pdf. March 17, 2022 ● California Department of Housing and Community Development. “Accessory Dwelling Unit Handbook”. https://www.hcd.ca.gov/sites/default/files/2022-07/ADUHandbookUpdate.pdf. July 2022 ● Association of Bay Area Governments. “Final Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) Plan: San Francisco Bay Area, 2023-2031”. https://abag.ca.gov/sites/default/files/documents/2022- 12/Final%20RHNA%20Methodology%20Report%202023-2031_update_11-22.pdf. November 2022 ● State of California Department of Justice. “Attorney General Bonta Puts city of Huntington Beach on Notice That Its Proposed Ordinance Violates State Housing Law”. https://oag.ca.gov/news/pressreleases/attorney-general-bonta-puts-city-huntington-beach-notice-its-proposed-ordinance. February 13, 2023
● Department of Housing and Community Development Division of Housing Policy Development. “RE:

Town of Atherton’s 6th Cycle (2023-2031) Adopted Housing Element”. https://www.dropbox.com/home/Grand%20Jury%202022%20-%202023/Committees/ADUs/ADU%20- %20research%20materials/Housing%20Elements/Pending?preview=Atherton_HCD_Letter40423.pdf.

April 4, 2023

Grand Jury Reports
● San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury. “Second Units: Adding New Housing In The Neighborhood”. https://www.sanmateocourt.org/documents/grand_jury/2019/second_units.pdf. 2019-2020 Independent Agencies
● UC Berkeley. “A Solution on the Ground: Assessing the Feasibility of Second Units in Unincorporated San Mateo County”. https://smcrecovery.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/08/UC-Report-on-ADUfeasability.pdf. January 2017 ● Ramsey-Musolf, Darrel. “Accessory Dwelling Units as Low-Income Housing: California’s Faustian Bargain”. https://www.mdpi.com/2413-8851/2/3/89. September 18, 2018 -141-
2022-2023 San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury 20
● AARP. “The ABCs of ADUs”. https://www.hcd.ca.gov/policy-research/docs/adu-guide-websingles.pdf. 2019 ● California YIMBY (Yes in My Back Yard). “AB 881”. https://cayimby.org/ab-881/. October 9, 2019 ● Center of Community Innovation. “The ADU Scorecard: Grading ADU Ordinances in California”. https://www.aducalifornia.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/ADU-Scorecard-InterimReport-200201-

1.pdf. February 1, 2020
● UC Berkeley Center for Community Innovation. “Implementing the Backyard Revolution: Perspectives of California’s ADU Owners”. https://www.aducalifornia.org/wpcontent/uploads/2021/04/Implementing-the-Backyard-Revolution.pdf. April 22, 2021 ● Terner Center for Housing Innovation, UC Berkely. “First Ever Statewide ADU Owner Survey Shows Growth, Room for Improvement”. https://ternercenter.berkeley.edu/blog/cci-adu-survey/. April 22, 2021
● University of California, Berkeley. “California ADU”. https://www.aducalifornia.org/. August 16, 2021 ● Colburn, Gregg. Aldern, Clayton. “Homelessness is a Housing Problem”. https://homelessnesshousingproblem.com/. 2021-2022
● Sumner, Scott. “California housing prices and homelessness”. https://www.econlib.org/californiahousing-prices-and-homelessness/. May 23, 2022 ● Williams, Paul. “Carving out a Path for Public Developers”. https://housingchronicle.substack.com/p/carving-out-a-path-for-public-developers. July 14, 2022 ● Terner Center for Housing Innovation, UC Berkeley. “ADUs for All: Breaking Down Barriers to Racial and Economic Equity in Accessory Dwelling Unit Construction”. https://ternercenter.berkeley.edu/research-and-policy/adu-equity-barriers/. August 4, 2022 ● Bertolet, Dan. “Washington Bill Would Boost In-Law Apartments Throughout the State”. https://www.sightline.org/2023/01/21/washington-bill-would-boost-in-law-apartments-throughout-theState/. January 21, 2021 ● Ohanian, Lee. “California’s Failed Soviet-Style Housing Mandates Should End Now”. https://www.hoover.org/research/californias-failed-soviet-style-housing-mandates-should-end-now.

February 7, 2023
● Hamilton, Emily. “Learning from Houston’s Townhouse Reforms”. https://www.mercatus.org/research/policy-briefs/learning-houstons-townhouse-reforms. April 11, 2023 -142-
2022-2023 San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury 21

APPENDICES
● A: Survey Results
● B: Timeline of Important Legislative Events
● C: ADUs: An American Tradition
● D: Housing Elements Are an Iterative Process
-143-
2022-2023 San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury 22

APPENDIX A
Survey Results
Who responded to the survey
Survey responses
-144-
2022-2023 San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury 23
-145-
2022-2023 San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury 24
-146-
2022-2023 San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury 25
-147-
2022-2023 San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury 26
-148-
2022-2023 San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury 27
-149-
2022-2023 San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury 28
-150-
2022-2023 San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury 29
-151-
2022-2023 San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury 30
-152-
2022-2023 San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury 31
-153-
2022-2023 San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury 32

APPENDIX B
Timeline of Important Legislative Events

1. 1970 — the Legislature directed HCD to develop guidelines for housing element preparation on one and five year cycles. SB 1489 (Moscone), emphasized housing need, passed in 1971, and ABX 1 of 1971 established more standards. The California Housing Finance Agency (CalHFA), which also assisted communities in providing affordable housing, was created in 1975. The legislation authorized HCD to review local housing elements for conformity to its guidelines.

2. 1976 — Fair-share was added to the guidelines by HCD. The COGs are now given the responsibility by HCD to distribute shares of low-income and moderate-income housing. The local housing element had to include these income requirements — whether or not communities wanted them. HCD also was given responsibility to review local housing elements. Statewide hearings in 1977 brought out a number of positions on housing elements and HCD requirements.

3. Mid 1980’s — AB 2853 (Roos), provided for faster permit processing and higher densities, and allowed the housing element to meet State goals and be reviewed by HCD. COGs would continue to formulate the fair share for each community, but HCD had final approval of the numbers and each community was to revise its Housing Element every five years.

4. 1990s — Cities and counties looked at housing elements, if certified, as providing protection against lawsuits. In addition, this decade also created the concept of regional allocation “sharing burdens of lower- income households among geographic areas,” without mandated goals.

5. 1993 — The Senate Committee on Local Government held hearings on housing element progress and heard concerns that communities were not doing enough and that housing elements were despised by local governments. Bills changed the cycle timeframe, including AB 2172 (Hauser), SB 1703 (Costa) and SC 320 (Committee). Main topics for discussion by the Committee on Housing and Land Use hearings in 1995 were the housing allocations and the Department of Finance (DoF) projections. A common complaint was that the DoF projections were not complete enough for communities to develop appropriate allocations. The COGs projections also were criticized.

6. 1998 — AB 438 (Torlakson), allowing for the creation of sub-RHNA areas, looked at how housing units were counted. 2001 — SB 910 (Dunn) would have included imposing fines on jurisdictions not complying; and would have tied RHNA to transportation planning on a six year cycle. However, this bill did not pass. 2002 — SB 423 (Torlakson) created a jobs and housing balance incentive program, also known as Workforce Housing Incentive Program. In 2003, at HCD’s request, a working group of stakeholders met to make recommendations, which included:
● Develop more transparency in determining fair shares
● Clarify land inventories of building sites
● Ensure inventories were buildable
● Increase HCD review consistency of local elements
● Explore city self-certification
● Devise better housing element enforcement that would penalize non-compliance.

