City Council Meeting Page 1 of 43 June 26, 2023
7 City of Lafayette
City Council Minutes
Lafayette Library and Learning Center – Don Tatzin Community Hall June 26, 2023 3491 Mount Diablo Boulevard, Lafayette, California 6:00 p.m.
As a courtesy, and technology permitting, members of the public may participate virtually. However, the City cannot guarantee that the public’s access to teleconferencing technology will be uninterrupted, and technical difficulties may occur from time to time. Unless required by the Brown Act, City Council/Board meetings will continue despite technical difficulties for participants using the teleconferencing (Zoom) option. To participate virtually in the City of Lafayette’s public meetings and provide public comment, please follow these steps:
1. Watch or Listen: Meetings are broadcast on the City of Lafayette’s YouTube Channel:
http://bit.ly/LoveLafayetteYouTube.
2. Submit Comments Before the Meeting: Members of the public can provide public comment by sending an e-mail to [email protected] for City Council meetings no later than noon the day of the meeting. Those e-mails will be distributed to City Council, the City Manager, and the City Attorney, and will be posted as part of the public record.
3. Live Remote Public Comments: Technology permitting, members of the public may submit live public comment via Zoom conferencing by using the link below. You must download the Zoom app or software. Zoom meetings can be accessed by telephone, computer, or smart device. When the Mayor invites public comment for the item on which you would like to comment, please use the "raise hand" feature (or press *9 if connecting via telephone only) to alert staff you have a public comment to provide. Each speaker is allowed three (3) minutes to speak.
4. At the time and date of the meeting, please click this URL to join the webinar:
https://us02web.zoom.us/j/89008805648?pwd=ODQxRGxzaGNHSWVITUVFalFuUHBIZz09 Passcode: 426199 Or join by phone: Dial 1 669 900 9128
Webinar ID: 890 0880 5648 Passcode: 426199
City Council Meeting Page 2 of 43 June 26, 2023
Mayor Anduri called the Regular City Council meeting to order at 6:00 p.m.
2. ROLL CALL
Present: City Council: Mayor Anduri; Vice Mayor Dawson; Councilmembers Candell, Gerringer, and Kwok
Absent: None
Staff Present: Niroop Srivatsa, City Manager; Tracy Robinson, Administrative Services Director; Mike Moran, Engineering and Public Works Director; Jonathan Katayanagi, Parks and Recreation Director; Matt Luttropp, Engineering Manager; Patrick Golier, Transportation Program Manager; Mala Subramanian, City Attorney; Joanne Robbins, City Clerk
3. Disclosure and/or Take Action on Remote Participation due to Just Cause or Emergency Circumstances Pursuant to AB 2449 (Gov. Code section 54953(f).)
4. ADOPTION OF AGENDA
ACTION: It was M/S/C (Candell/Dawson) to adopt the agenda. Vote: 5-0 (Ayes: Anduri, Dawson, Candell, Gerringer, and Kwok; Noes: None).
5. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE – Peggy Nelson led the Pledge of Allegiance.
6. PUBLIC COMMENTS – (For items not on the agenda)
There were no speakers.
7. PRESENTATIONS – None.
8. CONSENT CALENDAR
Mayor Anduri requested removal of Item 8.A. Councilmember Candell requested removal of Item 8.D. asked if there were requests for removal of items or public comments, and there were no items or public comments.
B. Resolution 2023-26 Reappointing various commission/committee members Recommendation: Adopt Resolution 2023-26.
C. MTC Priority Sites Nomination for Lafayette BART Parking Lots Recommendation: Direct staff to nominate the Lafayette BART station parking lots as a candidate site for the MTC Priority Sites Pilot Program
E. Resolution 2023-40 Approving Assessment of Unpaid Nuisance Abatement; and Directing Contra Costa County to Assess the Property for an Amount Totaling $1,800 (1183 Glen Rd., APN 245-080-004-6
Recommendation: Approve Resolution 2023-40
City Council Meeting Page 3 of 43 June 26, 2023
ACTION: It was M/S/C (Candell/Gerringer) to adopt Consent Calendar Items B, C and E. Vote: 5-0 (Ayes:
Anduri, Dawson, Candell, Gerringer, and Kwok; Noes: None).
9. OLD BUSINESS
A. Matt Luttropp, Engineering Services Manager
Consider appropriating funds to design an alternative to the center median pathway design on Pleasant Hill Road between Mt. Diablo Blvd. and Deer Hill Rd./Stanley Blvd.
Recommendation: Because an east side path does not eliminate conflicts between pedestrians, cyclists, and vehicles at the freeway on- and off-ramps, and because additional design work is unfunded: staff does not recommend allocating reserve funds to consider a design alternative to the proposed center multi-use pathway.
Engineering Services Manager Matt Luttropp gave the staff report and overview of the Council’s consideration to appropriate funds to design an alternative to the center median pathway design on Pleasant Hill Road between Mt. Diablo Boulevard and Deer Hill Road/Stanley Boulevard.
Councilmember Candell referred to the map of the road now. The 3-lane W for the autos extends beyond Acalanes Road now and with this design the City is eliminating the bike lane on the east side. She asked where bikers would go.
Mr. Luttropp said bicyclists have some of the same options they have now. When going southbound, there is no bike lane now but there is a sharrow. That same configuration can be put in place on the northbound side which already has sharrows going underneath the freeway, but this is not a great option for people who do not feel comfortable trying to keep up with the flow of traffic. So, those people would be encouraged to use the center median as their bike route. For the Terraces, the bike lane would stop at the freeway on-ramp. If there is a desire to still preserve that they can do that, but they would need to reduce the shoulders associated with the center median pathway or center lanes adjacent to the center median k-rails.
Councilmember Candell asked if the signalized lights are safer and she asked by how much. Mr. Luttropp said he cannot quantify that, but the signals would run about $750,000 each. In this case, there is the added difficulty of them being on Caltrans property. Caltrans would have to agree to having signals on their property which will likely impact the flow of traffic to and from the freeway. The secondary concern is when you push the call for the on-ramp signal, you will back cars out onto Pleasant Hill Road which will create additional delays on Pleasant Hill Road.
Councilmember Candell referred to a controversial project in San Francisco on Valencia Street. One of the complaints was the weaving the bikers were doing to get into the middle. They were not getting off their bikes, weaving, and have been causing accidents. She asked if this would not happen for Lafayette.
Mr. Luttropp said he thinks those that are the “road warrior bicyclists” will not use the center median because they ride 35 mph. He envisions commuters or kids going to school or people just trying to connect from one side of the freeway to the other side. They are the ones that will use the center median more often. They will not have the weave problem because much like a freeway this is a controlled access facility. You can only get in on the ends whereas you can get in anywhere you want on Valencia Street, which is the problem with it.
City Council Meeting Page 4 of 43 June 26, 2023
Councilmember Candell said by making them have sharrows on both sides, she asked how much less safe is that than having their own bike lane. Mr. Luttropp said anytime you have a dedicated lane it will be safer if you choose to be on the road versus a sharrow.
Councilmember Kwok said there is a section that talks about reducing the margins next to the concrete barrier from 2 feet down to 1 foot in order to not infringe on the right-of-way of the Terraces. Mr. Luttropp stated this is an option if they want to keep that bike lane. If the Council is okay with not having a bike lane in the southbound direction from Deer Hill Road to the on-ramp then they do not need to do anything to the medians.
Councilmember Kwok said the middle 2 lanes of the separated path is 10 feet, 2 feet shoulders, and 2 feet of k-rail, and then 2 more feet before paint. He asked and confirmed with Mr. Luttropp that it is 22 feet in total and they would reduce each of those by 1 foot, so 2, 2, 2 all go down to 1, 1, 1 and 1. Or, you could do 0, 2, 2, 0 which he does not recommend, or you could make the pathway 2, 0, 0, 2. He just needs 4 feet.
Councilmember Kwok said in the cost proposals, if they design the east side it is a certain cost, and if they do the west side it is a different cost. It begs the question that if they did the east side, he asks if this implies that all southbound traffic is then coming over to cut over to the east side and use the east side and then go back to the other side. It is a combined usage so therefore what will be drawn up is a bidirectional path. Mr. Luttropp confirmed.
Councilmember Kwok asked if you would then have bi-directional bike opportunities. Mr. Luttropp said it would still be a multi-use path. You would take the center median concept and move it over to the east side.
Councilmember Kwok said that seems to imply there is no reason to do a study of both the east and the west side. Staff only proposed one or the other. Mr. Luttropp said you could do both, but he would not suggest that because it would be a waste.
Councilmember Kwok said if you did the west side, the implication is that the west side would be bidirectional path or the east side as bi-directional and you are not recommending both for that reason.
Mayor Anduri asked if #6 includes 1-5. Mr. Luttropp replied no, it does not.
Mayor Anduri asked if you could not do #6 without doing #1. Mr. Luttropp said arguably you could if you did not want to have any preliminary work done and wanted to go straight forward with it and build it.
Mayor Anduri said if they did #6 that would not necessarily include the signalized ramp terminals. Mr.
Luttropp said no, it would not include the signalized ramps.
Mayor Anduri asked if there has been a time recently when staff has sat down with Caltrans and had a discussion of what the City’s issues and safety concerns are about Pleasant Hill Road and what they might be willing to do.
Mr. Luttropp said he has not had that discussion. He does not know if Mr. Moran or Mr. Golier have either.
City Council Meeting Page 5 of 43 June 26, 2023
Mayor Anduri asked if it might be worthwhile to schedule a meeting with Caltrans and see what they are willing to do after the City pointing out its problems and get a sense of what they might be willing to do.
Mr. Luttropp stated they would want a specific request and they would want it to be better directed, which he described. He can do it, but he would have guarded expectations.
Councilmember Candell said if they are going to install the RRFBs she thinks the City should talk to them sooner rather than later.
Mayor Anduri said he is stepping back and looking at this. It is such a difficult problem to figure out, some things are so expensive, and this whole thing was designed when Pleasant Hill Road was to be seen in the future as a freeway and yet, they have the full 4 cloverleaf. Maybe they have done that somewhere else and some other community has approached them and asked what they can do. They have people coming off the freeway at high speed expecting a freeway and it is now more of a collector street, and they are all speculating about what Caltrans would do.
Councilmember Gerringer said if they had these kinds of decisions the Council is being asked to make tonight about additional studies she asked if they could go to Caltrans ahead of that with those very specific things about stop signs, signalized ramps, speed humps, and others. Mr. Luttropp said, yes.
Mayor Anduri opened the public comment period.
PEG MATSON ceded her time to Ramsay Thomas.
RAMSAY THOMAS asked not to fund the study, said regardless what happens to this median strip their community and everyone else uses the pathway to bike or walk and they will choose to go down the east side parkway. To suggest not spending $17,000 to study a bit of improvements seems odd. He encouraged the Council to ask tough questions of staff regarding the issue. The Vision Zero asks for a data-driven approach to crash patterns. They would like someone to ask staff where the data is that says there is a crash pattern between cars, pedestrians, and bikers on this strip of road. They know it is scary and would love to see improvements, but this does not mean it is automatically dangerous. They have lived there for decades and have not seen any crash patterns at all, ever.
In contract, there is a clear crash pattern at the 2 intersections where the red lights are. They sent pictures of an awful crash in March next to the Shell Station. Their experience is that they see piles of debris when walking, jogging, riding bikes at the 2 intersections where the stop lights are. They would estimate there are 4 crashes a year on both, possibly more. Those are exactly designed where these bikers going to the center median strip are supposed to enter. It is inevitable that drivers will be more attempted to accelerate on yellow lights, run through red lights, and cause accidents.
His second question is where is the data from a professional survey that suggests bikers will choose that center median pathway as opposed to what they currently use—the eastside pathway or open road itself.
The Acalanes High School community which is supposed to be the beneficiary of this Safe Routes to Schools initiative have not been asked . One of their staff members from Acalanes walked through their neighborhood recently. They asked her if they heard about the median strip, and she said they have not heard a thing. She thinks it is the craziest idea and she would never let her child bike down a pathway.
City Council Meeting Page 6 of 43 June 26, 2023
The third question is, is it not time for staff or the Council to admit that this median strip proposal is really for bikers only, as no pedestrians will use that. That then is designated as a Class IV bike path and a Class IV bike path has consequences. The enormous study on bike paths provided by the State suggests that if a Class IV bike path is proposed or designated, the similar and simultaneous study should be made to make sure pedestrians on the other end of the pathway are not going to be impacted in a negative way.
That would open the door to the Council saying they could spend money on the study of an east side parkway because they have designated this as a bike-only pathway which it most certainly will be, and they can use the money already there to produce the study on the east side pathway. With 2 comparative study, a survey of what use is likely to be, median pathway, open road, east side parkway, the City Council is working with real information to start making a decision that makes common sense, and they would urge the Council to move in that direction.
DUANE NELSEN said he and his wife appreciate that the Council is listening to concerns raised by residents about the Pleasant Hill Road median pathway by adding an item on tonight’s agenda to fund the study of an alternative. However, City staff is recommending the denial of spending funds to look at an alternate.
At the same time, staff is continuing to push forward with the $3.2 million plan which ignores serious concerns from not only residents but the City’s own Transportation and Circulation Transportation Circulation Commission. The City has done a lot of good things, which he described as speed bumps, solar powered flashing lights adjacent to the Acalanes Football Field. This slowed traffic, created a safer way to cross Stanley, good signage, and flashing lights. He asked to contrast that with the City’s current plan for this project. The gains are that pedestrians and bikes will not have to confront Hwy 24 on and off ramps, with the caveat if pedestrians and bikes use the pathway. The losses he could see are that traffic will be delayed if pedestrians or bicyclists use the facility. The specific language was, “No change in vehicular delay unless pedestrians or bicyclists use the facility.” The City must believe people will use it or they would not put it in and therefore, there will be a delay. That delay with the amount of traffic going through Pleasant Hill is a major concern for safety.
Councilmember Candell asked if people look at those RFFBs and stop when they see them flashing on Stanley.
