Agenda — Menlo Park City Council, July 26, 2022 (part 2 of 4)

1060 National Drive #5, Sacramento, CA 95834
Phone: (916) 933-9554 Fax: (951) 637-1500
Proprietary and Confidential
• Conduct field training for installers and/or utility personnel on the installation of SmartPoints and meters
• Schedule and coordinate Sensus Analytics and RNI training • Coordinate AMI Integration between Utility’s Billing
System and Sensus, to integrate nightly synchronization of account data (vFlex) and provide billing read information o Note: The Utility will need to contract with billing
vendor to provide the billing part of the interface for vFlex integration and for the billing read process
• Assist with Monitoring of system read performance
• Coordinate Sensus Base Station and antenna
installation
• Coordinate Sensus Regional Network Interface
(RNI) SaaS setup and build
• Coordinate Sensus Analytics SaaS setup and build
Coordinate Sensus Customer Portal setup and
build
Manage final system acceptance process
• Facilitate customer acceptance testing of the Sensus FlexNet system • Secure customer sign-off of system acceptance
Aqua-Metric Responsibilities by Phase
The following tasks are the responsibility of Aqua-Metric during each specific phase of an AMI Project sale and deployment.

Pre-Sales Phase
• Obtain area site map from utility
• Evaluate potential tower sites
• Input collected data to Sensus System
to get propagation model completed
• Prepare AMI Base Terms document
Initiation Phase
• Gather project documents
• Gain understanding of project scope and deliverables
• Coordinate network infrastructure installation contractor • Review equipment orders
• Create preliminary schedule
• Host project kick-off meeting
Planning Phase
• Verify Network Propagation Analysis
• Refine Project Plan
• Meter Configuration Workshop
• FieldLogic Configuration Workshop
• Confirm Base Station site preparation
Closeout Phase
• Evaluate system performance
• Perform any system cleanup needed
• Close out project
Execution Phase
• AMI Network Base Station installation and certification • Facilitate SaaS Sensus RNI and Sensus Analytics servers and software • Perform RNI and Sensus Analytics configuration
• Coordinate integration with CIS or Billing system for meter billing reads • Pre-Deployment
o Test deployment process
o Validation Workshop
• Training
o Schedule customer training
§ Analytics
§ Customer Portal
§ Field Training - FieldLogic
§ RNI
System Implementation
A successful implementation begins with Utility participation in the integration. This workshop will include overviews on the system design, integration milestones, and data flow. During the workshop, the most appropriate integration methods are identified for each integration point.

The FlexNet AMI System supports a variety of methods for integrating with third-party applications, including:
• Flat file exports of CMEP, HHF, and MVRS to feed MDM, CIS, and OMS systems with registry reads, interval data, and alarm events.
• MultiSpeak web services for meter reading, customer billing, outage management, meter management, and meter lifecycle functions.

Page 18 ends

1060 National Drive #5, Sacramento, CA 95834
Phone: (916) 933-9554 Fax: (951) 637-1500
Proprietary and Confidential
• MultiSpeak web service, including the MDMClient meter reading web service, which is capable of transmitting real-time readings to the MDM as the Utility receives them and ensuring that they are not duplicates. This real-time integration is a huge advancement over daily flat file exchanges used by many utilities today. • CIM interfaces for on-demand reading, power status verification, interval data delivery (auto-push), meter event delivery (auto-push), and remote connect/disconnect.

If any custom integration is needed outside the standard APIs, we can identify requirements during our workshop. Sensus is an active and influential voting member of the MultiSpeak organization. They continually introduce and propose improvements to MultiSpeak standards. Additionally, Sensus actively participates in CIM working sessions to provide feedback and advice.

Third Party Integration: Aqua-Metric is successfully able to integrate the Sensus FlexNet AMI solution with many third-party software, including the City’s existing software (Minol, Inc. Cartegraph, and customer portal). The type of integration required will be based on the interface needed from the software company and the type of services required by the City.
b. Include a summary of the firm’s capabilities in accordance with the required maintenance program services.

Aqua-Metric has reviewed the City of Menlo Park’s Appendix A, AMI Scope of Work, Maintenance Program and understands the requirements set forth by the City. To adhere to the requirements provided, Aqua-Metric is proposing either a Network-as-a-Service (NaaS) solution or FlexNet Managed Services (FMS) Solution. Both solutions utilize the Sensus FlexNet AMI system as its backbone. The following provides an overview of NaaS and FMS.

FlexNet AMI System Managed Services Overview
Sensus offers a wide range of end-to-end solution management services to our utility customers across the lifecycle of their FlexNet AMI system. These services are designed to help our customers achieve maximum return on their AMI system investment and to enable critical utility resources to focus on more strategic activities and business objectives of the utility.

The ITIL (Information Technology Infrastructure Library)-based Sensus Managed Services include Software as a Service (SaaS), Application Managed Services (AMS), FlexNet Managed Services (FMS), and Network as a Service (NaaS). The figure below gives an outline of the scope of each service.

Our managed services solutions are scalable and will grow with you as your solutions grow to match your changing needs over time and enables utilities to only pay for what they use through a per-meter, per-year, subscription-based fee, depending on the actual number of endpoints in service – providing predictable level costing for your budgetary planning. The performance of your FlexNet AMI system will be guaranteed and tracked using mutually agreed KPIs and monitored 24x7x365 by Sensus security experts to prevent intrusions.

Page 19 ends

Detailed Cost Estimate
Quantity Unit Cost Total Total Rounded
$ 4,664,000
AMI System Hardware - base stations $ 84,447 $ 85,000
M400 Basestation 2 15,750$ $ 31,500
Basestation Installation - City Hall Monopole 1 19,741$ $ 19,741 Basestation Installation - Reservoir 1 26,397$ $ 26,397 Basestation Certification 2 1,750$ $ 3,500
Basestation Communication Backhaul 2 1,000$ $ 2,000
CommandLink Bluetooth Device 2 654$ $ 1,309
AMI System Software - integrate with Sensus
Analytics and WaterSmart customer portal $ 68,162 $ 68,000 Setup $ 26,206
RNI SaaS Setup 1 7,956$ $ 7,956
RNI Core Education 1 5,500$ $ 5,500
SA System Setup 1 3,750$ $ 3,750
SA Basic Integration 1 5,000$ $ 5,000
SA Training 1 4,000$ $ 4,000
Sensus Annual Subscriptions $ 29,456
Hosted RNI SaaS 1 8,240$ $ 8,240
SA Enhanced 1 7,031$ $ 7,031
SA Text Message Fee 1 646$ $ 646
Basestation Extended Warranty 2 1,769$ $ 3,538
Aqua-Metric Support 1 10,000$ $ 10,000
WaterSmart Integration $ 12,500
Integration with SA WaterSmart CP 1 12,500$ $ 12,500
Materials - meters, meter endpoints, meter boxes
and lids $ 2,226,474 $ 2,227,000
5/8" x 3/4" Meter Replacement
Sensus SRII Meter 2575 133$ $ 341,780
1" Meter Replacement
Sensus SRII Meter 714 218$ $ 155,638
1-1/2" Meter Replacement
Sensus OMNI R2 Meter 108 428$ $ 46,174
2" Meter Replacement
Sensus OMNI R2 Meter 205 600$ $ 122,973
3" Meter Replacement
Sensus OMNI C2 Meter 37 1,509$ $ 55,818
4" Meter Replacement
Sensus OMNI C2 Meter 34 2,620$ $ 89,085
6" Meter Replacement
Sensus OMNI C2 Meter 80 4,526$ $ 362,058
8" Meter Replacement
Sensus OMNI C2 Meter 32 7,311$ $ 233,951
10" Meter Replacement
Sensus OMNI C2 Meter 10 9,434$ $ 94,335
12" Meter Replacement
Sensus Hydroverse Meter 5 7,249$ $ 36,243
EXHIBIT A-2 Page I-5.22
Quantity Unit Cost Total Total Rounded
Meter Box Lid 4310 48$ 206,234 $
Meter Boxes 430 81$ $ 34,680
520M SmartPoint (Endpoint) 4305 104$ $ 447,505
Installation - meter replacements and retrofits $ 1,093,396 $ 1,094,000 5/8" x 3/4" Meter Replacement
Sensus SRII Meter 2575 108$ $ 277,250
1" Meter Replacement
Sensus SRII Meter 714 108$ $ 76,876
1-1/2" Meter Replacement
Sensus OMNI R2 Meter 108 313$ $ 33,750
2" Meter Replacement
Sensus OMNI R2 Meter 205 313$ $ 64,063
3" Meter Replacement
Sensus OMNI C2 Meter 37 1,017$ $ 37,631
4" Meter Replacement
Sensus OMNI C2 Meter 34 1,585$ $ 53,898
6" Meter Replacement
Sensus OMNI C2 Meter 80 3,693$ $ 295,454
8" Meter Replacement
Sensus OMNI C2 Meter 32 4,545$ $ 145,454
10" Meter Replacement
Sensus OMNI C2 Meter 10 5,682$ $ 56,818
12" Meter Replacement
Sensus Hydroverse Meter 5 6,818$ $ 34,091
Meter Retrofit 510 36$ $ 18,110
Miscellaneous (as needed) – meter box/lid
replacements, plumbing retrofits, other items
(estimated quantities)
$ 1,189,900 $ 1,190,000
Plumbing Retrofits (hourly) 100 284$ $ 28,409
Standby Charges 50 142$ $ 7,103
Notification (Distribute Doorhangers) 1 70,455$ $ 70,455 Call Center Support Services 1 10,227$ $ 10,227
Clean/Vactor Meter Boxes 1000 51$ $ 51,140
Meter Box Lid Replacement 4310 14$ $ 61,202
Meter Box Replacement - Dirt 430 165$ $ 70,851
Meter Box Replacement - Concrete 430 795$ $ 342,044
Installation Project Management (monthly) 7 12,500$ $ 87,500 Work-Order Management Software - Programming
and Setup 1 8,523$ $ 8,523
Work-Order Management Software - Integration 1 8,523$ $ 8,523 Work-Order Management Software - Implementation 4310 2$ $ 8,103 Staging and Warehousing: Storage Containers,
Monthly Rental Fee (monthly) 6 1,023$ $ 6,136
Staging and Warehousing: Waste, Spoils, and Scrap
Disposal, Price per Month (monthly) 6 2,841$ $ 17,045
Staging and Warehousing: Forklift and Pallet Jack 1 34,091$ $ 34,091 Installation Mobilization 1 69,068$ $ 69,068
Estimated Sales Tax for Product (9.38%) 1 217,481$ $ 217,481 Performance and Payment Bond (24 months) 1 92,000$ $ 92,000 Page I-5.23
Customer:

PRF000387
6/30/2021

MENLOWPARK
Order Number:

Customer PO
VBL
SO0066544
6/30/2021
Ship Via Delivery method
Aqua-Metric Sales, Co.

Invoice Number:

Invoice Date:

Order Date:

Salesperson: 0025
Bill To:

MENLO PARK MWD
AMI Project - Scott Jaw
701 Laurel St
MENLO PARK, CA 94025-3409

MENLO PARK MWD
AMI Project - Luis Olivera
333 Burgess Dr
MENLO PARK, CA 94025-3409
Ship To:

Terms
NET30

Page 1 of 1 ends

4050 Flat Rock Dr.

Riverside, CA 92505
TEL: 951-637-1400

PROFORMA
Project
Quantity
Shipped BKO Product Unit price Total tax excluded
15 15 S502TR 1" SR II TR/PL 100 C.F. 235.00 3,525.00
15 15 S202TR 5/8"x3/4" SR II TR/PL 100 C.F. 141.00 2,115.00 15 15 S302TR 3/4" SL SR II TR/PL 100 C.F. 173.00 2,595.00 1 1 OMNIC3 3" OMNI C2 100 C.F. 1,800.00 1,800.00
1 1 OMNIC4 4" OMNI C2 100 C.F. 3,127.00 3,127.00
1 1 OMNIC6 6" OMNI C2 100 C.F. 5,400.00 5,400.00
Tax excluded line total 18,562.00
TAX EXCLUDED TOTAL 18,562.00
Sales Tax 1,716.99
TOTAL TAX INCLUDED 20,278.99
GRAND TOTAL 20 278.99

INVOICE
EXHIBIT A-3 Page I-5.24
Confidential │Page 1 of 16
Software as a Service and Spectrum Lease Agreement
between

CITY OF MENLO PARK AMI PROJECT
(“Customer”)
and
Sensus USA Inc.
(“Sensus”)
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have caused this Software as a Service and Spectrum Lease (“Agreement”) to be executed by their duly authorized representatives as of the day and year written below. The date of the last party to sign is the “Effective Date.”
This Agreement shall commence on the Effective Date and continue for/until: 5 Years (“Initial Term”). At the end of the Initial Term, this Agreement shall automatically renew for an additional term of 5 years (“Renewal Term”). The “Term” shall refer to both the Initial Term and the Renewal Term.

This Agreement contains two parts: Part (1) is The FCC Notification for Spectrum Manager Lease, to be filed with the FCC by Sensus on behalf of the Customer and Part (2) is a Software as a Service and Spectrum Lease between Sensus and Customer.

Together, these two parts create the Agreement.

Sensus USA Inc. Customer: CITY OF MENLO PARK AMI PROJECT By: {{Sig_es_:signer3:signature}} By: {{Sig_es_:signer2:signature}} Name: {{Sig_es_:signer3:fullname}} Name: {{Sig_es_:signer2:fullname}} Title: {{Sig_es_:signer3:title}} Title: {{Sig_es_:signer2:title}} Date: {{Dte_es_:signer3:date}} Date: {{Dte_es_:signer2:date}} Contents of this Agreement:

Part 1: Notification for Spectrum Manager Lease
Part 2: Agreement
Exhibit A Software
Exhibit B Technical Support
ATTACHMENT B Page I-5.25
Confidential │Page 2 of 16
Part 1: Notification for Spectrum Manager Lease
In order for Sensus to apply to the FCC on the Customer’s behalf for a spectrum manager lease, Customer must complete the information below in boxes one (1) through ten (10) and certify via authorized signature. Customer’s signature will indicate that Customer authorizes Sensus to file the spectrum manager lease notification on FCC Form 608 with the Customer as spectrum Lessee, and if Customer does not already have one, ownership disclosure information on FCC Form 602.

1. Customer/Lessee Name:

Attention To: Name of Real Party in Interest:

Street Address: City:

State: Zip: Phone:

Fax: Email:

Is Customer contact information same as above? Yes No (If No, complete box 2 below)

2. Additional Customer/Lessee Contact Information
Company Name:

Attention To:

Street Address: City:

State: Zip: Phone:

Fax: Email:

3. Customer/Lessee is a(n) (Select one): Individual ǀ Unincorporated Association ǀ Trust Government Entity ǀ Corporation ǀ Limited Liability Company ǀ General Partnership Limited Partnership ǀ Limited Liability Partnership ǀ Consortium ǀ Other __________

4. FCC Form 602: FCC File Number of Customer’s Form 602 Ownership Information: __________. If Customer has not filed a Form 602, Sensus will file one for Customer. Please complete questions 5, 6, and 7 below if Customer does not have a Form 602 on file.

Customer must complete items 8, 9 and 10 irrespective of whether Customer has an ownership report on file.

5. Customer Tax ID:

6. Individual Contact For FCC Matters
Please designate one individual (the Director of Public Works or similar person) who is responsible to the FCC for the operation of the FlexNet radio system.

Name
Title:

Email: Phone:

7. Ownership Disclosure Information
If Customer/Lessee is a government entity, list the names of the Mayor and all Council Members below, as well as verify citizenship and ownership interests in any entity regulated by the FCC. Such ownership must be disclosed where a mayor/council member owns 10% or more, directly or indirectly, or has operating control of any entity subject to FCC regulation. If any answer to Ownership question is Yes, or any answer to Citizenship question is No, provide an attachment with further explanation.

US Citizen? Ownership Disclosure?
Mayor: Yes No Yes No
Council Member:

Yes No Yes No
Council Member:

Yes No Yes No
Page I-5.26
Confidential │Page 3 of 16
Council Member:

Yes No Yes No
Council Member:

Yes No Yes No
Council Member: Yes No Yes No
Council Member:

Yes No Yes No

8. Alien Ownership Questions (if the answer is Yes, provide an attachment explaining the circumstances) 1) Is the Customer/Lessee a foreign government or the representative of any foreign government? Yes No

9. Basic Qualification Information
1) Has the Customer or any party to this application had any FCC station authorization, license, or construction permit revoked or had any application for an initial, modification or renewal of FCC station authorization, license or construction permit denied by the Commission?
Yes No
2) Has the Customer or any party to this filing, or any party directly or indirectly controlling the Customer or any party to this filing ever been convicted of a felony by any state or federal court? Yes No 3) Has any court finally adjudged the Customer or any party directly or indirectly controlling the Customer guilty of unlawfully monopolizing or attempting to unlawfully monopolize radio communication, directly or indirectly, through control of manufacture or sale of radio apparatus, exclusive traffic arrangement, or any other means or unfair methods of competition?
Yes No

10. Customer/Lessee Certification Statements
1) The Customer/Lessee agrees that the Lease is not a sale or transfer of the license itself. Yes 2) The Customer/Lessee acknowledges that it is required to comply with the Commission’s Rules and Regulations and other applicable law at all times, and if the Customer/Lessee fails to so comply, the Lease may be revoked, cancelled, or terminated by either the Licensee or the Commission.

Yes
3) The Customer/Lessee certifies that neither it nor any other party to the Application/Notification is subject to a denial of Federal benefits pursuant to Section 5301 of the Anti-Drug Abuse Act of 1988, 21 U.S.C § 862, because of a conviction for possession or distribution of a controlled substance (See Section 1.2002(b) of the rules, 47 CFR § 1.2002(b), for the definition of “party to the application” as used in this certification.) Yes
4) The Customer/Lessee hereby accepts Commission oversight and enforcement consistent with the license and lease authorization. The Lessee acknowledges that it must cooperate fully with any investigation or inquiry conducted either by the Commission or the Licensee, allow the Commission or the Licensee to conduct on-site inspections of transmission facilities, and suspend operations at the direction of the Commission or the Licensee and to the extent that such suspension of operation would be consistent with applicable Commission policies.

Yes
5) The Customer/Lessee acknowledges that in the event an authorization held by a Licensee that has associated with it a spectrum leasing arrangement that is the subject of this filing is revoked, cancelled, terminated, or otherwise ceases to be in effect, the Customer/Lessee will have no continuing authority to use the leased spectrum and will be required to terminate its operations no later than the date on which the Licensee ceases to have any authority to operate under the license, unless otherwise authorized by the Commission.

Yes
6) The Customer/Lessee agrees the Lease shall not be assigned to any entity that is not eligible or qualified to enter into a spectrum leasing arrangement under the Commission’s Rules and Regulations. Yes 7)The Customer/Lessee waives any claim to the use of any particular frequency or of the electromagnetic spectrum as against the regulatory power of the United States because of the previous use of the same, whether by spectrum lease or otherwise.

Yes
8) The Customer/Lessee certifies that it is not in default on any payment for Commission licenses and that it is not delinquent on any non-tax debt owed to any federal agency. Yes The Customer/Lessee certifies that all of its statements made in this Application/Notification and in the schedules, exhibits, attachments, or documents incorporated by reference are material, are part of this Application/Notification, and are true, complete, correct, and made in good faith.

The Customer/Lessee shall notify Sensus in writing in the event any information supplied on this form changes.

CITY OF MENLO PARK AMI PROJECT
By: {{Sig_es_:signer1:signature}} Title: {{Sig_es_:signer1:title}} Name: {{Sig_es_:signer1:fullname}} Date: {{Dte_es_:signer1:date}} FAILURE TO SIGN THIS APPLICATION MAY RESULT IN DISMISSAL OF THE APPLICATION AND FORFEITURE OF ANY FEES PAID.

WILLFUL FALSE STATEMENTS MADE ON THIS FORM OR ANY ATTACHMENTS ARE PUNISHABLE BY FINE AND/OR IMPRISONMENT (U.S. Code, Title 18, Section 1001) AND/OR REVOCATION OF ANY STATION LICENSE OR CONSTRUCTION PERMIT (U.S. Code, Title 47, Section 312(a)(1)) AND/OR FORFEITURE (U.S. Code Title 47, Section 503).

Page I-5.27
Confidential │Page 4 of 16
Part 2: Agreement

1. General
A. Agreement Generally. The scope of this Agreement includes usage terms for Sensus’ hosted Software solution, leased spectrum, technical support, and supporting terms and conditions for an advanced metering infrastructure solution that Customer will purchase from Sensus’ authorized distributor. Customer is not paying Sensus directly for the services provided by Sensus under the Agreement; rather, Customer shall pay Sensus’ authorized distributor pursuant to a separate agreement between Customer and such authorized distributor.

2. Software.

A. Software as a Service (SaaS). Sensus shall provide Customer with Software as a Service, as defined in Exhibit A, only so long as Customer is current in its payments for such services.

B. UCITA. To the maximum extent permitted by law, the Parties agree that the Uniform Computer Information Transaction Act as enacted by any state shall not apply, in whole or in part, to this Agreement.

3. Spectrum
A. Definitions in this Section 3. In this Section 3 only, “Sensus” shall mean Sensus USA Inc. and its wholly owned subsidiary, Sensus Spectrum LLC.

B. Spectrum Lease. Sensus hereby grants to Customer, and Customer accepts, a spectrum manager lease (“Spectrum Lease”) over the frequencies of certain FCC license(s) (“FCC License”) solely within Customer’s Service Territory. (The frequencies of the FCC License within Customer’s geographic Service Territory are called the “Leased Spectrum”). Customer shall pay the Ongoing Fees for use of the Leased Spectrum.

C. FCC Forms. At the Federal Communications Commission (“FCC”), Sensus will; (1) obtain an FCC Registration Number (“FRN”)) for Customer; (2) submit on behalf of Customer the FCC Form 602 Ownership Disclosure Information if Customer has not already done so; and (3) file a FCC Form 608, notification/application for long-term spectrum manager lease. This Lease becomes effective when the FCC accepts the FCC Form 608.

D. Lease Application. In order to complete the FCC lease application, Customer will promptly:
i. Complete and sign the representations in Part 1 of this Agreement such that Customer demonstrates it qualifies for a spectrum lease under FCC rules. Customer’s signature will indicate that Customer authorizes Sensus to; (1) obtain an FRN on behalf of Customer; (2) submit the FCC Form 602 Ownership Disclosure Information on behalf of Customer if Customer has not already done so; and (3) file the spectrum manager lease notification on FCC Form 608 with the Customer as spectrum lessee. ii. Give Sensus the coordinates of the boundaries of Customer’s Service Territory or, alternatively, approve Sensus’ estimation of the same. iii. If Customer has not already done so; Customer hereby authorizes Sensus to apply on Customer’s behalf and obtain for Customer a Federal Registration Number (FRN, the FCC’s unique identifier for each licensee) and shall supply Sensus with Customer’s Taxpayer Identification Number (“TIN”).
iv. Provide any other information or other cooperation reasonably necessary for the Parties to perform as set forth herein.

E. Permitted Use of Spectrum Lease and Equipment. Customer may transmit or receive over the Leased Spectrum only in the Service Territory and only using FlexNet equipment manufactured by Sensus and used in accordance with Sensus’ specifications. Customer may use the Leased Spectrum only to read and direct Field Devices or any other operation approved by Sensus in writing. Without limiting the foregoing, Customer is prohibited from reselling, subleasing or sublicensing the FlexNet Equipment and Leased Spectrum, and from transmitting voice communications over the Leased Spectrum. For each piece of RF Field Equipment used by Customer, Customer shall affix a Sensus-supplied label to the exterior of the RF Field Equipment cabinet or other appropriate visible place to indicate that RF operation is conducted under authority of FCC License(s) issued to Sensus.

F. Term of Spectrum Lease. Unless terminated earlier (because, for example, Customer stops using the FlexNet equipment or because this Agreement terminates or expires for any reason), this Spectrum Lease will have the same term as the FCC license. If Customer is operating in compliance with this Agreement and is current on any payments owed to Sensus, when the FCC License renews, the Parties will apply to the FCC to renew this Spectrum Lease.

G. Termination of Spectrum Lease. The Spectrum Lease will terminate: (a) two months after Customer stops transmitting with FlexNet equipment manufactured by Sensus; (b) upon termination, revocation or expiration of the FCC License; (c) upon Customer’s breach of this Agreement; or (d) upon termination or expiration of this Agreement for any reason.

H. FCC Compliance. The following FCC requirements apply i. Pursuant to 47 CFR 1.9040(a);
a. Customer must comply at all times with applicable FCC rules. This Agreement may be revoked by Sensus or the FCC if Customer fails to so comply;
b. If the FCC License is terminated, Customer has no continuing right to use the Leased Spectrum unless otherwise authorized by the FCC; c. This Agreement is not an assignment, sale or other transfer of the FCC License; d. This Agreement may not be assigned except upon written consent of Sensus, which consent may be withheld in its discretion; and e. In any event, Sensus will not consent to an assignment that does not satisfy FCC rules. ii. Referencing 47 CFR 1.9010, Sensus retains de jure and de facto control over the applicable radio facilities, including that, a. Sensus will be responsible for Customer’s compliance with FCC policies and rules. Sensus is responsible for engineering the FlexNet equipment and accompanying software and other programs to comply with FCC rules. Customer will operate the FlexNet equipment subject to Sensus’ supervision and control and solely in accordance with Sensus’ specifications. Sensus retains the right to inspect Customer’s radio operations hereunder and to terminate this Agreement or take any other necessary steps to resolve a violation of FCC rules, including to order Customer to cease transmission. Sensus will act as spectrum manager in assigning spectrum under the FCC License so as to avoid any harmful interference or other violation of FCC rules. Sensus will be responsible for resolving any interference complaints or other FCC rule violations that may arise; and
b. Sensus will file any necessary FCC forms or applications and Customer agrees to reasonably assist Sensus with such filing by providing any necessary information or other cooperation. Sensus will otherwise interact with the FCC with respect to this Agreement, the FCC License or FlexNet equipment.
iii. Customer must continue operations on the spectrum during the Term of this Agreement. If Customer stops operations for any period of time, Customer must notify Sensus by sending an email to [email protected]. Customer may not pause or discontinue operations for more than 180 days.