7. 2004 — AB 2348 (Mullin) clarified the relationship between the land inventory and adequate sites requirement, provided guidance on the content of adequate land inventory, and provided greater development certainty. AB 2158 (Lowenthal) revised the process for determining allocation from just -154-
2022-2023 San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury 33
DoF to include transportation planning numbers and created a review process.

8. 2005 — AB 1233 (Jones) assured that unmet need from previous RHNA cycles was added into the next cycle.

9. 2017 Housing Legislative Package
Approximately 150 housing bills were submitted in 2017. Fifteen relating to funding, streamlining and accountability, were signed by the governor. These bills significantly changed how RHNA is conducted, requiring additional outreach and reporting, increasing the number of factors included, and the ability of HCD to sue individual cities for not meeting requirements.

SB 2 (Atkins) Building Homes and Jobs Act is projected to generate hundreds of millions of dollars annually for affordable housing, supportive housing, emergency shelters, transitional housing, and other housing needs via a $75 to $225 recording fee on specified real estate documents.

SB 3 (Beall) Veterans and Affordable Housing Bond Act of 2018 places a $4 billion general obligation bond on the November 2018 ballot to fund affordable housing programs and the veterans homeownership program (CalVet).

SB 35 (Wiener) streamlines multifamily housing project approvals, at the request of a developer, in a city that fails to issue building permits for its share of the regional housing need by income category.

SB 35 city approval of a qualifying housing development on a qualifying site is a ministerial act, without need for CEQA review or public hearings.

AB 73 (Chiu) streamlines the housing approval process by allowing jurisdictions to create a housing sustainability district to complete upfront zoning and environmental review in order to receive incentive payments for development projects that are consistent with the ordinance.

SB 167 (Skinner), AB 678 (Bocanegra), and AB 1515 (Daly) are three measures that were amended late in the 2017 legislative session to incorporate changes to the Housing Accountability Act (HAA).

The HAA significantly limits the ability of a jurisdiction to deny an affordable or market-rate housing project that is consistent with existing planning and zoning requirements.

AB 1505 (Bloom) allows a jurisdiction to adopt an ordinance that requires a housing development to include a certain percentage of rental units affordable to and occupied by households with extremely low, very low, low or moderate income.

AB 879 (Grayson) expands upon existing law that requires, by April 1 of each year, general law cities and charter cities to send an annual report to their respective city councils, the State Office of Planning and Research (OPR) and HCD that includes information related to implementation of the General Plan.

AB 1397 (Low) makes numerous changes to how a jurisdiction establishes its housing element site inventory.

AB 72 (Santiago) provides HCD broad new authority to find a jurisdiction’s housing element out of substantial compliance if it determines that REGIONAL the jurisdiction fails to act in compliance with -155-
2022-2023 San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury 34
its housing element and allows HCD to refer violations of law to the attorney general.

10. 2018 — SB 828 (Wiener) changed the way HCD determines each region’s RHND, adding a number of new factors for consideration and accounting for “unmet need” in the existing housing stock by applying “adjustment factors” to a region’s total projected households, not just the incremental housing growth.

11. 2018 — AB 1771 (Bloom) and AB 686 (Santiago) strengthened the mandate for regions and local governments to combat discrimination, overcome historic patterns of segregation, and create equal access to opportunity through housing planning and decision-making, in other words, to “affirmatively further fair housing.” AB 1771 (Bloom) added to RHNA an enhanced focus on racial equity with an explicit mandate that COGs’ housing distribution plans affirmatively further fair housing and required COGs to survey jurisdictions on their fair housing activities, to identify regional barriers to furthering fair housing, and to recommend strategies or actions to overcome those barriers. AB 686 (Santiago) created a mandate that local jurisdictions plan and administer housing and community development programs and activities in a manner that affirmatively further fair housing.

12. 2019 — AB 1486 (Ting) strengthened the Surplus Lands Act (SLA), which requires that local agencies provide right of first refusal to affordable housing developers when disposing of surplus land by expanding the scope of land subject to the right of first refusal requirement, updating the mechanics of the surplus land disposal process, extending HCD’s enforcement mandate to include the SLA and establishing financial penalties for violation of the act.

AB 1487 (Chiu), authorized ABAG and MTC to place on the ballot regional housing measures to help fund affordable housing and established 3 REGIONAL HOUSING NEEDS ALLOCATION the Bay Area Regional Housing Authority. The 2019-20 State Budget also included significant new resources to support housing planning, including $250 million for local governments and COGs for planning activities. The Bay Area is receiving approximately $50 million in combined funds, split between ABAG and local jurisdictions.

SB 330 (Skinner) made further revisions to the HAA, establishing new criteria for housing approvals at the local level, including prohibiting a local agency from subjecting a project to new ordinances, rules or fees after an application is submitted and limiting the number of hearings on a project to five. The bill also prohibits a local agency from lowering the allowed residential density below that level in effect on January 1, 2018 in high rent, low-vacancy areas, as defined. The bill’s provisions sunset in five years.

AB-881, “Accessory dwelling units,” and AB-68, “Land use: accessory dwelling units”: Makes many of the current restrictions that cities place on ADUs obsolete. It also provides for a streamlined process for approvals.

These bills require permits for ADUs added to single-family and multifamily homes to be approved or denied faster. Current law permits these decisions to take 120 days, but this new law requires decisions within 60 days. These approvals or denials must be issued ministerially, so that way, there are fewer potential issues to encounter. Cities and counties may establish minimum and maximum ADU size requirements, but the maximum size cannot be less than 850 square feet for a one-bedroom ADU or 1,000 square feet for more than one bedroom.
-156-
2022-2023 San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury 35
Most importantly, these bills prohibit any lot coverage, minimum lot size, etc. requirements that municipalities have. Cities have enacted these laws to have the effect of making it impossible to build an ADU. Cities cannot require the correction of nonconforming zoning conditions as part of the approval process.

SB-13 Accessory dwelling units are similar to AB-881 and AB-68 with a couple of significant differences. Before this bill, local agencies could require that the person applying for the ADU occupy either the primary residence or the proposed new structure. This bill exempts from these requirements all proposed ADUs until Jan. 1, 2025. Additionally, this bill removes the impact fee for ADUs smaller than 750 square feet. Even for ADUs larger than that, the impact fees assessed must correlate with the square footage of the primary residence.

SB-13 makes building ADUs cheaper and also removes an essential regulation. Now, landlords who rent their properties out can apply for an ADU for their rental properties.

AB-670, “Common interest developments: accessory dwelling units,” makes it easier for people within HOA complexes to construct ADUs. Specifically, it prevents banning or unreasonably restricting on single-family lots on the construction of these units. Presently, many HOAs have CCRs ("conditions, covenants and restrictions") that prevent people from building ADUs. HOAs may worry about the uniformity of the properties if one has an ADU on it, or they might be concerned that they don't know who is and who isn't renting from an ADU. Regardless, HOAs now need to have a way for people to construct ADUs if they so choose.