Mr. Nelsen said yes, people have reacted well and then have been very helpful.
GILBERT WOLTJER ceded his time to Sheryl Anderson.
SHERYL ANDERSON suggested reading Ramsay Thomas’s thorough and articulate letter to the City Council dated June 22nd. She said she stands in favor of the analysis and support of the east Pleasant Hill Road pathway because the median strip pathway offers more possible dangerous outcomes. She has lived here since 1978 and her husband since 1985 on the property at the end of Acalanes Avenue off Pleasant Hill Road. They have gone on 2+ walks a week during that time that always includes the east Pleasant Hill Road. They understand the freeway entrances and exits always need more focus when crossing, i.e., cannot be jabbering or be on the phone, but they have never felt unsafe in all those years. She understands data supposedly supports their experience with no crashes reported at those points. The dangerous accidents Mr. Thomas referred to have almost always been at the intersection which are planned as the entrances and exits to the possible median strip pathway, Mt. Diablo and Pleasant Hill Road, and especially at Stanley and Pleasant Hill Road. The strip could mean more foot and bike traffic and could really make it more dangerous for Acalanes High School students. If you live in this neighborhood you see readily that one of the big contributions to the crashes are people running the red stop lights from slightly to full out blatantly. You see this often or have experienced it personally.
City Council Meeting Page 7 of 43 June 26, 2023
Another issue is that if the median strip is put in the driving lanes on either side might need to be smaller so it might feel more crowded and congested. The ones inside the strip seem more captive and vulnerable until they get to one side or the other. She questioned what happens when cars change lanes and possibly getting too close and scraping the cement stirp, or car accidents that cause a few cars to get jumbled and hit the cement barrier. Median occupants have nowhere to go until they can work their way out. It remains to be seen how useful such a median strip path would be. First, bicyclists and pedestrians are not good next to each other in small enclosed spaces, and she questioned if they would want to take the extra time needed to use the crosswalks that lead to getting you into and out of the median strip.
When she first heard about the median strip idea she was floored and head-shaken because it seems so counter-intuitive that someone would walk or bike down the middle of the road with 2 lanes of traffic to either side, even with a partial concrete barrier. She thanked the Council for listening and said people will still see her and her husband walking up and down east Pleasant Hill Road no matter how this plays out.
MARGIE DARLINGTON ceded her time to Janet Thomas.
JANET THOMAS said as mentioned in her letter, the median strip proposal has motivated her to speak about a situation she has been aware of for decades. There are ways that the walkway along Pleasant Hill Road could be improved to enhance safety, attractiveness, and use but she has not felt compelled to say anything until the median strip pathway proposal came up. She reiterated that she can understand and have heard this is scary and dangerous for many people, especially bikers, but she still stands by her claim that she is not afraid to walk on the east side pathway. She has jogged, ridden a bike with kids, pushed a stroller there over the years, have always done so knowing she needs to be cautious at the on and off ramps. In most cases, autos will stop as she approaches the sidewalk, or she waits until the path is clear.
However, there are obvious ways to remedy some of the safety concerns along the corridor. The first is cutting the vegetation near the on and off ramps to improve driver visibility of bikers and pedestrians. She presented pictures of the on and off ramps and she recognizes it is hard to work with Caltrans, but she thinks the City needs to try.
Emboldening and shifting the crosswalks is important. This was initially meant to be part of a highway.
The crosswalks do not make sense in many cases, and whatever the City does it should try to improve where those crosswalks are. That way, drivers and people using the pathway would feel safer. She asked to replace the current sidewalk or the wider pathway that has a barrier between the path and car traffic to allow 2-way biking and pedestrian use which would be a Class I pathway would be ideal. A wider path would allow bikers, who currently use the green lanes, to cross over a lane of traffic merging onto the freeway. This would no longer have to be the case because they would be together.
At the eastern corner of Pleasant Hill Road and Mt. Diablo Boulevard near the Veterinarian Hospital when coming north, this is one of the scariest places to walk in the City which is about 5 feet of a merge lane onto the highway. People are speeding and do not even look to see if there are pedestrians. There is an island there, and she would recommend that be replaced with a right-turn at the stop light. Simply making the whole pathway look more attractive through resurfacing and landscaping, thus more comfortable for those traveling on it, as well as the fact this is an entry point to Lafayette.
City Council Meeting Page 8 of 43 June 26, 2023
In her letter, she cited her reasons for not thinking the median strip pathway is the best way to improve safety which she will not go into, but she reiterated that she and others from her neighborhood would like to work with City staff as they move forward to try to do what is best for this important transportation corridor. She requests the City not pursue construction of the median strip pathway until thorough consideration, discussion, and analysis of the pros and cons of an expanded east side Class I pathway versus the proposed median strip pathway has taken place.
CHRISTINE SLOSEK ceded her time to Steve Slosek.
STEVE SLOSEK voiced support of speakers thus far who think the center median idea is a very flawed idea.
He is someone who have commuted for years by bicycle over this very path that exists. He is not a road warrior but a 63-year old who rides a 30-year old mountain bike. He thinks the City got hooked on this idea of the center median by free money and there seems to be no ability to stop what seems to be a bad idea. He supports pursing alternatives before the Council continues down this path. He applauded the intent but thinks it is a bad idea. He very much enjoys the improvements already made by adding the green marking, which was a substantial change for the better. His main point here was, while supporting alternatives, he wants to also say that he is looking for a commitment from the Council. Since the Council has already approved proceeding with the design work of the center median he asked to stop. Before committing to pursuing to any funding for the center median, to ask staff to clearly evaluate all reports because they are not clear of an analysis of Option A-put in the center median, Option B-do nothing. He asked to identify the net benefits, positive and negative. It seems this whole approach has been to eliminate this traffic conflict and everything else is secondary. So, the whole process has been to make the implications less bad and he does not think that is the right approach. He is an architect and suggested starting from the beginning at alternatives before moving forward, but unfortunately the City is past that point in the process.
He asked 5 things when getting to that point--Is a bike rider safe if they take this center median. He contends he would be less safe. He assumes pedestrians will take this path so the City is putting bicycles, E-bikes, E-scooters, kids, walking with cell phones and headphones on, and they will be put in the center of Pleasant Hill Road and he will say that is safer than the existing condition. As a bike rider he is more likely to get in an accident there than he is on the side of the road. Riding bikes on the sidewalk does not make sense and the Council is saying to put bikes going in 2 directions and pedestrians all in the same place which does not make sense. He asked to step back and determine whether this is better or worse for safety and whether it is more convenient. To him, it is far less convenient.
Right now, he has 1 stop light, 1 signal, he turns left if going to BART and is on Pleasant Hill, has a righthand turn, and then he is home free. If he takes the center median he needs to wait for 2 signals—2 signals to get to the center median, get to the end, then wait for another signal. He thinks it would be 2- 4 minutes at the signal and worse coming back because he cannot turn right onto Acalanes. He must go all the way to the end and back track.
He asked who will use this? He has never seen any analysis that says what bikers and pedestrians are using it. Earlier mentioned is there will be no change in vehicular delay at the intersection unless pedestrians or bicyclists use the facility which is an insane statement. The City does not know who will use it and the impact, so this is forcing an idea without stepping back.
City Council Meeting Page 9 of 43 June 26, 2023
There will be impacts on the neighborhood. The first meeting the Council eliminated the right-hand turn onto Stanley which was crazy. He asked that whatever the design ends up being he asked how this will impact the Reliez Creek neighborhood. Lastly, for high school drop-off or pickup, no one has looked at what happens.
Mayor Anduri said Mr. Slosek said he wanted a commitment that before the City pursues funding for the center median there would be an analysis of A) the center median; and B) nothing. Mr. Slosek clarified that he said before proceeding with funding construction, the City step back and have a simple plus/minus comparison of whatever ends up being proposed, what is the current condition, and he added any of these other alternates pursued, and how better or worse they would be.
Mayor Anduri said what is being proposed for the east side is a Class I walkway which he understands to be a 10-foot-wide walkway that can accommodate pedestrians and 2-way bike traffic. This sounds like the center median
Mr. Luttropp said staff is basically copying what they do in the center median and putting it on the side of the road.
Mayor Anduri said in terms of flow of pedestrians, he asked if there is a difference.
Mr. Slosek said personally when riding his bike, he is not in the center of Pleasant Hill Road with 2 concrete barriers on each side. He thinks the right solution is to allow confident bike riders to stay on the sides of the roads and not make it more dangerous to keep what you have.
Mayor Anduri, in refining his question, asked if Mr. Slosek sees a difference in potential accidents between a Class I walkway or multi-purpose walkway on the east side or the center median.
Mr. Slosek said he does not know the specific details of what the alternate would be in terms of the configuration and the layout. Assuming it is the same and the same number of people were in it, the situation would be the same. His opinion would be if there is a casual or a not so confident bike rider going slow, it is better being on the side and not the center of the road. If going at a pace that is slow, they are not likely to meet someone on an E-bike going 25 mph. He and the E-bike rider will need to say on a safe path on the right side of the road going north and south.
STELLA WOTHERSPOON said she is speaking as a resident and not a member of the Transportation Circulation Commission. She thanked the Council for asking staff for obtaining the cost estimates for options for studies of an eastside path. She encouraged the Council to fund studies 1 and 3 through 5 to understand the comparative pros and cons of continuing a Class I pathway that exists south of Mt. Diablo Boulevard. They need to understand how the freeway ramps can be controlled via a stop sign or signal.
This would create conditions like the southern pathway. She would not limit the study design to signalized ramps but rather allow the consultant to determine the optimal method of traffic control. There is a freeway light quality of Pleasant Hill Road and it results from its physical design as a future placeholder for a future freeway. But, it is time to work with Caltrans to re-design Pleasant Hill Road to align with the local scale.
City Council Meeting Page 10 of 43 June 26, 2023
The width of the right-of-way and the free right off-ramps maintain driver’s perception that they are still on a freeway and this is why they see 85th percentile speeds well in excess of the posted 35 mph limit.
Caltrans has entered a new era as she understands. In 2020, it launched a Division of Safety and adopted the Safe System framework. The Director is a former Transportation Circulation Commissioner. The City needs to engage with Caltrans and some of us may know the person who directs that division.
Exploring the control of the off-ramps aligns with the goals of Vision Zero and the tactic of reducing speed as a major focus in the 2023 draft Local Road Safety Plan. The crash analysis for that plan found that none of the incidents on Pleasant Hill Rod involved a bicyclist or pedestrian, and all were motor vehicle or motorcycle crashes. Speed and inattention were the factors, so controlling speed will benefit all modes.
Interestingly, from 2009 to 2020, the City had Pleasant Hill Road, Deer Hill to Stanley to Mt. Diablo Corridor study on the Transportation Circulation Commission Work Plan and the intent was to look at ways to improve bicycle and pedestrian safety. It appeared on 2 grant candidate lists and was described as “development of a corridor plan for Pleasant Hill Road to that extent, consider walkway facilities, improve crossings at freeway on and off ramp safety improvements, and feasibility of southbound bike lanes.” Funding those studies 1, 3 through 5 with the east side alternative would achieve the goals of the corridor study envisioned over that 11 year span, it would also complete the due diligence of possibilities of these 2 alternatives, and most importantly it would be meaningful engagement with the broader public.
MARY ANN HOISINGTON said she understood this project was designed to protect the Acalanes students as they rode their bikes to school. If that is the case, it bothers her that she was speaking to a grandmother of children who attend Acalanes and they told her that hardly anyone rides a bike to school. Therefore, she asked how many young people at Acalanes will be using this project.
SADEGH said this is his first time speaking at a Council meeting and said he is a frequent traveler through Pleasant Hill Road. He grew up here and went to Acalanes and is familiar with the area. He referred to the area south of Mt. Diablo on Pleasant Hill Road and said there has been a recent change to the bike lane before the roundabout. One of the lanes was converted.
Mayor Anduri stated the Council will be addressing that in the next item.
CHERYL MACDONALD said she agrees with many of the speakers and their concerns of funding for the east end project for the study. There has been a difficult Caltrans relationship in the past, but she was encouraged by Ms. Wotherspoon’s comments and thinks the City should speak with them.
LIBBY HENRY said she saw the recommendation from Mr. Luttropp and is very disheartened by the disingenuous part of the staff about the east side pathway. Most residents and particularly those people most affected by this would much rather see an alternative to the median project. To say it does not solve the problems, unless the City has no pedestrians, walkways or cars, there will be problems no matter what is done. Staff fails to mention the median pathway creates a lot more problems than it solves. According to the report, it is a lot less expensive to do the preliminary work on this study than what is currently being done. She hopes the Council rejects staff’s recommendation and pursues going further with this because she does not feel it was given fair attention by those involved.
City Council Meeting Page 11 of 43 June 26, 2023
Mayor Anduri said Mr. Thomas raised a point with respect to use of the funds that the City has received for the median pathway which is if they designate the center median as primarily or exclusively for bikes and it is deemed to be a Class IV bikeway then the City is required to study effects on pedestrians which might lead them to study an alternative on the east side and use part of the funds for that. He asked if this would be possible.
Mr. Luttropp said he does not believe it is because the grant funding the City received was for a multi-use pathway in the center median. Changing that would require the City to obtain approval for that.
Mayor Anduri asked what is the extent with the interaction with the school district, specifically Acalanes Union High School District.
Mr. Luttropp said he has not personally reached out to them. They received notices, they had the A-frame signs up, and he was not sure how anyone would not know about this project over the last year or so.
There has been a great deal of information on social media, A-frames, and meetings as evidenced by the people who turned out to his public meetings.
Mayor Anduri said the last the Council discussed this, there was a comment they might need 8 feet of right-of-way from the Terraces project in order to do this, but this is new information tonight that they do not need to do that.
Mr. Luttropp said correct. The developer already baked it into their design and had assumed they would be providing that much right-of-way to accommodate the center median pathway plus the 5-foot bike lane they had included in their design.