I. Interference. Customer agrees to report to Sensus promptly, and in no event later than 72 hours afterward, any incident related to the Leased Spectrum, including where Customer experiences harmful interference, receives a complaint or other notice of having caused harmful interference, or receives any type of communication from the FCC or other government agency regarding radio transmission.

4. Equipment.

A. Purchase of Equipment. Customer shall purchase all Field Devices, RF Field Equipment, and other goods (collectively, “Equipment”) from Sensus’ authorized distributor pursuant to the terms and conditions (including any warranties on such Equipment) agreed by Customer and Sensus’ authorized distributor. This Page I-5.28
Confidential │Page 5 of 16
Agreement shall not affect any terms and conditions, including any warranty terms, agreed by Customer and Sensus' authorized distributor. If Customer elects to purchase any equipment or services directly from Sensus, or if Customer pays any fees or other costs to Sensus, then Sensus’ Terms of Sale shall apply.

The “Terms of Sale” are available at: https://www.sensus.com/tc, or 1-800-METER-IT B. THERE ARE NO WARRANTIES IN THIS AGREEMENT, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED. SENSUS EXPRESSLY DISCLAIMS ANY AND ALL REPRESENTATIONS,

WARRANTIES AND/OR CONDITIONS, EXPRESSED, IMPLIED, STATUTORY OR OTHERWISE, REGARDING ANY MATTER IN CONNECTION WITH THIS AGREEMENT, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, WARRANTIES AS TO FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, MERCHANTABILITY, NONINFRINGEMENT AND TITLE.

5. Services.

A. Installation of Equipment. Installation services for Field Devices, other goods, and RF Field Equipment will be as agreed between the Customer and Sensus' authorized distributor. Sensus will not provide installation services pursuant to this Agreement B. Technical Support. Sensus shall provide Customer the technical support set forth in Exhibit B.

C. Project Management. Sensus’ authorized distributor will provide project management services to Customer. Any project management of the FlexNet System provided by Sensus shall be subject to a separate agreement which describes the scope and pricing for such work.

D. Training. Sensus’ authorized distributor will provide Customer with training on the use of the FlexNet System. Any training provided by Sensus shall be subject to a separate agreement which describes the scope and pricing for such work.

E. IT Systems Integration Services. Except as may otherwise be provided herein, integration of the Software into Customer’s new or existing internal IT systems is not included in this Agreement. Any integration work shall be subject to a separate agreement which describes the scope and pricing for such work.

6. General Terms and Conditions.

A. Infringement Indemnity. Sensus shall indemnify and hold harmless Customer from and against any judgment by a court of competent jurisdiction or settlement reached from any litigation instituted against Customer in the United States by a third party which alleges that the FlexNet System provided hereunder infringes upon the patents or copyrights of such third party, provided that Sensus shall have the right to select counsel in such proceedings and control such proceedings.

Notwithstanding the foregoing, Sensus shall have no liability under this indemnity unless Customer cooperates with and assists Sensus in any such proceedings and gives Sensus written notice of any claim hereunder within fourteen (14) days of receiving it. Further, Sensus shall have no liability hereunder if such claim is related to; (i) any change, modification or alteration made to the FlexNet System by Customer or a third party, (ii) use of the FlexNet System in combination with any goods or services not provided by Sensus hereunder, (iii) Customer’s failure to use the most recent version of the Software or to otherwise take any corrective action as reasonably directed by Sensus, (iv) compliance by Sensus with any designs, specifications or instructions provided by Customer or compliance by Sensus with an industry standard, or (v) any use of the FlexNet System other than for the Permitted Use. In the event the FlexNet System is adjudicated to infringe a patent or copyright of a third party and its use is enjoined, or, if in the reasonable opinion of Sensus, the FlexNet System is likely to become the subject of an infringement claim, Sensus, at its sole discretion and expense, may; (i) procure for Customer the right to continue using the FlexNet System or (ii) modify or replace the FlexNet System so that it becomes non-infringing. THIS SECTION STATES CUSTOMER’S SOLE AND EXCLUSIVE REMEDY AND SENSUS’ ENTIRE LIABILITY FOR ANY CLAIM OF INFRINGEMENT.

B. Limitation of Liability. Sensus’ aggregate liability in any and all causes of action arising under, out of or in relation to this Agreement, its negotiation, performance, breach or termination (collectively “Causes of Action”) shall not exceed the greater of; (a) the total amount paid by Customer directly to Sensus under this Agreement; or (b) ten thousand US dollars (USD 10,000.00). This is so whether the Causes of Action are in tort, including, without limitation, negligence or strict liability, in contract, under statute or otherwise. As separate and independent limitations on liability, Sensus’ liability shall be limited to direct damages.

Sensus shall not be liable for; (i) any indirect, incidental, special or consequential damages; nor (ii) any revenue or profits lost by Customer or its Affiliates from any End User(s), irrespective whether such lost revenue or profits is categorized as direct damages or otherwise; nor (iii) any In/Out Costs; nor (v) damages arising from maincase or bottom plate breakage caused by freezing temperatures, water hammer conditions, or excessive water pressure. The limitations on liability set forth in this Agreement are fundamental inducements to Sensus entering into this Agreement. They apply unconditionally and in all respects. They are to be interpreted broadly so as to give Sensus the maximum protection permitted under law.

C. Termination. Either party may terminate this Agreement earlier if the other party commits a material breach of this Agreement and such material breach is not cured within forty-five (45) days of written notice by the other party. Upon any expiration or termination of this Agreement, Sensus’ and Customer’s obligations hereunder shall cease and the software as a service and Spectrum Lease shall immediately cease.

D. Force Majeure. If either party becomes unable, either wholly or in part, by an event of Force Majeure, to fulfill its obligations under this Agreement, the obligations affected by the event of Force Majeure will be suspended during the continuance of that inability. The party affected by the force majeure will take reasonable steps to mitigate the Force Majeure.

E. Intellectual Property Rights.
i. Software and Materials. No Intellectual Property is assigned to Customer hereunder. Excluding Customer Data, Sensus shall own or continue to own all right, title, and interest in and to the Intellectual Property associated with the Software and related documentation, including any derivations and/or derivative works (the “Sensus IP”). To the extent, if any, that any ownership interest in and to such Sensus IP does not automatically vest in Sensus by virtue of this Agreement or otherwise, and instead vests in Customer, Customer agrees to grant and assign and hereby does grant and assign to Sensus all right, title, and interest that Customer may have in and to such Sensus IP. Customer agrees not to reverse engineer any Sensus Products purchased or provided hereunder.
ii. Customer Data. Notwithstanding the prior paragraph, as between Customer and Sensus, Customer remains the owner of all right, title or interest in or to any Customer Data. “Customer Data” means solely usage data collected by the Field Devices. To avoid doubt, Customer Data does not include non-End User usage data collected by the Field Devices, Software, or FlexNet System, such as network and equipment status information or the like. iii. Consent to Use of Customer Data. Customer hereby irrevocably grants to Sensus a royalty-free, non-exclusive, irrevocable right and license to access, store, and use such Customer Data and any other data or information provided to Sensus, to (1) provide the Service; (2) analyze and improve the Service; (3) analyze and improve any Sensus equipment or software; or (4) for any other internal use. As used herein, “Service” means Sensus' obligations under this Agreement.
iv. Access to Customer Data. Within 45 days of Customer’s written request, Sensus will provide Customer a copy of the previous 24 months CMEP interval file and deliver the file to a drop location specified by Customer.

F. Data Privacy. Customer acknowledges that Sensus and its Affiliates (collectively, “Xylem”) will collect and process personal data for the purposes outlined in this Agreement. Xylem’s data privacy policy is available at https://www.xylem.com/en-us/support/privacy/. Customer acknowledges that it has read and understood Xylem’s privacy policy and agrees to the use of personal data outlined therein. The collection and use of personal data by Customer is Customer’s responsibility.

Page I-5.29
Confidential │Page 6 of 16
G. Confidentiality. Except as may be required under applicable law, court order, or regulation, or to the extent required to perform and enforce this Agreement, both parties shall (and shall cause their employees and contractors to) keep all Confidential Information strictly confidential and shall not disclose it to any third party. The Confidential Information may be transmitted orally, in writing, electronically or otherwise observed by either party. Notwithstanding the foregoing, “Confidential Information” shall not include; (i) any information that is in the public domain other than due to Recipient’s breach of this Agreement; (ii) any information in the possession of the Recipient without restriction prior to disclosure by the Discloser; or (iii) any information independently developed by the Recipient without reliance on the information disclosed hereunder by the Discloser. “Discloser” means either party that discloses Confidential Information, and “Recipient” means either party that receives it.

H. Compliance with Laws. Customer shall comply with all applicable country, federal, state, and local laws and regulations, as set forth at the time of acceptance and as may be amended, changed, or supplemented. Customer shall not take any action, or permit the taking of any action by a third party, which may render Sensus liable for a violation of applicable laws.
i. Export Control Laws. Customer shall; (i) comply with all applicable U.S. and local laws and regulations governing the use, export, import, re-export, and transfer of products, technology, and services; and (ii) obtain all required authorizations, permits, and licenses. Customer shall immediately notify Sensus, and immediately cease all activities with regards to the applicable transaction, if the Customer knows or has a reasonable suspicion that the equipment, software, or services provided hereunder may be directed to countries in violation of any export control laws. By ordering equipment, software or services, Customer certifies that it is not on any U.S. government export exclusion list. ii. Anti-Corruption Laws. Customer shall comply with the United States Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA), 15 U.S.C. §§ 78dd-1, et seq.; laws and regulations implementing the OECD’s Convention on Combating Bribery of Foreign Public Officials in International Business Transactions; the U.N.

Convention Against Corruption; the Inter-American Convention Against Corruption; and any other applicable laws and regulations relating to anti-corruption in the Customer’s county or any country where performance of this Agreement, or delivery or use of equipment, software or services will occur.

I. Non-Waiver of Rights. A waiver by either party of any breach of this Agreement or the failure or delay of either party to enforce any of the articles or other provisions of this Agreement will not in any way affect, limit or waive that party’s right to enforce and compel strict compliance with the same or other articles or provisions.

J. Assignment and Sub-contracting. Either party may assign, transfer or delegate this Agreement without requiring the other party’s consent; (i) to an Affiliate; (ii) as part of a merger; or (iii) to a purchaser of all or substantially all of its assets. Apart from the foregoing, neither party may assign, transfer or delegate this Agreement without the prior written consent of the other, which consent shall not be unreasonably withheld. Furthermore, Customer acknowledges Sensus may use subcontractors to perform RF Field Equipment installation, the systems integration work (if applicable), or project management (if applicable), without requiring Customer’s consent.

K. Amendments. No alteration, amendment, or other modification shall be binding unless in writing and signed by both Customer and by a vice president (or higher) of Sensus.

L. Governing Law and Dispute Resolution. This Agreement shall be governed by, construed and enforced in accordance with the laws of the State of Delaware. Any and all disputes arising under, out of, or in relation to this Agreement, its negotiation, performance or termination (“Disputes”) shall first be resolved by mediation between the Parties. TO THE MAXIMUM EXTENT PERMITTED BY LAW, THE PARTIES AGREE TO A BENCH TRIAL AND THAT THERE SHALL BE NO JURY IN ANY DISPUTES.

M. Acknowledgement of Events. The parties acknowledge and agree that the global COVID-19 pandemic (“COVID-19”) is ongoing, dynamic, unpredictable, and as such may impact the ability of Sensus to meet its obligations under this Agreement. The parties agree that, for so long as there is an impact of COVID19 on Sensus’ performance, all performance efforts by Sensus will be on a reasonable efforts basis only and Sensus shall not be responsible for failure to meet its obligations, to the extent that it is precluded from doing so as a result of COVID-19. The parties shall work, in good faith, to make any reasonable adjustments that may be required as a result of COVID-19.

N. Survival. The provisions of this Agreement that are applicable to circumstances arising after its termination or expiration shall survive such termination or expiration.

O. Severability. In the event any provision of this Agreement is held to be void, unlawful or otherwise unenforceable, that provision will be severed from the remainder of the Agreement and replaced automatically by a provision containing terms as nearly like the void, unlawful, or unenforceable provision as possible; and the Agreement, as so modified, will continue to be in full force and effect.

P. Four Corners. This written Agreement, including all of its exhibits, represents the entire understanding between and obligations of the parties and supersedes all prior understandings, agreements, negotiations, and proposals, whether written or oral, formal or informal between the parties. Any additional writings shall not modify any limitations or remedies provided in the Agreement. There are no other terms or conditions, oral, written, electronic or otherwise. There are no implied obligations. All obligations are specifically set forth in this Agreement. Further, there are no representations that induced this Agreement that are not included in it. The ONLY operative provisions are set forth in writing in this Agreement. Without limiting the generality of the foregoing, no purchase order placed by or on behalf of Customer shall alter any of the terms of this Agreement. The parties agree that such documents are for administrative purposes only, even if they have terms and conditions printed on them and even if and when they are accepted and/or processed by Sensus. Any goods, software or services delivered or provided in anticipation of this Agreement (for e.g., as part of a pilot or because this Agreement has not yet been signed but the parties have begun the deployment) under purchase orders placed prior to the execution of this Agreement are governed by this Agreement upon its execution and it replaces and supersedes any such purchase orders.

Q. Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in any number of counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original, but all of which together shall constitute one and the same instrument. Additionally, this Agreement may be executed by facsimile or electronic copies, all of which shall be considered an original for all purposes.

7. Definitions. As used in this Agreement, the following terms shall have the following meanings:

A. “Affiliate” of a party means any other entity controlling, controlled by, or under common control with such party, where “control” of an entity means the ownership, directly or indirectly, of 50% or more of either; (i) the shares or other equity in such entity; or (ii) the voting rights in such entity.

B. “Confidential Information” means any and all non-public information of either party, including all technical information about either party’s products or services, pricing information, marketing and marketing plans, Customer’s End Users’ data, FlexNet System performance, FlexNet System architecture and design, FlexNet System software, other business and financial information of either party, and all trade secrets of either party.

C. “End User” means any end user of electricity, water, and/or gas (as applicable) that pays Customer for the consumption of electricity, water, and/or gas, as applicable.

D. “Field Devices” means the SmartPoint Modules .

E. “FlexNet Base Station” identifies the Sensus manufactured device consisting of one transceiver, to be located on a tower that receives readings from the SmartPoint Modules (either directly or via an R100 unit) by radio frequency and passes those readings to the RNI by TCP/IP backhaul communication. For clarity, FlexNet Base Stations include Metro Base Stations.

F. “FlexNet System” is comprised of the SmartPoint Modules, RF Field Equipment, Server Hardware, software licenses, Spectrum Lease, and other equipment provided to Customer hereunder. The FlexNet System only includes the foregoing, as provided by Sensus. The FlexNet System does not include goods, equipment, software, licenses or rights provided by a third party or parties to this Agreement.

G. “Force Majeure” means an event beyond a party’s reasonable control, including, without limitation, acts of God, hurricane, flood, volcano, tsunami, tornado, storm, tempest, mudslide, vandalism, illegal or unauthorized radio frequency interference, strikes, lockouts, or other industrial disturbances, unavailability of component parts of any goods Page I-5.30
Confidential │Page 7 of 16
provided hereunder, acts of public enemies, wars, blockades, insurrections, riots, epidemics, earthquakes, fires, restraints or prohibitions by any court, board, department, commission or agency of the United States or any States, any arrests and restraints, civil disturbances and explosion.

H. “Hosted Software” means those items listed as an Application in Exhibit A.

I. “In/Out Costs” means any costs and expenses incurred by Customer in transporting goods between its warehouse and its End User’s premises and any costs and expenses incurred by Customer in installing, uninstalling and removing goods.

J. “Intellectual Property” means patents and patent applications, inventions (whether patentable or not), trademarks, service marks, trade dress, copyrights, trade secrets, know-how, data rights, specifications, drawings, designs, maskwork rights, moral rights, author’s rights, and other intellectual property rights, including any derivations and/or derivative works, as may exist now or hereafter come into existence, and all renewals and extensions thereof, regardless of whether any of such rights arise under the laws of the United States or of any other state, country or jurisdiction, any registrations or applications thereof, and all goodwill pertinent thereto.

K. “LCM” identifies the load control modules.

L. “Ongoing Fee” means the annual or monthly fees, as applicable, to be paid by Customer to Sensus’ authorized distributor during the Term of this Agreement.

M. “Patches” means patches or other maintenance releases of the Software that correct processing errors and other faults and defects found previous versions of the Software.

For clarity, Patches are not Updates or Upgrades.

N. “Permitted Use” means only for reading and analyzing data from Customer’s Field Devices in the Service Territory. The Permitted Use does not include reading third devices not provided by Sensus or reading Field Devices outside the Service Territory.

O. “R100 Unit” identifies the Sensus standalone, mounted transceiver that takes the radio frequency readings from the SmartPoint Modules and relays them by radio frequency to the relevant FlexNet Base Station or directly to the RNI by TCP/IP backhaul communication, as the case may be.

P. “Release” means both Updates and Upgrades.

Q. “Remote Transceiver” identifies the Sensus standalone, mounted relay device that takes the radio frequency readings from the SmartPoint Modules and relays them directly to the RNI by TCP/IP backhaul communication.

R. “RF Field Equipment” means, collectively, FlexNet Base Stations, R100 units (if any) and Remote Transceivers (if any).

S. “RNI” identifies the regional network interfaces consisting of hardware and software used to gather, store, and report data collected by the FlexNet Base Stations from the SmartPoint Modules. The RNI hardware specifications will be provided by Sensus upon written request from Customer.

T. “RNI Software” identifies the Sensus proprietary software used in the RNI and any Patches, Updates, and Upgrades that are provided to Customer pursuant to the terms of this Agreement.

U. “Service Territory” identifies the geographic area where Customer utilizes Sensus equipment to provide services to End Users as of the Effective Date. This area will be described on the propagation study in the parties’ Spectrum Lease filing with the FCC.

V. “Server Hardware” means the RNI hardware.

W. “SmartPoint™ Modules” identifies the Sensus transmission devices installed on devices such as meters, distribution automation equipment and demand/response devices located at Customer’s End Users’ premises that communicate with the relevant devices and transmit those communications by radio frequency to the relevant piece of RF Field Equipment.

X. “Software” means all the Sensus proprietary software provided pursuant to this Agreement, and any Patches, Updates, and Upgrades that are provided to Customer pursuant to the terms of this Agreement. The Software does not include any third party software.

Y. “Updates” means releases of the Software that constitute a minor improvement in functionality.

Z. “Upgrades” means releases of the Software which constitute a significant improvement in functionality or architecture of the Software.

AA. “WAN Backhaul” means the communication link between FlexNet Base Stations and Remote Transceivers and RNI.

Page I-5.31
Confidential │Page 8 of 16
Exhibit A
Software
Software as a Service

1. Description of Services.

This exhibit contains the details of the Software as a Service that Sensus shall provide to Customer if both; (i) pricing for the application of Software as a Service has been provided to the Customer; and (ii) the Customer is current in its payments to Sensus’ authorized distributor for such application of Software as a Service.

A. Software as a Service Generally.

Software as a Service is a managed service in which Sensus will be responsible for the day-to-day monitoring, maintenance, management, and supporting of Customer’s software applications. In a Software as a Service solution, Sensus owns all components of the solution (server hardware, storage, data center, network equipment, Sensus software, and all third-party software) required to run and operate the application. These software applications consist of the following (each an “Application”):
● Regional Network Interface (RNI) Software
● Sensus Analytics
○ Enhanced Package
● Consumer Portal
The managed application systems consist of the hardware, Sensus Software, and other third-party software that is required to operate the software applications.

Each Application will have a production, and Disaster Recovery (as described below) environment Test environments are not provided unless otherwise specifically agreed by Sensus in writing. Sensus will manage the Applications by providing 24 x 7 x 365 monitoring of the availability and performance of the Applications.

B. Use of Software as a Service. Subject to the terms of this Agreement, Sensus shall make Software as a Service available to Customer to access and use solely for the Permitted Use and solely for so long as Customer is current in its payments to Sensus or its authorized distributor for Software as a Service. The Software as a Service term commences on the date that Sensus first makes Software as a Service available to Customer for use, and ends upon the earlier of:
(i) the expiration or termination of the Agreement; (ii) breach by Customer of this exhibit or the Agreement; or (iii) Customer’s termination of Software as a Service as set forth in paragraph (C) below.

C. Termination of an Application. Customer shall have the option at any time before the end of the Term to terminate any Application by giving Sensus one hundred twenty (120) days prior written notice. Such notice, once delivered to Sensus, is irrevocable. Should Customer elect to terminate any Application, Customer acknowledges that; (a) Customer shall pay all applicable fees, including any unpaid Software as a Service fees due in the current calendar year plus a ten percent (10%) early termination fee, where such fee is calculated based on the annual Software as a Service fee due in the current calendar year; and (b) Software as a Service for such Application shall immediately cease. If Customer elects to terminate the RNI Application in the Software as a Service environment but does not terminate the Agreement generally, then upon delivery of the notice to Sensus, Customer shall purchase the necessary (a) RNI hardware from a third party and (b) RNI software license at Sensus' then-current pricing. No portion of the Software as a Service fees shall be applied to the purchase of the RNI hardware or software license.

D. Software as a Service means only the following services:
i. Sensus will provide the use of required hardware, located at Sensus’ or a third-party’s data center facility (as determined by Sensus), that is necessary to operate the Application.
ii. Sensus will provide production and disaster recovery environments for Application. iii. Sensus will provide patches, updates, and upgrades to latest Sensus Hosted Software release. iv. Sensus will configure and manage the equipment (server hardware, routers, switches, firewalls, etc.) in the data centers:
(a) Network addresses and virtual private networks (VPN) (b) Standard time source (NTP or GPS)
(c) Security access points
(d) Respond to relevant alarms and notifications
v. Capacity and performance management. Sensus will:
(a) Monitor capacity and performance of the Application server and software applications 24x7x365 using KPI metrics, thresholds, and alerts to proactively identify any potential issues related to system capacity and/or performance (i.e. database, backspool, logs, message broker storage, etc.)
(b) If an issue is identified to have a potential impact to the system, Sensus will open an incident ticket and manage the ticket through resolution per Exhibit B, Technical Support.
(c) Manage and maintain the performance of the server and perform any change or configuration to the server, in accordance to standard configuration and change management policies and procedures.
(d) Manage and maintain the server storage capacity and performance of the Storage Area Network (SAN), in accordance to standard configuration and change management policies and procedures.
(e) Exceptions may occur to the system that require Sensus to take immediate action to maintain the system capacity and performance levels, and Sensus has authority to make changes without Customer approval as needed, in accordance to standard configuration and change management policies and procedures.
vi. Database management. Sensus will:
(a) Implement the data retention plan and policy, and will provide the policy upon request. (b) Monitor space and capacity requirements.
(c) Respond to database alarms and notifications.
(d) Install database software upgrades and patches.
(e) Perform routine database maintenance and cleanup of database to improve capacity and performance, such as rebuilding indexes, updating indexes, consistency checks, run SQL query/agent jobs, etc.
vii. Incident and Problem Management. Sensus will:
(a) Proactively monitor managed systems (24x7x365) for key events and thresholds to proactively detect and identify incidents. (b) Respond to incidents and problems that may occur to the Application(s). (c) Maintain policies and procedures for responding to incidents and performing root cause analysis for ongoing problems.