HOAs will likely challenge this bill, at least to some degree, in court, but for now, if you live in an HOA complex with single-family homes, you can construct an ADU.

AB-671, “Accessory dwelling units: incentives," requires that general plans incentivize homeowners in some way to construct these ADUs and make them available for low-to-moderate-income households to rent. While it doesn't specify what these incentives will be, it does require local agencies to think about financial incentives and construct a plan.
-157-
2022-2023 San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury 36

APPENDIX C
ADUs: An American Tradition
-158-
2022-2023 San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury 37

APPENDIX D
Housing Elements Are an Iterative Process
-159-
-160-

TOWN OF HILLSBOROUGH
San Mateo County
1600 Floribunda Avenue
Hillsborough, CA 94010
17 NEW BUSINESS

CITY COUNCIL MEETING
AUGUST 14, 2023

AGENDA STAFF REPORT
ITEM SUBJECT: RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING SOUTH BAYSIDE WASTE MANAGEMENT AUTHORITY TO ACQUIRE REAL PROPERTY LOCATED AT 1245 SAN CARLOS AVENUE, UNIT E, SAN CARLOS PURSUANT TO CEQA GUIDELINE 15378
____________________________________________________________________________ SUMMARY:

Background
SBWMA is a joint powers authority formed pursuant to California Government Code Section 6500 et seq. to provide solid waste and recycling services to its 11 Member Agencies (i.e., County of San Mateo, Belmont, Burlingame, East Palo Alto, Foster City, Hillsborough, Menlo Park, City of San Mateo, Redwood City, San Carlos, and West Bay Sanitation District).

SBWMA’s administrative office has been located in the San Carlos Library for over 16 years.

Under the terms of the current lease, SBWMA occupies 2,429 square feet at a monthly rent of $5,618 or $2.31/sf. The current lease term ends on June 30, 2024, and the City of San Carlos has indicated that the term will not be extended because the space is needed to accommodate San Carlos staff.

Upon receiving this notice from San Carlos, SBWMA Executive Director La Mariana began working with a commercial real estate broker to find affordable office space that would accommodate the current staff and agency/public guests, provide proper space for SBWMA Board and Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) meetings, provide easy access to parking for Board and TAC members, be located near public transit to accommodate staff members wishing to utilize this mode of transportation, and be in close proximity to the Shoreway facility in San Carlos.

Dozens of rental properties were researched. This research demonstrated that current market lease rates for properties comparable to the San Carlos library space are currently being leased at $4.50-$6.50 per square foot per month. This means that monthly rent for a comparable space would be $10,931-$15,789. A number of rental properties were toured and found to be unacceptable due to location; inadequate access to public transit; inadequate or lack of parking; unfavorable lease/purchase rates; lack of building amenities; poor functionality of available workspace; inadequate building/workspace finishes (ADA access/compliance/lack of elevator); distance from the Shoreway Environmental Center facility; deferred maintenance on critical base building systems (i.e., HVAC, electric, plumbing, mechanical, lighting); and non-code compliance with Title 24 and ADA requirements.

In addition to his search of the commercial office rental market, the Executive Director also contacted staff at all Member Agencies to inquire whether they might have suitable available space for long-term leasing within the given mandatory relocation time frame. No sites were identified. The Executive Director also identified one property currently for sale in the Wheeler -161-
Agenda Staff Report - Hillsborough City Council
August 14, 2023

Page 2 ends

Plaza development, located at 1245 San Carlos Avenue, Suite E, in San Carlos (the “Property”).

This is the last remaining commercial space for sale in the Wheeler Plaza development (Attachment 2).

The Property is a Commercial Condominium located directly across the street from the SAMTRANS Building’s main entrance. It is currently zoned MU-DC (Mixed Use-Downtown Core). Zoning clearance for use of the space by SBWMA was issued by the City of San Carlos on May 18, 2023. (See Attachment 3.)
The unit is approximately 2,841 square feet in size and is currently an empty shell which would provide adequate space for all SBWMA administrative functions and could be improved to include a large conference room to accommodate Board and TAC meetings along with some community environmental education sessions. The Property has two dedicated parking spaces (below ground) and easy access to the attached 252-space public parking at the adjacent Wheeler Plaza parking garage (no charge), the adjacent 30-space Laurel Street parking lot (600 block), and adjacent neighborhood surface streets. The Property is listed for sale at $1,988,000.

The SBWMA Board met in closed session at its April, May, and June 2023 regular meetings to discuss whether to direct staff to pursue further rental options or to offer to purchase the Property. At the conclusion of its June 2023 discussion, the Board authorized the Executive Director to make an offer to purchase the Property. The seller has agreed to a sale of the Property pursuant to the following summary of terms:

Purchase Price: $1,700,000
Due diligence period: Up to 60 days from agreement (this is the period in which SBWMA conducts its due diligence, architectural studies, finance options, etc., and in which SBWMA can back out of the sale and get its deposit refunded)
Agency contingency: Obtain no less than 2/3 of member agency approvals within 105 days.

Loan to value: Up to 75%
Deposit: $50,000
Close of Escrow: No later than 11/15/2023
Analysis
This item has been placed on the agenda for review and approval because, as noted in the offer’s contingencies, a purchase of real property by SBWMA must be approved by 2/3 of the Member Agencies pursuant to The Second Amended and Restated Joint Powers Agreement Article 7, Powers.

Having considered the option to rent other available office properties or to purchase the Property, the SBWMA Board recommends to the Member Agencies that the purchase of the Property be approved for two reasons. First, the Property meets all the identified criteria regarding location and space. Second, as demonstrated by the Cost Analysis of Offer to Purchase Versus Lease prepared by Rick Simonson, Senior VP of HF&H Consulting, acquisition of the Property will result in a 39% cost saving (or $2,166,098) when comparing a total purchase and tenant improvement budget of $2.5 million to a long-term lease based on current office market lease rates (Attachment 4).
-162-
Agenda Staff Report - Hillsborough City Council
August 14, 2023

Page 3 ends

Conclusion
The SBWMA Board recommends that the Council/Board approve the purchase of the Property for use as administrative offices for SBWMA. Upon receiving approval of 2/3 of the Member Agencies and satisfaction of all other contingencies, the SBWMA Board will, in open session, authorize closing of escrow and purchase the Property.

FISCAL IMPACT: The purchase price including improvements is approximately $2.3 to $2.5 million for the SBWMA JPA. The purchase will be financed with a balloon payment at year 25, with SBWMA reserving a portion each year in anticipation of the balloon payment. As outlined in the cost analysis (Attachment 4), the purchase is more affordable than a long-term lease at current market rates. Therefore, there is no projected impact for to the Town and member agencies for this proposed purchase, as the annual contribution toward the balloon payment is offset by no lease payments.

ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES: The proposed action is exempt from environmental review pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines sections 15387(b)(2) and 15378(b)(5) as ongoing administrative or organizational activities that will not result in direct or indirect physical changes to the environment.

ATTACHMENTS:

1. Resolution

2. Property Brochure

3. Zoning Clearance from City of San Carlos

4. Cost Analysis of Offer to Purchase Versus Lease prepared by Rick Simonson, HF&H Consulting
PREPARED BY: Jan Cooke, Finance Director
RECOMMENDATION: Adopt the resolution authorizing South Bayside Waste Management Authority to acquire real property located at 1245 San Carlos Avenue, Unit E, San Carlos for use as administrative offices for SBWMA.