Mayor Anduri said if we get the 8 feet, he asked if that means they do not have to decide between a bikeway and narrowing the shoulders.
Mr. Luttropp said they still must make that choice as to whether the City wants the dedicated bike lane in the southbound lanes from Deer Hill Road to the on ramp, and if so, they need to reduce the shoulders in the center median pathway and adjacent lanes even with the additional 8 feet of right-of-way.
Councilmember Candell said she knows the City did extensive outreach to Acalanes when they were doing all changes to the speed humps and safe routes to school items. She asked and confirmed there was no official contact with them for this project.
Mr. Luttropp said no, and as the Council is aware, this project took a slightly different path than normal.
They still could however, but at this point the City is already starting the design work.
Councilmember Candell referred to data collected before and after in Burton Valley, and she asked if there is any plan to collect data before and afterwards. Mr. Luttropp asked what data should be collected.
City Manager Srivatsa stated they did an analysis of the number of students biking to and from the school and the number of pedestrians for Burton Valley.
City Council Meeting Page 12 of 43 June 26, 2023
Mr. Luttropp said staff would probably want to collect that data the year before it gets built and then collect the data the year after since staff has no idea when this project will get built because it is based on funding. He would not think collecting data right now would be particularly useful, particularly if it is built 5-6 years from now because people’s habits can change quite a bit in that span.
Councilmember Candell asked and confirmed staff could do the outreach to Acalanes School. Mr. Luttropp said he was not sure what that data would look like because it would simply be asking how many people they think use it, but it costs nothing to ask for this.
Councilmember Candell said if they do these studies, they do not talk about the RRFBs, and she asked if they will assume the east side multi-use pathway if they study it will include the fact it will have RFBs in there or not.
Mr. Luttropp said the studies in the list for the east side include pros and cons, and the RRFBs could be included in that pros and cons list.
Councilmember Candell referred to the bulb outs they might do on the east side and said she thinks they might affect evacuations or solid things like that. She asked if there would be any thought about talking with Fire and understanding if they think it might have impact on evacuation routes.
Mr. Luttropp said the bulb outs are not taking any lanes. From Acalanes to the right turn pocket section you could arguably sneak a couple of cars in that area. If it was painted with delineators, the Fire Department could drive over them.
Councilmember Kwok referred to the strip map suggestions for 1 or 2, he was trying to clarify what is the deliverable going to look like in that report when talking about the pros and cons. He asked if it will be the pros and cons compared to what. Mr. Luttropp replied it would be compared to the center median.
Councilmember Kwok said if they picked Option 1, he asked and confirmed the east side concepts developed are in lieu of the median and not in addition to. The designers will start with current conditions and they will paint out a vision for the east side and weighs the pros and cons against the median.
Councilmember Gerringer said she is in support of looking at buffers put north of Acalanes Avenue going into the right turn lane and vegetation, hardscape, or paint by the northbound south of Acalanes Avenue.
This was part of what the Council had asked for during the decision to move forward with the study and design of the center median, which she is supportive of no matter where they go with the additional studies.
Mayor Anduri asked to focus on this because the Council has voted to move forward with the detailed study. Now, the Council is giving guidance on specific aspects of that detailed study that become more apparent as they looked at the east side options. He suggested taking them one by one because they are independent of the other decision they will make. He asked what options there are for the east side northbound, north of Acalanes.
City Council Meeting Page 13 of 43 June 26, 2023
Mr. Luttropp said the options are relatively limited. Once you get to the right turn pocket here, there is no room left which is the same as it is now. Once you go south, they have quite a few options. They can make this whole blue area either a landscaped area, painted with delineators that Fire personnel can drive over, or they can eliminate it entirely. If the concern is that they want it even easier to get to that right turn pocket you could conceivably extend that right-turn pocket all the way to Acalanes Avenue, but you would be pushing the cars right up against the sidewalk which is what people said they were apprehensive about. He pointed to a portion owned by EBMUD, so the City might have an easier time acquiring an easement, although it is directly over the top of their aqueducts, so they may be apprehensive about the retaining walls that would be needed to make the sidewalk wider. But, there are more options once getting further until getting by the gas station and homes which is harder.
Mayor Anduri asked what are the options on that stretch. Mr. Luttropp said since the Council does not want to acquire more right-of-way, the options are to do a stripped median in blue, landscaping in the blue area, they could do something slightly smaller than the full 10 feet that the blue area is, or nothing could be done and make it more road which people could use like they use now as cheating their way to the right turn lane. Those are the options he sees in that area.
Councilmember Kwok said right now, there is a bike lane in there painted with green, so presumably cars would not drive into there. They might visually see this as only crossing at the hashed green. Mr. Luttropp said the City installed delineators in there because they were finding vehicles were driving in it. That amounts to about 7 feet of real estate that is currently being used there for the bike lane and a painted separation between the bikes and cars, which is when looking at this, you see a whole 10 feet they can work with. He pointed to the red line which he said is the existing median, so that is getting carved away to give them more left turn pocket as part of the Terraces development which is why you are ending up with about 10 feet on the other side that is usable for whatever purpose they wish to use it for.
Councilmember Candell asked if there is any way to maintain the bike lane, do not use the blue area, and she hesitates on the major evacuation routes when doing things like this. She asked staff to talk with Fire and get their input. She is very concerned the City is eliminating the bike lane on there, as well. There will be sharrows, but the 2 lanes and the road diet in the middle will probably be the most heavily trafficked lanes in all of Lafayette and they are sharrowing it with bikes, which is a real concern and negative. She is not a big fan of this for those 2 major reasons.
Mr. Luttropp asked if Councilmember Candell would not recommend creating those buffers and would rather have it be open. Councilmember Candell confirmed she would for those 2 big safety reasons.
Mayor Anduri said this recognizes there is no bike lane. Councilmember Candell said they could fit a bike lane there. Mr. Luttropp said no, they could not because you would not have anything when you got to either side of that.
Councilmember Candell said she understands all of that, but she thinks this is a dangerous thing for the road warriors and Fire. Mr. Luttropp emphasized you will have the real estate. It just will not be striped as a bike lane because it would not make any sense to have a tiny chunk of bike lane in the middle of nowhere with no bike lane on either side.
Councilmember Candell returned to her point and said she does not like it. She thinks it is a problem with 2 major safety issues if they go with this design exactly for those reasons. There is no way to fit the bikes and it is uncontrolled. They will have negatively impacted their evacuation route.
City Council Meeting Page 14 of 43 June 26, 2023
Mr. Luttropp noted the center median is still there, and Councilmember Candell said unfortunately she does not think they are going to design their way out of those 2 safety problems with this design.
Mayor Anduri asked to recognize they are having this discussion on the assumption that they are designing a center median. Councilmember Candell said she thinks this is in the “cons” column then. These are the things that are going to be negatively impacted by it.
Vice Mayor Dawson said this is north of Hwy 24 and during evacuations, she asked if people would evacuate to Hwy 24. What she thinks Councilmember Candell is worried about is first responders would go that way, and Councilmember Candell confirmed.
Mayor Anduri said he is hearing to just leave it to the designers. He did not think there was guidance on this. The second one is now moving the block south on from Acalanes and possibilities there. He asked if it will be the same thing.
Mr. Luttropp said yes, the same thing. He just wants to make sure what he is hearing and what the direction is to not to go forward with mitigating how close the cars are to the edge of the road. He is hearing to leave it as open real estate and not do any of that. He noted they are building the center median so the question at hand is, do they try to mitigate moving the cars closer to the people on the sidewalk on the east side or not.
Councilmember Candell said you must think about the bike lanes and evacuation routes, and not just about pedestrians. It is Vision Zero so she does not think this is the final design they should pursue.
Mayor Anduri said if he understands this correctly, there is no room for the bike lane, and Mr. Luttropp confirmed and said he wants to make sure he understands again that the Council does not want to mitigate moving the cars closer to the people on the sidewalk because it is very binary. You either are mitigating it or you are not.
Councilmember Candell suggested putting a K-rail on the side of the sidewalk so you do not take space from the road. Mr. Luttropp said you would take space from the road of 4 feet. Councilmember Candell said she does not like the design. It hastoo many downsides. She does not think they have struck the right balance.
Mr. Luttropp said he needs to give the designer some direction, so he is doing the center median and he needs to know what they are going to do on the edge of the road and there are 2 choices. They either do nothing or something.
Mayor Anduri said where this ends up though is going to have a detailed design. It does not mean the Council is allocating funds. It does not mean they are approving going ahead. All they are doing is giving guidance with respect to doing a detailed design. If the detailed design returns to them and they evaluate A against B or nothing, in Councilmember Candell’s mind it would be a con, and before they go forward they would evaluate the pros and cons. If there is no way they can get around eliminating a bike lane then that may be seen as a fatal problem. He was not sure, but he is pointing that out. He asked if there is any more right-of-way from the Terraces project, and Mr. Luttropp said, no.
Councilmember Kwok asked and confirmed with Mr. Luttropp that the Council is looking at:
City Council Meeting Page 15 of 43 June 26, 2023
• Option 1 as the blue area north of Acalanes Avenue and direction on what should they tell the designers what to do with that; whether the blue should be blacktop and stay the same which would not provide any buffer to the sidewalk which is the northern edge of the blue; • Option 2 would be landscaping in there and it becomes a barrier that keeps cars closer to the center median and it creates that landscape barrier from the sidewalk; and • Option 3 would be something not formalized as landscape but something fire trucks could drive over, there could be delineators or plastic barriers that create a visual buffer.
Councilmember Candell said she would like a narrow barrier and not take any roadway away, so Option 3 is not giving her that.
Councilmember Gerringer asked what is there now other than delineators that have been put in. Mr.
Luttropp said this is north of Acalanes Avenue.
Councilmember Gerringer said therefore they hear nothing raised on the roadway, but it could be paint and delineators that create a median that could go around the blue pieces and would solve the evacuation issues, but would make people realize they should not be driving in that space. She is supportive of that design coming back because it addresses Councilmember Candell’s concern. Also, it is an attempt to address what the Council had asked staff to do which was to make pedestrians on that sidewalk feel more comfortable.
Mayor Anduri said the bicycles would be in the lane and there would be sharrows in that lane south of Acalanes and recognizing they lost the bike lane, and he voiced support of Option 3, as well as Councilmember Kwok, and Vice Mayor Dawson.
Mayor Anduri said the southbound bike lane can either be eliminated or they can reduce the shoulders on the center median. If they do the center median, he thinks they must have 2 feet between the roadway and the K rail and 2 feet between the inside of the K rail and the lane. He would want to keep those buffers and do away with the bike lane if they must make that choice.
Councilmember Kwok said he will take an opposing direction because he likes the idea if they can preserve the bike lane and if there is not a significant decrease in safety from a 2 foot to 1 foot. He continues to reflect on the half hour he spent on the San Mato Third Avenue overcrossing where he saw 90 people walking across that in one-half hour. There were 90% pedestrians and not bicyclists walking. They had 8 feet and had 1 foot on the sides to the K rail and 1 to the paint stripe. There were many people using it to cross over Hwy 101 and being there gave him more confidence that this is a viable mechanism.
They still had east and west sidewalks and ways they crossed over the 2 butterflies, and he saw 3 or 4 people using those, so people have a choice. The majority use the middle, but if they only need 4 feet and can keep the bike path, it is not a sacrifice to safety and does not compromise the intent of the median multi-use pathway, he thinks it is a good trade-off so he would have a different viewpoint and save the bike path and narrow those.
Councilmember Gerringer said that sound bound piece is different than northbound which is a true, solid green bike path on the east side. On the southbound side coming into that or past the intersection onto westbound Hwy 24 is a sharrow. Right now, it is a short sharrow.
City Council Meeting Page 16 of 43 June 26, 2023
Mr. Luttropp said right now, southbound Pleasant Hill Road is sharrows the whole way and there is no bike lane. When the Terraces gets built as part of building out their project, they had planned on installing a bike lane from Deer Hill to the first on-ramp. After that, it is all sharrows again.
Councilmember Gerringer asked if Councilmember Kwok’s proposal is to stick with the Terraces had designed through that, but it changes because there will be the trap lane which Mr. Luttropp said is shown and he presented to it. The red curb is the existing face of curb. If you were doing the sharrows, he pointed to where they would be in the through lane from Deer Hill to Mt. Diablo Boulevard like they are now. If they put a bike lane in, the bike lane goes between the through lane and the turn lane, so it is out in the middle of the street.
Councilmember Gerringer said if they did sharrows the way it is now she asked if you would still need to get 4 feet out of that or, she asked if it can be designed to put the green paint on there which also shows drivers they are sharing the lane with a bicyclist. Or, she asked if it must be the solid bike lane.
Mr. Luttropp said what they are trading is you are taking away the proposed bike lane which is the solid green dedicated space for bicyclists. You put a sharrow in the through lane and this is how you bought your 5 feet. The sharrow in the through lane is effectively what they have out there right now. You put those feet in the center median. If you do not do that, he must get more space out of what is in the center median. The stuff in the center median are the shoulders.
Councilmember Gerringer said she is uncomfortable losing the 2 feet buffer and was trying to find a way to still do a visual and find a compromise. She still thinks people who will ride through that part are back to the 35 mph whether they are road warriors or commuters. What they have there right now does not seem like they must give up putting paint in the space, so she currently wants the 2 feet on either side, so she is leaning towards no bike lane.
Vice Mayor Dawson said she would lean with agreeing with Councilmember Kwok to preserve as much as they can of a bike lane. She also thinks with the center median in place it would be part of slowing down traffic anyway and the buffer with 1 to 2 feet on either side is okay.
Mayor Anduri pointed out on the trail if there is a problem, you have an option. Vice Mayor Dawson said she is saying with the trail itself, there is still navigation within that trail.