Page I-5.32
Confidential │Page 9 of 16
(d) Correlate incidents and problems where applicable.
(e) Sensus personnel will use the self-service portal to document and track incidents. (f) In the event that Sensus personnel is unable to resolve an issue, the issue will be escalated to the appropriate Subject Matter Expert (SME). (g) Maintain responsibility for managing incident and problems through resolution and will coordinate with Customer’s personnel and/or any required third-party vendor to resolve the issue.
(h) Provide telephone support consistent with Exhibit B, Technical Support in the case of undetected events. viii. Data Security. Sensus shall:
(a) At all times during the Term provide and maintain up-to-date security with respect to (i) the Services, (ii) Sensus’ website where Customer accesses the Services, (iii) Sensus’ physical facilities, and (iv) Sensus’ networks., (b) Provide security for its networks and all internet connections consistent with best practices observed by well-managed SaaS’s working in the software services industry, which customer agrees are reasonable efforts to prevent unauthorized access or "hacking" of Customer’s Data.. (c) Promptly install all patches, fixes, upgrades, updates and new versions of any security software it employs. (d) Maintain appropriate safeguards to restrict access to Customer's Data to those employees, agents or service providers of Sensus who need the information to carry out the purposes for which such data was disclosed to Sensus. (e) For information disclosed in electronic form, Sensus agrees that appropriate safeguards include electronic barriers (e.g., "firewalls", Transport Layer Security (TLS), Secure Socket Layer [SSL] encryption, or most current industry standard encryption, intrusion prevention/detection or similar barriers) and secure authentication (e.g. password protected) access to the Customer's Confidential Information and hosted Customer Data. (f) For information disclosed in written form, Sensus agrees that appropriate safeguards include secured storage of Customer's Data. (g) Customer’s Data classified as Confidential Information shall be encrypted at rest and in transit with controlled access. (h) Establish and maintain any additional physical, electronic, administrative, technical and procedural controls and safeguards to protect the Customer's Data that are no less rigorous than accepted industry practices (including, as periodically amended or updated, the International Organization for Standardization’s standards: ISO/IEC 27001:2005 – Information Security Management Systems – Requirements and ISO-IEC 27002:2005 – Code of Practice for International Security Management, NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4 or its successor, the Information Technology Library (ITIL) standards, the Control Objectives for Information and related Technology (COBIT) standards or other applicable industry standards for information security).
(i) Ensure that all such controls and safeguards, including the manner in which Confidential Information is collected, accessed, used, stored, processed, disposed of and disclosed, comply with applicable data protection and privacy laws, as well as the terms and conditions of this Agreement. ix. Security Management. Sensus will:
(a) Monitor the physical and cyber security of the server and Application(s) 24x7x365 to ensure system is highly secure in accordance with NIST Security Standards.
(b) Perform active intrusion prevention and detection of the data center network and firewalls, and monitor logs and alerts. (c) Conduct period penetration testing of the network and data center facilities. (d) Conduct monthly vulnerability scanning by both internal staff and external vendors. (e) Perform anti-virus and Malware patch management on all systems. (f) Install updates to virus protection software and related files (including virus signature files and similar files) on all servers from the update being generally available from the anti-virus software provider. (g) Respond to any potential threat found on the system and work to eliminate any virus or malware found. (h) Adhere to and submit certification to NERC/CIP Cyber Security standards. (i) Monitors industry regulation/standards regarding security – NERC, FERC, NIST, OpenSG, etc. through the dedicated Sensus security team. (j) Provide secure web portal access (SSL) to the Application(s). x. Backup and Disaster Recovery Management. Sensus will:
(a) Perform daily backups of data providing one (1) year of history for auditing and restoration purposes. (b) Back-up and store data (on tapes or other storage media as appropriate) off-site to provide protection against disasters and to meet file recovery needs.
(c) Conduct incremental and full back-ups to capture data, and changes to data, on the Application(s). (d) Replicate the Application(s) environments to a geographically separated data center location to provide a full disaster recovery environment for the Application production system.
(e) Provide disaster recovery environment and perform fail-over to Disaster Recovery environment within forty-eight (48) hours of declared event. (f) Generate a report following each and any disaster measuring performance against the disaster recovery plan and identification of problem areas and plans for resolution.
(g) Maintain a disaster recovery plan. In the event of a disaster, Sensus shall provide the services in accordance with the disaster recovery plan. (h) In the case of a disaster and loss of access to or use of the Application, Sensus would use commercially reasonable efforts per the Recovery Time Objectives (RTO) and Recovery Point Objectives (RPO) specified herein to restore operations at the same location or at a backup location within forty-eight (48) hours.
(i) The Application shall have a RTO of forty-eight (48) hours. (j) The RPO shall be a full recovery of the Application(s), with an RPO of one (1) hours, using no more than a twenty-four (24) hour old backup. All meter-related data shall be pushed from each Base Station/TGB restoring the database to real-time minus external interfaced systems from the day prior.
(k) Data from external interfaced systems shall be recreated within a forty-eight (48) hour period with the assistance of Customer personnel and staff, as needed.

E. Customer Responsibilities:
i. Coordinate and schedule any changes submitted by Sensus to the system in accordance with standard configuration and change management procedures. ii. Participate in all required configuration and change management procedures. iii. Customer will log incidents related to the managed Application with Sensus personnel via email, web portal ticket entry, or phone call. iv. Responsible for periodic processing of accounts or readings (i.e., billing files) for Customer’s billing system for billing or other analysis purposes. v. Responsible for any field labor to troubleshoot any SmartPoint modules or smart meters in the field in populations that have been previously deployed and Page I-5.33
Confidential │Page 10 of 16
accepted.
vi. First response labor to troubleshoot FlexNet Base Station, R100s, Remote Transceivers or other field network equipment. vii. Responsible for local area network configuration, management, and support. viii. Identify and research problems with meter reads and meter read performance. ix. Create and manage user accounts.
x. Customize application configurations.
xi. Support application users.
xii. Investigate application operational issues (e.g., meter reads, reports, alarms, etc.). xiii. Respond to alarms and notifications.
xiv. Perform firmware upgrades over-the-air, or delegate and monitor field personnel for on-site upgrades.

F. Software as a Service does not include any of the following services:
i. Parts or labor required to repair damage to any field network equipment that is the result of a Force Majeure event. ii. Any integration between applications, such as Harris MeterSense, would require a Professional Services contract agreement to be scoped, submitted, and agreed in a signed writing between Sensus and all the applicable parties.

If an item is not listed in subparagraphs in item (D) above, such item is excluded from the Software as a Service and is subject to additional pricing.

2. Further Agreements
A. System Uptime Rate.
i. Sensus (or its contractor) shall manage and maintain the Application(s) on computers owned or controlled by Sensus (or its contractors) and shall provide Customer access to the managed Application(s) via internet or point to point connection (i.e., Managed-Access use), according to the terms below. Sensus endeavors to maintain an average System Uptime Rate equal to ninety-nine (99.0) per Month (as defined below). The System Uptime Rate, cumulative across all Applications, shall be calculated as follows:

System Uptime Rate = 100 x (TMO – Total Non-Scheduled Downtime minutes in the Month) TMO
ii. Calculations
a. Targeted Minutes of Operation or TMO means total minutes cumulative across all Applications in the applicable month minus the Scheduled Downtime in the Month.
b. Scheduled Downtime means the number of minutes during the Month, as measured by Sensus, in which access to any Application is scheduled to be unavailable for use by Customer due to planned system maintenance. Sensus shall provide Customer notice (via email or otherwise) at least seven (7) days in advance of commencement of the Scheduled Downtime. c. Non-Scheduled Downtime means the number of minutes during the Month, as measured by Sensus, in which access to any Application is unavailable for use by Customer due to reasons other than Scheduled Downtime or the Exceptions, as defined below (e.g., due to a need for unplanned maintenance or repair).
iii. Exceptions. Exceptions mean the following events:
• Force Majeure
• Emergency Work, as defined below; and
• Lack of Internet Availability, as described below.
a. Emergency Work. In the event that Force Majeure, emergencies, dangerous conditions or other exceptional circumstances arise or continue during TMO, Sensus shall be entitled to take any actions that Sensus, in good faith, determines is necessary or advisable to prevent, remedy, mitigate, or otherwise address actual or potential harm, interruption, loss, threat, security or like concern to any of the Application(s) (“Emergency Work”). Such Emergency Work may include, but is not limited to: analysis, testing, repair, maintenance, re-setting and other servicing of the hardware, cabling, networks, software and other devices, materials and systems through which access to and/or use of the Application(s) by the Customer is made available (the ”Managed Systems”). Sensus shall endeavor to provide advance notice of such Emergency Work to Customer when practicable and possible.
b. Lack of Internet Availability. Sensus shall not be responsible for any deterioration of performance attributable to latencies in the public internet or point-to-point network connection operated by a third party. Customer expressly acknowledges and agrees that Sensus does not and cannot control the flow of data to or from Sensus’ networks and other portions of the Internet, and that such flow depends in part on the performance of Internet services provided or controlled by third parties, and that at times, actions or inactions of such third parties can impair or disrupt data transmitted through, and/or Customer’s connections to, the Internet or point-to-point data connection (or portions thereof). Although Sensus will use commercially reasonable efforts to take actions Sensus may deem appropriate to mitigate the effects of any such events, Sensus cannot guarantee that such events will not occur. Accordingly, Sensus disclaims any and all liability resulting from or relating to such events. iv. System Availability. For each month that the System Uptime Rates for the production RNI falls below 99.0%, Sensus will issue Customer the following Service Level Credits:

System Uptime Rate per calendar month Service Level Credit Less than 99.0% but at least 97.5% 5% of the monthly RNI SaaS Fees in which the service level default occurred (Note: SaaS fees are pre-paid annually and for purposes of SLA Credits are computed on a monthly basis.)
Less than 97.5% but at least 95.0% 10% of the monthly RNI SaaS Fees in which the service level default occurred
Less than 95.0% 20% of the monthly RNI SaaS Fees in which the service level default occurred
Service Level Credits for any single month shall not exceed 20% of the RNI SaaS Fee associated with the month in which the service level default occurred.

Sensus records and data will be the sole basis for all Service Level Credit calculations and determinations, provided that such records and data must be made available to Customer for review and agreement by Customer. To receive a Service Level Credit, Customer must issue a written request no later than ten (10) days after the Service Level Credit has accrued. Sensus will apply each valid Service Level Credit to the Customer’s invoice within 2 billing cycles after Sensus’ receipt of Customer’s request and confirmation of the failure to meet the applicable Service Level Credit. Service Level Credits will not be payable for failures to meet the System Uptime Rate caused by any Exceptions. No Service Level Credit will apply if Customer is not current in its Page I-5.34
Confidential │Page 11 of 16
undisputed payment obligations under the Agreement. Service Level Credits are exclusive of any applicable taxes charged to Customer or collected by Sensus. Sensus shall not refund an unused Service Level Credits or pay cash to Customer for any unused Service Level Credits. Any unused Service Level Credits at the time the Agreement terminates will be forever forfeited. THE SERVICE LEVEL CREDITS DESCRIBED IN THIS SECTION ARE THE SOLE AND EXCLUSIVE REMEDY FOR SENSUS’ FAILURE TO MEET THE SYSTEM UPTIME REQUIREMENT OR ANY DEFECTIVE SAAS PERFORMANCE. IN NO EVENT SHALL THE AGGREGATE AMOUNT OF SERVICE LEVEL CREDITS IN ANY ANNUAL PERIOD EXCEED 20% OF THE ANNUAL RNI SAAS FEE.

B. Data Center Site-Security. Although Sensus may modify such security arrangements without consent or notice to Customer, Customer acknowledges the following are the current arrangements regarding physical access to and support of the primary hardware components of the Managed Systems:
i. The computer room(s) in which the hardware is installed is accessible only to authorized individuals. ii. Power infrastructure includes one or more uninterruptible power supply (UPS) devices and diesel generators or other alternative power for back-up electrical power.
iii. Air-conditioning facilities (for humidity and temperature controls) are provided in or for such computer room(s) and can be monitored and adjusted for humidity and temperature settings and control. Such air systems are supported by redundant, back-up and/or switch-over environmental units. iv. Such electrical and A/C systems are monitored on an ongoing basis and personnel are available to respond to system emergencies (if any) in real time. v. Dry pipe pre-action fire detection and suppression systems are provided. vi. Data circuits are available via multiple providers and diverse paths, giving access redundancy.

C. Responsibilities of Customer.
i. Customer shall promptly pay all Software as a Service fees. ii. Customer may not (i) carelessly, knowingly, intentionally or maliciously threaten, disrupt, harm, abuse or interfere with the Application(s), Managed Systems or any of their functionality, performance, security or integrity, nor attempt to do so; (ii) impersonate any person or entity, including, but not limited to, Sensus, a Sensus employee or another user; or (iii) forge, falsify, disguise or otherwise manipulate any identification information associated with Customer’s access to or use of the Application(s).
iii. The provisioning, compatibility, operation, security, support, and maintenance of Customer’s hardware and software (“Customer’s Systems”) is exclusively the responsibility of Customer. Customer is also responsible, in particular, for correctly configuring and maintaining (i) the desktop environment used by Customer to access the Application(s) managed by Sensus; and (ii) Customer’s network router and firewall, if applicable, to allow data to flow between the Customer’s Systems and Sensus’ Managed Systems in a secure manner via the public Internet. iv. Upon receiving the system administrator account from Sensus, Customer shall create username and passwords for each of Customer’s authorized users and complete the applicable Sensus registration process (Authorized Users). Such usernames and passwords will allow Authorized Users to access the Application(s). Customer shall be solely responsible for maintaining the security and confidentiality of each user ID and password pair associated with Customer’s account, and Sensus will not be liable for any loss, damage or liability arising from Customer’s account or any user ID and password pairs associated with Customer. Customer is fully responsible for all acts and omissions that occur through the use of Customer’s account and any user ID and password pairs. Customer agrees (i) not to allow anyone other than the Authorized Users to have any access to, or use of Customer’s account or any user ID and password pairs at any time; (ii) to notify Sensus immediately of any actual or suspected unauthorized use of Customer’s account or any of such user ID and password pairs, or any other breach or suspected breach of security, restricted use or confidentiality; and (iii) to take the Sensus-recommended steps to log out from and otherwise exit the Application(s) and Managed Systems at the end of each session. Customer agrees that Sensus shall be entitled to rely, without inquiry, on the validity of the user accessing the Application(s) application through Customer’s account, account ID, usernames or passwords.
v. Customer shall be responsible for the day-to-day operations of the Application(s) and FlexNet System. This includes, without limitation, (i) researching problems with meter reads and system performance, (ii) creating and managing user accounts, (iii) customizing application configurations, (iv) supporting application users, (v) investigating application operational issues, (vi) responding to alarms and notifications, and (vii) performing over-the-air commands (such as firmware updates or configuration changes).

D. Software Solution Components.
i. Description of Software Solutions. Sensus software consists of a core communication module and a set of applications. Some applications are required to perform basic solution capabilities, other applications are optional and add additional capabilities and function to the overall solution. As Customer’s business process expands and/or new Sensus offerings are made available, additional applications and functionality can dynamically be added to the solution, provided Customer purchases such additional applications. ii. Regional Network Interface. The Regional Network Interface (RNI) or Sensus head-end is the centralized intelligence of the FlexNet network; the RNI’s primary objective is to transfer endpoint (such as meters) data to the Customer and the advanced feature applications. The RNI is adaptable to Customer configurations by simultaneously supporting a wide range of FlexNet enabled endpoints; including but not limited to meters (electric, water, gas), street lighting, and Home Area Network devices.
a. Core Package
(i) Communication

1. Manages all inbound and outbound traffic to and from endpoints

2. Outbound routing optimization

3. Route analyzer

4. AES256 bit encryption of radio messages

5. Reports and metric details of network performance and troubleshooting aids

6. Management of RF equipment (base stations and endpoint radios) (ii) Data Collection

1. Missing read management

2. Management of duplicate reads

3. 60 day temporary storage
(iii) Application integration

1. To Sensus Analytics applications

2. Enable 3rd party application integration

3. Batch CMEP file export

4. Real-time access through MultiSpeak
(iv) Endpoint Management

1. Gas, water, electric, lighting concurrent support
Page I-5.35
Confidential │Page 12 of 16

2. Remote configuration

3. Remote firmware updates

4. Reports, metrics and Troubleshooting
(v) User Management

1. Secure access

2. Password management

3. Definable user roles

4. User permissions to manage access to capabilities
b. Integration of RNI. Sensus shall provide RNI integration support services to Customer only to the extent specifically provided below:
(i) Sensus shall meet with the representative from the Customer’s system(s) targeted for integration to determine which integration method is appropriate (e.g., Multispeak, CMEP, etc.).

1. In scope and included integration efforts: Provide the gateway URLs to the integrating system as needed, provide Customer with standard integration API documentation, validate and test that the correct Customer information is flowing into and/or out of the RNI.

2. Out of scope and subject to additional charges: Modifications or extensions to the standard API provided by Sensus and any integration efforts not outlined above as in scope and included.
(ii) Customer Responsibilities:

1. Provide Sensus with information about the relevant information Customer wishes to transfer and integrate with the RNI.

2. Establish the network and security required for the two systems to reasonably communicate.

3. Verify integration to third party system functionality is working as intended. (iii) If an item is not listed in subparagraph (i) above, such item is excluded from the integration of Sensus RNI Support and is subject to additional pricing.

3. Sensus Analytics
Sensus Analytics is a cloud-based solution and data platform that allows storage and retrieval of raw reads and data from other sources for analysis, exportation, and inquiry or reporting. The platform provides applications and reporting capabilities.

A. Essential Package. The Essential Package of the Sensus Analytics Application shall consist of the following modules:
i. Device Access
a. Allows search for meter details by using data imported from the billing system or the Sensus Device ID or AMI ID. b. Allows a view of the meter interval or register reads. c. Meter data is available to be copied, printed, or saved to certain user programs or file formats, specifically CSV, PDF, and Spreadsheet. d. Allows the current and historical data to be viewed. e. Allows the current usage to be compared to historical distribution averages. f. Allows the user to see the meter location on a map view. g. Allows notifications for an event on a single meter to be forwarded to a Customer employee. h. Allows details to be viewed about a meter – (dependent on the data integrated from other systems). ii. Meter Insight (provides the following)
a. # of active meters.
b. # of orphaned meters with drill down to the list of meters. c. # of inactive meters with usage drill down to the list of meters. d. # of stale meters with drill down to the list of meters. e. # of almost stale meters with drill down to the list of meters. f. # of meters where no read is available with drill down to the list of meters. g. # of meters with maximum threshold exceptions with drill down to the list of meters. h. # of meters with minimum threshold exceptions with drill down to the list of meters. i. # of unknown radios with drill down to the list of meters. iii. Report Access
a. Allows the user to see meter alarms and choose a report from a list of standard reports. b. Master Route Register Reads: Shows the latest reads for all meters within specified time window. c. Meter Route Intervals Reads: Allows users to inspect intervals of a single meter over a period of time. d. Master Route No Readings: List all meters that are active in the system, but have not been sending reads within the specified time window. e. Consumption Report: List meters’ consumption based on meter readings within the specified time window. f. Zero Consumption for Period: List meters whose readings do not change over a period of time. g. Negative Consumption: Shows the number of occurrences and readings of negative consumption for the last 24hr, 48hr and 72hr from the entered roll up date.
h. High Low Exception Report: Displays meters whose reads exceed minimum or/and maximum threshold, within a time range. i. Consumption vs Previous Reported Read: Compares latest reading (from RNI) with last known read received from CIS. j. Consumption Exception 24 hour Report: This report shows meters that satisfy these two conditions: (1) The daily average consumptions exceed entered daily consumption threshold; (2) The number of days when daily thresholds are exceeded are greater than the entered exception per day threshold.
k. Endpoint Details: Shows the current state of meters that are created within the specified time range. l. Orphaned Meters: List meters that are marked as ‘orphaned’, which are created as of entered Created as of parameter. m. Billing Request Mismatch: Displays meters in a billing request that have different AMR id with the ones sent by RNI. It also shows AMR id in billing request that have different meter Id in the RNI. Users must enter which billing request file prior to running the report. n. All Alarms Report: List all alarms occurred during a time window. Users can select which alarm to show. iv. Billing Access
a. Initiate the creation of billing export files formatted to the import needs of the billing system. b. Receive billing request files from the billing system to identify what meters to include in the billing export file in the case where billing request file Page I-5.36
Confidential │Page 13 of 16
option is used.
c. Provides a repository of past billing files that were either used for billing preparation or actually sent to the billing system. d. Will store created billing files for a period of three years unless otherwise denoted. e. The system will allow creation of test files before export to the billing system. v. Billing Adaptor
a. The underlying configurator and tools mapping the extraction of billing data to enable integration to the utility’s billing system. vi. Data Store
a. Allows storage of meter reading data including Intervals, Registers, and Alarms to be stored. b. Stored data is available online for reports and analysis. c. Data will be retained for 3 years. Additional duration can be purchased.

B. Enhanced Package. The Enhanced Package shall consist of the modules listed above in the Essential Package, as well as the following additional modules:
i. Alarm Insight
a. Allows the user to summarize and filter alarms by a date range. b. Allows the user to review all alarm types on a single screen. c. The user can filter out the alarms not wanted on the screen. d. Alarm totals can be visualized.
e. Adds a view of trending alarms over time.
f. Click to drill down on an alarm to gain more information on specific events. g. Click to analyze a specific event on a particular device. ii. Alert Manager
a. Allows creation of alert groups who will be notified when an alarm occurs. b. Users can manage alert groups by adding and removing group members. c. Allows selection of notification method for how end users in the group will be notified; email or SMS (text message). d. Allows creation of an alert from the available system events from smart points and assign to a group. e. Monitors the systems meters for events. When an event is triggered, all users in the group will be notified.

C. Sensus Analytics Customer Portal. The Customer Portal (CP) is a cloud-based platform that aggregates data from several sources. The CP Package may consist of the following modules or widgets, provided Customer purchases access to the modules:
i. Web Portal Standard Features
a. Self-serve sign up and account/password management
b. Dynamic sizing to work on most standard browsers
c. Customizable logo and backdrop images
d. Capable of supporting multiple languages (Spanish and English standard) e. Provides links to bill payment and support web locations. (Single Sign On access is not standard) f. Supports multiple accounts and multiple meters
g. Supports multiple Units of Measure (UoM)
h. Exportable data
i. Alerts and Notifications that can be delivered to the customers’ points of contact j. Support for multiple alert recipients
k. Admin Management of Widgets Displayed
ii. Web Portal Additional Features
a. Single Sign: Integration to other web services in a manner that does not require the user to login multiple times b. Water usage down to 15 minute intervals.
c. Presentation of Tier Limits and Tier Alerts
iii. Dashboard Page Widgets
a. Current Billing Cycle View Widget: Allows the customer to view how much water they have used since the billing cycle has started. b. Alerts: Shows the alerts created by meters or usage alerts c. Notifications: Allows messages to be sent to customers by the Utility – Sent via Text, Email or presented on the Portal d. Billing Cycle Threshold: Shows users progress toward Billing Cycle Usage Target set as an alert iv. Add-on Dashboard Widgets
a. Watering Schedule: Presents data regarding the days and times that the account can use outdoor water b. Bill Estimate: Provides an estimate of the cost of the water used in the billing cycle. c. Sandbox: Provides a widget space for the utility to place documents, links, and videos. (up to 100Mb) v. Usage Details Features
a. Consumption in various time periods
b. Exportable to other file formats
c. Temperature and Rainfall data
vi. Meters Features
a. Meter information including Meter #, address, current reading, b. Meter Nicknames
vii. Meter Tab Additional Features
a. Google Maps view of meter location (Location data provided by Utility) viii. Settings – Usage Alerts (per meter)
a. Billing Cycle Usage Alert
b. Daily Usage Alert
Page I-5.37
Confidential │Page 14 of 16
c. Vacation Alerts
ix. Settings – Usage Alerts Additional Features
a. Tier Alerts
x. Alert Recipients Features
a. Editable selection of alerts to receive
b. Additional Recipient management
xi. User Settings Features
a. Change of email address
b. Customer management of points of contact
c. Customer capability to add additional accounts
d. Customer password management (Self-serve)
D. Integration of Sensus Analytics. Sensus shall provide integration support services to Customer only to the extent specifically provided below:
i. Sensus shall provide Customer with a simple flat file specification known as VFlex for the integration of the Customer’s back office system to the Sensus Analytics modules. The VFlex shall contain the following types of information: Device ids, end users in the system, end user status, end user account information, end user name, and other end user details. This flat file may be delimited or fixed width. Customer shall produce this file and transmit it to the FTP location designated by Sensus. When sent to the Sensus FTP servers, this file exchange will enable the system to become operational with the Customer’s systems. Customer shall produce this file and transmit it to the FTP location designated by Sensus. Sensus will provide reasonable support to explain to Customer the required vs. optional fields that are in the specification, testing and validation of the file format and content. ii. In scope and included integration efforts: kick-off meeting to engage all required parties, mapping the Customer’s fields to the VFlex specification, validation of expected output, and a two (2) hour system review of Sensus Analytics application and integration with the Customer’s system (conducted remotely). iii. Out of scope and subject to additional charges will be the transformation of data where business logic including code must be written to modify the field content or format of the data to meet the VFlex specification. iv. Sensus’ integration services consist of four (4) hours of assistance (remote or on-site, as determined by Sensus). If additional time is needed to complete the integration efforts, Sensus shall invoice Customer for additional fees on an actual time and materials basis. v. If an item is not listed in subparagraphs (i) or (ii) above, such item is excluded from the integration of Sensus Analytics Support and is subject to additional pricing.
vi. Data Import. The Sensus Analytics Application contains adapters for the import of data from; (a) Customer’s FlexNet System; and/or (b) AutoRead application for handheld and drive by systems, as applicable. vii. Customer Acknowledgements.
a. Customer acknowledges that the Sensus Analytics Application provides up to fifty (50) user logins for Customer’s use. b. Customer acknowledges and agrees the Sensus Analytics Application is based upon the actual number of End Users within Customer’s Service Territory. Pricing may increase if Customer’s Service Territory or actual number of End Users expands. c. Customer acknowledges that all data related to the Sensus Analytics Applications is geographically hosted within the United States of America.

Customer accepts the geographic location of such hosting, and indemnifies Sensus for any claims resulting therefrom. d. Customer acknowledges and agrees that the Intellectual Property provisions of this Agreement apply in all respects to Customer’s access to and use of the Sensus Analytics Applications.
e. Customer is responsible for validating the data analyzed by the Sensus Analytics Applications. Sensus makes no promises of improving Customer’s operations or saving Customer money, nor is Sensus liable for any damages resulting from decisions made by Customer related to Customer’s use of Sensus Analytics.

4. Third Party Software.

A. RedHat Linux.If Sensus is providing Customer with a license to use RedHat Linux Software, Customer agrees to the following:

By entering into this Agreement, Customer agrees to abide by and to be legally bound by the terms and conditions of the Red Hat End User License Agreements identified below, each of which are incorporated into this Agreement by reference and are available at the websites identified below. Please read the Red Hat End User License Agreements and incorporated references carefully.

Subscription: End User License Agreement:

Red Hat Enterprise Linux http://www.redhat.com/licenses/rhel_rha_eula.html JBoss Enterprise Middleware http://www.redhat.com/licenses/jboss_eula.html Page I-5.38
Confidential │Page 15 of 16
Exhibit B
Technical Support

1. Introduction
Sensus Technical Services provides utility customers with a single point of contact for Tier 1 support of technical issues as well as any coordination of additional resources required to resolve the issue. Requests that require specialized skills are to be forwarded to a senior support engineer or Technical Advisor within the team for further analysis. If Technical Services has exhausted all troubleshooting efforts for the product type, the issue will escalate to the Engineering Support Team. Occasionally, on-site troubleshooting/analysis may be required. The preferred order of on-site support is:
a) The Customer (for assistance with the easiest and lowest time-consuming activities such as power on/power off). b) The local distributor.
c) Sensus employees or contracted personnel, if required to fulfill a contract commitment.