Upon receiving approval of 2/3 of the Member Agencies and satisfaction of all other contingencies, the SBWMA Board will, in open session, authorize closing of escrow and purchase of the Property.
-163-
RESOLUTION NO. 23-

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF HILLSBOROUGH APPROVING THE ACQUISITION OF REAL PROPERTY LOCATED AT 1245 SAN

CARLOS AVENUE, SUITE E, SAN CARLOS, CALIFORNIA BY THE SOUTH

BAYSIDE WASTE MANAGEMENT AUTHORITY PURSUANT TO CEQA GUIDELINE 15378
WHEREAS, the South Bayside Waste Management Authority (SBWMA) is a Joint Powers Authority formed to provide recycling and solid waste collection services to its eleven member agencies; and
WHEREAS, the Town of Hillsborough (“Town”) is a member agency of the SBWMA, and
WHEREAS, SBWMA’s administrative offices are currently located in the San Carlos Library building through a lease that will expire June 30, 2024 and the City of San Carlos has indicated that it does not wish to renew the lease; and WHEREAS, SBWMA staff conducted a broad search for office space to lease for its administrative offices once its current office lease expires but did not find space that suited its needs; and
WHEREAS, a new, unfinished commercial unit located at 1245 San Carlos Avenue, Suite E, San Carlos, California (the Property), which is approximately one block from SBWMA’s existing office, is currently listed for sale; and WHEREAS, SBWMA had a cost analysis prepared by HF&H Consulting to determine whether purchasing the Property and having the Property improved to meet SBWMA’s needs would be more cost efficient that entering into a lease for office space; and
WHEREAS, the cost analysis conducted by HF&H Consulting determined that purchasing the Property and making necessary improvements on an assumed total budget of $2.5 million will result in a 39% cost savings versus entering into a long-term lease for office space at current market rates; and
WHEREAS, the SBWMA Board directed SBWMA staff to submit an offer to purchase the Property, contingent upon approval by no less than 2/3 of the member agencies; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to the signed Purchase Agreement, the seller of the Property has agreed to sell the property for a purchase price of $1.7 million, which is an amount consistent with the authorization given by the SBWMA Board of Directors; and
WHEREAS, Article 7, Section 7.1.1(a) of the Second Amended and Restated Joint Exercise of Powers Agreement for the SBWMA requires that the ATTACHMENT 1
-164-
2 acquisition of real property be approved by no less than 2/3 of the member agencies; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the Town of Hillsborough agrees with the recommendation of the SBWMA Board to purchase the property for use as the SBWMA’s administrative offices.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the Town of Hillsborough approves the acquisition by the SBWMA of the real property located at 1245 San Carlos Avenue, Suite E, San Carlos, California, pursuant to the terms of the Purchase Agreement.

Mayor of the Town of Hillsborough

Attest: City Clerk
This resolution was adopted by the City Council of the Town of Hillsborough at its regular meeting held on the 14th day of August 2023 by the following vote of the members thereof:

AYES: Councilmembers
NOES: Councilmembers
ABSENT: Councilmembers
ABSTAIN: Councilmembers
-165-
This information supplied herein is from sources we deem reliable. It is provided without any representation, warranty, or guarantee, expressed or implied as to its accuracy. Prospective Buyer or Tenant should conduct an independent investigation and verification of all matters deemed to be material, including, but not limited to, statements of income and expenses. Consult your attorney, accountant, or other professional advisor.

FOR SALE unit pricing below
SUITE A & B (Sold)
SUITE C: (Sold)
SUITE D: (Sold)
SUITE E: $1,988,000
UNIT E has ±2,841 RSF
MONTHLY ASSOCIATION FEE:
$.14 PSF/month estimated
ON-SITE parking open to the public
OUTSIDE seating possible
RESERVED and secure onsite parking
for employees
18-20 FOOT ceiling height
“WALKER’S PARADISE” walk score of
91 on WalkScore.com
1 BLOCK to the San Carlos
Caltrain station
1245 San Carlos Ave

SAN CARLOS, CA

FOR SALE
Retail/Commercial Condominium
Units in Downtown San Carlos

BRETT WEBER
650.771.3000
[email protected]
LIC N° 00901454
KIDDER.COM

STEVE DIVNEY
650.400.8065
[email protected]
LIC N° 01216239

JOHN MCLELLAN
415.418.9880
[email protected]
LIC N° 01869489
ONLY 1

UNIT LEFT
ATTACHMENT 2
-166-
This information supplied herein is from sources we deem reliable. It is provided without any representation, warranty, or guarantee, expressed or implied as to its accuracy. Prospective Buyer or Tenant should conduct an independent investigation and verification of all matters deemed to be material, including, but not limited to, statements of income and expenses. Consult your attorney, accountant, or other professional advisor.

KIDDER.COM

SAN CARLOS, CA

FOR SALE
1245 San Carlos Ave
Floorplan

BRETT WEBER
650.771.3000
[email protected]
LIC N° 00901454

STEVE DIVNEY
650.400.8065
[email protected]
LIC N° 01216239

JOHN MCLELLAN
415.418.9880
[email protected]
LIC N° 01869489
± 264 SF

UNITS CAN BE COMBINED
-167-
This information supplied herein is from sources we deem reliable. It is provided without any representation, warranty, or guarantee, expressed or implied as to its accuracy. Prospective Buyer or Tenant should conduct an independent investigation and verification of all matters deemed to be material, including, but not limited to, statements of income and expenses. Consult your attorney, accountant, or other professional advisor.

KIDDER.COM

SAN CARLOS, CA

FOR SALE
1245 San Carlos Ave

BRETT WEBER
650.771.3000
[email protected]
LIC N° 00901454

STEVE DIVNEY
650.400.8065
[email protected]
LIC N° 01216239

JOHN MCLELLAN
415.418.9880
[email protected]
LIC N° 01869489
-168-
This information supplied herein is from sources we deem reliable. It is provided without any representation, warranty, or guarantee, expressed or implied as to its accuracy. Prospective Buyer or Tenant should conduct an independent investigation and verification of all matters deemed to be material, including, but not limited to, statements of income and expenses. Consult your attorney, accountant, or other professional advisor.

KIDDER.COM

SAN CARLOS, CA

FOR SALE
1245 San Carlos Ave

BRETT WEBER
650.771.3000
[email protected]
LIC N° 00901454

STEVE DIVNEY
650.400.8065
[email protected]
LIC N° 01216239

JOHN MCLELLAN
415.418.9880
[email protected]
LIC N° 01869489

DOWNTOWN

SAN CARLOS

PASTRAMI - BURGERS
JOHNSTON’S SALTBOX

MEDITERRANEAN
DELITE

CALTRAIN
San Carlos

SUBJECT

PROJECT

EL CAMINO REAL

INDUSTRIAL RD

BAYSHORE FWY

BRITTAN AVE
-169-
ATTACHMENT 3
-170-
Managing Tomorrow’s Resources Today
590 Ygnacio Valley Rd, Suite 105 Robert D. Hilton, Emeritus Walnut Creek, California 94596 John W. Farnkopf, PE
Telephone: 925/977-6950 Laith B. Ezzet, CMC
Fax: 925/977-6955 Richard J. Simonson
www.hfh-consultants.com Marva M. Sheehan, CPA
Robert C. Hilton

MEMORANDUM
To: Joe La Mariana, Executive Director – South Bayside Waste Management Authority From: Rick Simonson, Senior Vice President – HF&H Consultant Date: June 7, 2023
Subject: Cost Analysis of Office Purchase versus Lease
Background
The South Bayside Waste Management Authority’s (SBWMA’s) administrative office is currently located in the City of San Carlos Library. The office has been located in this space for over 16 years. Under the terms of the current lease, SBWMA occupies 2,429 square feet at a monthly rent of $5,618 or $2.31/sf.