Councilmember Candell said she thinks they should reach out to the bike folks on this one. Having the additional bike lane would be safer, but she sees it as a conflict now because of the new slip lane for people to go onto the freeway which is a new thing they will have. If they put the bike lane in between those two, she sees people that did not get into the slip lane fast enough wanting to suddenly cross over the bike lane. The bike is there, and they are not paying attention that the bike is there. So, the sharrow in that situation may be safer for them because it is clear they are in your lane and you must deal with them, so she suggested speaking with the “bike guy.”
Mr. Luttropp said unfortunately there is not a “bike guy” that represents the whole community at large.
There are handfuls of people who have given them completely different answers with the roundabout.
They can ask a handful of people but there is not just one person.
Councilmember Candell said since they are at a stale mate it seems they could reach out and get some ideas because she sees the 2 options and does not know which is safer.
City Council Meeting Page 17 of 43 June 26, 2023
Mayor Anduri said the third guidance item makes the most difference in the design because it impacts the median itself. He suggested talking about what more information about what they want, such as reaching out to the bike community.
Mayor Anduri said the Council has given guidance, and he recommended discussion regarding an alternative and what they do.
Councilmember Gerringer said she thinks they should go forward with studies, spending the money on the conceptual strip map drawings, looking at pros and cons, looking at the signalized ramp terminals, stop signs, or speed humps. She thinks what the Mayor said about having that conversation with Caltrans is an important part of the ultimate study of the whole east side path and trying to make those intersections and ramps coming on and off safer and hinge on whether Caltrans will work with the City.
The can look at the new Caltrans Safety Division, look at safe streets, but before she feels comfortable moving forward and spending any money, she would like to know they have a path forward with Caltrans.
Councilmember Candell said she agrees the City should talk with Caltrans, but she is comfortable in doing #1 to swag out what that multi-use pathway looks like and the pros and cons. She would hesitate on doing the signalized on and off ramps until they talk with Caltrans to see if they have any chance of doing those.
So, she suggested looking at #1 with the RFFBs and see where they are at.
Vice Mayor Dawson said they want it safe in the long term but in the short term it sounds like they have come up with a lot of things they can maybe do, and even in the short term. Even before they decide to build the center median, they can still make it as safe as possible. One of the things would be enhancing the east side pathway. So, she sees providing a strip map to see what it is they can do inexpensively if that is even a possibility. It is $110,000 and she also supported talking with Caltrans about doing things in the short term.
She is of the mind as Councilmember Gerringer that she would not be comfortable doing any signalization, given the cost of them as well as other components that are costly.
Councilmember Kwok said the simple thing for him is if they are going to approve some study expenditures of $17,000 he feels uncomfortable voting on it now because he thinks it is all part of the rest of the unfunded items on the list. If they had a lot of surpluses, it would be easy to do this, but they are not in that luxury now. If they deem this as something they want to consider, he would suggest moving it into the next budget discussion and weigh what other things they will cut. They are in a difficult situation with their budget where they cannot just say “yes” to every public request. He has said that everybody wants to do more, but they need to raise the money. He would feel uncomfortable voting for this at this time and would feel comfortable if there is a consensus to do this to vote for it later. The thing about doing the $17,000 strip concept is only going to lead to being better than the median or not or in the middle. If it is better, it still triggers lots of dollars to do the next and final steps to get it done and he asked where the City would get that money.
This is a completely unfunded path and since the City is in a budget deficit situation now, he does not feel comfortable embarking on that and bringing the public along to think they could do this. He would rather make the tough decision now, so he is leaning for practical reasons. He would like to see more study but for practical reasons he would support the staff recommendation.
City Council Meeting Page 18 of 43 June 26, 2023
Mayor Anduri said when Councilmember Kwok says to decide later, he asked and confirmed he meant during the budget discussion when discussing all other unfunded measures.
Mayor Anduri said he sees this as something they could decide now. He would feel more comfortable if they had a discussion with Caltrans before making the decision this evening. He would like to hear any input that would affect what they are doing. If they felt Caltrans would be cooperative and willing to discuss this, he would be in favor of going ahead with Option 1 or in any event because they need to look at the south side. Even starting down that road would be more productive if they have a better sense of what Caltrans has in mind.
Councilmember Gerringer asked if Mayor Anduri was proposing moving forward with Option 1 and then talk with Caltrans. Mayor Anduri said no, he would favor talking with Caltrans first because that may give guidance with respect to the direction on Option 1. In fact, it might make them feel more optimistic or not. It is critical to what they want to do so it is worth reaching out.
Mayor Pro Tem Dawson asked Mr. Luttropp if it would be helpful if she and Mayor Anduri reached out to Caltrans. Mr. Luttropp said if they have a specific contact they already have a relationship with, that would be great, but if not, he will see what he can do, and Mr. Golier might have some connections as well.
Mayor Anduri received consensus Councilmembers were comfortable with the direction. He noted the other thing that relates to this is that he thinks it would be worthwhile to do an official outreach to the Acalanes Union High School District to discuss the project.
Councilmember Candell said she and Councilmember Gerringer talk with them a lot for the other projects and could do that. Mr. Luttropp asked about the timing of that, and he asked if this is separate from finishing up the design on the center median pathway. Councilmember Candell said they can be done along the same times
Councilmember Gerringer stated she believes there is a City/Schools meeting being scheduled just as school starts where they could provide this information, but staff can also conduct direct outreach. She is sure someone has contacts for Caltrans as well as CCTA folks.
Mr. Luttropp confirmed he had direction and it sounds like the most important thing to do is first talk with Caltrans before doing anything else.
Mayor Anduri recognized Brian Candell who wishes to speak.
BRIAN CANDELL said it is amazing what the Council does for 6 hours twice a week giving their time for free for doing all of this, being with your family and kids, and sometimes you miss an important event like your birthday. He wished Councilmember Candell a happy birthday and said there is also ice cream.
BREAK
Mayor Anduri called for a break at 8:10 p.m. and thereafter reconvened the regular meeting at 8:24 p.m.
B. Mike Moran, Director of Engineering and Public Works Olympic Boulevard Roundabout Design Update
City Council Meeting Page 19 of 43 June 26, 2023
Recommendation: 1) Maintain the lane merge and other striping and delineation on southbound Pleasant Hill Road. 2) Do not perform additional traffic studies or analysis. 3) Continue outreach with other agencies to determine possible additional efforts that could be implemented to improve the safety of the intersection. 4) Hold a public meeting to present proposed design changes and receive input from the community prior to implementing additional temporary or permanent changes to the intersection.
Director of Engineering and Public Works Mike Moran stated Matt Luttropp will cover most of this item, but he added that he, Mr. Luttropp and Mr. Golier have all been involved. This is the roundabout update and looking at some of the pilot study elements put in place and evaluating those to date.
Mr. Luttropp stated at the March 13th City Council meeting, the Council directed staff to preserve the temporary reconfiguration of the roundabout and reopen the slip lane for south bound Pleasant Hill Road and perform additional traffic studies and public outreach on the final design option to be implemented in the summer of 2024. This update is to provide the Council with costs for further analysis and update on the data collected thus far.
He gave a background of the item which was in response to a fatality in the roundabout in 2021. After that, they met with the Bike East Bay bike advocates, the Transportation Circulation Commission liaisons, 2 Council liaisons, and the City Manager to discuss possible changes that could be made to the roundabout that would improve bike and pedestrian safety. In these discussions the primary concern was that vehicles are traveling too fast in advance of and through the roundabout.
Following the meeting, Kimley-Horn was hired to develop modifications that could be made to the roundabout that would improve the safety of the facility. The preliminary plans were presented and reviewed by the City, slightly modified, and then shared with Transportation Circulation Commission at the November 2, 2022 meeting. On January 25, 2023, the City reduced Pleasant Hill Road from 2 lanes to 1 lane just sound of the intersection with Reliez Station Road and made other striping modifications to clearly delineate narrowed vehicle lanes into and out of the roundabout. Further modifications were made to the roundabout on February 21st with elimination of the slip lane from southbound Pleasant Hill Road to westbound Olympic Boulevard. The removal of the slip lane was in response to comments staff received that there was not sufficient time for motorists making this right turn from southbound Pleasant Hill Road to westbound Olympic to judge vehicles’ intent to depart the roundabout and see pedestrians in the crosswalk on the west leg of Olympic Boulevard.
On March 13th, the City Council directed staff to restore the slip lane for southbound Pleasant Hill Road and to improve the vehicle merge, reducing Pleasant Hill Road from 2 lanes to 1 lane. These changes were implemented on April 14th. In addition, the Council directed staff to continue to collect data to determine how the changes put in place had impacted driver, pedestrian, and bicyclist safety.
City Council Meeting Page 20 of 43 June 26, 2023
In summary, what they found was a drop in vehicle speeds which they were hoping they would see from this. The 85th percentile vehicle speeds leading to the roundabout are within the posted speed limits now whereas before they were higher than that. Pleasant Hill Road southbound between Reliez Station Road and the roundabout is now 36 mph. Olympic Boulevard eastbound between Reliez Station and the roundabout is 32 mph, and Olympic Boulevard westbound between Reliez Station and the roundabout are about 39 mph. A good thing to point out is the 85th percentile speed in the southbound direction of Pleasant Hill Road has been reduced by 7 mph as part of these improvements, and this is based on a speed survey done in 2015 that showed the 85% for that reach of the road at 43 mph. The good news about that is that these reduced speeds may allow for consideration of speed tables in advance of the intersection.
Staff asked Kimley-Horn to submit a proposal to provide a robust traffic study and model for the traffic flow leading to and through the roundabout. The cost for that modeling effort is estimated at $50,000.
At this time, staff does not believe this study will provide additional information that is not already well understood, nor will it likely provide meaningful guidance in moving forward with future design features.
Since last report to the Council on the roundabout, staff again met with the bike and pedestrian advocates at the roundabout to observe the conditions and consider options for further updates. In addition, staff continues to receive guidance from Kimley-Horn and has consulted with staff from other Bay Area cities to help determine potential improvements that have proven to be successful in other cities.
Items currently under consideration include adding flashing beacons or RRFBs at all crossings but especially the crosswalk on the west leg of Olympic Boulevard which the Council has already approved, adding stenciling to the Class I facilities on both sides of Pleasant Hill Road to raise awareness for both pedestrians and bicyclists that bicyclists are permitted on the pathway which he described, adding bike “merge ahead” stenciling in the roadway specifically southbound Pleasant Hill Road right before it splits to have the right turn lane and the lane going to the roundabout so people know to expect bikes which is in addition to the green dashed line, and replacing white delineators along Olympic Boulevard with green delineators and perhaps other raised elements to make the bike lanes more visible and apparent to drivers. In speaking with Mr. Moran, maybe they do not have to have those delineators quite so close together as they currently have the white ones. This might make it less obtrusive. Those items along with others would be presented in a public meeting to be held in late summer or early fall to solicit input from the public and inform the public on the design changes proposed to improve the safety at the roundabout.
At this time, staff recommends 1) maintain the lane merge and other striping and delineation on southbound Pleasant Hill Road; 2) do not perform additional traffic studies or analysis; 3) continue outreach with other agencies to determine possible additional efforts that could be implemented to improve the safety of the intersection; and 4) to hold a public meeting or perhaps multiple public meetings to present proposed design changes and receive input from the community prior to implementation of additional temporary or permanent changes to the intersection.
City Council Meeting Page 21 of 43 June 26, 2023
Mr. Moran added that the roundabout is an efficient way of moving traffic. You can go out to Olympic tomorrow because they are working on Olympic with curb, gutter, and sidewalk as part of the project, having to close one lane, circulating traffic around on Reliez Station Road and having them make a stop at Pleasant Hill Road and then make a left or a right. The used to have an all-way stop where the roundabout is, and traffic backed up 27 minutes up and around the hill. From the beginning, discussions have been with the bike community, traffic engineers, and roundabout specialists, the main things are reducing speeds into, though, and out of the roundabout. That is the safety thing for everyone. There are fender benders that occur in that roundabout, but it is a matter of speed, spacing, and timing.
He knows when they closed the 2 southbound lanes and merged them to one lane, they did get complaints from some of the public saying to open it back up and restore it to the way it was. But, having had those discussions to reduce speeds, one of the ways of reducing speeds is that lane merge. So, while it may not be popular, it is not really adding delay. There is a slow movement through, a few cars stopped, but it is not backing up even when staff observed it during the school periods.
So, the recommendation is what the Council’s recommendation was to them; the status quo on that lane merge and this is the only tool they have had so far for southbound Pleasant Hill Road that would allow them to maybe add something more traffic calming into that roundabout and particularly to slow cars before they make that free right turn, where, when they opened it up, there was some confusion with people because they changed things 3 times in quick succession. But, they only got calls and emails on that for a few days, but they have heard no follow-up on that. He thinks people have learned it, got used to it, and know to make the free right. Some feedback was received voicing appreciation that the City reopened the free right turn for the efficiency of the roundabout. They want it to be safe, but he thinks the tool is to slow speeds.
Mayor Anduri opened the public comment period.
SADEGH, 840 Reliez Station Road, said he was one of the people who complained that the switching 3 times about the southbound Pleasant Hill Road where it meets Olympic Boulevard. He thinks the situation it has created is unsafe for bikers because he has had a few instances himself where they merge into one lane and bikers take the right side and if they want to go around the roundabout, they must merge left again and cars must merge right if they want to exit westbound on Olympic Boulevard. It creates a weird environment where cars do not know where the bikers are going, but bikers can see where the cars are going if they have their blinkers on or not. He thinks it does slow down traffic, but it has created an unsafe environment for bikers whereas before you had a better idea because the cars on the right lane were going to turn right so people knew where they were going to begin with.
He understands the roundabout is great. It is a great addition to that area where they used to have the stop sign. He thinks it was a lot slower and they had a lot of backups, but he would be in favor of restoring it to the 2 lanes it was before and perhaps exploring other options for slowing traffic down before reaching the roundabout.
Councilmember Candell said when it goes back in, she asked the speaker if he could imagine something they could do there when it goes back up into 2 lanes that it would make it better than it is now and make him feel safer.
Sadegh said from a biker’s standpoint, if they have the white posts or delineators on the ground going all the way to the roundabout it could help.