2. Support Categories

2.1. General questions regarding functionality, use of product, how-to, and requests for assistance on Sensus AMR, AMI, RF Network Equipment, Metering Products, Sensus Lighting Control, and Demand Response Management System (FlexNet Home).

2.2. Proactive reporting and resolution of problems.

2.3. Reactive reporting to isolate, document, and solve reported hardware/software defects.

2.4. Responding to service requests and product changes.

2.5. Addressing customer inquiries with printed or electronic documentation, examples, or additional explanation/clarification.

3. Support Hours

3.1. Standard Support Hours: Toll-free telephone support (1-800-638-3748 option #2) is available Monday thru Friday from 8:00 a.m. EST to 8:00 p.m. EST. Afterhours, holiday and weekend support for Severity 1 and Severity 2 issues is available by calling 1-800-638-3748, option #8.

4. Support Procedures

4.1. Customer identifies an issue or potential problem and calls Technical Services at 1-800-638-3748 Option #2. The Customer Service Associate or Technical Support Engineer will submit a SalesForce ticket.

4.2. The Customer Service Associate or Technical Support Engineer will identify the caller name and utility by the assigned software serial number, city, and state based on where the call originated. The Customer Service Associate or Technical Support Engineer will require a brief description of the problem symptoms, or error messages depending on nature of the incident. The nature of the problem and severity levels will be mutually agreed upon by both parties (either at the time the issue is entered or prior to upgrading or downgrading an existing issue) using the severity definitions below as a guideline. The severity level is then captured into SalesForce for ticket creation and resolution processing. Any time during the processing of this ticket, if the severity level is changed by Sensus, the customer will be updated.

A. Severity Levels Description:

Sev1 Customer’s production system is down. The system is unusable resulting in total disruption of work. No workaround is available and requires immediate attention.

Example: Network mass outage, all reading collection devices inoperable, inoperable head end software (e.g., FlexWare, Sensus MDM). Not able to generate billing files.

Sev2 Major system feature/function failure. Operations are severely restricted; there is a major disruption of work, no acceptable work-around is available, and failure requires immediate attention.

Examples: Examples: Network equipment failure (e.g., FlexNet Echo, FlexNet Remote, Base Station transceiver, or VGB); inoperable reading devices (e.g., AR5500, VXU, VGB, or CommandLink); head end software application has important functionality not working and cannot create export file for billing system operations.

Sev3 The system is usable and the issue doesn’t affect critical overall operation.

Example: Minor network equipment failure (e.g., Echo/Remote false alarms or Base Station transceiver false alarms); head end software application operable but reports are not running properly, modification of view or some non-critical function of the software is not running.

4.3. The Customer Service Associate or Technical Support Engineer identifies whether or not the customer is on support. If the customer is not on support, the customer is advised of the service options as well as any applicable charges that may be billed.

4.4. Calls are placed in a queue from which they are accessible to Technical Support Engineers on a first-come-first-served basis. A 1st level Customer Service Associate may assist the customer, depending on the difficulty of the call and the representative’s technical knowledge. Technical Support Engineers (Tier 1 support) typically respond/resolve the majority of calls based on their product knowledge and experience. A call history for the particular account is researched to note any existing pattern or if the call is a new report. This research provides the representative a basis and understanding of the account as well as any associated problems and/or resolutions that have been communicated. a. Technical Services confirms that there is an issue or problem that needs further analysis to determine its cause. The following information must be collected: a detailed description of the issue’s symptoms, details on the software/hardware product and version, a description of the environment in which the issue arises, and a list of any corrective action already taken. b. Technical Services will check the internal database and product defect tracking system, to see if reports of a similar problem exist, and if any working solutions were provided. If an existing resolution is found that will address the reported issue, it shall be communicated to the customer. Once it is confirmed that the issue has been resolved, the ticket is closed. c. If there is no known defect or support that defines the behavior, Technical Services will work with the customer to reproduce the issue. If the issue can be reproduced, either at the customer site or within support center test lab, Technical Services will escalate the ticket for further investigation / resolution.

If the issue involves units that are considered to be defective with no known reason, the representative will open a Special Investigation RMA through the SalesForce system. If it is determined that a sample is required for further analysis, the customer will be provided with instructions that detail where to send the product sample(s) for a root cause analysis. Once it is determined that the issue cannot be resolved by Tier 1 resources, the ticket will be escalated to Tier 2 support for confirmation/workarounds to resolve immediate issue. Technical Services will immediately contact the customer to advise of the escalation. The response and escalation times are listed in Section 5. At this time, screen shots, log files, configuration files, and database backups will be created and attached to the ticket.

5. Response and Resolution Targets.

Page I-5.39
Confidential │Page 16 of 16
Sensus Technical Support will make every reasonable effort to meet the following response and resolution targets:

Severity Standard Target
Response Standard Target Resolution Resolution (one or more of the following) 1 30 Minutes
Immediately assign trained and qualified
Services Staff to correct the error on an
expedited basis. Provide ongoing
communication on the status of a
correction (24 hours).
• Satisfactory workaround is provided.
• Program patch is provided.
• Fix incorporated into future release.
• Fix or workaround incorporated into
SalesForce Knowledge Base.
2 4 hours
Assign trained and qualified Services
Staff to correct the error. Provide
communication as updates occur (48
hours).
• Satisfactory workaround is provided.
• Program patch is provided.
• Fix incorporated into future release.
• Fix or workaround incorporated into
SalesForce Knowledge Base.
3 1 Business Day 30 business days
• Answer to question is provided.
• Satisfactory workaround is provided.
• Fix or workaround incorporated into
SalesForce Knowledge Base.
• Fix incorporated into future release.

6. Problem Escalation Process.

6.1. If the normal support process does not produce the desired results, or if the severity has changed, the issue may be escalated as follows to a higher level of authority.

6.1.1.1. Severity 1 issues are escalated by Sales or Technical Services to a Supervisor if not resolved within 2 hours; to the Manager level if not resolved within 4 hours; to the Director level if not resolved within the same business day; and to the VP level if not resolved within 24 hours.

6.1.1.2. A customer may escalate an issue by calling 1-800-638-3748, Option 2. Please specify the SalesForce ticket number and the reason why the issue is being escalated.

6.1.1.3. In the event that a customer is not satisfied with the level of support or continual problem with their products, they may escalate a given SalesForce ticket to Manager of Technical Services (1-800-638-3748, Option 2).

7. General Support Provisions and Exclusions.

7.1. Sensus provides online documentation for Sensus products, and all Sensus customers are provided access to this online database, which includes operation, configuration and technical manuals. The customer shall provide names and email accounts to Sensus so Sensus may provide access to the product documentation.

7.2. Specialized support from Sensus is available on a fee basis to address support issues outside the scope of this support plan or if not covered under another specific contract or statement of work. For example: specialized systems integration services or out of warranty network equipment repair.

Page I-5.40

JUNIPERO

SERRA BLVD

BAYFRONT EXPRESSWAY

RAVENSWOOD
AVE

MARSH RD

SANTA CRUZ AVE BAY RD

RINGWOOD AVE
HWY 280

OAK GROVE AVE

WILLOW RD

MIDDLEFIELD RD

ALAMEDA DE LAS PULGAS

MIDDLE AVE

EL CAMINO REAL

ALPINE RD
HWY 101

SAND HILL RD

UNIVERSITY DR

VALPARAISO AVE
City Limits
Travel Ways
Water
Water Provider
California Water Service Company -- Bear Gulch District City of East Palo Alto
City of Palo Alto
City of Redwood City
Menlo Park Municipal Water
Stanford University
Palo Alto Mutual Water Company
O'Connor Tract Co-Operative Water Company
0 0.5 1 2
Miles
.

California Water Service Company
-- Bear Gulch District
Stanford
University
City of
Palo Alto
City of East Palo Alto
Menlo Park
Municipal Water
City of Redwood City
Menlo Park
Municipal Water
O'Connor Tract
Co-Operative
Water Company
Palo Alto Mutual
Water Company
Water Agencies Within and
Surrounding Menlo Park

ATTACHMENT C
Page I-5.41
AMI System Components, Schematic, and Photos
AMI
component Location Description
Sensus FlexNet
network
Cloud-based,
online
The network consists of multiple synchronized, high-performance, 900- MHz, primary-use, FCC-licensed radio frequency bands. It is where servers and databases reside that provides business logic and services that comprise the AMI management system. The network receives meter and other endpoint messages from the field via the base stations. It monitors base station performance and status, and provides reports, diagnostics, deployment information, and on-air configuration and firmware upgrade capability for endpoints as well as other functions. Sensus manages, operates, and monitors Sensus Analytics, and Aqua-Metric helps maintain the FlexNet infrastructure.

Only the City will have access to the radio frequencies that Sensus licenses.

Sensus FlexNet
software
Cloud-based,
online
The software is a secure, web-based portal that connects to the base stations via a wide area network to form the AMI communications network. MPMW would maintain ownership rights and responsibilities for the network data and infrastructure. It will integrate with the City’s current and future billing contractors.

Sensus
Analytics
Cloud-based,
online
A cloud-based meter data management system that organizes data collected from the AMI system and is the main interface between the utility billing system, the customer portal, and staff. City staff will have access to detailed customizable dashboards to identify water use, evaluate water use trends, set leak alerts, compile regulatory reports, and quickly identify customers affected by an issue (e.g. water outage, water leak). It improve operations and customer service.

Base station
Two to three
locations:

1. Sand Hill
Reservoirs

2. City Hall
and/or Nealon
Park
Base stations are antennas that retrieve data from the meter endpoints and pass the data to the Sensus FlexNet network. They can be installed on existing communication towers, poles, and buildings.

Sensus is recommending two to three base stations on existing poles, if available. A new pole 55 feet high would be needed at the Sand Hill Reservoirs. There is an existing 120 foot high police antenna tower at City Hall and an existing 60 foot high stadium light pole at Nealon Park.

Meter endpoints
(Sensus
SmartPoint
modules)
Each water meter
High powered, two-way, long-range radio communication endpoints that collect meter reads on an hourly basis and transmit the reads to the base station at scheduled intervals (e.g., every four hours). The meter endpoints and batteries come with a 20-year warranty.

WaterSmart
customer portal
software
Cloud-based,
online
FlexNet has the ability to interface with the WaterSmart software, a cloud-based user-friendly customer portal that allows water users to view their water use (hourly meter reads) and historical water use trends, set alerts and notifications, determine if they have leaks and self-initiate corrective actions, and learn about available water conservation programs on their computer and mobile devices. It allows water users to understand their water use, make adjustments if desired, and see immediate effects. WaterSmart costs are not included in Aqua-Metric’s agreement. Staff plans to enter into a separate agreement with WaterSmart to utilize the software through a BAWSCA 3-year subscription program. Estimated costs are $25,000 for FY22-23, and $10,000 annually for the following two years. Staff anticipates transitioning to the WaterSmart customer portal within the next 4-6 months, prior to replacing and retrofitting meters. This early integration is anticipated to help customers prepare for the transition to AMI and also to assist with drought preparedness and water conservation.

ATTACHMENT D Page I-5.42
Page I-5.43
Map of Meter Read Cycles
Cycle 1 ●
Cycle 2 ●
Cycle 3 ●
Cycle 4 ●
ATTACHMENT F Page I-5.44
Public Works
City of Menlo Park 701 Laurel St., Menlo Park, CA 94025 tel 650-330-6600 www.menlopark.org

STAFF REPORT
City Council
Meeting Date: 7/26/2022
Staff Report Number: 22-146-CC
Consent Calendar: Adopt a resolution to reduce the posted speed limit in school zones consistent with the California
Vehicle Code
Recommendation
Staff recommends that the City Council adopt a resolution (Attachment A) to reduce the posted speed limit in school zones consistent with the California Vehicle Code (CVC.) Policy Issues
This project is consistent with the City’s Circulation Element, adopted in 2016, which includes the following goals and policies:
• Goal Circ-1: Provide and maintain a safe, efficient, attractive user-friendly circulation system that promotes a healthy, safe and active community and quality of life throughout Menlo Park. • Policy Circ-1.1: Vision Zero. Eliminate traffic fatalities and reduce the number of non-fatal collisions by 50 percent by 2040.
• Policy Circ-1.5 Enforcement Program. Develop and implement enforcement program to encourage safe travel behavior and to reduce aggressive and/or negligent behavior among drivers, bicyclists and pedestrians.
• Policy CIRC-1.9 Safe Routes to Schools. Support Safe Routes to School programs to enhance the safety of school children who walk and bike to school.

Per Municipal Code Section 11.12.010, the City Council, by resolution, orders the installation of traffic control devices including posted speed limit signs.

Background
This item is a continuation of an action taken by the City Council August 17, 2021 (Attachment B.) Speed plays a critical role in the cause and severity of crashes. According to the 1999 National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) “Literature Review on Vehicle Travel Speeds and Pedestrian Injuries” study, fatality and serious injury rates increase substantially when travel speeds rise. For children ages 14 and under, 20.2 percent suffer fatal or serious injuries when struck by a vehicle traveling 1-20 miles per hour (mph) while 33.8 percent are killed or seriously injured when hit by a vehicle traveling 21-25 mph.

Therefore, it is important that safe speed limits be set for a specific road context and that proper enforcement and data collection measures be followed to ensure the desired speeds are achieved once a speed limit is set.

The CVC, section 22358.4b(1) grants authority to local jurisdictions to 1) reduce the posted speed limit to 15 mph within 500 feet of school grounds, and 2) extend the 25 mph posted speed limit in school zones from AGENDA ITEM I-6 Page I-6.1
Staff Report #: 22-146-CC

City of Menlo Park 701 Laurel St., Menlo Park, CA 94025 tel 650-330-6600 www.menlopark.org 500 feet to 1,000 feet from the school grounds, while children are going to or leaving the school, either during school hours or during the noon recess period.

These school zone speed limits per CVC 22358 4b(1) are applicable on roadway segments that meet the following conditions:

1. Within a residential district.

2. Posted speed limit no greater than 30 mph immediately before and after the school zone.

3. No more than a total of two through lanes of traffic.

On October 13, 2020, the City Council modified and approved the 2019 Citywide engineering and traffic survey. Additionally, the City Council directed staff to expand the school zones to the furthest extent of law.

On August 17, 2021, the City Council adopted a resolution to established school zones for a set of public and private schools that are wholly within Menlo Park’s jurisdictions, and directed staff to work with neighboring agencies for schools that are not wholly within Menlo Park. For the schools approved in 2021, staff anticipates to complete installation of updated speed limit signs for schools that are wholly within Menlo Park by summer 2022.

Analysis
Table 1 identifies additional schools to receive the establishment of school zones and extended school zones that are proposed for speed reduction to 15 mph posted speed limit when children are present in accordance with CVC Section 22358.5b(1.)
Table 1: Schools identified for speed reduction
School name Address Grade Type Neighbor agency
coordination

1. Littlest Angels Bethany Preschool 1095 Cloud Avenue Pre-K Private San Mateo County

2. New Beginnings School 1100 Middle Avenue Pre-K Private N/A

3. TIDE Academy 150 Jefferson Drive 9 to 12 Public N/A
New Beginnings School was inadvertently left off the approval made by City Council in 2021. TIDE Academy, previously ineligible for school zones, is now qualified due to recently approved residential projects (e.g., Menlo Uptown and Menlo Flats) on Jefferson Drive. Staff will also continue to have discussions with neighboring agencies to consider speed limit reductions on schools that serve Menlo Park residents that are not wholly within Menlo Park. Attachment C shows the three schools.

Impact on City Resources
If approved by City Council, the costs of furnishing and installing the new posted speed limit signs in school zones and extended school zones would be drawn from the City’s operating budget for roadway signing and striping maintenance. Staff anticipates this would cost approximately $12,000, based on the bid prices provided by the City’s signing and striping contractor. The installation costs are estimated to be approximately $2,000 and the purchase costs of the signs and poles are estimated at $10,000. The sign installation for schools wholly within Menlo Park would be completed in fall 2022 through the City’s signing and striping contractor.

Page I-6.2
Staff Report #: 22-146-CC
City of Menlo Park 701 Laurel St., Menlo Park, CA 94025 tel 650-330-6600 www.menlopark.org Environmental Review
The proposed installations are minor upgrades to an existing residential street right-of-way and would not result in any new impacts to the existing environment. This project is considered as a minor alteration to the existing street system, and therefore categorically exempt (Class 1 Exemption, Section 15301) from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA.) Public Notice
Public notification was achieved by posting the agenda, with the agenda items being listed, at least 72 hours prior to the meeting.

Attachments
A. Resolution
B. Hyperlink – August 17, 2021 City Council staff report:
beta.menlopark.org/files/sharedassets/public/agendas-and-minutes/city-council/2021- meetings/agendas/20210817-city-council-agenda-packet.pdf#page=44 C. Map of proposed school frontage extensions
Report prepared by:

Patrick Palmer, Engineering Technician
Kevin Chen, Senior Transportation Engineer
Report reviewed by:

Hugh Louch, Assistant Public Works Director – Transportation Page I-6.3
RESOLUTION NO. XXXX

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MENLO PARK TO REDUCE THE POSTED SPEED LIMIT TO 15 MPH WITHIN 500 FEET OF THE SCHOOL GROUNDS, AND EXTEND THE 25 MILES PER HOUR POSTED SPEED LIMIT IN SCHOOL ZONES FROM 500 FEET TO 1,000 FEET FROM THE

SCHOOL GROUNDS, WHILE CHILDREN ARE GOING TO OR LEAVING THE

SCHOOL, EITHER DURING SCHOOL HOURS OR DURING THE NOON

RECESS PERIOD
WHEREAS, California Vehicle Code (CVC) Section 22358.4b(1) grants authority to local jurisdictions to 1) reduce the posted speed limit to 15 mph within 500 feet of the school grounds, and 2) extend the 25 miles per hour posted speed limit in school zones from 500 feet to 1,000 feet from the school grounds, while children are going to or leaving the school, either during school hours or during the noon recess period, and,
WHEREAS, the reduced or extended school zone speed limits per CVC Section 22358b(1) are consistent with several goals and policies in the City’s circulation element, adopted in 2016, specifically Goal Circ. 1, Policy Circ. 1-1, Policy Circ. 1-5, and Policy Circ. 1-9, and, WHEREAS, the City of Menlo Park, acting by and through its City Council, having considered and been fully advised in the matter and good cause appearing therefore, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Menlo Park that the City Council does hereby determine and justify pursuant to CVC Section 22358.4(b)(1) that 15 miles per hour shall be the prima facie speed limit at a distance within 500 feet of the school grounds and 25 miles per hours in school zones from 500 feet to 1000 feet from the school grounds on the road segments shown below while children are going to or leaving the school, either during school hours or during the noon recess period:

Number School name Road
segments
Posted or prima
facie speed limit
(mph)
Recommended
school zone
speed limit
(mph)
1 Littlest Angels Bethany Preschool Santa Cruz
Avenue 30/25 25/15
Cloud Avenue 25 15
Avy Avenue 25 15
2 New Beginnings School Middle Avenue 30/25 25/15
Arbor Road 25 15
Westfield Drive 25 15
3 TIDE School Jefferson Drive 25 15
Chrysler Drive 25 15
//
//
Page I-6.4 ATTACHMENT A
I, Judi A. Herren, City Clerk of Menlo Park, do hereby certify that the above and foregoing City Council Resolution was duly and regularly passed and adopted at a meeting by said City Council on the twenty-sixth day of July, 2022, by the following votes:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the Official Seal of said City on this __ day of July, 2022.