The current lease term ends on June 30, 2024 and the City has indicated that the term will not be extended because the space is needed to accommodate San Carlos staff and will no longer be available to the SBWMA.

Since receiving this notice, Executive Director La Mariana has been working with a commercial real estate broker to identify potential alternative spaces. The goal has been to identify an affordable space that will accommodate the current staff and agency/public guests, provide proper space for Board and TAC meetings, have easy access to parking for Board and Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) members, be located near public transit, and be in close/immediate proximity to the Shoreway Facility. With these factors in mind, the Executive Director La Mariana has researched and toured many local properties that are currently available for rent and one property that is currently for sale.

Executive Director La Mariana has toured a property, currently for sale, at 1245 San Carlos Avenue, Suite E, in San Carlos. In addition, working with a commercial real estate broker, Executive Director La Mariana has identified a number of properties available to lease that meet the some, but not all, of criteria above.

The current lease rates have been estimated to be between $4.50-$6.50 per square foot in the general San Carlos area.

The following analysis compares the projected costs, over a 30-year period, of purchasing the available property versus leasing a property of the same size; the specific property is unknown at this time. An Excel model was developed to calculate the projected costs over time with a number of assumptions. The model has been constructed to allow multiple scenarios regarding costs and funding terms. This memorandum summarizes one such cost scenario. The model will be available to run additional scenarios at any upcoming meetings.

Cost Analysis of 1245 San Carlos Avenue Property
Executive Director La Mariana’s discussions with the real estate broker has identified a commercial suite located at 1245 San Carlos Avenue, Suite E, which is 2,841 square feet with 20-foot ceilings which can ATTACHMENT 4
-171-
Managing Tomorrow’s Resources Today

MEMORANDUM

Page 2 of 4 ends

accommodate adding a second floor and increase the usable space to 3,977 square feet. The expanded space will accommodate existing SBWMA staff workspaces, ADA-compliant restrooms, a kitchen, storage, and a large fully-wired video conference room available to host Board and TAC meetings.

The estimated cost to purchase and make the necessary interior improvements is $2.3 million - $2.5 million. For this analysis we have assumed the high of $2.5 million.

Figure 1 summarizes the cost assumptions used to evaluate the cost-per-square foot procuring, improving, and maintaining the San Carlos Avenue property. Figure 2 summarizes the first-year total cost of the property and the projected cost per square foot ($4.11 per square foot), with additional detail describing the assumptions following Figure 2. Attachment 1 includes a 30-year analysis of projected costs, including the calculation of the present value of the total annual costs of occupying the property over the next 30-years.

Figure 1 – Office Purchase Key Assumptions
Figure 2 – Year 1 Cost Summary
1Lost investment income from use of reserves for
downpayment and upfront bank/broker fees
Size (at purchase) 2,841 square feet
Estimated Size (at buildout) 3,977 square feet
Property Purchase Price $1,700,000 (est. $1.5 - $1.7 million) Plus: Tenant Improvements $800,000
Total Project Cost $2,500,000
Downpayment 30% ($750,000)
Total Loan Amount $1,750,000
Loan Term for Pymt Calc 30 years
Amortization 25 years
Balloon Payment $551,295 due @ Year 25
Interest Rate 6.19%
Payments per Year 12
Bank Fee 0.50% of loan amount
Broker Fee 1.00% of purchase price
Association Fees $0.14 per sq. f t. per month @ size at purchase Association/Utilities Fee escalator 5.00% per year
Reserves Return-on-Investments 2.00% per year
FY 2023-24
Office Purchase Financial Analysis
Loan Repyament $128,482
Bank Fee $8,750
Broker Fee $17,000
Balloon Payment Reserve $16,874
Association Fees $4,773
Utilities (excl. refuse) $6,000
Opportunity Cost1 $14,485
Total $196,364
Build-out Square Footage 3,977.00
$ per sq. ft. per month $4.11
-172-
Managing Tomorrow’s Resources Today

MEMORANDUM

Page 3 of 4 ends

Loan Repayment, Fees, and Balloon Payment Reserve. One-time loan and broker fees are included in Year 1 only. The estimated annual loan repayment (at the terms included in Figure 1) is repaid over 25 years with a “balloon” payment due in Year 25. For this analysis, we have assumed the SBWMA would reserve 1/25 of the balloon payment each year so the cash is available when due. The calculated annual reserve contribution assumes earned interest on the funds at 2.0% per year. The loan payment terms include a fixed 6.19% interest rate for the first 10 years and adjusted thereafter based on 10-year Treasury plus 2.5%. Our analysis assumes the 6.19% throughout the 25-year term. Actual interest rates may be higher or lower.

Association Fees. Association fees are paid monthly by all property owners (i.e., City of San Carlos, Commercial Owners, and Residential Owners through a Joint Use Agreement). The fees cover common area maintenance, insurance, window washing, natural gas, water, sewer, and refuse. In addition, a portion of the fees are set aside in reserves for future capital repairs and maintenance (e.g., building exterior repair and paint, roofs). In total, the five commercial suites are allocated 4.84% of Joint Maintenance Costs. The $0.14 per square foot is based on recent budgeted expenses and reserve contributions. The analysis assumes a 5% annual increase, which may vary from the actual annual changes. Unexpected capital needs may arise which shall be assessed to all property owners in excess of the current $0.14 per square foot fee.

Utilities. The Association fees cover common area utilities, and the refuse needs for the commercial suites. The current understanding is the SBWMA will be responsible for their water, sewer, and electricity needs for their suite. These have been estimated at $500 per month with a 5% annual escalator for this analysis.

Opportunity Costs. To purchase a property instead of leasing, requires upfront cash outlay for the downpayment and one-time bank/loan fees ($775,750 in total). The SBWMA has reserves available to make these upfront payments. This analysis includes a “cost” component for the purchase option to recognize the loss of investment income that would otherwise be earned if the cash was continued to be held in reserves. For this analysis, we have assumed the cost of purchasing the property includes the annual loss of investment income at 2.0% per year on the $775,750 withdrawal from reserves, based on recent historical return-on-investments experienced by the SBWMA.

Cost Analysis of Leasing a Property
Executive Director La Mariana, with assistance from a real estate broker researched and toured dozens of rental properties. Currently, for properties that fit the needs of the SBWMA in this targeted geographic area, leases range from $4.50 to $6.50 per square foot per month. Typically, the lease amounts are inclusive of the Common Area Maintenance (CAM) expenses (e.g., water, sewer, refuse, electricity), though the charges are reviewed annually and reconciled for any incremental differences that are passed along (or refunded) to the tenant. For comparison purposes, and to be conservative, we have assumed all CAM-related costs are included in the per square foot lease charge throughout the 30-year period.