City Council Meeting Page 22 of 43 June 26, 2023
Councilmember Candell said then they would have to close the slip lane. Sadegh said he guessed the way it used to work before was that the kids would bike all the way to the roundabout and the use the crosswalks to get over to the other side.
Mr. Luttropp said right now, one option is kids can get on the multi-use pathway on the side of the road rather than dealing with where that merge occurs where people are trying to get to the slip lane. So, they can get on the pathway and then go to the crosswalks at the roundabout. One thing mentioned in the staff report is putting designations on that pathway to make it clearer for people; that if they do not want to deal with the merging activity, the cars, and the roundabout, that pathway is an option for both bicyclists and pedestrians to be able to bypass some of the cars.
JUDY CARNE agreed with what Sadeh, thinks southbound going towards the roundabout is extraordinarily confusing and she is a bicyclist. There is no signage, no way for them to know which way to go, no way for her driving her car, and she understand it has slowed traffic and thinks that is the right concept but there is a lot of cross-over going on there and it appears to be unsafe. There is also someone’s driveway at someone’s home so there are 2 cutoffs. Initially, that was a bit of a frenzy and she asked if there were any solutions to help with that.
Mayor Anduri asked for discussion by Councilmembers.
Councilmember Kwok said he was happy to see that the speeds came down by 7 mph and everyone is driving less than 40 mph in all directions. He read the report to say this whole project is trying to move in the direction of slowing speeds down, so he thinks the mission has been accomplished for this phase.
They could keep tweaking and learning which is what staff is suggesting the Council do. Mr. Moran’s comment is that there were concerns and reopening a lane, but the public feedback has subsided, so people are getting used to it by and large. His reaction was that this was a successful exercise and glad they did it.
Councilmember Gerringer said she is glad they did the study and pilot and asked what were the comments from the bike advocates.
Mr. Moran said they came to consensus for the east/west directions for Olympic. The southbound Pleasant Hill Road is the hardest portion. The Council gave staff direction to add an RFFB at that location, which was also a staff recommendation at one point, so they are planning to do that. They did not have a lot of emphasis other than making it clearer that there is a bypass. Even some of the bike community came to the realization of using the Class I pathway on the right which they have always had sign there to route people around the roundabout.
City Council Meeting Page 23 of 43 June 26, 2023
Other things include striping things. Instead of the white delineators they might go with the green indicating the bike lane and bike travel, so it is more striping, delineation, and pinching down. There was a suggestion to make that the elephant feet green paint crossing where everybody does cross. A bike would have to cross a vehicle which is merging into the right lane and make that a little steeper, which shortens that distance they are crossing. Another suggestion wasthe opposite—take the delineators back further, give a bicyclist a longer merge so people have more time to fit themselves in between traffic. He thinks it would have to be run through their traffic engineers, particularly those very familiar with roundabouts. There were some suggestions, but it comes down to what Councilmember Kwok said— tweaking the ideas they are trying to do now and trying to improve on them, making them more visible.
If it is safer for bikes and pedestrians it inherently is going to be safer for vehicle drivers as well. There was no suggestion to re-open it to two lanes for that southbound Pleasant Hill.
Councilmember Gerringer said she is very supportive of the work done and supportive of not doing the additional $50,000 study. She is also supportive of number 4 presented in the update and holding public meetings as they look at other potential changes.
Mr. Moran said he thinks they would gather more data. They would not do the extensive study but would re-affirm vehicle speeds before they made another change. It is not they would not collect more information as part of this tweaking process, but it would not return as a 100-page study because the consensus is narrowing the lanes and speeds and ensuring everything is as visible and concise as possible.
Councilmember Candell echoed comments, supported helping bikers know where they need to go for the southbound Pleasant Hill Road, but she thinks there is still confusion with drivers. She asked to let them know the merge is coming and to be prepared for it. Mr. Luttropp stated they have all permanent and regulatory signs up too, and the changeable message sign out there is the only temporary sign.
Vice Mayor Dawson said she drives that daily and has noticed great improvements. It is well signed even with arrows that have been helpful. She thinks whatever can be done to slow down when turning in the slip lane because the crosswalk is further out, and people are not seeing that, so they pick up speed at the corner. She asked if the flashing lights would show up at the crosswalk or sooner before.
Mr. Moran said that is a tough one. Sometimes they do an advanced flashing light. The problem is around the corner they already have flashing beacon crossings there, so you cannot confuse which crosswalk it applies to. He thinks they will be at that west leg and you will see them as they slightly come up. There will be a center median one too that might be farther forward, so as you turn that corner, you might catch this one and may see the other one on the right side of the vehicle as you are driving. They are a little restricted and the delineators will probably not be in their exact configuration had there not been a driveway there that the need access to in and out of. It would be clearer, but obviously the homeowners need access in and out of their home. If they can improve it more, staff will do so.
Vice Mayor Dawson asked if the flashing lights are already budgeted. Mr. Moran said he thinks they can be covered in their current project for Olympic/Glenside/St. Mary’s. They may be contingency funds. He knows they were talking about adding many improvements at one time around the roundabout, so this is probably $45,000 just for the flashing beacons. The ones that cross Pleasant Hill Road at the north leg are a combination of solar and hard lined power. This would maybe be the same, but they would be as efficient as they can with pricing and packaging.
City Council Meeting Page 24 of 43 June 26, 2023
Mayor Anduri said he agrees with the staff recommendations and echoed comments. He asked and confirmed staff has sufficient direction. He and Councilmembers thanked staff for their work on this.
C. Patrick Golier, Transportation & Circulation Program Manager Update to the Traffic Calming Program
Recommendation: Approve the adoption of a new Traffic Calming Program for Lafayette, as described in the updated Guidebook, that replaces the existing Traffic Calming Program Guidebook previously approved by City Council in 2003.
Transportation and Circulation Program Manager Patrick Golier gave the staff report and overview of the Traffic Calming Program, as described in the updated Guidebook, which replaces the existing Guidebook previously approved in 2003. He introduced Bruce Brubaker from PlaceWorks who described the process for the program.
Bruce Brubaker gave a PowerPoint presentation, described the purpose of the update to align traffic calming with Vision Zero and other efforts for the City, and identifies the priorities for traffic calming on community support and balances that with data, equity, and available resources, and to ensure traffic calming measures includes design, engineering, and best practices.
The Transportation Circulation Commission gave direction to have succinct goals and policies, to make sure process steps are clear, and to ensure the toolbox has appropriate tools for Lafayette streets. He displayed the various goals and described 4 key policies for the plan.
Vice Mayor Dawson referred to page 8 of the Guidebook under striping and signage, second to the last line which says, “modifying speed limits”, and she thinks they mean “signs that show modification of speed limits.” Mr. Golier said they have limited ability to reduce speeds but do on streets like Mt. Diablo where the land use is changed along with the speed limits. They are tending to think about school limit zones, as well this year to dovetail with this program.
Councilmember Gerringer referred to the same page and asked if they are encouraging residents to put official signs on city bus stops and she suggested changing the photo. She also noticed in public comments, Geoff Bellenger made a comment regarding speed hump negatives and air quality. She asked if that was something that could be added.
Mr. Golier explained they seek to encourage the maintenance of a single speed across the corridor and unlike the old bumps that might create more noise and encourage people to speed up afterwards, the design of speed humps are flatter on top so it is more moderate, and he confirmed that style is one of the new ones they installed in Burton Valley.
Councilmember Gerringer said she appreciates the process and she referred to the process of getting majority support from one’s block to agree. In a situation where there are several blocks connected, she asked how this would be analyzed.
Mr. Golier said he would likely insert himself into the community and try to achieve consensus and would like have staff intervene with “no” blocks.
Mayor Anduri noted that 50% is needed for the application to get in and that will be a factor staff will take into consideration in deciding which ones to recommend for funding.
City Council Meeting Page 25 of 43 June 26, 2023
Councilmember Kwok asked how many applications are expected per year. Mr. Golier said in the past year he received about 12-15.
Councilmember Kwok asked if the bulk processing once applications are received at the end of the year helpful to staff or asked if it would be more helpful to spread them out over the year with a spring and fall deadline. Mr. Golier said for staff time, it is easier to evaluate everything at once.
Councilmember Kwok said this is an update to 2003 and asked if there are any best practices PlaceWorks was able to incorporate into the Guidebook.
Mr. Brubaker said some of the innovative aspects are the organizations of the application process which now many cities are doing. In terms of the technology for the toolbox, the previous plan did a good job of presenting the state-of-the-art at the time which has not changed that much over time.
Councilmember Candell asked about the existing applications for the September 30th deadline, and asked if those would need to be re-submitted.
Mr. Golier said he has collected the data for all the applications he has received thus far, and they will be required to follow these standards. Some applications came with signatures and others did not. He will reach back out to everybody as well as those without signatures and ask them to do that.
Vice Mayor Dawson asked if staff looks at the neighborhoods and then step back to look at a larger application of traffic calming.
Mr. Golier said that has not happened and they have been scattered throughout the City. Many neighborhoods have some traffic calming in them already, with the school effort that is layering on top of that.
Mayor Anduri asked how much public exposure this program has had. Mr. Golier said it has gone to Transportation Circulation Commission twice. Everyone who has contacted him in the past year is aware the program is being updated, and staff has promoted it through Weekly Roundup over the past 2-3 weeks, as well.
Mayor Anduri opened the public comment period, and there were no speakers.
Councilmember Candell referred to eligible locations on page 7 of the Guidebook. Under the last bullet she asked to put the Glenside one up because the last 2 are from Deer Hill to Mt. Diablo or Mt. Diablo to Deer Hill. She would put these as the last 2 and have either Deer Hill first or Mt. Diablo first. They are both streets that go between Deer Hill and Mt. Diablo and they are being described with different directions. The 6th bullet states, “First Street from Deer Hill Road to Mt. Diablo.” The last bullet states “Oakhill Road from Mt. Diablo Blvd. to Deer Hill.” She suggested putting those two bullets back to back.
City Council Meeting Page 26 of 43 June 26, 2023
She then referred to a picture on page 16 of the document and it was street narrowing through striping.
The car is not even in the lane. On page 23 regarding curb extensions and bulb outs, she thinks they should call out “on non-evacuation routes” or “refer to Fire” because that was something they did for LRSP. On the final page with the points and traffic volumes, she understands they want to prioritize ones with more vehicles but sometimes those are the ones that do not have many crashes but are dangerous.
It seemed like the traffic volumes were over-weighted.
Mr. Golier said the point behind the traffic volumes weighting was that if you have 2 equal streets, the street with the higher traffic volumes would be prioritized over another street. Councilmember Candell agreed but suggested that be the second tier rather than the first-tier consideration.
Councilmember Gerringer voiced appreciation of how it identifies the streets that apply and the streets and areas it does not apply. She suggested doing outreach to emphasize that and said it will be great to have the program going again. She also noted there is an extra “s” in the middle of a sentence. She made a motion to approve the program, as amended based on discussion.
ACTION: It was M/S/C (Gerringer/Candell) to approve the adoption of a new Traffic Calming Program for Lafayette, as described in the updated Guidebook, that replaces the existing Traffic Calming Program Guidebook previously approved by City Council in 2003, as amended. Vote: 5-0 (Ayes: Anduri, Dawson, Candell, Gerringer, and Kwok; Noes: None).
10. STAFF REPORTS
A. Niroop Srivatsa, City Manager and Tracy Robinson, Administrative Services Director Association of Lafayette Employees – Memorandum of Understanding Recommendation: Authorize the City Manager to execute a Memorandum of Understanding that includes the agreed upon changes effective July 1, 2023 through June 30, 2027.
City Manager Srivatsa stated over the last several months the Council has been negotiating with ALE to draft a new MOU. The current MOU expires June 30, 2023. Some of the highlights of the new MOU include new salary ranges, the way salary ranges are calculated, the ability of the City Manager to hire people at Step 8, and several clarifications needing to be made to the Personnel Rules. Her recommendation is for the Council to authorize her to execute the MOU, which is effective for 4 years, beginning July 1, 2023 through June 30, 2027.
Mayor Anduri opened the public comment period, and there were no speakers.
ACTION: It was M/S/C (Gerringer/Dawson) to authorize the City Manager to execute a Memorandum of Understanding that includes the agreed upon changes effective July 1, 2023 through June 30, 2027. l Vote: 5-0 (Ayes: Anduri, Dawson, Candell, Gerringer, and Kwok; Noes: None).
B. Tracy Robinson, Administrative Services Director
Consideration of Additional Funding Requests for Proposed FY2023-24 Budget and Explore Options for Additional Revenue Sources
Recommendation: 1) Use all remaining ARPA funds for current General Fund expenditures. 2) Direct staff to begin an internal review to assess what expenses need to be reduced to balance the budget for future years and the subsequent impact on services. 3) Direct the ad hoc Financial Sustainability Committee to explore options for increasing revenue.
City Council Meeting Page 27 of 43 June 26, 2023
Administrative Services Director Tracy Robinson stated at the last Council meeting there were several additional funding requests. The Council asked staff to put those requests into the 5-year budget forecast to see how they would affect the budget which is included in a spreadsheet in the packet. She reviewed those requests as identified in the staff report. The Council will see across the years the impact of those funding requests.
She referred to the Surplus/Deficit Line, the Council will see after the year 2023-24 the City has about a $2.2 million deficit and a $2 million deficit going forward if all those requests were funded based on keeping the budget running with no new programs, no new projects, and just the base budget and these projects and programs.
Moving down to the shaded portion, the first line would show what would happen if they just put all unused ARPA funds into the General Fund which they are allowed to do because of lost revenue. The City has about $2.95 million, and whether it is spaced out or put in one year, the City must encumber them them by 2024- and spend them by December 2026. This buys the City another year or two of getting to the 60% target. They would likely be able to maintain their 60% target to 2025-26 but again, it would drop precipitously, and they would still have the same budget deficits.