Judi A. Herren, City Clerk
Page I-6.5 Resolution No. XXX

Page 2 of 2 ends

HORGAN AVE

MENALTO AVE

CERRITO AVE

MENALTO AVE

WILBURN AVE

ELDER AVE

GILBERT AVE

BARNEY AVE

OAKDELL DR

MCKENDRY PL

LINFIELD DR

TERMINAL AVE

PARK LN

POLHEMUS AVE

ROBLE AVE

GREEN ST

CHESTNUT ST

CAMBERLY WAY

HAMPSHIRE AVE

HALLMARK CIR

WALNUT ST

CLOUD AVE

CYPRESS ST
BAY RD

FLETCHERDR

MAGNOLIA CT

CARLOS AVE

PEMBROKE
PL

BERKSHIRE AVE

LINDA LN

YARBOROUGH LN

CARDIF LN

MALLET CT

IDYLLWILD
CT
BAY RD

RUSSELLCT

WHEELER AVE

COTTON PL

HOOVER ST

MARMONA CT

MANOR PL

HILLVIEWPL

SEQUOIA CT

CROCUS CT

W SELBY LN LN

ENCINAL AVE

LA LOMA DR
HELEN
PL

EDISON WAY

NIGHTSBRIDGE LN

GRE NWO D DR

BARTON PL

IRIS LN

SEQUOIA AVE

STONE PINE LN

CHA TSWORTH LN

BOLTON PL

GRAYSON CT

KENTFIELD AVE

MARKET PL

ALMENDRAL AVE

PEPPERWOOD
CT

DEL NORTE AVE

RANDALL PL

BLACKBURN AVE

OLIVE ST

PATRICIA PL

JONES CT

CRONER AVE

SANDLEWOOD ST

DEX T ER AVE

COLLEGE AVE

BELLAIR WAY

LAUREL AVE

PARKWOODWAY

GINGER ST

PIERCE RD

ANNETTE AVE

SAN CLEMENTE DR

BELLE AVE

SAN ANDREAS DR

SAN LUIS DR

WENDY LN
ALLEY

DURHAM ST

ATHERWOOD AVE

INYO PL

CATHY PL

ENTRADA WAY

SHARON RD

WAVERLEY CT
ASH ST

HESKETH
CT

LINFIELD PL

QUAIL CT

BRADY PL

BASSETT LN

ELDER CT

SHERIDAN DR

CREEK DR

CLELAND PL

VASILAKOS CT

COTTON ST

SANTA CLARA AVE

CHERYL PL

COLUMBIA AVE

FAIR OAKS LN

WARDWAY
ATHER
PLWDO

E SELBY LN

CURTIS WAY

MONTEGO LN

ADLER PL

IDYLLWILD AVE

MELVIN HENRYCT

TRINITY DR

ALMA ST

SHEF IELD LN

E CREEK PL

FRE DRICK CT

DELMAR CT

BRITTANY MEADOWS

LILAC LN

AUSTIN AVE

CHR SI TOPHER WAY

KINGSFORD LN

MARION DR

CLAREMONT PL

LOS ROBLES CT

HARKINS AVE

WHITEHALL LN

INDEPENDENCE DR

KRAMER LN

ESCONDIDO LN

CERRITO PL

ARBOR RD

SONOMA PL

RILEYWAY

CAPPER CT

BELLEAU AVE

NEWCASTLE CT

ODELLPL

WOODLAND
CT

OAK KNOLL LN

HARMON DR

NORTHGATE DR

PLUMAS AVE

SANTIAGO AVE

SOUTHGATE DR

BERESFORD AVE

FREMONTPL

CEDARWOODWAY

WHITE OAK CT

ALBERNI ST
ELM PL

DUMBARTON AVE

ATHLONE CT

FAXON FOREST RD

ODESSA CT

VICTORIA DR

SAN MATEO DR

WILLIAM CT

POLHEMUS AVE

LEXINGTON DR

MCKENDRY DR

E UGENIALN

FAIR OAKS AVE

ALTREE CT HERITAGE PL

WATKINS AVE

FLYNN AVE

TADLEY CT

MAC BAIN AVE

HARRISON WAY

MALORY CT

E FOX CT

FRIENDLY CT

WELLS AVE

STOCKBRIDGE AVE

GARWOOD WAY

HERMOSAWAY

STANFORD AVE

ULMER CT

SUSAN GALE CT

MIDDLEGATE DR

PALM CT

FAIR OAKS AVE

HILLARY LN

STAMBAUGH ST

HALSEY AVE

SHASTA ST

ALMA ST

SAN MATEO AVE

LORELEI LN

HILTON ST

RONDO WAY

PAGE ST

BUCKINGHAM AVE

SANTA MONICA AVE

ORANGE AVE

SURREY LN

WHITAKER WAY

ALPINE AVE

RIORDAN PL

MILTON ST

NORMANDY LN

MID LE CT

BAYWOOD AVE

PACIFIC AVE

LAUREL ST

JOHNSON ST

OAKWOOD PL

LEMON ST

WINDSOR DR

OLIVERCT

SAN MATEO DR

CHRYSLER DR
18TH AVE

HILLSIDE CT FAXON RD

M CCORMICK LN

FAIR OAKS AVE

HERMOSA PL

ELMWOOD PL

BARMETTAWAY

KAREN WAY

DUMBARTON AVE
KENTPL

CALVIN AVE

MURRY CT

NEWBRIDGE ST

ATHERTON OAKS LN

FELTON DR

LINDEN AVE

MAGNOLIA ST

EVERGREEN ST

HIMMEL AVE
OAK
AVE

MONTGOMERY AVE

TUDOR DR

BLAKE ST

LOCUST ST MADRONE ST VAN BUREN RD

VAN BUREN RD

ARTHUR LN

NORTHSIDE AVE

HOOVER ST
15TH AVE

GLENDALE AVE

WHITE OAK DR

ALTSCHUL AVE

SEQUOIA WAY

SAGE ST
8TH AVE

WAVERLY AVE

PARK RD

SELBY LN

PARK RD

WILLIAM AVE

NEWBRIDGE ST
LEE DR

ALTSCHUL AVE

OSBORN AVE

TIOGA DR

PAGE ST

VASILAKOSWAY
3RD AVE

FAIR OAKS AVE

SHIRLEY WAY

ST MARY'S PL

SAN JUAN AVE

WINDSOR WAY

DAKIN AVE

FOREST LN

CERROS MANOR

DINKELSPIEL STATION LN

HENDERSON AVE

HOWARD WAY

FLEUR PL

GARLAND DR

POLHEMUS CT

COLLEGE AVE

ST FRANCIS PL

O'KEEFE ST

CAMBRIDGE AVE

SOMERSET LN

ARBOR RD

WEMBLEY CT

CASTLE WAY

SAXON WAY

CHARTER ST

SHERWO D WAY

HERITAGE CT

POPE ST

CONCORD DR

CHERRY AVE

CONTINENTAL DR

STOCKBRIDGE AVE

HOLLAND ST

BAY LAUREL DR

PATTERSON AVE

QUEENS CT

EDISON WAY

BEACON ST

COGHLAN LN

FLORENCE LN

CRANE ST

WILLOW PL

HAVEN AVE

HOMEWOOD PL

FENNWOOD DR

LAUREL ST

GILBERT AVE

KNOLLVISTA

SEMINARY DR

ATHERTON AVE

WILLOW ST

HANCOCK ST

HEMLOCK AVE

BETTY LN

BAY LAUREL DR

SCOTT AVE

WINCHESTER DR

SAN MATEO DR

BLAKE ST

ALTO LN

ATHLONE WAY

COMMONWEALTH DR HAVEN CT

GREENOAKS DR

NANCY WAY

WALSH RD

LILAC DR

CORNELL RD

SANTA CLARA AVE

BERGESEN CT

HIDDEN OAKS DR

MILLS CT
IRVING
AVE

LABURNUM RD

AUGUST CIR

C OUNTRY LN

NOVA LN

CAROLINA LN

JOHNSON LN

EVELYN ST

CURTIS ST

DOYLE ST

CRANE ST

RIDGEVIEW DR

STANFORD AVE

MONTAN A LN
ELM ST

SERRANO DR

WILLOW RD

WALSH RD

FANITA WAY

LAUREL PL

WOOD L N

IRVING AVE

OAKFIELD LN
2ND AVE

LARCH DR

A L L E Y

FREMONT ST

PROSPECT ST

FLOOD AVE

MARKHAM AVE

MAPLELEAF WAY

BARTON WAY

ABRYANWAY

DOHERTYWAY

MULBERRY LN

LUCKY AVE
ALLEY

WAVERLEY ST

ROSEWOOD DR

GILBERT AVE

BELMONT AVE

COLEMAN PL

WISTERIAWAY

OAKFIELD AVE

BONSEN CT

CROCKER AVE

ATKI N SON L N

CLOVER LN

LIBERTY PARK AVE

NASH AVE

CATALPA DR
OAK DR

FAIRFAX AVE

H ENDER SON PL

CURTIS AVE

MADISON WAY

ARNOLD WAY

PRADO SECOYA

MOSSWOOD WAY

RITTENHOUSE AVE

HUNTINGTON AVE

PRIOR LN

MICHAELS WAY

REGAL CT

GREENWOOD PL

LOUISE ST

BRIGHTON LN

LOGAN LN

BARRY LN

ACORNWAY

GRACE DR
OAK LN

PINEVIEW LN

MENLO AVE

MOREY DR

ALICE LN

BARTON ST

HEATHER
DR

MALONEY LN

CLAY DR

CONSTITUTION DR
4TH AVE

CALLADO WAY

CENTRAL AVE

HERMOSA WAY

GRESHAM LN

SNOWDEN AVE

JEFFERSON DR

NORA WAY

SEQUOIA AVE

BIEBER AVE

BERKELEY AVE

LAUREL AVE
12TH AVE

LEAHY ST

AUSTIN AVE

HOWARD ST

MERRILL ST

FRANKS LN

BUCK CT

KILROY WAY

ENCINAL AVE

ALTO LN

HIL AVE

MENLO OAKS DR

MODOC AVE

NOTTINGHAM AVE

WILLOW ST

PINE ST

MILLIE AVE

ROSE AVE

HANNA WAY

LEONWAY

POPE ST

RENATO CT

REBECCA LN

FLOOD CIR

NORTHUMBERLAND AVE

ACACIA DR

NASSAU DR
15TH AVE

HELENA WAY

HULL AVE

MELLO ST

THERESA CT

MERCEDES LN

COT ON ST

WAYNE CT

E OAKWOOD BLVD

EDGE RD

OAKWOOD DR

BURBANK AVE

WERTH AVE

CAMELLIA AVE

MANZANITA RD
3RD AVE
14TH AVE
10TH AVE
11TH AVE
12TH AVE

EDWARDS LN

SUTHERLAND DR

SAN BENITO AVE

E CREEK DR

PALMER LN

MILLS AVE

OAKWOOD BLVD
ROBERT S. DR

MAGNOLIA DR

MAY WOOD LN

ISABELLA AVE

DANBURY LN

LAKEVIEW DR

PAGE ST

HURLINGAME AVE

STANFORD AVE

MAY BROWN AVE

CALLIE LN

STOCKBRIDGE AVE

WESTFIELD DR

L A N E P L

WILLOW ST

CEBALO LN

JEN INGS LN

AMERICAN WAY

DELFINO WAY

NOR HTUMBERLAND AVE

LINDEN ST

MAC ARTHUR AVE

OAKSIDE AVE
9TH AVE

CAMINO A LOS CERROS

PAGE ST

ALMANOR AVE

JUNIPER DR

REDWOOD WAY
11TH AVE

LOWERY DR

CAMINO AL LAGO

CAMINO AL LAGO
8TH AVE

MC EVOY ST

PARK ST

MANZANITA AVE

CENTER ST

WARRINGTON AVE
9TH AVE

KAYNYNE AVE

CLAIRE PL
10TH AVE

PARK AVE

BLENHEIM AVE

EDGEWOOD LN
4TH AVE

BARRON AVE

TIMOTHY LN

DOUGLASWAY

RUTHERFORD AVE

HURLINGAME AVE

NIMITZ AVE

BUENA VISTA AVE

ALMENDRAL AVE

CAMINO POR LOS ARBOLES

DOUGLAS AVE

MONTEREY AVE

SWEENEY AVE

ARRO W HEAD LN

INGLEWOOD LN

SPENCER LN

SANTA RITA AVE

ROSEFIELD WAY

STEVENSON LN

RUTHERFORD AVE

NORTHGATE DR

EL CAMINO REAL

CAMINO DE LOS ROBLES

LAUREL AVE

LEN OX AVE

BOHANNON DR

HARVARD AVE

YARNALL PL
10TH AVE

GARDEN LN

MARLBOROUGH AVE

CENTRAL AVE

CEDAR AVE

KENWOOD DR

HULL AVE
7TH AVE
6TH AVE
7TH AVE

HOOVER ST

E LLIOTT DR

BRADBURY LN

CAMBRIDGE AVE

SAN CARLOS AVE
3RD AVE
4TH AVE

BRADLEY WAY

ENCINO RD

OAKLEY AVE

GORDON AVE

ALEXANDER AVE

STERLING AVE

ASHTON AVE
6TH AVE

HENDERSON AVE
18TH AVE

BURGESS DR

CHESTER ST

MOULTON DR

MESA CT

OAKDELL DR

JERVIS AVE

DEVONSHIRE AVE

YALE RD

DEL NORTE AVE

PRINCETON RD

CORINNE LN

COLBY AVE

BERESFORD AVE

ROBIN WAY

VIRGINIA LN

TEHAMAAVE

DUNSMUIR WAY

BUCKTHORN WAY

SHERMAN AVE

COWELL LN

WAVERLEY ST

WINDERMERE AVE

ALTA VISTA DR

AMBAR WAY

PLACITAS AVE

SPRUCE AVE

LUPIN LN

WESTMORELAND AVE

MADRONE RD

WALLEA DR

NIMITZ AVE

BERKELEY AVE

POPPY AVE

HOLLY AVE

CA MINO DE LOS ROBLES

MANDARIN WAY

SCOTT DR
16TH AVE

WESTSIDE AVE

HAIGHT ST

MT VERNON LN

LAUREL AVE
4TH AVE

AUSTIN AVE

MAPLE AVE

SONOMA AVE

S E MINARY DR

HESKETH DR

BAY LAUREL DR
3RD AVE

BELBROOKWAY

MEADOW LN

STOCKBRIDGE AVE

TRENTON WAY
1ST AVE

HOLLYBURNE AVE
2ND AVE

LLOYDEN PARK LN

CHILCO ST

STERN LN

PENINSULA WAY

PEGGY LN

WALNUT AVE

LLOYDEN DR

STEVICK DR

GREENWO O D LN

MEADOW LN

ORCHARD AVE

ALMANOR AVE

RINGWO D AVE

ASHFIELD RD

SEVIER AVE

WESTMINSTER AVE
14TH AVE

ENCINA AVE

MICHAEL DR

ENCINA AVE

ARLINGTON WAY

DEODORA DR
17THAVE
6TH AVE

BROADWAY

BROADACRES RD

ALMA LN

ROSE AVE

DODGE DR

MADERA AVE
17TH AVE

PARKWOOD DR

MARCUSSEN DR
ALLEY

MENLO OAKS DR

HILLSIDE AVE

NOEL DR

CHURCHILL AVE

RALSTON RD

AMADOR AVE

HAWTHORNE DR

MILLS ST
16TH AVE

GREENWAYS DR

PARK LN

N LEMON AVE
7TH AVE

DORIS DR

CLAREMONT WAY

CARLTON AVE

EMILIE AVE

SAN ANTONIO ST

HAVEN AVE

TALLWOOD CT

SHEARER DR
ALLEY
ALLEY

OAKLAND AVE

NUEVA ST
8TH AVE

HILLVIEW DR

ROBLEDADR

ARDEN RD

ROBLE AVE

ORCHARD HILLS ST

DE BELL DR

ALEJANDRA AVE

HOLBROOK LN

AMHERST AVE

WILLOW RD

HEDGE RD

WINDERMERE AVE

MONTWOOD CIR

LOYOLA AVE

HOLLYBURNE AVE

OAKHURST PL

HOBART ST

SEVIER AVE

ATHERTON AVE

BONITA AVE

BRITTON AVE

MADERA AVE

MELANIE LN

CARLTON AVE

MARYMONT AVE
EUCLID
AVE

FR ONTAGE RD

PATRICIA DR

EL CAMINO REAL EL CAMINO REAL EL CAMINO REAL

WILLOW RD

WOODSIDE RD

WOODSIDE RD WOODSIDE RD
5TH AVE

SANTA CRUZ AVE

UNIVERSITY DR

RINGWOOD AVE

SANTA CRUZ AVE
5TH AVE

SEMICIRCULAR RD

ALAMEDA DE LAS PULGAS
5TH AVE

MIDDLEFIELD RD

MIDDLEFIELD RD
BAY RD

FLORENCE ST

UNIVERSITY DR

WIL OW RD

MENLO AVE

MIDDLEFIELD RD

MIDDLEFIELD RD LAUREL ST

MIDDLEFIELD RD

VALPARAISO AVE VALPARAISO AVE VALPARAISO AVE

NEWBRIDGE ST

RAVENSWOOD AVE
BAY RD
BAY RD
BAY RD

GLENWOOD AVE
BAY RD

MIDDLEFIELD RD
BAY RD
BAY RD

ALAMEDA DE LAS PULGAS ALAMEDA DE LAS PULGAS

ALAMEDA DE LAS PULGAS

SANTA CRUZ AVE

UNIVERSITY DR

HAZEL AVE

LAUREL ST
BAY RD

MARSH RD MARSH RD

LAUREL ST

OAK GROVE AVE

LIVE OAK AVE

MIDDLEFIELD RD
5TH AVE
5TH AVE

RAVENSWOOD AVE

GLENWOOD AVE

ATHERTON AVE

WILLOW RD

MIDDLEFIELD RD

JEFFERSON AVE

SPRING ST

SANTA CRUZ AVE

HAMILTON AVE
IVY DR

LAUREL ST

CYPRESS ST

STOCKBRIDGE AVE

MID LE AVE

SPRING ST

JAMES AVE
2ND AVE

SELBY LN

SELBY LN SELBY LN

CHILCO ST

MIDDLE AVE

FAIR OAK S
LN
IVY DR

HAMILTON AVE

WILLOW RD

SPRING ST

AVY AVE
IVY DR

OAK GROVE AVE

MIDDLE AVE

CHARTER ST

E BAYSHORE RD

COLEMAN AVE

OLIVE ST

OAK GROVE AVE

JAMES AVE

OAK GROVE AVE

SPRING ST

CARLOS AVE

DOUGLAS AVE

CE N T RAL AVE

SARATOGA AVE

ELENA AVE

GREENOAKS DR

ROLISON RD

FREDRICK AVE

ELENA AVE

CONSTITUTION DR

CAMPBELL AVE

SANTIAGO AVE

GLORIA CIR

W OAKWOOD BLVD

CATALPA DR

E CRE K DR

HAWTHORNE DR

TOYON RD

SOUTHGATE DR

FLETCHER DR

SANTA MARGARITA AVE

POLITZER DR

ARBOR RD

FAIRVIEW AVE

BURNS AVE

LINDA VISTA AVE

ELEANOR DR

PARK LN

COTTON ST

HERMOSA WAY

HOBART ST

MONTE VISTA AVE

HEATHER DR

ADAMWAY

TUSCALOOSA AVE TUSCALO SAAVE

MOORE RD

SPIROS WAY

BRADLEY CT

MILLER CT

BERESFORD PL

HAZEL ST
¤£101 ÅÄ84
¤£101

CLOUD AVE

TOYON RD

POLITZER DR

HESKETH DR

OAK AVE

CONCORD DR

LEXINGTON DR

ROBIN WAY ROSEMARY ST

SELBY LN

JUBILEE CT

LAUREL AVE

CENTRAL AVE

MENALTO AVE

SHERWOOD WAY

CHESTNUT ST

SANTA CRUZ AVE

TRINITY DR

MIDDLEFIELD RD

MARSH RD

ELEANOR DR

WALSH RD

SELBY LN

SELBY LN
15TH AVE
17TH AVE

WARRINGTON AVE

MANZANITA ST

HEDGE RD

BOHANNON DR

ROBLE AVE

BURGESS DR

EL CAMINO REAL

ALMA ST

MIDDLEFIELD RD
17TH AVE
16TH AVE
18TH AVE

LEMON ST LEMON ST

CHESTER ST

DURHAM ST

O'KEEFE ST

LAUREL AVE

BERKELEY AVE

ALMANOR AVE

MENLO OAKS DR

HENDERSON AVE

WINDERMERE AVE

HOLLYBURNE AVE

SEVIER AVE

MADERA AVE

VALPARAISO AVE

ORCHARD LN

WAVERLEY ST

EL CAMINO REAL

PLUM LN

GUINDA ST

ALMA ST

UNIVERSITY CIR

BRYANT ST
ALMAST

PALOALTO AVE

RAMONA ST

UNIVERSITY AVE
LA N E 11 W E S T
LANE 5 EAST
L A N E 6 E A S T

MANZANITA AVE

BRYANT ST

URBAN LN

QUARRY RD

SAND HILLRD

PALMAVE
L A N E 3 3

SAND HILLRD

RAMONA ST

QUARRY EXTENSION

SEQUOIA AVE

FULTON ST

WELCH RD

EL CAMINO REAL

HAMILTON CT

WELCH RD

PALOALTO AVE

MIRAMONTE AVE

BOYCE AVE

CASTILLEJA AVE

HIGH ST
LANE 30

HAWTHORNE AVE

HAMILTON AVE

PAULSEN LN

LINCOLN AVE

FOREST AVE

LYTTON AVE

UNIVERSITY AVE

HAWTHORNE AVE

FOREST AVE
LANE 20 WEST

ADDISON AVE

LYTTON AVE

UNIVERSITY AVE
LANE 20 EAST

EVERETT AVE

HAMILTON AVE

LYTTON AVE

UNIVERSITY AVE

EL CAMINO REAL

CENTENNIAL WALK
LANE 12 WEST

MOSHER WAY

CHARLES MARX WAY

CLARK WAY

VARIAN WAY

PEAR LN

TASSO ST

LONDONPLANEWAY

RUTHVEN AVE

EMERSON ST

PISTACHE PL

SWAIN WAY

MADRONO AVE

MIDDLEFIELD RD

SWEET OLIVE WAY

MARLOWE ST

OAK CREEK DR
(STANFORD)

DURAND WAY

PORTOLAAVE

ENCINA AVE

MIDDLEFIELD RD

GILMAN ST

COWPER ST
LANE 7 WEST

HIGH ST

LANE A WEST

COWPER ST

LANE B WEST

FULTON ST

KIPLING ST

DOWNING LN

BYRON ST
LANE 56

LANE D EAST
LANE 39

HIGH ST

LANE D WEST

ALMA ST
LANE 7 EAST

GUINDA ST

LANE B EAST

MIDDLEFIELD RD

RAMONA ST

KIPLING ST

WAVERLEY ST
LANE 8 WEST

BYRON ST

WEBSTER ST

EMERSON ST
LANE 15 EAST

WEBSTER ST

BRYANT ST
LANE 59 EAST

TASSO ST

SENECA ST

EMERSON ST

COWPER ST

BYRON ST

WEBSTER ST

FULTON ST

ALMA ST

ESCOBITA AVE

BRYANT ST
POE ST

BLAKE WILBUR DR

CHURCHILL AVE

EMERSON ST

QUARRY RD

WELLS AVE

EVERETT CT

UNIVERSITY AVE

HOMER AVE

LINCOLN AVE

MELVILLE AVE

BRYANT CT

CHANNING AVE

EVERETT AVE

CHURCHILL AVE

WHITMAN CT

KINGSLEY AVE

ADDISON AVE

CHANNING AVE

HOMER AVE

MELVILLE AVE

KELLOGG AVE

COLERIDGE AVE

PALOALTO AVE

MITCHELL LN

CHAUCER ST

HALE ST
L A N E 2 1

PASTEUR DR

EMBARCADERO RD

SAND HILL RD

CLARK WAY

MARIPOSA AVE

CASTILLEJA AVE

MED ICALFOUNDATIONWYA

HAMILTON AVE

PALO ALTO AVE

VINEYARD LN

SHO P P NI GCENTER WAY

SHOPPING CENTER WAY

SAM MCDONALD RD

LOMITA AVE

CAMPUS DR

EMBARCADERO RD

CAMPUS DR

LASUEN ST

WELCH RD

STOCK FARMRD

SAM MCDONALD RD

GALVEZ ST

MEDICAL LN

LASUEN MAL

CAMPUS DR W

NORTH-SOUTH AXIS
OAK RD

NELSON RD

STANFORD UNIV

PALM DR

ROTH WAY

ARBORETUM RD

N SERVICE RD

MUSEUM WAY

PLUMTREE LN

LASUEN MALL

ARBORETUM RD

SAM MCDONALD MALL

PALO RD

PALM DR

MENLO AVE

LIVE OAK AVE

O'BRIEN DR

RINGWOOD AVE

ROBLE AVE

ARLINGTON WAY

MENLO OAKS DR

OAK GROVE AVE

EL CAMINO REAL

GARWOOD WAY

GLORIA CIR
(DAISY LN)

ARIANA LN
City of Menlo Park: Proposed School Frontage Extensions 0 1,250 2,500
Feet
Existing School Frontage
Schools
500ft extension of 15mph zone
15 mph zones are shown approximately
and for reference only. All information is
based on California Vehicle Code
22358.4
New Beginnings
School
TIDE Academy
Littlest Angels
Preschool
ATTACHMENT C Page I-6.6
Community Development
City of Menlo Park 701 Laurel St., Menlo Park, CA 94025 tel 650-330-6600 www.menlopark.org

STAFF REPORT
City Council
Meeting Date: 7/26/2022
Staff Report Number: 22-148-CC
Public Hearing: Receive the Elections Code Section 9212 report regarding the proposed initiative measure entitled
“A Citizen-Sponsored Initiative Measure to Amend
the Land Use Element of the General Plan to
Prohibit the City Council of the City of Menlo Park
from Re-Designating or Re-Zoning Certain
Properties Designated and Zoned for Single Family
Detached Homes”
Recommendation
Staff recommends the City Council receive the report pursuant to Elections Code Section 9212 (Attachment A) regarding the proposed initiative measure entitled “A Citizen-Sponsored Initiative Measure to Amend the Land Use Element of the General Plan to Prohibit the City Council of the City of Menlo Park from ReDesignating or Re-Zoning Certain Properties Designated and Zoned for Single Family Detached Homes.” Background
On April 15, 2022, the petition for the proposed initiative was filed with the city clerk of the City of Menlo Park (Elections Code Section 9208.) On June 28, 2022, following the city clerk’s determination that the proponents submitted 2,011 valid signatures, which exceeded the minimum number of 1,984 signatures required, the City Council accepted the certification of the sufficiency of the petition for the proposed initiative. At the same meeting, the City Council was required to take one of following three actions as required by the California Elections Code Section 9215:

A. Adopt an ordinance of the City Council of the City of Menlo Park adopting the citizen sponsored initiative measure to amend the Land Use Element of the General Plan to prohibit the City Council of the City of Menlo Park from re-designating or re-zoning certain properties designated and zoned for single family detached homes; or
B. Adopt a resolution of the City Council of the City of Menlo Park adopting the citizen sponsored initiative measure to amend the Land Use Element of the General Plan to prohibit the City Council of the City of Menlo Park from re-designating or re-zoning certain properties designated and zoned for single family detached homes; establishing the schedule for submission of ballot arguments; and authorizing and requesting the County of San Mateo conduct the election; or C. Order a report pursuant to Elections Code Section 9212 at the regular meeting at which the certification of the petition is presented. When the report is presented to the City Council, the City Council is required to either adopt the ordinance within 10 days or order an election pursuant to subdivision (b.) The City Council selected Option C and ordered the preparation of a report with the following topics all of which are encompassed by Elections Code Section 9212:

1. Its fiscal impact.

2. Its effect on the internal consistency of the city’s general and specific plans, including the housing element, the consistency between planning and zoning, and the limitations on city actions under Section AGENDA ITEM J-1 Page J-1.1
Staff Report #: 22-148-CC

City of Menlo Park 701 Laurel St., Menlo Park, CA 94025 tel 650-330-6600 www.menlopark.org 65008 of the Government Code and Chapters 4.2 (commencing with Section 65913) and 4.3 (commencing with Section 65915) of Division 1 of Title 7 of the Government Code.

3. Its effect on the use of land, the impact on the availability and location of housing, and the ability of the city to meet its regional housing needs.

4. Its impact on funding for infrastructure of all types, including, but not limited to, transportation, schools, parks and open space. The report may also discuss whether the measure would be likely to result in increased infrastructure costs or savings, including the costs of infrastructure maintenance, to current residents and businesses.

5. Its impact on the community’s ability to attract and retain business and employment.

6. Its impact on the uses of vacant parcels of land.

7. Its impact on agricultural lands, open space, traffic congestion, existing business districts, and developed areas designated for revitalization.

The City Council also requested the following topics be evaluated and studied in the Elections Code Section 9212 report:

1. Racial and economic equity; and

2. Educational equity; and

3. Ability to comply with state housing laws, including production of affordable housing and affirmatively furthering fair housing; and

4. Climate and traffic impacts of people driving to or through Menlo Park for work because they cannot afford to live here; and

5. Impacts to the other existing sites the draft Housing Element; and

6. Impacts on public (e.g., fire station) and other sites owned by nonprofit institutions (e.g., churches) that are zoned for single family but do not include single-family residential uses.

The report shall be presented to the legislative body within the time prescribed by the legislative body, but no later than 30 days after the elections official certifies to the legislative body the sufficiency of the petition.

The report is being presented within the prescribed 30 days. Within 10 days of the report being presented to the City Council, the City Council is required to either adopt the ordinance or order an election. At the meeting of July 26, 2022, the City Council will also have the opportunity to take action and select one of these two options.

Analysis
The Elections Code Section 9212 report, included as Attachment A, was prepared by the Housing Element Update consultant team, including M-Group, BAE and Hexagon, with assistance from City staff. The consultant team was selected for their planning and economic expertise, knowledge of Housing Element law, and ability to prepare a report within the statutory 30-day deadline. The report before the City Council evaluates how the proposed initiative would impact the topic areas set forth above. The report is intended to present factual information and professional judgement to arrive at conclusions or hypotheses into potential results of the initiative measure should it be adopted.

The report is presented to the City Council in compliance with California Elections Code Section 9212 and completes the scope of work within the authorized funding. The consultant team will be available for questions at the July 26, 2022, meeting.

Impact on City Resources
The fee for the preparation of the report pursuant to Elections Code Section 9212 was $61,500, which is within the city manager’s signing authority. At the City Council meeting of June 28, 2022, the City Council Page J-1.2
Staff Report #: 22-148-CC
City of Menlo Park 701 Laurel St., Menlo Park, CA 94025 tel 650-330-6600 www.menlopark.org approved a budget augmentation of $86,000 for Planning consultant services as part of the fiscal year 2022-23 budget adoption in order to prepare the report.

Environmental Review
The report is not a project subject to CEQA. Additionally, initiative measures submitted to the voters or adopted by the City Council are not projects under CEQA Guidelines Section 15378 (b)(3.) A project under CEQA does not include “[t]he submittal of proposals to a vote of the people of the state or a particular community that does not involve a public agency sponsored initiative.” (Stein v. City of Santa Monica (1980) 110 Cal. App.3d 458; Friends of Sierra Madre v. City of Sierra Madre (2001) 25 Cal. 4th 165.) Public Notice
Public notification was achieved by posting the agenda, with the agenda items being listed, at least 72 hours prior to the meeting.

Attachments
A. Ballot measure impact analysis pursuant to Elections Code Section 9212 Report prepared by:

Deanna Chow, Assistant Community Development Director
Report reviewed by:

Nira F. Doherty, City Attorney
Page J-1.3

CITY OF

MENLO PARK

BALLOT MEASURE

IMPACT ANALYSIS
Pursuant to Election Code 9212
July 26, 2022
PREPARED BY:

City of Menlo Park
Bay Area Economics (BAE)
Metropolitan Planning Group
Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc.