Attachment 1 includes a 30-year analysis of projected costs, including the calculation of the present value of the total annual costs of leasing a property over the next 30-years. The analysis assumes the low end -173-
Managing Tomorrow’s Resources Today

MEMORANDUM

Page 4 of 4 ends

of $4.50 per square foot per month, escalated 2.0% per year, which is equivalent to approximately $0.10 per square foot each year.

Limitations
The analysis has been prepared with readily available projections and information provided by SBWMA staff, Beale Street Lending, Barc Architecture, and discussions with the 1245 San Carlos property builder, KB Homes. The projections contained herein may change. Additional costs not contemplated in this financial analysis to acquire the San Carlos property may be incurred.

Recommendation
Figure 3 summarizes the comparison of total estimated costs, and average cost per square foot per month, of the two options: 1) purchasing the San Carlos Avenue property and 2) continue leasing available commercial properties, based on the assumptions and projections described in this memo. Based on this financial analysis, the net present value (based on a present value discount rate of 3.0% annually) of the cost to purchase the San Carlos Avenue property is considerably less (approximately 39% less) than leasing property at the low-end of current market rates. Assuming all costs of purchasing and maintaining the San Carlos Avenue property have been fairly represented, the purchase of the San Carlos Avenue property is recommended. Results may differ if the cost to purchase, finance the property, or other cost factors increase.

Figure 3 – Comparative Summary (detailed analysis provided in Attachment A) Average Cost
30-year Costs per Sq. Ft. per Month
(in 2023$) (in 2023$)
Office Purchase $3,446,716 $2.41
Office Lease $5,612,814 $3.92
-174-

ATTACHMENT A
Key Assumptions - Office Purchase Key Assumptions - Lease Key Assumptions - GeneralSize (at purchase) 2,841 square feet Size (square feet) 3,977 Present Value Discount Rate 3.0% Estimated Size (at buildout) 3,977 square feet Lease Amount $4.50 per sq. ft. per month (est. ($4.50-$6.50)Property Purchase Price $1,700,000 (est. $1.5 - $1.7 million) Annual Lease Amount $214,758Plus: Tenant Improvements $800,000 Common Area Maint (CAM) incl. in lease water, sewer, electric, refuse, custodial, landscape, etc. (usually part of 1st yr lease amt (baseline), reconciled annually for incremental difference only) Total Project Cost $2,500,000 Lease Inflation Rate 2.00% Downpayment 30% ($750,000)Total Loan Amount $1,750,000Loan Term for Pymt Calc 30 yearsAmortization 25 yearsBalloon Payment $551,295 due @ Year 25Interest Rate 6.19%Payments per Year 12Bank Fee 0.50% of loan amountBroker Fee 1.00% of purchase priceAssociation Fees $0.14 per sq. ft. per month @ size at purchaseAssociation/Utilities Fee escalator 5.00% per yearReserves Return-on-Investments 2.00% per yearOffice Purchase Financial Analysis FY 2023-24 FY 2024-25 FY 2025-26 FY 2026-27 FY 2027-28 FY 2028-29 FY 2029-30 FY 2030-31 FY 2031-32 FY 2032-33 FY 2033-34 FY 2034-35 FY 2035-36 FY 2036-37 FY 2037-38 Loan Repyament $128,482 $128,482 $128,482 $128,482 $128,482 $128,482 $128,482 $128,482 $128,482 $128,482 $128,482 $128,482 $128,482 $128,482 $128,482Bank Fee $8,750Broker Fee $17,000Balloon Payment Reserve $16,874 $16,874 $16,874 $16,874 $16,874 $16,874 $16,874 $16,874 $16,874 $16,874 $16,874 $16,874 $16,874 $16,874 $16,874 Association Fees $4,773 $5,012 $5,262 $5,525 $5,801 $6,092 $6,396 $6,716 $7,052 $7,404 $7,775 $8,163 $8,571 $9,000 $9,450Utilities (excl. refuse) $6,000 $6,300 $6,615 $6,946 $7,293 $7,658 $8,041 $8,443 $8,865 $9,308 $9,773 $10,262 $10,775 $11,314 $11,880Opportunity Cost1 $14,485 $15,805 $16,121 $16,443 $16,772 $17,108 $17,450 $17,799 $18,155 $18,518 $18,888 $19,266 $19,651 $20,044 $20,445 Total $196,364 $172,473 $173,354 $174,271 $175,223 $176,213 $177,243 $178,314 $179,428 $180,586 $181,792 $183,048 $184,354 $185,714 $187,131 Build-out Square Footage 3,977.00
$ per sq. ft. per month $4.11 $3.61 $3.63 $3.65 $3.67 $3.69 $3.71 $3.74 $3.76 $3.78 $3.81 $3.84 $3.86 $3.89 $3.92 Present Value Discount Factor 1.0000 1.0300 1.0609 1.0927 1.1255 1.1593 1.1941 1.2299 1.2668 1.3048 1.3439 1.3842 1.4258 1.4685 1.5126 Present Value of Future Cost $196,364 $167,449 $163,403 $159,482 $155,683 $152,003 $148,438 $144,985 $141,642 $138,404 $135,271 $132,237 $129,302 $126,463 $123,716 30-year Costs (2023$) $3,446,716
Monthly NPV cost per square foot $2.41
Office Purchase Financial Analysis FY 2038-39 FY 2039-40 FY 2040-41 FY 2041-42 FY 2042-43 FY 2043-44 FY 2044-45 FY 2045-46 FY 2046-47 FY 2047-48 FY 2048-49 FY 2049-50 FY 2050-51 FY 2051-52 FY 2052-53 TOTAL Loan Repyament $128,482 $128,482 $128,482 $128,482 $128,482 $128,482 $128,482 $128,482 $128,482 $128,482 $3,212,056Bank Fee $8,750Broker Fee $17,000Balloon Payment Reserve $16,874 $16,874 $16,874 $16,874 $16,874 $16,874 $16,874 $16,874 $16,874 $16,874 $421,855 Association Fees $9,922 $10,419 $10,940 $11,487 $12,061 $12,664 $13,297 $13,962 $14,660 $15,393 $16,163 $16,971 $17,819 $18,710 $19,646 $317,105Utilities (excl. refuse) $12,474 $13,097 $13,752 $14,440 $15,162 $15,920 $16,716 $17,552 $18,429 $19,351 $20,318 $21,334 $22,401 $23,521 $24,697 $398,633Opportunity Cost1 $20,854 $20,854 $20,854 $20,854 $20,854 $20,854 $20,854 $20,854 $20,854 $20,854 $20,854 $20,854 $20,854 $20,854 $20,854 $579,758 Total $188,606 $189,726 $190,902 $192,137 $193,433 $194,794 $196,223 $197,724 $199,300 $200,954 $57,335 $59,159 $61,074 $63,085 $65,197 $4,955,157 Build-out Square Footage
$ per sq. ft. per month $3.95 $3.98 $4.00 $4.03 $4.05 $4.08 $4.11 $4.14 $4.18 $4.21 $1.20 $1.24 $1.28 $1.32 $1.37 Present Value Discount Factor 1.5580 1.6047 1.6528 1.7024 1.7535 1.8061 1.8603 1.9161 1.9736 2.0328 2.0938 2.1566 2.2213 2.2879 2.3566 Present Value of Future Cost $121,059 $118,231 $115,499 $112,860 $110,312 $107,853 $105,480 $103,191 $100,983 $98,856 $27,383 $27,432 $27,495 $27,573 $27,666 1Lost investment income from use of reserves for downpayment and upfront bank/broker fees Office Lease Financial Analysis FY 2023-24 FY 2024-25 FY 2025-26 FY 2026-27 FY 2027-28 FY 2028-29 FY 2029-30 FY 2030-31 FY 2031-32 FY 2032-33 FY 2033-34 FY 2034-35 FY 2035-36 FY 2036-37 FY 2037-38 Annual Lease $214,758 $219,053 $223,434 $227,903 $232,461 $237,110 $241,852 $246,689 $251,623 $256,656 $261,789 $267,025 $272,365 $277,812 $283,369CAM ChargesOther Total $214,758 $219,053 $223,434 $227,903 $232,461 $237,110 $241,852 $246,689 $251,623 $256,656 $261,789 $267,025 $272,365 $277,812 $283,369 $ per sq. ft. per month $4.50 $4.59 $4.68 $4.78 $4.87 $4.97 $5.07 $5.17 $5.27 $5.38 $5.49 $5.60 $5.71 $5.82 $5.94 $ change $0.09 $0.09 $0.09 $0.10 $0.10 $0.10 $0.10 $0.10 $0.11 $0.11 $0.11 $0.11 $0.11 $0.12 Present Value Discount Factor 1.0000 1.0300 1.0609 1.0927 1.1255 1.1593 1.1941 1.2299 1.2668 1.3048 1.3439 1.3842 1.4258 1.4685 1.5126 Present Value of Future Cost $214,758 $212,673 $210,608 $208,563 $206,539 $204,533 $202,548 $200,581 $198,634 $196,705 $194,795 $192,904 $191,031 $189,177 $187,340 30-year Costs (2023$) $5,612,814
Monthly NPV cost per square foot $3.92
Office Lease Financial Analysis FY 2038-39 FY 2039-40 FY 2040-41 FY 2041-42 FY 2042-43 FY 2043-44 FY 2044-45 FY 2045-46 FY 2046-47 FY 2047-48 FY 2048-49 FY 2049-50 FY 2050-51 FY 2051-52 FY 2052-53 TOTAL Annual Lease $289,036 $294,817 $300,713 $306,727 $312,862 $319,119 $325,501 $332,012 $338,652 $345,425 $352,333 $359,380 $366,568 $373,899 $381,377 $8,712,320CAM Charges $0Other $0 Total $289,036 $294,817 $300,713 $306,727 $312,862 $319,119 $325,501 $332,012 $338,652 $345,425 $352,333 $359,380 $366,568 $373,899 $381,377 $8,712,320 $ per sq. ft. per month $6.06 $6.18 $6.30 $6.43 $6.56 $6.69 $6.82 $6.96 $7.10 $7.24 $7.38 $7.53 $7.68 $7.83 $7.99 $ change $0.12 $0.12 $0.12 $0.13 $0.13 $0.13 $0.13 $0.14 $0.14 $0.14 $0.14 $0.15 $0.15 $0.15 $0.16 Present Value Discount Factor 1.5580 1.6047 1.6528 1.7024 1.7535 1.8061 1.8603 1.9161 1.9736 2.0328 2.0938 2.1566 2.2213 2.2879 2.3566 Present Value of Future Cost $185,521 $183,720 $181,936 $180,170 $178,421 $176,689 $174,973 $173,274 $171,592 $169,926 $168,276 $166,643 $165,025 $163,423 $161,836 -175-