The last shaded box shows if they were able to adjust their sales tax revenue to the same level it currently is in Moraga and Orinda, that would have a dramatic effect on the budget. If the additional 1 cent was added to sales tax it is about $3.5 million right now a year. If that increases within inflation, not only is the City able to relatively easily to cover these funding needs but the City would have some revenue left over to approach new projects and programs people have been asking for.
Councilmember Candell asked if the City was considering adding a tax measure, but rather staff is showing what that could do. Ms. Robinson said this is not on the agenda tonight, but they do have a couple of recommendations which is to perhaps explore that option.
Councilmember Candell asked what is the cost of an election. Ms. Robinson said they must hold an election concurrent with a general election or on a ballot which Councilmembers are up for re-election.
The City incurs minimal costs for the general election other than staff time.
Mayor Anduri opened the public comment period.
GRACE DIXON said at the last City Council meeting a wonderful doctor had a message that they need to give people what they want and not what we feel they need. The residents have expressed a want which has been well documented for decades. They are faced tonight to reduce expenses and increase revenue. 160 years of scientific studies have proven that adding downtown parkland increases revenue. She read quotes from slides offered previously relating to investments of a public park which increases home values, generates sales tax, attracts employees, adds civic engagement, and improves public health, and asked to budget for future park projects.
Mayor Anduri stated staff’s recommendation is to 1) use all remaining ARPA funds for current General Fund expenditures which were placed in the 2024-25 column; 2) direct staff to begin internal review; and 3) direct the Financial Sustainability Committee to explore options for increasing revenue. They also want to consider the unfunded items to see if there are any changes in those.
City Council Meeting Page 28 of 43 June 26, 2023
Councilmember Gerringer said she is supportive of the overall recommendations. She referred to Ms.
Dixon’s comments and asked about parkland funds, noting the Community Foundation set up an MOU with the City to raise money for land acquisition, but with changes to parkland fees and when the City can begin to use those, it narrowly defined and changed the scope with the Foundation so she would like to discuss this.
Mayor Anduri said they can discuss this later and he is looking for comments on staff’s recommendations.
The Council would then go into the unfunded requests.
Councilmember Candell said she is supportive of all 3 recommendations and she did want to talk about the unfunded requests. She does not think if the City is going out for money, if they have not done due diligence and start cutting things, she thinks they will have a hard time getting buy-in.
Mayor Anduri said he agrees strongly with the staff recommendations except for number 1; using all remaining ARPA funds for current General Fund expenditures. This is not a decision the Council needs to make tonight. He agrees that the vast bulk of ARPA funds should be used for General Fund expenditures, but he would rather make that decision next year, as there are still potential uses for the ARPA funds which the Council should think about.
Councilmember Gerringer asked and confirmed that spending ARPA funds with General Fund uses is not a problem, and Ms. Robinson confirmed and said the City already has claimed the funds as lost revenue because it is less than $10 million. The cities who were more at risk of that were larger cities that were not able to just claim that full $10 million. They still must spend it specifically on 4 ARPA related items, and Lafayette is in a different situation.
Mayor Anduri noted the claw back generally applied to funds still sitting in the federal treasury but not having been transferred.
Councilmember Gerringer asked that because it is lost revenue she asked if they can technically allocate it. Ms. Robinson said they must encumber it by December of 2024, and she would recommend putting it towards specific expenses as opposed to just holding it as the City is now. They can accomplish that relatively easily, but Mayor Anduri is correct. This is not a decision the Council needs to make tonight. The Council could make it in June of next year when doing the budget adjustments.
Councilmember Kwok said if the Mayor is suggesting not taking all $2.9 million, he asked what is the number. Mayor Anduri said he is suggesting the number stay the same in the budget because the City will be spending it and leaving it where it is now, and they might break off part for something else.
Councilmember Kwok referred to the spreadsheet and said line 60; the ARPA section is a hypothetical.
Mayor Anduri confirmed and said it is in an out year and the Council is not approving that. He agrees with the intent, but he just does not think the Council needs to make a decision for number 1.
Councilmember Kwok asked if the Council was voting on Column G or I. He said G56 is subject to what the Council discussed, and this is why Mayor Anduri said the Council does not have to discuss the ARPA fund because it is in Row I. Mayor Anduri said they would not be dealing with that in any measure under 11A because that is not part of the budget. So, he did not think the Council needs to give the recommendation under number 1. Councilmember Kwok concurred not to include Number 1 in tonight’s vote but is supportive of numbers 2 and 3.
City Council Meeting Page 29 of 43 June 26, 2023
Mayor Anduri asked if there is anyone who is not supportive or would like to elaborate further. He asked and confirmed numbers 2 and 3 would begin as soon as possible.
Mayor Anduri suggested discussing the unfunded requests. He pointed out that while number 3 is on here, this was approved at the last meeting which distinguishes it from the other items. There was a motion to allocate the $27,000 for the Public Art Committee which was approved unanimously.
Councilmember Kwok asked if the Council approved $40,000 for the schools, and Mayor Anduri said no, nothing else was approved at the last meeting. He asked if the Council would like to take each one by one.
Councilmember Candell said she is struggling with these projections. Strategically, if the City does not start doing some of their own due diligence they will struggle with bringing the public along with them. Her thought is as much as she loves affordable housing contributions, it will take 3 years to get one unit. Their City is literally facing a $660 million deficit if they were going to build all units they were supposed to for their 7th cycle. So, she would remove these. If they pass the sales tax measure and it is looking good, then they can bring it back. She would then take all other items and split them in half which she thinks it equitable.
Councilmember Kwok said he also is concerned with Row 56 which shows the 5-year project all in red of a negative $649,000, $2.2 million, $1.9 million, $1.8 million, and $1.9 million, so they are overspending by about $2 million per year. In terms of their sources of revenue on Line 14, they are about a $19 to $20 million a year budget. So, the City is overspending its budget by 10% a year. He knows the City is proud to be fiscally prudent, said they spent within their means, and this is healthy.
He thinks staff has done a good job in guiding them and juggle budget elements to try and make it through another year. But, when looking at these numbers, they must face the music sometime, so it is never too early to shore up their fiscal health. He thinks every line item is justified and he can get behind them, but in totality, this leads to $22 million in spending with $20 million of revenue which does not work.
He also shares Councilmember Candell’s concern that they should address this. He is voting no on everything because the Council cannot justify it. He likes every single one, but they must stop at some point. Many of these are for the future health of the City, especially for roads. Again, this is a challenging place for the City to be and he wants the public to know that as well run as they are, they are looking at some ugly numbers. He was not sure how he would vote yet, he wanted to provide comments.
Mayor Anduri noted roads are currently not on the list of unfunded and asked if Councilmember Kwok wants to add them, as the Council is only voting on next year’s budget. Councilmember Kwok said therefore roads are not part of this agenda.
Vice Mayor Dawson said she agrees this is a sorry situation the City is in. It has been building up and prices are going up, so they are seeing it and trying to get ahead of it. She asked how the affordable housing contribution is tied into any programs the City had provided as part of the Housing Element.
City Manager Srivatsa said she will locate the email he sent regarding this.
City Council Meeting Page 30 of 43 June 26, 2023
Mayor Anduri said they did not put in any of the elements that the City would be contributing, but rather look at sources and listed many of them, none of which was a contribution from the General Fund.
Vice Mayor Dawson said she is supportive of tightening belts, agrees with comments by Councilmembers, agreed the City has been good about providing services for so many years in stretching the dollars, but this is catching up with them now. That said the only place she would look at cutting this year would be the affordable housing contribution. She believes the State is looking to providing bonds and possibly the City can look at those as opposed to setting this aside. Otherwise, she thinks these for this year are necessary things to put these into place, especially anything having to do with infrastructure, so it does not worsen over the next year. Therefore, she agrees with tightening the City’s belts in where they can look and directing the Finance Sustainability Committee to meet.
City Manager Srivatsa returned to Vice Mayor Dawson’s question and stated the program states, “The City will create a plan to utilize existing funds in the Housing Trust Fund and identify additional sources for on-going revenues.” It does not commit a number towards affordable housing.
Mayor Anduri agreed and it goes onto mention some specific examples. Ms. Srivatsa said these include commercial development linkage fees, vacancy taxes, real estate transfers, and so on.
Councilmember Gerringer said in terms of the affordable housing bonds, there will be a requirement for matching funds. While this might not be the time to put the money into affordable housing contribution, she still thinks it is important as they look at how they will do this. They will not be able to do the $670 million all by themselves and will partner with affordable housing developers and non-profits. She can support removing that at this time. She agrees with making sure the City is funding infrastructure like the PTR parking lots. She believes the studies have been done and it needs to be done given it will cost more into the future. Cutting that by 50% does not get them to where they need to be. She does not see how they cut the other things by 50%, such as the Economic Development Manager which would be 3 and not 6 months, the additional sinking funds which are important to plan for, and she appreciates the discussion around why they are in this situation, given increased expenses across the board on many things.
They did not vote to commit to it, but the crossing guards is a partnership with the schools, and they could look at cutting that by 50% but making some commitment would be important because they get good will and benefits from the Chamber of Commerce’s support. Lastly, if they were going to start cutting other things by 50%, she wished they would have had the mural be part of this discussion because on an infrastructure need versus a “nice to have” she thinks that would have been one of the things that she would have balanced.
Mayor Anduri said he takes a different approach but started by following up on how they got here. What is interesting is if you look at the 4th, 5th, and 6th out years the deficit is steady. If you look at the major components of that deficit, $1 million comes from the roads. They were just given the information that they were going to have that increased expense which was an unpleasant surprise. $250,000 if they vote for it is the housing contribution which they did not see coming. In the out years, $98,000 in the first year, $101,000 and $104,000 is for the insurance which was a big increase they did not see coming, and then the office rent, which adds up in the third year of 2025-26 to $1.51 million, $1.52 million the next year, and then $1.526. Most of the deficit are these things that are new. Mentioned was the downtown assessment and storm drain he did not include because the Council knew about these. He just wants to identify these in case people ask Councilmembers why didn’t they see these coming. These are relatively all new things, but they must deal with these.
City Council Meeting Page 31 of 43 June 26, 2023
The way he looks at this is if you look at the 5 year forecast, they carry it out to FY 2025-26 so this is 3 more fiscal years and still maintain their reserve target even at the current level of spending if they are to approve the items approved at the last meeting. With staff work that will be done in the future they should have a better sense of whether there are things they have not thought about enough. He has confidence in staff that they are not spending money they should not be spending. But still, he appreciates staff’s efforts to look at if they needed to erase these deficits in the 4th and 5th years what would they need to cut in order to do that. They may decide even before getting to the sales tax election they want to make cuts. They could decide that 4 months from now if they had recommendations as things that may not be as cost-effective or as desirable by the public.
He said if they got to the election and it did not pass, they would still have 1 ½ years to make adjustments.
One of the big items are the roads. He thinks they could make adjustments to the budget and bring it back to a balanced budget. When he looks at each of these items he is thinking these are something to do next year. If it is something that would be valuable to do next year, he still feels they should go ahead and do it. While looking at outer years and the deficits, he sees it as a concerning situation but not a situation that would require the Council to burn bridges with any organization so he would still want to do things that are important for them to do as a City. He asked if there were any other comments on general approach. If not, he suggested going right to the unfunded items and discuss them.
PTR Parking Lots at the Community Center, Buckeye Fields, and the Community Park ($500,000):
Councilmember Gerringer voiced support leaving them in.
Councilmember Candell supports leaving them in at 50% and spreading them out longer.
Vice Mayor Dawson asked and confirmed with Director Katayanagi this is a realistic number for 3 years and spreading it out on the sinking fund which would turn over into repairs over time based on the City Engineer’s review of the sites and having funding available for when they need to do repairs.
Mayor Anduri suggested looking at it as today the number is $500,000. If they were to defer this for 3 years, he asked what the number would be. Mr. Katayanagi said this is the overall cost. There are portions of the project that would be rolled out with other road repair. When there is other roadwork for paving and that type of work, while they may not have an exact $170,000 amount that goes into the first year, they would roll out portions of that repair over time. The timing and the amount of failing for each parking lot of each project will vary.
Ms. Robinson said prices for labor and material in the road repair have increased more than expected, which is part of the $1 million for the roads. It will be more expensive, but it could be 50% more if they keep seeing these kinds of inflationary rises. Staff does not know if it will happen, but the sooner the better.
Mayor Anduri said if they get to a certain PCI it drops and the costs go up. Ms. Robinson said she did not necessarily think the parking lots are similar to roads but at this point it is as expensive as it is going to be however, staff can return to this and confirm.
City Council Meeting Page 32 of 43 June 26, 2023
Councilmember Kwok said when looking at this list he thinks some are discretionary items but at some point they will have to pay to get these completed. They are sort of allocating some now. So, this is not a difficult one and he voiced support of setting aside the funds in the event they need to do it earlier and it is cheaper to do it earlier.
Mayor Anduri agreed, and he will mark this down as a “yes.” Low Income Housing ($250,000): Councilmember Gerringer said given the current situation she would support removing it for this cycle but having it as a priority when discussing needs moving forward.
Councilmember Candell and Vice Mayor Dawson agreed. Councilmember Kwok said ethically it pains him to go to zero, but practically, $20,000 likely does not mean anything either, so he voiced support for its removal.
Mayor Anduri thinks it is the right thing to do, helpful to do, agrees with having seed money and matching funding, and if they do not have any additional revenue he thinks they have a reason to consider stopping it, but he would do it for the first 2 years at the $250,000 level. They want affordable housing and understands the point of it basically buying a half a unit, but it provides some flexibility if they have matching funds or seed money. It sends a signal to HCD as well.
Councilmember Gerringer said the current amount in the affordable housing fund is a little over $2 million.
If approved tonight, the Council would put $250,000 aside each year. They will look at this budget again next year and can make a decision to not fund it. She voiced support to put aside this money, but it is a struggle in fixing the deficit this year. So, she morally wants to do it but is torn with how it fits with everything else.