ATTACHMENT A Page J-1.4

CITY OF MENLO PARK
BALLOT MEASURE IMPACT ANALYSIS | Pursuant to Election Code 9212 P2

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Introduction................................................................................................................................. 3 Purpose ...................................................................................................................................... 3 Background................................................................................................................................. 3 Impact Analysis........................................................................................................................... 5

1. Impact on City’s Ability to Comply with State Housing Law.............................................. 5

2. Internal Consistency of the City’s General and Specific Plans, Housing Element, and Planning and Zoning......................................................................................................11

3. Impact on the Availability and Location of Housing, and the Ability of the City to Meet its Regional Housing Needs (RHNA)..................................................................................15

4. Impacts on Public, Vacant Land, and Other Sites Owned by Nonprofit Institutions.........19

5. Impact on Open Space, Existing Business Districts, and Developed Areas Designated for Revitalization.................................................................................................................22

6. Fiscal Impacts ................................................................................................................23

7. Impact on Funding for Infrastructure of all Types............................................................26

8. Impact on the Community’s Ability to Attract and Retain Business and Employment......32

9. Impact on Racial and Economic Equity ..........................................................................34

10. Educational Equity - Impact on Ravenswood City School District (RCSD)......................45

11. Impact on Climate and Traffic Congestion......................................................................48 Attachments:

Attachment A: Ballot Measure submitted to the City of Menlo Park on April 15, 2022 Attachment B: Non-Single-Family Sites Affected by the Ballot Measure Page J-1.5

CITY OF MENLO PARK
BALLOT MEASURE IMPACT ANALYSIS | Pursuant to Election Code 9212 P3

INTRODUCTION
This report covers the topics included in the Election Code Section 9212 as well as the topics directed by the City Council at its June 28, 2022 meeting. References in the text to “Ballot Measure” refer to the Ballot Measure submitted to the City of Menlo Park on April 15, 2022 included as Attachment A.

The Ballot Measure would amend City’s Land Used Element of the General Plan to prohibit the City Council from changing the General Plan land use designation or rezoning certain properties designated and zoned for single-family detached residences unless first approved by a majority vote of the people of the City of Menlo Park at a general election.

In general, this report describes how the Ballot Measure would impact the following topic areas:
• Ability to comply with State housing laws, including Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing (AFFH)
• Consistency with adopted planning policies and zoning regulations, including the Housing Element
• Various land uses and potential development sites
• Fiscal impacts, funding for infrastructure, and economic development • Racial and economic equity
• Climate and transportation
The report finds that while the Ballot Measure would potentially limit new multifamily development in single-family areas, it would likely have a limited impact on the overall number of housing units that can be built in Menlo Park in the near future because the City can rezone other areas to enable new housing development as necessary to meet Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) requirements under State law. Over time, however, the City would have less flexibility in planning for future housing because the Ballot Measure would limit the ability to plan for housing on certain sites. Additionally, under the Ballot Measure, the future distribution of new housing may be inconsistent with fair housing requirements contained within the AFFH law adopted by the State of California in 2018 (AB 686).

PURPOSE
Within the scope of the election code and as prescribed by the City Council, the purpose of this Report is to provide a professional, factual and objective analysis of the potential impacts of the Ballot Measure to the City of Menlo Park.

BACKGROUND
The city began a comprehensive update of the City’s Housing Element in May 2021. Community meetings were held virtually between May and December 2021 outlining general strategies and policy themes progressing towards specific housing opportunity sites strategies, policies, and programs. Additional public meetings in February of 2022 continued to garner community interest Page J-1.6

CITY OF MENLO PARK
BALLOT MEASURE IMPACT ANALYSIS | Pursuant to Election Code 9212 P4 especially regarding the former James Flood Elementary School site located at 320 Sheridan Drive. A virtual community meeting was directed by the City Council focused on this site with high public interest. This meeting was held on May 3, 2022 and approximately166 residents and other interested persons attended.

Through the General Plan and Zoning Ordinance, the City Council of the City of Menlo Park has designated certain property in the City of Menlo Park for single family detached homes. Under the General Plan, many such properties have a “Very Low Density Residential” or “Low Density Residential” land use designation.

The Citizen-Sponsored Initiative proposes an amendment to the Land Use Element of the General Plan that would prohibit the City Council of the City of Menlo Park from:
(1) changing the General Plan designation of properties that were designated Very Low Density Residential or Low Density Residential as of April 15, 2022; and (2) re-zoning properties that were zoned Residential Estate (R-E), Residential Estate Suburban (R-E-S), Single Family Suburban Residential (R-1-S), Single Family Suburban Residential (Felton Gables) (R-1-S (FG), Single Family Urban Residential (R-1-U), or Single-Family Urban Residential (Lorelei Manor) (R-1-U (LM) as of April 15, 2022.

Under the Citizen-Sponsored Initiative, properties designated Very Low Density Residential or Low Density Residential, and properties zoned R-E, R-E-S, R-1-S, R-1-S (FG), R-1-U or R-1-U (LM) as of April 15, 2022, could only be re-designated or re-zoned for other uses or denser residential uses by a majority vote of the people of the City of Menlo Park at a regular election.

The initiative does not impact the City Council’s authority to re-designate or re-zone properties that had other General Plan land use designations and/or zoning as of April 15, 2022.

The “Very Low Density Residential” designation provides for single family detached homes, secondary dwelling units, public and quasi-public uses, and similar and compatible uses at a maximum density of 2.9 units per acre. Properties with a “Very Low Density Residential” designation are zoned Residential Estate (R-E) or Residential Estate Suburban (R-E-S).

The “Low Density Residential” designation provides for single family detached homes, secondary dwelling units, public and quasi-public uses, and similar and compatible uses at a maximum density of 8.9 units per acre. Properties with a “Low Density Residential” designation are zoned Single Family Suburban Residential (R-1-S), Single Family Suburban Residential (Felton Gables) (R-1-S (FG), Single Family Urban Residential (R-1-U), or Single Family Urban Residential (Lorelei Manor) (R-1-U (LM).

All properties with Very Low Density Residential or Low Density Residential land use designations and the corresponding zoning described above are referred to as single-family residential properties in this report. A summary of these areas is provided in Table 2.

Most of the property in the City of Menlo Park designated Very Low Density Residential or Low Density Residential is improved with single family homes or other residential uses. However, certain properties with these land use designations currently have other uses (such as public utilities, private schools, churches, childcare centers, and a fire station) or are unimproved.

Page J-1.7

CITY OF MENLO PARK
BALLOT MEASURE IMPACT ANALYSIS | Pursuant to Election Code 9212 P5 On April 15, 2022, the initiative proponents submitted a Notice of Intent to Circulate a Petition with the City’s Elections Official with a request that a ballot title and summary be prepared for the Ballot Measure. In response, a Ballot Title and Summary was prepared by the City Attorney pursuant to Elections Code section 9203. The Ballot Title and Summary was submitted to the proponents on April 30, 2022. The proponents published the Notice of Intent in The Examiner – Redwood City Tribune May 4, 2022, pursuant to Elections Code section 9205 and filed an Affidavit of Publication with the city clerk May 10, 2022, pursuant to Elections Code section 9206.

The Petition regarding the proposed initiative was filed with the City Clerk on May 24, 2022, bearing 2,976 unverified signatures. Per the Elections Code, the City Clerk’s office, in conjunction with the County of San Mateo’s Office of the Assessor-County Clerk-Recorder & Elections (“County”), examined the signatures the proponents had collected to verify the sufficiency of the Petition. By letter dated June 15, 2022, the County notified the City that “of the 2,976 signatures submitted” in support of the Proposed Initiative, “2,369 were checked and 2,011 signatures were verified as valid.” The 2,011 verified signatures exceed the minimum of 1,984 signatures required to qualify the proposed initiative for the ballot. On June 28, 2022, the City Council accepted the certificate of the sufficiency of the petition for the proposed initiative.

The City Council was required to take one of three actions as required by the California Elections Code section 9215. At their meeting on June 28, 2022, the City Council directed the preparation of this report as authorized under section 9212. The report would need to be presented to the City Council no later than July 28, 2022, and within 10 days of the report being presented, the City Council is required to either adopt the ordinance or order an election.

IMPACT ANALYSIS

1. Impact on City’s Ability to Comply with State Housing Law Government Code Section 65008
California’s Planning and Zoning Law (Gov. Code, § 65000 et al.) prohibits jurisdictions from engaging in discriminatory land use and planning activities. Specifically, Government Code section 65008, subdivision (a), deems any action taken by a city or county to be null and void if such action denies to an individual or group of individuals the enjoyment of residence, landownership, tenancy, or any other land use in the state due to illegal discrimination.

Under the law, it is illegal to discriminate based on protected class such as race, color, religion, sex, gender, gender identity, gender expression, sexual orientation, marital status, national origin, ancestry, familial status, source of income, disability (including individuals in recovery for drug or alcohol abuse, whether or not they are actively seeking recovery assistance), veteran or military status, or genetic information.

The law further recites multiple categories of actions that are determined to be discriminatory, including the following:

Page J-1.8

CITY OF MENLO PARK
BALLOT MEASURE IMPACT ANALYSIS | Pursuant to Election Code 9212 P6  Enactment or administration of ordinances pursuant to any law that prohibits or discriminates against a protected class (Gov. Code, § 65008, subd. (b)(1)(B));  Enactment or administration of ordinances pursuant to any law that prohibits or discriminates against residential developments because they are “intended for occupancy by persons and families of very low, low, or moderate income, … or persons and families of middle income” (Gov. Code, § 65008, subds. (a)(3) and (b)(1)(C)); and  Imposition of different requirements on a residential use by a protected class or by persons of very low, low, moderate, or middle income, other than those generally imposed upon other residential uses. (Gov. Code, § 65008, subd. (d)(2)(A).) The Ballot Measure can be considered under a city-wide effect scenario for purposes of an analysis to determine if the Measure would unlawfully prohibit or discriminate against lower and moderate-income housing developments. The Ballot Measure would place a very high barrier to any land use change that would allow higher density residential uses in single family zoned districts and parcels. The barrier would impact the City’s ability to impose its inclusionary requirements which could in turn result in a secondary barrier to the production of affordable housing.

Housing affordability for moderate income households is assumed by state law to start at 20 DU/ac and lower income affordability is accepted at “default densities” of 30 DU/ac or more1 . With
the exception of rental-only accessory dwelling units (ADUs) and the 10% or 15% Below Market Rate (BMR) requirement of market rate projects, the single-family residential areas within the City consist of higher cost market rate detached homes. These areas also have the highest household incomes and proximity to the most services and high-quality schools.2 The City has an inclusionary ordinance that requires all residential projects of 5 to 19 units to provide 10% of the units as affordable housing for low income households or provide an alternative equivalent. Projects of 20 units or more are required to provide 15% of the units at the low income level of affordability or equivalent.

There are 53 developable parcels ranging from 0.1 to 41 acres in the City that would be effected by the Ballot Measure that do not have existing single-family residences located on them currently.

As a result, the Ballot Measure would prohibit 53 developable parcels in the City from being rezoned by the City to allow 5 or more units per parcel because the current land use designations allow a density of 2.9 DU/ac or 8.9 DU/ac, which would typically result in low-density single-family developments of less than 5 units per project.

Thus, the City cannot, on its own effectuate land use changes on these 53 parcels sites to allow for the default densities that would allow for the creation of new higher density and affordable housing. The potential for affordable housing thus decreases. 1 California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD). Default Density Standard Option – 2020 Census Update memo dated March 21, 2022. https://hcd.ca.gov/community-development/housingelement/housing-element-memos/docs/defaultdensity2020censusupdate.pdf 2 ABAG/MTC Housing Needs Data Report: Menlo Park, April 2021; U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 5-Year Data (2015-2019)
Page J-1.9

CITY OF MENLO PARK
BALLOT MEASURE IMPACT ANALYSIS | Pursuant to Election Code 9212 P7 Government Code Title 7 Chapter 4.2 (Sections 65913-65914.5) – Housing Development Approvals
State laws not only require local governments to affirmatively plan for current and future housing needs but to also avoid and overcome housing discrimination resulting from past and present land use practices. The provision of affordable housing where it has been excluded advances a basic goal of the fair housing and anti-discrimination laws—the elimination of segregation. These policies and objectives are addressed by Government Code section 65913 et seq. This statue and the Ballot Measure’s potential to impact the City’s ability to meet the policies and objectives established by the statute are discussed below.

Government Code section 65913 provides:
(a) The Legislature finds and declares that there exists a severe shortage of affordable housing, especially for persons and families of low and moderate income, and that there is an immediate need to encourage the development of new housing, not only through the provision of financial assistance, but also through changes in law designed to do all of the following:
(1) Expedite the local and state residential development process. (2) Assure that local governments zone sufficient land at densities high enough for production of affordable housing.
(3) Assure that local governments make a diligent effort through the administration of land use and development controls and the provision of regulatory concessions and incentives to significantly reduce housing development costs and thereby facilitate the development of affordable housing, including housing for elderly persons and families, as defined by Section 50067 of the Health and Safety Code.

These changes in the law are consistent with the responsibility of local government to adopt the program required by subdivision (c) of Section 65583. (b) The Legislature further finds and declares that the costs of new housing developments have been increased, in part, by the existing permit process and by existing land use regulations and that vitally needed housing developments have been halted or rendered infeasible despite the benefits to the public health, safety, and welfare of those developments and despite the absence of adverse environmental impacts. It is, therefore, necessary to enact this chapter and to amend existing statutes which govern housing development so as to provide greater encouragement for local and state governments to approve needed and sound housing developments.

Section 65913.1 provides, in part:
(a) In exercising its authority to zone for land uses and in revising its housing element pursuant to Article 10.6 (commencing with Section 65580 ) of Chapter 3, a city, county, or city and county shall designate and zone sufficient vacant land for residential use with appropriate standards, in relation to zoning for nonresidential use, and in relation to growth projections of the general plan to meet housing needs for all income categories as identified in the housing element of the general plan.

Page J-1.10

CITY OF MENLO PARK
BALLOT MEASURE IMPACT ANALYSIS | Pursuant to Election Code 9212 P8 Section 65913.2 provides that the City shall:
“(a) Refrain from imposing criteria for design, as defined in Section 66418, or improvements, as defined in Section 66419, for the purpose of rendering infeasible the development of housing for any and all economic segments of the community. However, nothing in this section shall be construed to enlarge or diminish the authority of a city, county, or city and county under other provisions of law to permit a developer to construct such housing.
(b) Consider the effect of ordinances adopted and actions taken by it with respect to the housing needs of the region in which the local jurisdiction is situated. (c) Refrain from imposing standards and criteria for public improvements including, but not limited to, streets, sewers, fire stations, schools, or parks, which exceed the standards and criteria being applied by the city, county, or city and county at that time to its publicly financed improvements located in similarly zoned districts within that city, county, or city and county.”
This State statute mandates as a general policy matter, that cities take actions to meet the housing needs of all income categories and to refrain from taking actions that render housing production infeasible. The proposed Ballot Measure may operate to render certain housing production more infeasible than housing production would be absent the Ballot Measure. This is because the Ballot Measure reduces the amount of housing that can be built on many parcels throughout the City, without a vote of the people. By prohibiting the City from taking any actions to rezone or redesignate single family zoned districts and parcels throughout the City, the Ballot Measure imposes a hurdle on increasing the amount of allowable housing on such parcels. These potential impacts are discussed in greater detail, below.

Government Code § 65913.1 is a corollary to the Housing Element Law and known as the “least cost zoning law.” (See Fonseca v. City of Gilroy, 148 Cal. App. 4th 1174, 1185–86 (2007).) It mandates that localities designate and zone sufficient vacant land for residential development with appropriate standards, in relation to land zoned for non-residential use, to meet the housing needs for all income categories identified in the housing element. “Appropriate standards” are “densities and requirements with respect to minimum floor areas, building setbacks, rear and side yards, parking, the percentage of a lot that may be occupied by a structure, amenities, and other requirements imposed on residential lots pursuant to the zoning authority which contribute significantly to the economic feasibility of producing housing at the lowest possible cost given economic and environmental factors, the public health and safety, and the need to facilitate the development of housing affordable to persons and families of low or moderate income.” (Gov. Code § 65913.1(a)(1).)
Whereas the Housing Element Law covers the content, preparation, adoption, and implementation of the housing element of the general plan, section 65913.1 establishes minimum requirements for a community's zoning laws. Under the Least Cost Zoning Law the City must ensure sufficient vacant land is zoned to accommodate the needs identified in the housing element in relation to zoning of non-residential vacant land. (Fonseca v. City of Gilroy, supra, 148 Cal. App. 4th at 1186.) The Housing Element focuses on identification of sufficient sites for rezoning.

Page J-1.11

CITY OF MENLO PARK
BALLOT MEASURE IMPACT ANALYSIS | Pursuant to Election Code 9212 P9 Although this report concludes that the actual production of housing units during the City’s sixth Housing Element cycle may not be reduced by the Ballot Measure, the City’s long term ability to zone for and produce housing may indeed be impeded by the Ballot Measure and may thus be inconsistent with section 65913.1. Sites that are zoned for single family uses but are vacant are considered by the State to be opportunity sites for denser housing development.3 The Ballot
Measure would prohibit the City from rezoning vacant sites such as the former Flood School Site for denser multifamily developments thus eliminating the City’s ability to impose its inclusionary housing requirements.

The City’s inclusionary housing requirements mandate that multifamily developments with 5-19 units provide 10% of the units at low income or equivalent deed restricted levels. Multifamily developments with 20 or more units must provide 15% of the units at low-income or equivalent deed restricted levels. By eliminating the City’s ability to increase density on such sites, the Ballot Measure eliminates the City’s ability to impose its existing inclusionary housing requirements, thus rendering the production of affordable more infeasible.

In addition to impacting the developability of vacant sites, the Ballot Measure also prohibits the City from rezoning sites with existing single family dwellings. Historically, redevelopment of sites with existing single-family dwellings into denser multifamily dwelling units is less likely that development of vacant sites. However, the Ballot Measure would prohibit the City from considering any rezoning of single-family sites into denser multifamily sites. Absent the Ballot Measure, the City would have the authority (through its police powers related to zoning) to “upzone” single family zoned sites to allow for housing uses that accommodate a greater density of housing units. By prohibiting the City from utilizing such police powers, the Ballot Measure reduces the number of sites within the City upon which denser housing could be located by the City. In doing so, the Ballot Measure renders housing production more infeasible than would be possible without the Ballot Measure.

The Ballot Measure is unlikely to be considered inconsistent with Government Code section 65913.2 which mandates that local agencies are to refrain from imposing criteria for design or improvement for the purpose of rendering infeasible the development of housing, and to refrain from imposing standards or criteria relating to public improvements, such as streets, sewers, fire stations, schools, or parks, that exceed the standards and criteria being applied by the local agency at the time to publicly financed improvements located in similarly zoned districts within the local agency's jurisdiction. The Ballot Measure does not impose development standards that would have the effect of rendering housing production infeasible; rather, the Ballot Measure limits the City’s ability to determine where denser housing may be located.

The City is not currently subject to SB 35 and therefore the impacts on the City’s ability to comply with Government Code section 65913.4 are not discussed in this report. The Ballot Measure is not inconsistent with Government Code section 65913.5 because it does not purport to prohibit SB 10 developments pursuant to the procedures and requirements set forth in section 65913.5.

The Ballot Measure does not directly address religious institution affiliated housing development projects and therefore Government Code section 65913.6 is not discussed in this report. The 3 California Department of Housing and Community Development, Division of Housing Policy Development.

Housing Element Site Inventory Guidebook, Government Code Section 65583.2. https://www.hcd.ca.gov/community-development/housingelement/docs/sites_inventory_memo_final06102020.pdf Page J-1.12

CITY OF MENLO PARK
BALLOT MEASURE IMPACT ANALYSIS | Pursuant to Election Code 9212 P10 provisions of Government Code sections 65913.7 through 65913.11 are not implicated by the Ballot Measure and therefore not discussed in this report.

Impact on Production of Affordable Housing and Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing (AFFH)
The following topic is included at the direction of the City Council on June 28, 2022, and is not specifically identified by Election Code Section 9212.

In the short to medium term during the upcoming eight-year 2023 – 2031 Housing Element time period, the Ballot Measure would very incrementally decrease the City’s ability to provide affordable housing and make progress on AFFH.

Longer term, over the next two or three eight-year housing element time periods, the City’s options would be considerably reduced and it may become increasingly difficult to both increase the production of affordable housing and make needed progress on affirmatively furthering fair housing. Some of the larger single-family properties that are used by religious organizations may, in the future, be considered good sites for housing but would require voter approval.

This could make future Housing Element updates more difficult to achieve compliance with housing requirements set by the State. This in turn would likely result in less affordable housing production which would also increase the difficulty of achieving fair housing outcomes as required under the AFFH requirements.

The City could consider a more widespread approach by adopting incentives to encourage homeowners in single-family areas to provide affordable housing by utilizing the new State laws such as SB 9 for urban lot splits and duplexes or two detached homes on single family properties.

ADUs could be also seen as an avenue for increasing affordable rental housing for smaller households. SB 10 is another new State law that would allow the city to encourage urban infill on any residential parcel with up to 10 units regardless of zoning and made exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).

To further fair housing, results must also include new affordable for-sale housing that can provide a means for previously disadvantaged and discriminated against communities to be able to own property and build generational wealth.

Due to the history of discriminatory housing policy and practice there are significant differences in homeownership rates by race/ethnicity. Across racial/ethnic groups, white households in the Bay Area are most likely to own their homes (63%) — nearly twice as likely as Black households (34%). Homeownership rates are also lower for Latinx (40%), multiracial (45%), and Native American (46%) households.4
4 Bay Area Equity Atlas website. September 21, 2021 post. Accessed on July 7, 2022, https://bayareaequityatlas.org/node/65531.

Page J-1.13

CITY OF MENLO PARK
BALLOT MEASURE IMPACT ANALYSIS | Pursuant to Election Code 9212 P11

2. Internal Consistency of the City’s General and Specific Plans, Housing Element, and Planning and Zoning
The Ballot Measure would affect the internal consistency of the city’s general and specific plans including the adopted 2015 - 2023 Housing Element. The existing General Plan includes several statements that support the continuation of low-density residential neighborhoods, while also allowing and encouraging them to change and evolve to provide varied housing types that would provide more affordable housing. The Land Use element provides the following background text that describes this effort:5
“The city’s long-established residential neighborhoods create the strong sense of community found in Menlo Park. Preserving and building on this foundation while also creating new opportunities for a range of housing types is an important focus of the City’s land use policies.”
If the Ballot Measure passes, any General Plan goal or policy that is found to be inconsistent with the Ballot Measure would need to be removed from the General Plan or modified to be consistent with the Ballot Measure.

GOAL LU-2 Maintain and enhance the character, variety and stability of Menlo Park’s residential neighborhoods.

The Ballot Measure would not conflict with this goal (LU-2) to maintain and enhance residential neighborhoods, although it would limit the ability to provide a variety of housing in R-1-U zoning districts.

Policy LU-2.1 - Neighborhood Compatibility. Ensure that new residential development possesses high-quality design that is compatible with the scale, look, and feel of the surrounding neighborhood and that respects the city’s residential character.

The Ballot Measure may not directly conflict with this policy (LU-2.1) to maintain neighborhood compatibility for those properties that are already developed with existing single-family homes.

However, for those other vacant or non-single-family properties the Ballot Measure would discourage and in many or most instances prevent from developing, it would be inconsistent with this policy that provides guidance for designing new development, including higher density housing, to be compatible with existing neighborhoods.

The Ballot Measure would be inconsistent with the following Housing Element (H) and Land Use Element (LU) goals and policies:
5 Menlo Park General Plan Land Use Element. Adopted November 29, 2016. Pages LU-1 and LU-20.

Page J-1.14

CITY OF MENLO PARK
BALLOT MEASURE IMPACT ANALYSIS | Pursuant to Election Code 9212 P12 Goal H4 - Use Land Efficiently to Meet Community Housing Needs at a Variety of Income Levels, Implement Sustainable Development Practices and Blend Well-Designed New Housing into the Community.

The Ballot Measure would limit the City’s ability to efficiently provide housing at a variety of income levels. Therefore, the Ballot Measure is considered to be inconsistent with this goal (H4).

Policy H1.3 - Neighborhood Responsibilities within Menlo Park. Seek ways, specific to each neighborhood, to provide additional housing as part of each neighborhood’s fair share responsibility and commitment to help achieve community-wide housing goals. This may range from in-lieu fees, secondary dwelling units, higher density housing sites, infill housing, mixed-use or other new housing construction.

The Ballot Measure would make it more difficult for each neighborhood to provide additional housing. The Ballot Measure would remove the ability of existing single-family neighborhoods from fully achieving their fair share of housing responsibilities. The Ballot Measure is inconsistent with this policy (H1.3).

Policy H1.6 - Equal Housing Opportunity. Actively support housing opportunities for all persons to the fullest extent possible. The City will ensure that individuals and families seeking housing in Menlo Park are not discriminated against on the basis of race, color, religion, marital status, disability, age, sex, family status (due to the presence of children), national origin, or other arbitrary factors, consistent with the Fair Housing laws.

The Ballot Measure would be inconsistent with this policy (H1.6) to support housing for all persons to the fullest extent possible. The Ballot Measure would add a financial and governmental constraint on developing housing for the full range of household incomes within the community.

Policy H4.1 - Housing Opportunity Areas. Identify housing opportunity areas and sites where a special effort will be made to provide affordable housing consistent with other General Plan policies. Given the diminishing availability of developable land, Housing Opportunity Areas should have the following characteristics:
a. The site has the potential to deliver sales or rental units at low or below market rate prices or rents.
b. The site has the potential to meet special housing needs for local workers, single parents, seniors, small families or large families. c. The City has opportunities, through ownership or special development review, to facilitate provision of housing units to meet its housing objectives. d. The site scores well for Low Income Housing Tax Credits (LIHTC) subsidy or has unique opportunities due to financing and/or financial feasibility.