TOWN OF HILLSBOROUGH
San Mateo County
1600 Floribunda Avenue
Hillsborough, CA 94010 NEW BUSINESS

CITY COUNCIL MEETING
AUGUST 14, 2023

AGENDA STAFF REPORT
ITEM SUBJECT: DESIGNATION OF A VOTING DELEGATE AND ALTERNATE VOTING DELEGATE(S) TO THE 2023 LEAGUE OF CALIFORNIA CITIES ANNUAL CONFERENCE SEPTEMBER 20-22, 2023 PURSUANT TO CEQA GUIDELINE 15378
SUMMARY: The League of California Cities/Cal Cities Annual Conference will be held September 20-22, 2023 at the Sacramento SAFE Credit Union Convention Center. An important part of the Annual Conference is the Annual Business Meeting during General Assembly on Friday, September 22, 2023 at 8:30 a.m. At this meeting, Cal Cities membership considers and takes action on resolutions that establish Cal Cities policy. This meeting is an opportunity for city/town officials to directly participate in the development of Cal Cities policy, a key part of the legislative effectiveness of Cal Cities. Resolutions approved by the General Assembly become Cal Cities policy.

In order to vote at the Annual Business Meeting, the City Council must designate by City Council action a delegate and up to two alternate voting delegates to attend the meeting and represent the Town. The designees must be registered attendees of the conference. In order to cast a vote, at least one voter must be present at the business meeting and in possession of the voting delegate card.

Following City Council action, the City Clerk will submit to Cal Cities the required Voting Delegate/Alternate Form.

FISCAL IMPACT: There is no significant fiscal impact associated with this agenda item.

ATTACHMENTS:

1. Annual Conference Voting Guidelines

2. Voting Delegate/Alternate Form

3. Resolutions and the General Assembly Flow Chart
PREPARED BY: Lisa Natusch, City Clerk
RECOMMENDATION: Designate a voting delegate and alternate(s) for the 2023 League of California Cities/Cal Cities Annual Conference Annual Business Meeting on Friday, September 22, 2023.
18 -176-
1400 K Street, Suite 400, Sacramento, CA 95814 • 916.658.8200 • calcities.org General Assembly Voting Guidelines

1. One City One Vote. Each member city has a right to cast one vote on matters pertaining to Cal Cities policy.

2. Designating a City Voting Representative. Prior to the Cal Cities Annual Conference and Expo, each city council may designate a voting delegate and up to two alternates; these individuals are identified on the voting delegate form provided to the Cal Cities Credentials Committee.

3. Registering with the Credentials Committee. The voting delegate, or alternates, may pick up the city's voting card at the voting delegate desk in the conference registration area. Voting delegates and alternates must sign in at the voting delegate desk. Here they will receive a special sticker on their name badge and thus be admitted to the voting area at the General Assembly.

4. Signing Initiated Resolution Petitions. Only those individuals who are voting delegates (or alternates), and who have picked up their city’s voting card by providing a signature to the credentials committee at the voting delegate desk, may sign petitions to initiate a resolution.

5. Voting. To cast the city's vote, a city official must have in their possession the city's voting card and voting tool; and be registered with the credentials committee. The voting card may be transferred freely between the voting delegate and alternates but may not be transferred to another city official who is neither a voting delegate nor alternate.

6. Voting Area at General Assembly. At the General Assembly, individuals with a voting card will sit in a designated area. Admission to the voting area will be limited to the individual in possession of the voting card and with a special sticker on their name badge identifying them as a voting delegate.