Councilmember Candell said she agrees and wishes they could do this and wishes they could put $1 million in, but it does not seem fiscally responsible at this time. The City also did not promise to do it so it will not hurt them because HCD can look at their bottom line.
Vice Mayor Dawson said this makes great sense to show the City is serious, but she wondered if there is a way to decrease the amount or defer it or approve half this year and half next year. They have $2 million now and said she is on the fence about it, but they do not have a program tied to it.
Councilmember Gerringer said at the last meeting she pushed for this, and she suggested leaving it in at $250,000 contingent on how they look at other items.
Mayor Anduri said there are 3 Councilmembers supporting leaving it in, and Councilmember Kwok said he could be persuaded to leave it in as a one-year commitment now and then reassess whether there is ongoing funding.
Mayor Anduri confirmed there is consensus to leave it in.
Public Art Murals ($96,000, with $27,000 approved in the first year): Councilmember Gerringer said they committed for $27,000 and $24,300 in subsequent years which would require review if they need to look at where to make cuts. She voiced support of this for now. Vice Mayor Dawson said she is of the mind the Council approved it for this year. Remaining Councilmembers agreed.
City Council Meeting Page 33 of 43 June 26, 2023
Economic Development Manager ($60,000): Councilmember Candell asked if he is willing to negotiate, and Ms. Robinson said it has already been negotiated down from his 30 hours, and she noted this is coming out of ARPA money. Ms. Robinson noted the City will be launching the website for the downtown business promotion program. Vice Mayor Dawson commented he is pivotal in many programs and the City does not have economic development staff. Ms. Robinson stated there are projects the City is in the middle of that staff does not have time to run point on.
Councilmember Candell asked if the website and things tied to the website for economic development will cost them more and asked if this is budgeted. Ms. Robinson said there is money budgeted from ARPA they had originally put aside. They have been asking the question about on-going costs to keep the website up, and she believes between the Chamber and current staff it should be relatively easy to keep it going. The only costs would be minimal in terms of hosting fees.
Mayor Anduri emphasized that each program he is working on is funded and is included in expenses. He confirmed there was consensus to leave it in.
Part-Time Reserve Officer ($50,000): Ms. Robinson said this is in the base budget right now, but she put it in because it was an additional position. Councilmembers all supported leaving this in.
Crossing Guards ($40,000 additional for a total of $140,000): Vice Mayor Dawson said she thought the Council approved this for one year and they would look at it. Mayor Anduri said they did this as part of the unfunded items as a ‘tentative’ with the understanding they would come back.
Vice Mayor Dawson said this is another expense where the City has a partnership and made a commitment to go up to $100,000 but this has increased. She thinks this is expensive, and they spoke about hourly positions in comparison to other cities and whether there are creative ways to support them in a more economical way. For this year, she is okay with this because it aligns with the Council’s priority for school safety.
Councilmember Candell said she thinks they should include it as $40,000 forever. Mayor Anduri said this is what they decided tentatively last time.
Councilmember Gerringer said she did not disagree, but Councilmember Kwok asked to approve the $40,000 this year and then to look at it next year to see if there are ways to reduce costs. She believes they have those discussions with the City Manager and Superintendent on savings on costs, as well as negotiations with the school crossing guard company. She would support going up to $140,000 going forward. She would support it at $40,000 and looking at it again next year.
Ms. Robinson said she would caution the Council about a blank check where they have no control over, which is why staff included the original ceiling there. The City does not decide on the hiring of the crossing guards, their number, and this would be something she would ask the Council to think about for the future.
Mayor Anduri and Councilmembers agreed with the $40,000 for this year and to look at it again next year.
Mayor Anduri clarified also that the Council is approving the special allocation $40,000 for one year but not approving raising the $100,000 to $140,000 and revising the MOU.
City Council Meeting Page 34 of 43 June 26, 2023
Chamber of Commerce ($20,000 to support community events): Councilmember Gerringer voiced her support and commented it has been a long time since there has been an increase. Vice Mayor Dawson concurred, noted they are trying to cover costs, and a fair request. Councilmember Kwok agreed that it comes right back to the City as most activities are for the City, especially for the Art & Wine Festival.
Councilmember Candell said she thinks the Council is not doing well cutting down its budget and not being critical about these things.
Mayor Anduri said he respectfully disagreed, said they looked at each item carefully in deciding whether to move ahead with them, and he voiced support of this item. He agreed they are moving forward with some items with messages on some of them.
Sinking Funds ($110,000): Councilmember Gerringer said these amounts were put in at the top of the range which makes it $100,000 annually and the bottom of the range is $65,000. It is money they are trying to be thoughtful about.
Ms. Robinson said the risk the Council runs is that the things the Council puts money away for are things they will definitely spend money on later. They are trying to smooth the path. The Council could decide not to put them in, but the bump they will hit will be bigger in the future. A good example is the General Plan. The City only updates the General Plan every 20 years, but when it is done it is very expensive and they did not put any money away for it which puts a dent in the budget.
She said they had a fund for the General Fund, but they started it too late at 3 years ago and then they caught up and went pay as you go. Also, for example we do have the Police building now which is expensive to maintain and Ms. Robinson said that a sinking fund for large capital maintenance projects makes sense, just as we do for the Library and the Community Center roof so that expenses that may cost several hundreds of thousands of dollars don’t “sneak up” on us.
Mayor Anduri then asked if maybe the concept of sinking funds was not actually prudent. Mayor Anduri said it is like taking that money out of circulation and it is sitting there losing value. This is why they bought property with the City fund because they get a higher rate of return and property they use. He asked if they would be better off that instead of putting money in the sinking fund, spend the money now such as the roof on the Community Center. Then, they are putting it into an asset which will increase in cost in the future, and they would be taking care of that now.
Ms. Robinson said she would respectfully disagree because that makes the budget go way up and way down. They will have spikes. If she has a year where she does not have a roof to put on something and it will look like there is extra money left over, some Councils will realize there is a lot of extra money. She does not think the Council can see what is coming and it is hard when you need new tires and have no money for it. It has always been the City’s philosophy that they know they will spend money. They put it away over time so when they need to spend it the money has been put away and available. They have money for a Community Center roof because they have been putting money away for 25 years, so instead of having to come up with $1 million today when the roof is leaking badly, the money has been put away so it does not hurt as much.
Mayor Anduri said he still thinks they are losing value on money which could be used more efficiently.
These are new sinking funds being created, and generally, he would not support these sinking funds given where they are now.
City Council Meeting Page 35 of 43 June 26, 2023
Vice Mayor Dawson said the City has been in a good position because of these sinking funds and being conservative. It happens they are hitting more expenses and things have gone up, so she did not think they should turn the corner by not doing what has worked for them.
Ms. Robinson said she thinks they are looking at some of this piecemeal. They have these things and they are new. She thinks the exercise staff will come to the Council is to look at the budget holistically with everything, and the department managers will come up with potentials and look at it like a tier of musthave’s, the next layer, etc. She thinks it would be more valuable for the Council to consider everything. If the Council were to ask her if there was $10,000 in this budget that she would rather not spend for things and put it into the sinking fund, this is a conversation the Council should have. But, the Council is thinking about it in a vacuum, so she can see putting all these things in and when they look at the budget, these just become the things that they then think about going forward and everything is a trade-off.
If they put these sinking funds in now, they have categories for them. One of the things that they might want to look at when doing the budget review is there may be sinking funds that they do not need or do not seem useful that possibly are not a good return on putting that money away, but the Council should probably look at it as a whole.
Mayor Anduri asked if there is any penalty for stopping or starting a sinking fund. Ms. Robinson said no.
The Council can stop contributing at any point which they have. They used to have sinking funds they used and have taken money from, but because of budget constraints they dwindled away. The funds can be used for anything and the Council only restricts them as part of policy, but they are not restricted in any way. Also, just because a particular sinking fund is for a roof, that does not mean the Council couldn’t decide to spend it on something else in the future.
Mayor Anduri said therefore he will change his vote to a ‘yes’ and Councilmember Gerringer agreed. Vice Mayor Dawson, Candell, and Kwok agreed.
3-Year Annual Matching Fund of $35,000 from Grace Dixon: Councilmember Gerringer asked Ms.
Robinson if this would be a sinking fund under PTR. Ms. Robinson said she only saw the request briefly, so she does not know. She and Mr. Katayanagi could talk about how best to put those funds aside and to spend.
Mr. Katayanagi said there are the two funds: the Parklands Fund and the Facilities Fund. He thanked Ms.
Dixon for her passion towards parks and the efforts made towards the Downtown Park Land Fund or Fund 17 that allows the City to acquire new parkland. This is more dedicated to Fund 12; the facilities fees that can only be spent for developing facilities on land that is already City land. They cannot use parkland funds for Leigh Creekside because the City is not acquiring new parkland. They are developing facilities on existing lands. He thinks this is a different effort she is considering with this non-profit and those fees would likely be used towards the engineering for those types of projects.
City Council Meeting Page 36 of 43 June 26, 2023
The one concern is that when looking at the Ropes project and the reason there has been a delay on Leigh Creekside and Gazebo is because when looking at the path, they had $70,000 in this year’s budget to work on those projects which is a conceptual design that does not include the civil engineering for a project like that. They go through the conceptual design process, start looking at the civil engineering, CEQA costs for both projects, the actual construction costs, construction management, and fees are coming in at a different pace for the City now. When looking at their forecast for this budget year they thought they might have $3 million in revenue to move forward with $3 million they expected last year, but they are looking at 2025 as the soonest they could have any funds available from those multi-unit projects.
When he looks back at his list of projects, they have not had the ability to add these facilities on the City’s lands. They had to do the rink resurface at the Community Center and added Pickleball but they had to do that, and he spoke about the several other projects they needed to address due to age, repair, and the need to take on new parkland and projects without additional funding. At the City’s size and current revenue stream it will be hard to maintain what they have let alone any growth moving forward to fund all projects.
Councilmember Kwok said the proposal on the table is to have a matching fund for 3 years of a certain amount. He asked Mr. Katayanagi to explain how that would be helpful in achieving the goals.
Mr. Katayanagi said the matching funds proposed by Ms. Dixon would start to cover the conceptual design and engineering which were the first known costs. When they look back at the previous iteration of Leigh Creekside Park, they only entered into a master plan phase and not into the actual civil design that could be turned into a bid package and put out for construction. This is really a conceptual design of the play structures that then could be turned over to a civil engineer and put into place and come up with a grading plan and everything they would need to move the project forward. It would be put towards starting to put ideas together for the project and readying it for a potential bid package.
Councilmember Kwok said it was a matching fund of $35,000 for 3 years. Assuming the public would contribute into the non-profit to match this funding for a total of $210,000 eventually. He asked if the original $70,000 has become larger due to inflation and he asked if that would be the first chunk that would be funded.
Mr. Katayanagi said the $70,000 is where they need to start to get the conceptual design done. He was only able to provide ballpark estimates for the civil engineering without the conceptual design and at the level of engagement with the public that they have done to date, they hit a refresh button that starts them at ground zero so all sides could come together and have that discussion. It is difficult to give an exact estimate on the civil engineering because the discussion has not happened regarding that $70,000 for the conceptual design yet.
Mayor Anduri said he is reading the proposal and the City puts in $35,000 and the goal would be to raise an additional $50,000 each year so $85,000. He asked if that number is chosen in order to meet the design plus engineering for Leigh and the Gazebo.
EXTEND MEETING
ACTION: It was M/S/C (Dawson/Gerringer) to extend the meeting until midnight. Vote: 5-0 (Ayes: Anduri, Dawson, Candell, , Gerringer, and Kwok; Noes: None).
City Council Meeting Page 37 of 43 June 26, 2023
Mr. Katayanagi said he thinks the number took shape after he shared the potential estimates for civil engineering costs. He gave an initial range of $100,000 to $200,000 based on the Buckeye Patio cost being $112,000 which was a little bit less for the Community Center Playground, but it was brought forward with the idea of those 2 steps.
Vice Mayor Dawson commended Ms. Dixon for this creative idea. This is one of those things when they think about that third recommendation and getting the ad-hoc committee going, these are fundamental things they need to show the community they are not able to put this money out there and the City needs their help one way or the other. They need more parks for multiple reasons. Even if the Council approves this funding, they will not get to that shovel ready place, so she is not sure about the timing of it. She knows this is important and a fundamental need but was not sure right now if it isfeasible with this budget they are working with. But, at the same time it gives the community a chance to weigh in with their opinion in supporting the idea of funding a park.
Mayor Anduri said one way to look at this is that PTR has not allocated Fund 12 to cover this expense because there is very little money and it is all being used on the Community Center Playground, plus money borrowed from the recreation surplus. So, this would be looked at as a General Fund contribution to this specific purpose with no intent of repayment for parks. If the Council were to do that for this work considered by the full PTR, he asked how that would be seen.
Mr. Katayanagi said there has been general support. The 2-part proposal has been supported by the Commission, has been supported by the Council. There was a lot of work to get there. The most difficult part with that is movement on the timing regarding when they are going to get the fees and be able to move any of the projects forward. So, they are looking for a potential General Fund contribution and/or donation needing to support that project down the road. If the Council is looking for a message as he listed those other projects, it is grass kids might not be able to play on if they cannot fund resurfacing the ballfields, leaky ceilings they have been saving for at the Community Center, the parking lots failing at facilities, and this is where there is a dire need from that fund to support those things moving forward based on the timing of when those facilities will fail.
They have pushed the turf resurfacing for many years. They had to dip into the sinking fund when the wild boars came and damaged the field, and only further pushed back the replacement of that turf. The Commission has been waiting for funds to roll in so they could consider synthetic or other improvements out there. When they are looking at the outlook of those buildings, the Buckeye meeting room which is very important for the town and these are things they will need to take care of that they will need those funds for. While this is very important for expanding the facilities, it is something to consider when looking at what their revenue sources are and how they support any of those projects moving forward.