Page J-1.15

CITY OF MENLO PARK
BALLOT MEASURE IMPACT ANALYSIS | Pursuant to Election Code 9212 P13 e. For sites with significant health and safety concerns, development may be tied to nearby physical improvements, and minimum density requirements may be reduced.
f. Site development should consider school capacity and the relationship to the types of residential units proposed (i.e., housing seniors, small units, smaller workforce housing, etc. in school capacity impact areas). g. Consider incorporating existing viable commercial uses into the development of housing sites.

The Ballot Measure is inconsistent with this policy (H4.1) as it would limit the city’s ability to identify opportunity sites (including the former Flood School site) for affordable housing.

Policy H4.2 - Housing to Address Local Housing Needs. Strive to provide opportunities for new housing development to meet the City’s share of its RHNA.

In doing so, it is the City’s intent to provide an adequate supply and variety of housing opportunities to meet the needs of Menlo Park’s workforce and special needs populations, striving to match housing types, affordability and location, with household income, and addressing the housing needs of extremely low-income persons, lower income families with children and lower income seniors.

The Ballot Measure is inconsistent with this policy (H4.2) as it would limit the city’s ability provide workforce housing and housing at various income levels.

Policy H4.4 - Variety of Housing Choices. Strive to achieve a mix of housing types, densities, affordability levels and designs in response to the broad range of housing needs in Menlo Park. Specific items include:
a. The City will work with developers of non-traditional and innovative housing approaches in financing, design, construction and types of housing that meet local housing needs.
b. Housing opportunities for families with children should strive to provide necessary facilities nearby or on site.
c. The City will encourage a mix of housing types, including: owner and rental housing, single and multiple-family housing, housing close to jobs and transit, mixed use housing, work force housing, special needs housing, single-room occupancy (SRO) housing, shared living and cohousing, mobile-homes, manufactured housing, self-help or “sweat-equity” housing, cooperatives and assisted living.
d. The City will support development of affordable, alternative living arrangements such as co-housing and “shared housing” (e.g., the Human Investment Project’s — HIP Housing — shared housing program).

The Ballot Measure is inconsistent with this policy (H4.4) as it would limit the density and mix of housing types to certain parts of the city.

Page J-1.16

CITY OF MENLO PARK
BALLOT MEASURE IMPACT ANALYSIS | Pursuant to Election Code 9212 P14 Policy H 4.12 - Fair Share Distribution of Housing throughout Menlo Park.

Promote the distribution of new, higher density residential developments throughout the city, taking into consideration compatibility with surrounding existing residential uses, particularly near public transit and major transportation corridors in the city.

The Ballot Measure would be inconsistent with this policy (H4.12) as it would limit the ability to rezone and distribute higher density housing throughout the City.

Policy LU-1.6 Infill Development Environmental Review. Streamline the environmental review process for eligible infill projects by focusing the topics subject to review where the effects of infill development have not been addressed in a planning level decision or by “uniformly applicable development policies or standards,” in accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15183.3.

Policy S1.D Require Early Investigation of Potential Hazard Conditions.

Require that potential geologic, seismic, soils, and/or hydrologic problems confronting public or private development be thoroughly investigated at the earliest stages of the design process, and that these topics be comprehensively evaluated in the environmental review process by persons of competent technical expertise.

These two policies (LU-1.6 and S1.D) would need to revised to reflect that citizen initiatives and developer-sponsored ballot measures are exempt from CEQA. 6 Impacts on the Other Existing Housing Sites in the Draft Housing Element This topic is included at the direction of the City Council on June 28, 2022, and is not specifically identified by Election Code Section 9212.

One site included in the Housing Element Housing Opportunity Sites List – the former Flood School site (Site No. 38) – would be directly impacted by the Ballot Measure. The site would either be removed from the Housing Element Opportunity Sites List altogether or retained on the list with the expected unit count reduced to zero due to the requirement for a citywide voter approval for the needed land use change.

The other sites within the Housing Element are not expected to be directly affected by the Ballot Measure. However, if the City Council desires to make up the “lost” capacity from the former Flood School site, then the other sites could be impacted if the density was increased on one or more of the other sites.
6 Tuolumne Jobs & Small Business Alliance v. Superior Court (2014) 59 Cal.4th 1029, the California Supreme Court held that CEQA does not apply to “citizen-sponsored” initiatives, even where the initiative is adopted by local officials rather than the voters.

Page J-1.17

CITY OF MENLO PARK
BALLOT MEASURE IMPACT ANALYSIS | Pursuant to Election Code 9212 P15

3. Impact on the Availability and Location of Housing, and the Ability of the City to Meet its Regional Housing Needs (RHNA)
The City of Menlo Park’s useable land area (not including the Baylands and the Bay itself) is 5.49 square miles or 3,517 acres as shown in Table 1 below. The land uses designated by the General Plan provide for 1,929 acres of Residential lands, which is 54.9% of all the land in the City. The two land use categories subject to the Ballot Measure are Very Low Density (168 acres) and Low Density Residential (1,372 acres). These two land uses total 1,540 acres which is 43.8% of all the land in the City. However, these two categories represent 79. 8% of all residential land in the City. The other remaining land uses are summarized in Table 1 as shown below. Housing development is also allowed in the Bayfront and Specific Plan Area.

Table 1 – Land Use Designations7
Land Use
Designation
Acres Percentage of Land
in City
Percentage of Land
subject to Ballot
Measure
Very Low Density
Residential
168 4.8%

43.8%
Low Density
Residential
1,372 39%
Medium Density
Residential
355 10.1% 0%
High Density
Residential
35 1% 0%
Commercial 254 7.2% 0%
Bayfront 511 14.5% 0%
Specific Plan Area 122 3.5% 0%
Parks & Recreation 349 9.9% 0%
Public/Quasi-Public 231 6.6% 0%
Utilities/Railroad
ROW
121 3.4% 0%
TOTAL 3,517 100% 43.8%
Nearly all of the 1,540 acres of Very Low and Low Density Residential lands are currently occupied by single-family housing built primarily over the past 95 years since the City’s incorporation in 1927. However, 53 parcels consisting of 116 acres of land are occupied by other 7 Menlo Park General Plan Land Use Element. Information adapted from Table 1. Page LU-13. November 19, 2016
Page J-1.18

CITY OF MENLO PARK
BALLOT MEASURE IMPACT ANALYSIS | Pursuant to Election Code 9212 P16 uses including a fire station, religious facilities, and vacant sites as shown in Table 4 later in this report. See Figure 1 for a location map of all the land use designations identified in Table 1.

Figure 1: General Plan Land Use Designations
Additionally, capacity for new housing is also located within the ECR/Downtown Specific Plan area and within the Residential Mixed-Use zoned areas within the Bayfront Area that were created as part of the ConnectMenlo General Plan update adopted in 2016.

Table 2 includes the corresponding zoning districts that implement the General Plan land uses affected by the Ballot Measure.

Table 2 – Zoning Districts Affected by the Ballot Measure Land Use
Designation
Corresponding Zoning Districts
Very Low Density
Residential (max. 2.9
DU/ac)
Residential Estate (R-E)
Residential Estate Suburban (R-E-S)
Low Density
Residential (max. 8.9
DU/ac)
Single Family Suburban Residential (R-1-S)
Single Family Suburban Residential (Felton Gables) (R-1-S (FG)) Single Family Urban Residential (R-1-U)
Single Family Urban Residential (Lorelei Manor) (R-1-U (LM)) Page J-1.19

CITY OF MENLO PARK
BALLOT MEASURE IMPACT ANALYSIS | Pursuant to Election Code 9212 P17 Future land use decisions will be constrained by the Ballot Measure. Other cities with similar Measures experience very few if any attempted ballot measures to change land uses due to long timeframes, significant expense and uncertain outcomes. For example, the City of Saratoga’s Measure G passed in March 1996 and required voter approval for any “intensification” of any residential or commercial land use designation. The City of Saratoga staff has confirmed that the City has not experienced any attempted Ballot Measures for land use changes from 1996 to 2022, a period of over 26 years.8
Notably, Saratoga’s Measure G does have a provision that exempt changes to residential densities in order comply with State Housing Element law.9 As a practical matter, most developed single-family parcels occupied by single family homes are unlikely candidates for a significant land use change due to the high value of the existing houses, 10 multiple property owners over a given area and the planning and zoning framework in place that discourages intensification of existing single-family residential areas.

However, a new State law known as Senate Bill 9 (passed in 2021 and effective January 1, 2022) does allow for ministerial approval of lot splits and two-unit development including attached duplexes and additional detached houses on existing parcels with single-family land use designation and/or zoning.

New State laws also encourage creation of Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) by allowing for ministerial approval of both attached and detached ADUs of up to 1,000 square feet and an allowance for an interior Junior ADUs up to 500 square feet.

Additionally, SB 10 provides tools for cities to zone for up to ten homes per parcel on single family zoned parcels in transit rich areas, or urban infill sites. New State housing laws such as SB 9 and SB10 would not be affected by the Ballot Measure.

Effects on Draft 2023 – 2031 Housing Element
As previously stated, passage of the Ballot Measure would result in the removal of the Former Flood School from the Draft Housing Element Opportunity Sites List. This 2.5-acre site is listed as Site No. 38 within the Draft Housing Element. The City Council directed, at their June 6, 2022 meeting, to allow for a base density of 20 dwelling units per acre with an allowance for State density bonus law of up to 80% which would result in a total maximum of 90 new dwelling units on the Flood School site. These density parameters would be consistent with the stated goal of the Ravenswood City School District to construct up to 90 affordable dwelling units for teachers and staff from the School District.
8 City of Saratoga. Communication with City Manager. July 9, 2022. 9 City of Saratoga Land Use Element. Adopted June 6, 2007. Page 5. Also see Measure G here:
https://saratoga.granicus.com/MetaViewer.php?view_id=10&clip_id=731&meta_id=30811. Pages 2, 5 and

6. 10 Zillow. The typical home value of homes in Menlo Park is $3,130,968. This value is seasonally adjusted and only includes the middle price tier of homes. Menlo Park home values have gone up 18.2% over the past year. Accessed on July 6, 2022, https://www.zillow.com/menlo-park-ca/home-values/.

Page J-1.20

CITY OF MENLO PARK
BALLOT MEASURE IMPACT ANALYSIS | Pursuant to Election Code 9212 P18 The requirement to secure voter approval would not necessarily make the project impossible to achieve but it would create a significant barrier or constraint to development. As a result the Housing Element would not be able to utilize the site to show housing capacity under the City’s housing allocation for the 6th Cycle Housing Element as shown below in Table 3:

Table 3 – City of Menlo Park Regional Housing Needs Allocation11 Income Category Percentage of Area
Median Income
(AMI)
Number of Units
Required
Very Low 0% to 50% 740
Low 51% to 80% 426
Moderate 81% to 120% 496
Above Moderate Over 120% 1,284
TOTAL 2,946
Adequate capacity for 2,946 new housing units must be demonstrated by the Housing Element for the 2023 – 2031 time period. Cities that cannot demonstrate meeting or exceeding their housing requirements during the eight-year planning period may risk not having their housing element certified by HCD. If HCD does not certify a city’s housing element within 180 days after the deadline for final submission of a housing element to HCD, a city will be required to complete all contemplated rezoning within one year of housing element due date instead of three years.

Certain rezoning is required to be contemplated in a city’s housing element in order to ensure the city has appropriate zoning in place to meet its regional housing needs allocation.

In Menlo Park, as set forth above, the City must plan for and produce 2,946 housing units within the 6th Cycle housing element period (2023-2031.)
As a result of “credit” provided for housing projects within the existing development process or the “pipeline” as well as the permitting of expected ADUs during the 6th Cycle housing element period, Menlo Park’s adjusted or “net” housing units that is must produce is calculated to be 1,493 affordable units at the very ow, low and moderate income categories. The Draft Housing Element includes a combination of strategies that results in up to 4,000 new housing units. This number may be reduced as the Draft Housing Element goes through the public review and adoption process in late 2022 and early 2023.

Amongst these strategies is a rezoning of the Flood School site in the manner described above.

As currently proposed in the City’s Draft Housing Element, the contemplated rezoning of the site would result in up to 90 very low, and moderate income housing units thereby contributing to the City’s requirement of 1,493 affordable units. The Draft Housing Element has an adjusted number 11 Association of Bay Area Governments. Final Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) Plan: San Francisco Bay Area, 2023-2031. Adopted December 2021, Updated March 2022. https://abag.ca.gov/sites/default/files/documents/2022-04/Final_RHNA_Methodology_Report_2023- 2031_March2022_Update.pdf
Page J-1.21

CITY OF MENLO PARK
BALLOT MEASURE IMPACT ANALYSIS | Pursuant to Election Code 9212 P19 of 85 very low, and moderate income housing units that are subject to change upon submittal to HCD.

The other single-family residential zoned parcels currently within the Opportunity Sites list in the City’s Draft Housing Element and would thus be subject to the Ballot Measure prohibition on City rezoning include:
 Site 40(c) R-1-S - 2650 Sand Hill Road – St. Bede’s Episcopal Church  Site 39(c) R-1-S - 2250 Avy Avenue – St. Denis Church These two sites are owned and utilized by religious organizations. Inclusion in the Housing Element was predicated not on general plan and zoning changes but through possible utilization of new State laws AB 1851 (2020) and AB 2244 (2022) that allow religious facilities to build housing by reducing by up to 50% of existing or required new parking lots without having to replace the reduced parking. Both of these laws modify section 65913.6 of the California Government Code. The Ballot Measure would require voter approval for any housing proposal beyond these State law parameters or the existing single family zoning designations.

Possible Effects On Future Housing Element Planning Efforts Looking further out into the future over the next 10, 20 or 30 years, the Ballot Measure would generally direct all new housing into non-single-family areas including Downtown, along El Camino Real, properties zoned Residential Mixed-Use (R-MU) within the Bayfront area, and redevelopment of existing commercial retail, office and industrial lands The Ballot Measure would incrementally reduce the ability of the city of meet future state housing requirements. This is due to the 53 identified developable sites that could not be considered for conversion, there is an increment of future, otherwise potentially viable housing sites that could not be considered.

4. Impacts on Public, Vacant Land, and Other Sites Owned by Nonprofit Institutions
The following topic is included at the direction of the City Council on June 28, 2022, and is not specifically identified by Election Code Section 9212.

The Ballot Measure would affect properties that do not currently have single family homes located on them but are developed with a variety of other uses. These properties are affected differently based on their existing land uses currently on the property.

The following Table 4 provides a summary of all the non-single-family properties that would be affected by the Ballot Measure including the number and acreage of the parcels of each type. The land uses are ranked top to bottom based on acreage. The non-single-family planned properties most affected in terms of acreage of land are the educational facility, religious facility, golf course, schools and vacant land categories. All of the residential categories combined equal 14.9 acres.

Narrow, undevelopable parcels and single-family lots with two or less existing dwelling units were removed. A map of these sites is shown in Figure 2 below and a complete list of sites is included as Attachment B.

Page J-1.22

CITY OF MENLO PARK
BALLOT MEASURE IMPACT ANALYSIS | Pursuant to Election Code 9212 P20 Table 4 – Summary of Non-Single-Family Properties Affected by the Ballot Measure Type of Land Use Number of Parcels Total Acres Average Parcel Size (Acres)
Educational Facility 1 41.0 41.0
Religious Facilities 14 34.8 2.5
Schools 8 18.4 2.3
Golf Course 3 10.2 3.4
Vacant Land 7 3.7 0.5
Civic Facility 1 2.0 2.0
Water Company 2 1.3 .6
Residential: 5 or
more units
1 1.6 1.6
Residential: Combo
of Unit Types
4 .8 0.2
Residential: Duplex 4 .7 0.2
Residential:

Fourplex
3 .7 0.2
Convalescent
Homes
3 0.7 0.2
Highways & Streets 2 .2 .1
TOTALS 53 116.1 4.2
Page J-1.23

CITY OF MENLO PARK
BALLOT MEASURE IMPACT ANALYSIS | Pursuant to Election Code 9212 P21 Figure 2: Non-Single-Family Properties Affected by the Ballot Measure Impact of the Ballot Measure on the Uses of Vacant Parcels of Land Based on an analysis of the City’s Geographic Information System (GIS) data there are 7 vacant parcels that would be affected by the Ballot Measure. These parcels are considered vacant in that there are no existing structures on the properties and would be affected by the Ballot Measure due to the existing single-family zoning. These parcels comprise 3.7 acres and are located throughout the City. These parcels range is size from 3,500 square feet to 1.9 acres. The average parcel size is approximately 0.5 acre. Similar to other redevelopment sites, the development potential of these sites in terms of higher density housing would be decreased as a result of the Ballot Measure.

Religious and other Institutional Facilities
There are several religious facilities or other institutional uses within the city that have a singlefamily General Plan and/or Zoning designation. Examples of these include St. Denis Church and Church of the Nativity. These facilities are permitted as a conditional use within the single-family zoned areas by both the existing General Plan policies and the zoning regulations. Furthermore, religious facilities can utilize recent State laws AB 1851 and AB 2244 to develop housing.

Therefore, these sites would not be directly affected by the Ballot Measure.

However, if the organizations that own the land decided to sell the land, the new use would be limited to a continuation of the existing use, another conditionally allowed use (public utilities, Page J-1.24

CITY OF MENLO PARK
BALLOT MEASURE IMPACT ANALYSIS | Pursuant to Election Code 9212 P22 private schools, churches, child day care centers, and home occupations) or redevelopment under the single-family zoning regulations. Redevelopment of the site requiring a change of use, including, but not limited to, higher density housing, would not be permitted unless the General Plan and Zoning designation changes were approved by a city-wide vote.

Menlo Park Fire Station No. 1
The existing fire station located at 300 Middlefield Road is located on property with a Low-Density Residential land use designation and within a single-family zoning district. The Menlo Park Fire Protection District (MPFPD) has communicated to the City in the past that they plan on replacing the aging fire station with a new structure at some point in the future. The City has previously informed the MPFPD that the new fire station would require a rezone from single-family residential to Public Facilities (P-F).

The existing R-1-S zoning of 300 Middlefield Road allows for single-family dwellings, ADUs, accessory buildings and accessory structures as permitted uses, and public utilities, private schools and churches, childcare centers and home occupations as conditionally permitted uses.

Fire stations are not an enumerated use in the R-1-S zoning district. A fire station, similar to other public uses and other facilities operated by other governmental agencies, is more consistent with the P-F (Public Facilities), which provides greater flexibility with respect to development standards than the R-1-S zoning district. The existing use and building are considered to be “legal, nonconforming”. Nonconforming uses and buildings are regulated by Chapter 16.80 of the Menlo Park Zoning Code. While the use is able to remain in its current operation, any future redevelopment or expansion of the building or intensification of the site would need to conform to the zoning district. Rezoning to P-F would allow for such modifications, but the rezoning would require voter approval to change from the current R-1-S zoning district.

The Ballot Measure would result in added time and costs for the fire district because of the requirement for a city-wide vote on the zoning change from R-1-S to P-F. The amount of added costs is unknown but would likely include marketing, advertising, public relations and public outreach events. Even with a well-financed Ballot campaign, there is no guarantee of approval of the project by the voters.

5. Impact on Open Space, Existing Business Districts, and Developed Areas Designated for Revitalization
The city has no agricultural lands so the Ballot Measure would have no impact on this land use.

To the extent that the Ballot Measure reduces or eliminates new, higher density forms of housing in or near existing single-family areas, this could put increasing pressure on the City to use open space lands for housing to meet future State housing requirements.

There is no direct impact on existing business districts from the Ballot Measure, however similar to open space, business properties may face a higher rate of conversion to mixed-use or residential only uses that could decrease the amount of available commercial space. Many downtowns suffer from a lack of modern retail or office space. Larger buildings may be converted to mixed use with smaller but more functional commercial spaces that attract new tenants.

This process of ongoing land use changes could also result in more customers and smaller but more modern and better functioning commercial space that could support the revitalization of Page J-1.25

CITY OF MENLO PARK
BALLOT MEASURE IMPACT ANALYSIS | Pursuant to Election Code 9212 P23 existing commercial areas. To the extent the Ballot Measure directs housing development Downtown, it could increase pedestrian traffic and improve the business climate.

6. Fiscal Impacts
Near Term Fiscal Impacts/Impacts Associated with the Flood School Site In the near term, the most tangible impact of the Ballot Measure that relates to fiscal impacts would be to prevent the City from rezoning the Flood School Site from R-1-U to a higher residential density zoning district to allow for multifamily residential development without voter approval. The Ravenswood City School District owns the property and received proposals from a number of developers for the site. The City has been informed by the School District that it is currently negotiating with a developer. The School District has publicly stated the site is intended to be used for affordable housing to serve District teachers and school staff. A formal development application has not yet been submitted by the School District to the City; as such, the City has no formal information on a development proposal.

Under current zoning and general plan policies, a rezoning would be required for the School District to develop the site at density greater than 8.9 DU/ac. The requirement for voter approval for the rezoning could prevent multifamily residential development from occurring on the site, due either to a lack of voter approval or a decision by the School District to not pursue development at the site because of the cost and uncertainty associated with getting voter approval. The School District has indicated that it is not interested in selling the site or transferring it to another governmental entity, and that it would likely be used for other District purposes if the District is not able to develop the site for multi-family housing. The District has cited a bus or van depot for District use as the most plausible alternative for the site. 12 The Ballot Measure may prohibit the
School District from using the site for a bus or van depot without voter approval.

Current Fiscal Impacts of the Flood School Site
In its current state, the Flood School Site has minimal impact on the City of Menlo Park General Fund. The site is owned by a public entity and therefore is not subject to property tax. The site is also vacant, and therefore does not generate any sales tax from activities on site or from worker or resident spending. The site also does not generate any other revenues that residents and workers tend to generate, such as charges for service, fines and forfeitures, or utility user taxes.

Furthermore, there are no residents or workers on the site to generate a demand for City services and therefore little to no City service cost associated with the site.

Potential Fiscal Impacts of the Flood School Site if Developed as Multifamily Housing If the Flood School Site were to be developed as higher density affordable housing, as would be possible in the absence of the Ballot Measure, the development would likely have a net negative fiscal impact on the City of Menlo Park General Fund. This is consistent with findings from several 12 City of Menlo Park website. Questions and responses summary from May 3, 2022, Flood School Site community meeting (Issue date: July 1, 2022). Accessed on July 7, 2022, https://beta.menlopark.org/files/sharedassets/public/community-development/documents/flood-schoolsite-community-meeting-questions-and-responses-summary.pdf.

Page J-1.26

CITY OF MENLO PARK
BALLOT MEASURE IMPACT ANALYSIS | Pursuant to Election Code 9212 P24 recent fiscal impact analyses that were prepared for planned and proposed residential development projects in the Menlo Park, including the 111 Independence Drive, Menlo Uptown, Menlo Portal, and Menlo Flats projects, all of which were either residential projects or mixed-use projects with a residential component.13
Fiscal impact analyses demonstrate that each of these projects is projected to have a negative net fiscal impact on the Menlo Park General Fund.

While the specifics of any future residential development at the Flood School Site are unknown, it is possible that a future development on the site would qualify for a property tax exemption as a 100% affordable housing development. A property tax exemption would lead to a larger negative fiscal impact from redevelopment of the site than would be typical of residential development that is not exempt from property tax, as the exemption would prevent the collection of property tax revenue to partially offset the cost of providing services to new residents.

Separate from the direct fiscal impacts associated with any future residential development on the Flood School Site, an affordable housing development on the site could have indirect positive fiscal impacts for the City of Menlo Park by providing workforce housing. To the extent that the site provides housing for the local workforce, it could help to support the attraction and retention of employers in Menlo Park that have an overall positive fiscal impact. Local employers may have a positive impact on the City’s General Fund by generating revenue from property tax, retail or business-to-business sales tax, transient occupancy (i.e., hotel room) tax, utility user tax, and other sources.

In addition, workers tend to create a lower level of demand for City services compared to residents, resulting in lower municipal service costs compared to residential development.

Furthermore, if the site provides housing for local teachers and/or school staff it could assist with School District employee attraction and retention, which could have a positive impact on school quality. Improvements in school quality tend to lead to increased property values, which would generate additional property tax revenue to the City of Menlo Park as residential properties in districts with improved school quality are sold over time.

Potential Fiscal Impacts of the Ballot Measure Associated with the Former Flood School Site If the Ballot Measure prevents the development of multifamily housing on the former Flood School site, one of two potential scenarios could occur:
 Scenario A: The affordable units that would have been developed on the Flood School site shift to other sites within Menlo Park. In this case, the fiscal impacts associated with these units would be similar to the fiscal impacts if the units were developed on the former Flood School site.
 Scenario B: The affordable units that would have been developed on the former Flood School site do not shift to other sites within Menlo Park, and fewer affordable units are developed in Menlo Park. If the Ballot Measure results in a decrease in the overall number of affordable units in Menlo Park, this would prevent the fiscal impacts associated with developing the site for multifamily housing.
13 City of Menlo Park website. Community Development Department, Approved Projects. Accessed July 19, 2022, https://beta.menlopark.org/Government/Departments/CommunityDevelopment/Projects/Approved-projects.

Page J-1.27

CITY OF MENLO PARK
BALLOT MEASURE IMPACT ANALYSIS | Pursuant to Election Code 9212 P25  As described above, affordable housing on the Flood School Site would likely have a negative net fiscal impact from the housing itself. This negative fiscal impact could be fully or partially offset by indirect positive fiscal impacts from non-residential uses that are supported by the availability of workforce housing and/or increases in property tax revenues resulting from improved School District worker retention and resulting improvements in school quality.
 In this scenario, the overall net fiscal impact of preventing the development of multifamily housing at the Flood School Site could be either positive or negative compared to a scenario in which multifamily housing is developed on the site. The net impact would depend on whether indirect positive fiscal impacts outweigh the negative direct fiscal impacts of the units.