7. Resolving Disputes. In case of dispute, the credentials committee will determine the validity of signatures on petitioned resolutions and the right of a city official to vote at the General Assembly.
-177-
ATTACHMENT 1
CITY: ________________________________________
2023 ANNUAL CONFERENCE

VOTING DELEGATE/ALTERNATE FORM
Please complete this form and return it to Cal Cities office by Monday, August 28, 2023.

Forms not sent by this deadline may be submitted to the Voting Delegate Desk located in the Annual Conference Registration Area. Your city council may designate one voting delegate and up to two alternates.

To vote at the General Assembly, voting delegates and alternates must be designated by your city council. Please attach the council resolution as proof of designation. As an alternative, the Mayor or City Clerk may sign this form, affirming that the designation reflects the action taken by the council.

Please note: Voting delegates and alternates will be seated in a separate area at the General Assembly. Admission to this designated area will be limited to individuals (voting delegates and alternates) who are identified with a special sticker on their conference badge. This sticker can be obtained only at the voting delegate desk.

1. VOTING DELEGATE
Name:

Title:

2. VOTING DELEGATE - ALTERNATE
Name:

Title:

Email: _______________________________
Email: ______________________________

3. VOTING DELEGATE - ALTERNATE
Name:

Title:

Email: _____________________________

ATTACH COUNCIL RESOLUTION DESIGNATING VOTING DELEGATE AND ALTERNATES OR ATTEST: I affirm that the information provided reflects action by the city council to designate the voting delegate and alternate(s).

Name: ____________________________________ Email: _________________________________ Mayor or City Clerk: ________________________ Date: __________ Phone: ________________ (circle one) (signature) Please complete and email this form to [email protected] by Monday, August 28, 2023.

Hillsborough
Lisa Natusch [email protected]
650-375-7421
-178-
ATTACHMENT 2
Sixty days before the
Annual Conference and
Expo, Cal Cities members
may submit policy
proposals on issues of
importance to cities. The
resolution must have the concurrence
of at least five additional member cities
or individual members.

How it works: Cal Cities
Resolutions and the General Assembly
General Assembly
General Resolutions
Policy Committees
Developing League of California Cities policy is a dynamic process that engages a wide range of members to ensure that we are representing California cities with one voice. These policies directly guide Cal Cities advocacy to promote local decision-making, and lobby against statewide policy that erodes local control.

The resolutions process and General Assembly is one way that city officials can directly participate in the development of Cal Cities policy. If a resolution is approved at the General Assembly, it becomes official Cal Cities policy. Here’s how Resolutions and the General Assembly works.

The petitioned resolution
is an alternate method
to introduce policy
proposals during the
annual conference. The
petition must be signed by
voting delegates from 10% of member
cities, and submitted to the Cal Cities
President at least 24 hours before the
beginning of the General Assembly.

Petitioned Resolutions
The Cal Cities President
assigns general resolutions
to policy committees where
members review, debate,
and recommend positions for
each policy proposal. Recommendations are
forwarded to the Resolutions Committee.

Who’s who
The Resolutions
Committee includes
representatives from
each Cal Cities diversity
caucus, regional
division, municipal
department, policy
committee, as well as
individuals appointed by
the Cal Cities president.

Voting delegates
are appointed by each
member city; every city
has one voting delegate.

The General Assembly
is a meeting of the
collective body of
all voting delegates —
one from every
member city.

Seven Policy
Committees meet
throughout the year to
review and recommend
positions to take on
bills and regulatory
proposals. Policy
committees include
members from each Cal
Cities diversity caucus,
regional division,
municipal department,
as well as individuals
appointed by the Cal
Cities president.

During the General Assembly, voting delegates
debate and consider general and petitioned
resolutions forwarded by the Resolutions Committee.

Potential Cal Cities bylaws amendments are also
considered at this meeting.

Cal Cities policy
development is a
member-informed
process, grounded
in the voices and
experiences of city
officials throughout
the state.

For more information visit www.calcities.org/general-assembly Prior to the Annual Conference and Expo
Resolutions Committee
The Resolutions Committee
considers all resolutions.

General Resolutions approved1
by either a policy committee
or the Resolutions Committee
are next considered by the General
Assembly. General resolutions not approved,
or referred for further study by both a policy
committee and the Resolutions Committee
do not go the General Assembly. All
Petitioned Resolutions are considered by the
General Assembly, unless disqualified.2
• Voting delegates will receive increased communications to prepare them for their role during the General Assembly.
• The General Assembly will take place earlier to allow more time for debate and discussion.
• Improvements to the General Assembly process will make it easier for voting delegates to discuss and debate resolutions.

What’s new in 2023?
During the Annual Conference and Expo
1 The Resolution Committee can amend a general resolution prior to sending it to the General Assembly. 2 Petitioned Resolutions may be disqualified by the Resolutions Committee according to Cal Cities Bylaws Article VI. Sec. 5(f). -179-
ATTACHMENT 3

TOWN OF HILLSBOROUGH
San Mateo County
1600 Floribunda Avenue
Hillsborough, CA 94010
19 DISCUSSION

CITY COUNCIL MEETING
AUGUST 14, 2023

AGENDA STAFF REPORT
ITEM SUBJECT: OVERVIEW OF GAS-POWERED LEAF BLOWER REGULATIONS IN SAN

MATEO COUNTY AND CONSIDERATION OF POTENTIAL DIRECTION TO STAFF ON ANY

MODIFICATIONS TO THE HILLSBOROUGH MUNICIPAL CODE
______________________________________________________________________________ SUMMARY: In October 2019, staff began reviewing the use of leaf blowers in Hillsborough and presented an informational item at the City Council Goal Setting Session in February 2020. In March 2020, the Shelter In Place (SIP) Order went into effect prohibiting gardeners and landscapers from working. The SIP delayed landscaping work in the community and concurrently delayed the City Council's public discussion of leaf blowers. Gardening and landscaping services resumed after the SIP.

At the April 12, 2021, and January 11, 2021, City Council meetings, staff presented informational reports on the use of leaf blowers in Hillsborough along with proposed next steps to address both noise and environmental impacts. Due to pending state legislation, staff paused any ordinance or policy modifications to determine if state funding would be made available for the implementation of any new programs. The Town continued public education efforts during this time. Due to the lack of funding available currently by the State, staff is presenting a proposed policy modification and additional public education and outreach efforts. On May 9, 2022, the City Council passed a resolution approving the prohibition of gas-powered leaf blowers on town-owned and managed property.

Following City Council discussion at the February 7, 2023 Goal Setting session, direction was provided to continue discussion and exploration of additional restrictions on gas-powered leaf blower use in Town as it relates to sustainability.

This report provides an overview of the existing bans on gas-powered leaf blower use in San Mateo County, lessons learned from other jurisdictions in implementing a gas-powered leaf blower ban, as well as topics for Council discussion and direction.

GAS POWERED LEAF BLOWER BANS/PARTIAL BANS IN SAN MATEO COUNTY Jurisdiction Status Notes
Atherton Banned Ordinance Amended May 2023
Effective July 1, 2024
Belmont None
Brisbane None
Burlingame Partial Ban1 Ordinance Adopted July 2012
Colma Partial Ban2 Ordinance Adopted May 2016
Daly City None
-181-
Agenda Staff Report - Hillsborough City Council
August 14, 2023

Page 2 ends

Hillsborough City CouncilAugust 14, 2023

Hillsborough City Council
August 14, 2023