Mayor Anduri said if the Council was to allocate $35,000 a year for 3 years he asked if they would be jumping this project ahead of other projects that are in Fund 12. Mr. Katayanagi said yes, from a design standpoint. It would be in a shovel-ready mode and it is in the existing CIP. Turf has been in there but something like the meeting room and Community Center playground had not been added yet because they thought a lot of projects would be done in an earlier cycle. He thought they would have $3 million, but they had less than $1 million in actual revenue they are able to use just for the Community Center Playground for.
Councilmember Kwok noted this was an approved project already and they had the $70,000 allocated.
Mayor Anduri said it was approved for Fund 12.
City Council Meeting Page 38 of 43 June 26, 2023
Councilmember Kwok offered that parks are very visible, part of their society, and he thinks this is one of the types of things the public can get excited about and a future reason why they should fund it. He appreciates that they are not being asked to raise all the funds but for every dollar raised there will be $1.50 from private fundraising, which is a wonderful opportunity to really engage the public to reach out and say, beautify the City with both monies. He thinks it could be seen as a seed way of engaging the public to participate in enhancing their parks. If they come up with drawings of a plan, people can get excited when they see a drawing rather than a hypothetical where they could build a park here. He is looking to the benefits of what is being offered here.
At the same time, it is still money they talked about not having, so he would offer something to think about on the Housing Fund. If they headed in that direction with the $250,000, they could approve $200,000 instead and do $50,000 and $50,000 which equals about what the ask is here.
Mayor Anduri said they have the projects here, one of which they have been waiting years for. They own the property and there is no doubt there is a need. Basically, they have an offer to more than match each dollar the City puts in so he would refine what Councilmember Kwok is saying, make the Housing Fund contribution $215,000 and take up on the offer of $35,000 per year over a three year period for the Park Fund. This is contingent on raising the matching fund, the second and third years. They have Brook Street which is a great park in the downtown but it has been so long waiting for these other parks on the other side of Moraga Road that he thinks the need to go forward with them, and they cannot afford to wait until the projects pay their impact fees. So, he would support $215,000 on the Housing Fund and $35,000 for this request.
Vice Mayor Dawson voiced support of the idea and that it supports park space downtown.
Councilmember Gerringer agreed and said she likes the balance of $215,000 and $35,000 across the 3 years. She knows they did the MOU with the Community Foundation and this will be with a new nonprofit. The $35,000 from the City is contingent upon the private monies being raised so there is a benefit and a checks and balance against that to move forward, and voiced support.
Councilmember Candell said she is also supportive of the $35,000, but she would stick with the $200,000 and let the $215,000 go because it is an odd number. She thinks the show of the number will make more sense to the City than to HCD.
Mayor Anduri said going above $200,000 is necessary and if the question is why that odd number, the answer is that is all the City has got. He confirmed there was consensus and he suggested getting a final consensus on each of the items. If they put this in the budget and add it to Exhibit A, he said it means the money is there but it would still return to the Council for an MOU or he asked if they would need to do any other proposal.
City Attorney Mala Subramanian said the Chamber amount is something they would bring back in the future with an agreement and be in the budget. Similarly, they would have some sort of MOU like they did with the Community Foundation to require a certain matching contingency. She also thinks the money would sit in the City funds and it would be contingent on receiving the matching funds.
City Council Meeting Page 39 of 43 June 26, 2023
Mayor Anduri summarized that they have approved all items they agreed on the last time but revising the low-income housing contribution to $215,000 and adding the $35,000, per year over three years for the Park Fund. When they get to the next item, they will revise the exhibit to change those numbers and adopt the resolution.
He said the Council supported the following:
1. Approving the $500,000, of $170,000 over 3 years for the PTR Parking lots;
2. $215,000 for the low-income Housing Fund;
3. $27,000 for the public art;
4. $60,000 for the Economic Development Manager;
5. $50,000 for a part-time reserve officer;
6. $40,000 for one year for the school with the message that this is not increasing the cap but a special contribution for one-year only;
7. $20,000 for the Chamber of Commerce;
8. $35,000 year for a 3-year period for the Park Fund. This is contingent on raising the matching funds the second and third years.
City Manager Srivatsa believed the Council has approved these allocations for the upcoming fiscal year with a strong message that all these items would be re-visited next year because of the budgetary issues.
Mayor Anduri concurred and said they will all be reconsidered, but they want the school district item is a one-time contribution for one year. Sinking funds would also stay the way they are.
ACTION: It was M/S/C (Gerringer/Dawson) to approve #2 to begin an internal review to assess what expenses need to be reduced to balance the budget for future years and the subsequent impact on services; and approve #3 to direct the Ad-Hoc Financial Sustainability Committee to explore options for increasing revenue. Vote: 5-0 (Ayes: Anduri, Dawson, Candell, Gerringer, and Kwok; Noes: None).
11. PUBLIC HEARING
A. Niroop Srivatsa, City Manager and Tracy Robinson, Administrative Services Director Resolution 2023-35 Adopting The Proposed Budget/Workplan; Appropriating Revenue And Expenses; Confirming The City’s Investment Policy; Determining The Appropriation Limit For Fiscal Year 2023-24; Determining Fees For All City Services And Authorizing Transfers And Expenditures Including The 2023 Capital Improvement Program And Related CEQA Findings Recommendation: Adopt Resolution 2023-35.
Mayor Anduri said they will be changing the $250,000 to $215,000 in Exhibit A and add $35,000 a year 3 years.
Ms. Robinson asked and confirmed the $35,000 would be a transfer from the General Fund to Fund 12 and into a Sinking Fund.
Mayor Anduri opened the public hearing.
GRACE DIXON thanked the Council for putting the money where the ethics are. It is a small amount but a start. They have left the meeting over 10 years thinking they were approved so she does not want that to happen again. She is excited and she would like some clarification on what happens next year.
City Council Meeting Page 40 of 43 June 26, 2023
Mayor Anduri stated the Council will be looking at this again next year.
Councilmember Candell said if the match works out well, it will be in the community’s favor.
Councilmember Gerringer commented that they have had an intention to do the parking lots over 3 years, have made an intention to do the murals, and everything will be reviewed every year.
Vice Mayor Dawson recognized Ms. Dixon’s work over the years and what this work moving forward entails with fundraising and matching the City’s funds.
ACTION: It was M/S/C (Dawson/Gerringer) to adopt Resolution 2023-35, as amended, to adopt the proposed Budget Work Plan, appropriating revenue and expenses, confirming the City’s investment policy, determining the appropriation limit for FY 2023-24, determining fees for all City services, and authorizing transfers and expenditures including the 2024 Capital Improvements Program and related CEQA findings. Vote: 5-0 (Ayes: Anduri, Dawson, Candell, Gerringer, and Kwok; Noes: None).
12. ITEMS REMOVED FROM CONSENT
A. Minutes – June 12, 2023
Recommendation: Approve.
Councilmember Gerringer referred to the item regarding Councilmember Gerringer thanking EBMUD, amend the second sentence, “She noted that EBMUD would meet with the DSOD prior to the community meeting.”
Mayor Anduri referred to page 8 of 38, 6th paragraph, “Mayor Anduri said he appreciates the presentations but what he is hearing Councilmember Gerringer saying in a very polite way…..” He was speaking of Mr. Yoloye and not Councilmember Gerringer. He also would like to add Councilmember Gerringer on page 37 of 38 under Councilmember Comments. The only day he commented on Community Day is because he knew Councilmember Gerringer was not going to congratulate herself for all the work she did. He asked to add a sentence to state, “He especially recognized Councilmember Gerringer for the leadership she provided as Co-Chair of the event.”
ACTION: It was M/S/C (Gerringer/Kwok) to approve the Minutes of June 12, 2023, as amended. Vote: 5- 0 (Ayes: Anduri, Dawson, Candell, Gerringer, and Kwok; Noes: None).
D. Suzanne Iarla, Communications Analyst
Hybrid Meeting Status
Recommendation: Continue offering hybrid meetings for City Council, Planning Commission, Design Review, Transportation & Circulation and adding the General Plan Advisory Committee (GPAC) which is a limited duration advisory body.
Councilmember Candell said she removed this and wanted to make sure they can add Town Halls and special meetings as fitting, and not just limit it to these particular meetings.
City Council Meeting Page 41 of 43 June 26, 2023
Communications Analyst Suzanne Iarla said as staff envisions, since they do have the capability to offer hybrid meetings in the various rooms where staff may hold a special meeting or a Town Hall meeting, depending on the type of meeting desired, they could host a hybrid meeting. She thinks it would be up to staff and the City Manager to determine if that meeting should be in person, on-line, or a hybrid meeting depending on the unique situation of each one, but they would be able to evaluate it for any Town Hall meeting.
Mayor Anduri said if they did a one-time Town Hall meeting here, he asked what would the cost be. Ms.
Iarla stated the AV Operators cost the City approximately $25/hour. The Library crew spends additional time setting up hybrid meetings versus a non-hybrid meeting but relatively minimal since the main bulk of expenses have already gone into the equipment for the room.
City Manager Srivatsa added that if it is a special meeting date, the City would have to pay the Library Foundation to rent the room.
Mayor Anduri asked if Councilmember Candell was thinking of meetings in this room only.
Councilmember Candell said it would have to be in the rooms that they have the equipment.
Mayor Anduri said it would be this room or the Sequoia Room. He said the proposal is to leave it to staff to determine whether they do it virtually. Councilmember Candell said she would rather have whoever is organizing the meeting decide they want it hybrid and then they can pick the right room.
Ms. Robinson said when a Councilmember is deciding to have a meeting they should pick the correct room. It would be more difficult to have a hybrid meeting in the JRB.
Mayor Anduri opened the public comment period, and there were no speakers.
ACTION: It was M/S/C (Candell/Dawson) to continue offering hybrid meetings for City Council, Planning Commission, Design Review, Transportation & Circulation and adding the General Plan Advisory Committee (GPAC) which is a limited duration advisory body, as amended to allow the City Manager to include hybrid meetings for Town Hall events. Roll Call Vote: 5-0 (Ayes: Candell, Dawson, Gerringer, Kwok and Anduri; Noes: None).
13. COUNCIL/COMMISSION REPORTS
A. Councilmembers report on activities and consideration of matters a Councilmember wishes to initiate for placement on a future agenda.
Mayor Anduri reported on his attendance to the Lamorinda Area Radio Interest Group Field Day which was great. He and Councilmember Kwok are in communications with the Citizen Advisory Group for EBMUD and there is correspondence with EBMUD, and they are aiming for agendizing this for the July 24th meeting.
B. City Manager’s Update
Recommendation: Receive and file.
City Manager Srivatsa reported that the Children’s Deck is almost ready. The door has not arrived, but it should in early July. It is a delightful space.
City Council Meeting Page 42 of 43 June 26, 2023
C. Councilmember Kwok and Mayor Anduri
Resolution 2023-36 Appointing two members to the Environmental Task Force Recommendation: Adopt Resolution 2023-36.
Councilmember Kwok reported on their interviews of candidates and recommend Nancy Hu who is reapplying after 6 years and a new member, Amy Starr to fill vacancies effective July 1, 2023.
Mayor Anduri opened the public comment period, and there were no speakers.
Councilmember Kwok thanked Colleen McCormick for her service on the task force.
ACTION: It was M/S/C (Kwok/Candell) to adopt Resolution 2023-36 appointing Nancy Hu and Amy Starr to the Environmental Task Force. Roll Call Vote: 5-0 (Ayes: Candell, Dawson, Gerringer, Kwok and Anduri; Noes: None).
D. Mayor Anduri and Councilmember Gerringer
1. Resolution 2023-37 Appointing one member to the Parks, Trails, and Recreation Commission
Recommendation: Adopt Resolution 2023-37.
Mayor Anduri stated he and Councilmember Gerringer interviewed very good candidates and recommend Shane Reisman for the position and encourage the other applicant to stay involved.
Mayor Anduri opened the public comment period, and there were no speakers.
ACTION: It was M/S/C (Anduri/Gerringer) to adopt Resolution 2023-37 appointing Shane Reisman to the Parks, Trails, and Recreation Commission. Vote: 5-0 (Ayes: Anduri, Dawson, Candell, Gerringer, and Kwok; Noes: None).
2. Resolution 2023-38 Appointing two members to the Senior Services Commission Recommendation: Adopt Resolution 2023-38
Mayor Anduri stated they held a good set of interviews. Dorothy Walker was up for her 6-year renewal, and she is being recommended for re-appointment for another 2 years. They are recommending Carol Federighi be appointed to the open position and encouraged the other applicant to be involved.
Mayor Anduri opened the public comment period, and there were no speakers.
ACTION: It was M/S/C (Anduri/Gerringer) to adopt Resolution 2023-38 appointing Dorothy Walker and Carol Federighi to the Senior Services Commission. Vote: 5-0 (Ayes: Anduri, Dawson, Candell, Gerringer, and Kwok; Noes: None).
City Council Meeting Page 43 of 43 June 26, 2023
E. Mayor Anduri and Vice Mayor Dawson
Resolution 2023-39 Appointing two members to the Public Art Committee Recommendation: Adopt Resolution 2023-39.
Vice Mayor Dawson stated she and Mayor Anduri interviewed 2 applicants and Carter Constantine and Carol Reif are being recommended to the Public Art Committee.
Mayor Anduri opened the public comment period, and there were no speakers.
Councilmember Kwok noted the terms are different. One expires on June 30, 2024 and the other is a 2- year term expiring June 30, 2025. He asked if the appointments should be designated.
Vice Mayor Dawson stated Carter Constantine is the 1-year term and Carol Reif is the 2-year term.
ACTION: It was M/S/C (Dawson/Anduri) to adopt Resolution 2023-39 appointing Carter Constantine and Carol Reif to the Public Art Committee. Vote: 5-0 (Ayes: Anduri, Dawson, Candell, Gerringer, and Kwok; Noes: None).
14. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS – None.
15. ADJOURNMENT – 11:43 p.m.
APPROVED:
__________________________________
Carl Anduri, Mayor
ATTEST:
_________________________
Joanne Robbins, City Clerk