Medium- and Long-Term Fiscal Impacts of the Ballot Measure on all Affected Sites Over the medium and long term, the Ballot Measure could prevent the City from rezoning singlefamily sites to allow for higher-density residential use or non-residential uses. Most sites that are zoned for single-family residential are currently developed with detached single-family homes and would be unlikely to be rezoned and redeveloped regardless of the outcome of the Ballot Measure.

However, there are some sites in Menlo Park with single-family zoning that are vacant, developed with multifamily uses, or developed with non-residential uses, which could be opportunity sites for multifamily development or non-residential development in the future.

If the Ballot Measure passes, it would likely reduce development opportunities for these sites, either because of a lack of voter approval or because the property owners would be deterred from pursuing development due to the expense and uncertainty of going through the voter approval process.

Potential Fiscal Impacts from Limiting Rezoning of Single-Family Sites to Allow Multifamily Uses As stated above, the Ballot Measure would potentially limit new multifamily development in singlefamily residential areas but would likely have a limited impact on the overall number of housing units that can be built in Menlo Park because the City will need to rezone other areas to enable multifamily development as necessary to meet RHNA requirements under State law. Therefore, passage of the Ballot Measure would likely limit the number of new multifamily units that could be built on certain single-family zoned sites, but would have little to no effect on the overall number of multifamily units that could be built in Menlo Park over the long term.

The fiscal impacts that new multifamily units will have on the City of Menlo Park’s General Fund will likely be relatively similar regardless of the specific location within Menlo Park where the units are built. Future development in Menlo Park will consist largely of infill projects in areas that are already served by infrastructure and City services. As a result, the cost to provide City services to new residents can be anticipated to increase approximately in proportion with increases in the number of persons served citywide, with minimal variation based on the specific location in Menlo Park where new housing is built. New 100 percent affordable developments are generally exempt from property tax, and therefore do not generate property tax revenue for the City of Menlo Park regardless of their location in the City. For new multifamily residential developments that are subject to property tax, the City’s General Fund revenues could vary somewhat based the tax rate area (TRA) where new housing is built because the City’s share of property tax revenue Page J-1.28

CITY OF MENLO PARK
BALLOT MEASURE IMPACT ANALYSIS | Pursuant to Election Code 9212 P26 differs between tax rate areas. However, this variation is generally small compared to the overall fiscal impact associated with new residential development.

The fiscal impacts to the City could also vary on a site-specific basis depending on the current use of specific properties where new housing would be built. For example, a new market-rate development on a site that currently has a very low assessed value would generate a larger increase in property tax revenue compared to a similar development on a site that currently has a higher assessed value. These site-specific differences are difficult to predict given the range of potential outcomes from the Ballot Measure. However, these differences are likely to be small in relation to the overall fiscal impact associated with new multifamily residential development, and are unlikely to affect whether the overall impact is positive or negative.

Potential Fiscal Impacts from Limiting Rezoning of Single-Family Sites to allow Non-Residential Uses
To the extent that the Ballot Measure prevents rezoning of single-family sites to another zoning district to allow non-residential uses, this action could have a positive, negative, or neutral fiscal impact on the City of Menlo Park. While many non-residential uses generate a positive fiscal impact for the City of Menlo Park, others have a negative or neutral impact. The overall fiscal impact to the City would depend on the specific mix of non-residential uses that would be prevented as a result of the Ballot Measure.

7. Impact on Funding for Infrastructure of all Types
The impact that the Ballot Measure would have on infrastructure funding, costs, and savings will depend largely on the extent to which the Ballot Measure affects the amount of new development (including both residential and non-residential development) in Menlo Park, compared to a scenario in which the Ballot Measure does not pass. Future development opportunities in Menlo Park will consist largely of infill development projects on sites that are served by existing transportation, schools, parks, open space, and utilities, whether on single-family sites or elsewhere in the City. As discussed above, passage of the Ballot Measure could reduce the amount of future development of multifamily projects on sites that currently have the single-family zoning designation. However, any impact would likely be small because the City will continue to be required to identify sites for multifamily residential development in order to meet its 6th cycle Housing Element RHNA requirements, no net loss requirements during the 6th cycle, and RHNA requirements in future Housing Element cycles. Rather, the Ballot initiative would likely shift a greater proportion of the future development of multifamily residential units to areas that are not currently zoned single-family.

There are no similar statutory requirements that the City identify sites for non-residential development, and therefore the Ballot Measure could reduce the overall quantity of future nonresidential development that could occur in Menlo Park. In part, this is because any potential future rezonings of single-family sites to allow non-residential uses would require voter approval.

In addition, the Ballot Measure would limit rezoning of single-family sites to allow multifamily uses, which could increase pressure to rezone other non-residential sites in Menlo Park to allow multifamily development in order to meet RHNA requirements. This could result in sites that might otherwise be developed as nonresidential uses instead being developed for residential use, Page J-1.29

CITY OF MENLO PARK
BALLOT MEASURE IMPACT ANALYSIS | Pursuant to Election Code 9212 P27 thereby limiting the number of sites available for new nonresidential development. In this case, the Ballot Measure would decrease the amount of new nonresidential development in Menlo Park.

Transportation
The impact that the Ballot Measure would have on roads and transportation infrastructure would depend in part on whether the Ballot Measure leads to an overall decrease in development in Menlo Park compared to a scenario in which the Ballot Measure does not pass. While the Ballot Measure is unlikely to have a significant impact on the amount of residential development in the Menlo Park, it may lead to a decrease in the amount of future nonresidential development in the City, as discussed above.

The City of Menlo Park has a transportation impact fee to finance roadway and transportation infrastructure improvements. This fee is subject to the California Mitigation Fee Act, and as such can only be used to cover the cost of the infrastructure needs that result due to new development.

Therefore, any impact of the Ballot Measure on the collection of fees from this source would be accompanied by a commensurate impact on the cost of necessary transportation improvements.

In addition to impact fees, the City funds street, sidewalk, and transportation improvements using funds from the State of California, parking permit sales, special gas tax levies, countywide sales tax levies, and grants. Developers may also construct on-site or off-site transportation improvements as a requirement for new development. Passage of the Ballot Measure is unlikely to have a significant impact on these funding sources. However, some of the funds available from these sources are contingent on a local jurisdiction having a compliant housing element. If the Ballot Measure were to impede the City’s ability to have a compliant housing element this could reduce the funding available for transportation infrastructure improvements.

Parks and Open Space
Since the Ballot Measure is unlikely to have a significant impact on the amount of residential development in Menlo Park over the long term on a citywide basis, it is not likely to have a significant impact on costs or funding for parks and open space. In contrast to transportation infrastructure, parks and open space tend to be used more intensively by people that live nearby, with comparatively little impact from people that work nearby. Because the Ballot Measure would be unlikely to have a significant impact on the number of residential units built in Menlo Park, it would also be unlikely to have a significant impact on costs and funding for parks and open space.

While there may be some slight differences in park usage depending on where new residential development occurs in the City, these differences would be difficult to predict based on what is currently known about the impacts that the Ballot Measure might have on the location of new housing in Menlo Park, and these differences are likely to have a minimal impact on overall costs.

Stormwater
The Ballot Measure is unlikely to have a significant impact on stormwater infrastructure funding or costs. The City of Menlo Park assesses a storm drainage fee on new development at a rate of $150 per residential unit or $0.24 per square foot of impervious site square footage. However, this fee only applies to developments that result in a net increase in impervious site square Page J-1.30

CITY OF MENLO PARK
BALLOT MEASURE IMPACT ANALYSIS | Pursuant to Election Code 9212 P28 footage. Many new developments in Menlo Park result in a decrease in impervious site square footage, reducing impacts on the City’s stormwater system, and therefore are not required to pay the fee. As discussed above, the Ballot Measure is unlikely to significantly impact the amount of future residential development in Menlo Park due to the City’s RHNA obligations, but may reduce nonresidential development because nonresidential land could be converted to residential use due to constraints on single-family properties. Nevertheless, any impacts of the Ballot Measure on costs or funding for the City’s stormwater system are likely to be small.

In addition to any impact fees, improvements to the City’s stormwater system are funded through the General Fund, which could be impacted by the Ballot Measure as described in the fiscal impact section of this report. Other potential funding sources include grants and developing benefit assessment districts. However, the specific impacts that the Ballot Measure could have on any potential future benefit assessment districts are currently uncertain.

Impacts of the Ballot Measure on Public School Facilities Elementary and middle school students living in Menlo Park attend one of four school districts, all of which serve children in kindergarten through eighth grade: Menlo Park City School District, Las Lomitas Elementary School District, Ravenswood City School District, or Redwood City School District as shown on Figure 3. The impact that the Ballot Measure would have on each of these districts would depend on the extent to which passage of the Ballot Measure would change the amount of new development that would occur in each district. The Sequoia Union High School District serves high school students throughout Menlo Park.

Page J-1.31

CITY OF MENLO PARK
BALLOT MEASURE IMPACT ANALYSIS | Pursuant to Election Code 9212 P29 Figure 3: Menlo Park Area School Districts and Facility Sites The Ballot Measure could affect the need for school facilities to the extent that it could affect the number of housing units in each of the school districts that serve Menlo Park, with an associated impact on the number of elementary, middle, and high school students living in each district.

Recent enrollment growth has created capacity constraints in the Sequoia Union High School District and the Menlo Park City School District. Both of these districts have recently developed new school facilities to accommodate student enrollment growth. A new high school, TIDE Academy, opened in August 2019 with capacity for approximately 400 students. One other high school in the Sequoia Union High School District, Menlo-Atherton High School, currently serves students residing in Menlo Park and was over capacity as of the 2020-2021 school year. The Menlo Park City School District constructed the new Laurel School Upper Campus to provide increased enrollment capacity in 2016 and previously expanded facilities and increased capacity at Hillview Middle School in 2012. Despite the construction of these new school facilities, the District has indicated that all of its schools are currently at or near maximum programmatic capacity. The Menlo Park City School District anticipates it will be challenging to accommodate the students that could be added to the District through implementation of the City’s 2023-2031 HEU. None of the other elementary school districts in Menlo Park currently face capacity constraints.

Page J-1.32

CITY OF MENLO PARK
BALLOT MEASURE IMPACT ANALYSIS | Pursuant to Election Code 9212 P30 Potential Near-Term School Facility Cost Impacts.

In the near term, the most significant impact of the Ballot Measure as it relates to school facilities would be that it would likely prevent the development of higher density housing on the former Flood School site, and result in lower student enrollment for the Ravenswood City School District.

Compared to a scenario in which the Ballot Measure does not pass, this could reduce the number of students living in the Ravenswood City School District due to the loss of potential residential units at that site. This could shift at least some of these residential units and students to other sites, and potentially other elementary school districts, within the City.

If the Ballot Measure prevents development of multifamily residential units at the former Flood School site, this would likely lead to less enrollment in the Ravenswood City School District because the site would not have as many residential units that could house families of students.

This impact would not affect the District’s need for school facilities, as the District has existing capacity regardless of whether residential units are built at the former Flood School site.

If the reduction of residential units at the former Flood School site results in a shifting of those units to other sites within Menlo Park, this could impact the need for facilities in other elementary school districts that serve the City. Preventing the development of residential units at the former Flood School site could create additional demand for multifamily residential development on sites elsewhere in Menlo Park where voter approval would not be required. The Menlo Park City School District covers a substantial portion of Menlo Park and therefore might absorb at least some of any shift in demand for multifamily residential development. Because the Menlo Park City School District is currently facing capacity constraints, this could exacerbate the need for new or expanded school facilities in the School District.

Preventing the redevelopment of the former Flood School site could potentially reduce the need for new or expanded school facilities within the Sequoia Union High School District. If preventing the redevelopment of the site leads to a reduction in residential units in Menlo Park overall, this would reduce the number of students in the Sequoia Union High School District, thereby reducing any impact on the District’s facilities. If demand for these units was instead shifted to other sites within Menlo Park, high school students living in those units would attend the Sequoia Union High School District regardless of the location of new residential units within the City.

Potential Near-Term School Facility Funding Impacts.

All of the school districts in Menlo Park levy school impact fees on new development projects to fund the construction or reconstruction of school facilities. Under State law, the maximum school impact fee is $4.08 per square foot for residential development and $0.66 per square foot for nonresidential development. Sequoia Union High School District collects these fees for all of the elementary feeder school district’s within SUHSD’s boundaries. Under the existing fee sharing agreement, elementary schools can collect up to 60% of the maximum fees if the school district provides a justification study. Table 6 below shows the current school impact fee schedule for each of the elementary school districts in Menlo Park.

Page J-1.33

CITY OF MENLO PARK
BALLOT MEASURE IMPACT ANALYSIS | Pursuant to Election Code 9212 P31 Table 6 – Current School Impacts Fees by Elementary School District (ESD) Rate ($/sf) ESD Share ($/sf) SUHSD Share
($/sf)
Las Lomitas
Residential $4.08 $2.016 $2.064
Commercial $0.66 $0.324 $0.336
Menlo Park City
Residential $4.08 $2.274 $1.806
Commercial $0.66 $0.366 $0.294
Ravenswood
Residential $4.08 $1.780 $2.300
Commercial $0.66 $0.282 $0.378
Redwood City
Residential $4.08 $2.274 $1.806
Commercial $0.66 $0.366 $0.294
Impact fees are often insufficient to construct new or expanded school facilities to accommodate increases in enrollment. School Districts typically depend on voter-approved local bonds to construct new or expanded school facilities.

If the Ballot Measure were to prevent the construction of multifamily units at the former Flood School site, this would mean that the Ravenswood City and Sequoia Union High School Districts would not collect impact fees from the development of the site. If these units were not developed elsewhere in Menlo Park, this would lead to an overall reduction in impact fee revenues for both districts. However, because there would be no housing on the site, there would also be no need for impact fee revenue to address facility needs associated with an increase in student enrollment.

If these units were developed elsewhere in Menlo Park, the Sequoia Union High School District would collect approximately the same amount of impact fee revenue compared to a scenario in which multifamily residential units are developed on the former Flood School site. However, because the Sequoia Union High School District gets a differing share of the impact fee revenue depending on the elementary and middle school district where new development occurs, there Page J-1.34

CITY OF MENLO PARK
BALLOT MEASURE IMPACT ANALYSIS | Pursuant to Election Code 9212 P32 would be some slight variation in the High School District’s funding for new facilities depending on the location of new development. The effect on impact fee revenue for the other districts would depend on which districts would receive more residential units, if any.

Potential Medium to Long Term Impacts on School Facilities and Costs.

The medium to long term impact that the Ballot Measure could have on school facility costs and funding is currently uncertain. As noted elsewhere in this report, the Ballot Measure is unlikely to have a significant impact on the amount of future residential development in Menlo Park because the City will be required to plan to accommodate residential growth to meet its Housing Element requirements under State law. However, the Ballot Measure would likely impact the location of new residential development in Menlo Park, which could impact the distribution of students between elementary and middle school districts in Menlo Park and the impact fee revenue generated by future residential development in each district. The impacts that the Ballot Measure would have on each specific elementary and middle school district in Menlo Park would depend on how the Ballot Measure would influence the distribution of residential development between school districts over time, which is currently unknown. The Ballot Measure would be unlikely to have a significant impact on the Sequoia Union High School District in terms of facility impacts or impact fees from residential development because it serves the entire City. .

However, school districts in Menlo Park could experience a decrease in impact fee revenue from non-residential development due to the Ballot Measure, compared to a scenario in which the ballot measure does not pass. As discussed above, the Ballot Measure could essentially require the City to increasingly incentivize residential development on sites where voter approval would not be required, possibly prioritizing the development of residential units over nonresidential development to a greater extent than would be required in the absence of the Ballot Measure.

Compared to a scenario in which the Ballot Measure does not pass, this would reduce impact fee revenue from nonresidential development and could have little to no effect on the impact fee revenue collected from, or the number of students generated by, residential development. The result in this case would be an overall decrease in the amount of impact fee revenue (i.e., the cumulative total from both residential and nonresidential development) collected for each new student.

8. Impact on the Community’s Ability to Attract and Retain Business and Employment
The Ballot Measure could impact Menlo Park’s ability to attract and retain businesses due to potential impacts on the availability of housing for the local workforce as well as potential impacts on the availability of sites for nonresidential development.

Potential Workforce Housing Impacts
The Ravenswood City School District, has expressed interest in using the former Flood School site for the development of affordable multifamily housing for teachers and District staff, which would likely be prevented if the Ballot Measure passes as described above. In May 2022, the District conducted a survey of teachers and staff and found that 43 percent of respondents were Page J-1.35

CITY OF MENLO PARK
BALLOT MEASURE IMPACT ANALYSIS | Pursuant to Election Code 9212 P33 considering leaving the District because of the cost of housing or the length of their commute, while over 60 percent responded that housing would make them much more likely to stay with the District.14 By potentially impacting the District’s ability to use the former Flood School Site for multifamily housing, the Ballot Measure could impact the District’s worker attraction and retention efforts.

In addition to potential impacts on the Ravenswood City School District, the Ballot Measure could impact the availability of workforce housing citywide. If District staff were able to live in a future housing development on the former Flood School site, this could reduce the extent to which District staff rely on other affordable units in Menlo Park, such as affordable units built pursuant to the City’s inclusionary ordinance or units owned and operated by nonprofit affordable housing developers, making affordable units elsewhere available for other members of the City’s workforce. In addition, a potential project at the former Flood School site would likely provide a preference for District teachers and staff but would be available to others, including other members of the City’s workforce, if not fully occupied by District employees.

Moreover, the Ballot Measure could prevent other single-family sites from being rezoned in the future to allow multifamily housing that could house local workers. Although most sites that are zoned single-family are currently developed with detached single-family homes and would be unlikely to be rezoned and redeveloped regardless of the outcome of the Ballot Measure, there are some sites in Menlo Park with single-family zoning that are vacant or developed with multifamily or nonresidential uses that could be opportunity sites for multifamily development in the future. Due to the high cost of housing in Menlo Park, the Ballot Measure could make it more difficult for local employers to attract and retain workers by impeding the development of higher density housing, especially affordable housing.

Potential Impacts on the Availability of Sites for Nonresidential Development If the Ballot Measure passes, it would reduce the likelihood that single-family sites would be rezoned to allow nonresidential uses in the future, either because of a lack of voter approval or because the property owners would be deterred from pursuing development due to the expense and uncertainty of going through the voter approval process. As noted above, most sites that are zoned single-family are currently improved with single-family homes and would be unlikely to be rezoned and redeveloped regardless of the outcome of the Ballot Measure due to the high cost of acquiring single-family homes in Menlo Park and challenges associated with assembling individual single-family parcels for redevelopment. However, some sites in Menlo Park with a single-family zoning are vacant or developed with multifamily or nonresidential uses such as the Menlo Park Fire Protection Station No. 1 located at 300 Middlefield Road, the City’s Seminary Oaks Park, and St. Patrick’s Seminary. The Ballot Measure could prevent these sites from being rezoned to align with their uses without voter approval and potentially deter or delay facility improvements or redevelopment of a site with similar uses. The Ballot Measure would likely impede rezoning of these sites to allow nonresidential uses, at least in some instances, which 14 City of Menlo Park website. Questions and responses summary from May 3, 2022, Flood School Site community meeting (Issue date: July 1, 2022). Accessed on July 7, 2022, https://beta.menlopark.org/files/sharedassets/public/community-development/documents/flood-schoolsite-community-meeting-questions-and-responses-summary.pdf.

Page J-1.36

CITY OF MENLO PARK
BALLOT MEASURE IMPACT ANALYSIS | Pursuant to Election Code 9212 P34 could limit the number of sites available in Menlo Park for attracting new businesses and employment.

Effects on nonresidential rezonings could also impact existing employers in Menlo Park. Some nonresidential uses that are currently located on single-family sites may become obsolete over time and will require a rezone to undertake needed facilities improvements. If the Ballot Measure prevents rezoning of these properties, it could cause existing local employers to leave Menlo Park to secure more appropriate facilities.

9. Impact on Racial and Economic Equity
The following topic is included at the direction of the City Council on June 28, 2022, and is not specifically identified by Election Code Section 9212.

Background
Government policies, exclusionary tactics, and disparate treatment have long been key components of the housing system which encouraged spatial inequality based on race. For decades, systematic redlining, restrictive covenants in private land sales, and residential segregation restricted many groups, particularly communities of color, from accessing opportunity and meaningful fair housing choice.

To address this, Congress established the Fair Housing Act in 1968 to prohibit discrimination in the sale, rental, and financing of housing based on race, religion, and national origin. Over time the law expanded its protections to include discrimination based on sex, disability, and familial status. The law also introduced the need to go beyond just prohibiting discrimination to instead creating real housing choice by affirmatively furthering fair housing.

However, while federal mandates prohibited overt forms of housing discrimination, residential segregation has remained through the use of more subtle, discriminatory methods that reinforce patterns of segregation that persist in California today. AB 686 introduces strong State policy to ameliorate this issue.

Assembly Bill 686 (2018) Housing Discrimination: Affirmatively Further Fair Housing is a bill which amended the government code relating to housing, so that it is in compliance with the federal Fair Housing Act.

AB 686 creates new requirements for all State and local agencies (including, but not limited to, all cities, counties, cities and counties, and housing authorities) to ensure that their laws, programs and activities affirmatively further fair housing, and that they take no action inconsistent with this obligation.

When housing choice and access are limited because of someone’s race, sexual orientation, or disability status, there are far-reaching impacts on access to job opportunity, access to quality education, and on mental and physical health. As indicated by the California’s Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD):

Page J-1.37

CITY OF MENLO PARK
BALLOT MEASURE IMPACT ANALYSIS | Pursuant to Election Code 9212 P35 “Past and present discriminatory policies and practices, including long-term disinvestment, have resulted in neighborhoods with concentrated poverty and poor housing stock, limited access to opportunity, unsafe environmental conditions, underfunded schools, dilapidated infrastructure, and other disproportionately experienced problems. In addition, governmental policies have subsidized the development of segregated, high-resourced suburbs in metropolitan areas by constructing new highway systems—often through lower income communities of color— to ensure access to job opportunities in urban centers.”
15 AFFH seeks to combat housing discrimination, eliminate racial bias, undo historic patterns of segregation, and lift barriers that restrict access in order to foster inclusive communities and achieve racial equity, fair housing choice, and opportunity for all Californians.

Unfortunately, there is a long history of planning and zoning in the United States being used as an enforcement mechanism for residential segregation based primarily on race as well as incomes. Land use planning and the implementation of zoning from the early part of the 20th century has had a specific aim to exclude Black people from most areas of many cities and counties. As noted by Richard Rothstein in the: Color of Law:
“To prevent lower-income African Americans from living in neighborhoods where middle-class whites resided, local and federal officials began in the 1910s to promote zoning ordinances to reserve middle-class neighborhoods for single-family homes that lower-income families of all races could not afford.” 16.

Specifically considering the Menlo Park history, local segregation and creation of isolated pockets of communities of color have been perpetuated as documented by the local community group, MenloTogether:
“In the mid 20th century Black families were barred from buying homes in Menlo Park and other white suburbs through racial covenants that restricted the purchase of homes by people of color. Redlining also restricted who could secure home loans. Later, real estate agents used discriminatory real estate tactics like “blockbusting” to scare white residents into selling their homes at a discount. Meanwhile, Black people in San Francisco and Oakland were encouraged to move in so that real estate agents could make a profit from buying at panic sales prices from white families and selling at inflated prices to Black families. With the economic boom since 2009, many Belle Haven families have been displaced by newcomers more equipped to pay rising market prices and rents.” 17
15 California Department of Housing and Community Development. Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing:

Guidance for All Public Entities and for Housing Elements. April 2021 update. Page 5, https://www.hcd.ca.gov/community-development/affh/docs/affh_document_final_4-27-2021.pdf#page=7. 16 Rothstein, Richard. The Color of Law: A Forgotten History of How Our Government Segregated America. Liveright Publishing Corporation, 2018. Page 48. 17 Menlo Together website. The Color of Law, Menlo Park Edition: The Local History of Housing Segregation. Accessed on July 12, 2022, https://www.menlotogether.org/2019/11/27/the-color-of-lawmenlo-park-edition-overcoming-systemic-segregation/.

Page J-1.38

CITY OF MENLO PARK
BALLOT MEASURE IMPACT ANALYSIS | Pursuant to Election Code 9212 P36 A continuation of disparate treatment of different areas based on racial and economic factors is evidenced in this background text from the City’s current Land Use Element adopted in 2016:
“FOCUS AREAS: The City Council identified the area generally between US 101 and the Bay adjoining the Belle Haven Neighborhood, where the transition from traditional industrial uses was well underway, as the primary location for potential change in the city over the coming decades.”18
The land use decisions around the 2016 ConnectMenlo effort were not necessarily explicitly based on racial and economic biases. However, the planning of large new development capacity nearest to the existing community with the least amount of political influence and means of effecting municipal decision-making results in inequity that has been acknowledged by members of the public and public officials during the current public process for the 6th Cycle Housing Element update.19
Nearly all new development was planned for this one area of the city where the only nearby singlefamily neighborhood is the predominately lower-income and community of color of Belle Haven.

Within the Bayfront Area, consisting of 14.5% of the land area of the City, the General Plan made the following allowance for new development:
• New commercial development of 2.3 million square feet in addition to 1.8 million square feet from the prior General Plan (4.1 million square feet total). • New residential development up to 4,500 new homes were planned in addition to 1,000 homes previously planned for (5,500 new homes total).
• New hotel rooms up to 400.20
This amount of new growth is an order of magnitude greater than the development planned throughout the remainder of the city comprising over 85% of all the land available for development.

For example, the Downtown/ECR Specific Plan covers 3.5% of the City, and is the only area with a specific plan calling for coordinated growth. As the remainder of the city is nearly “built-out” under the existing General Plan, the Specific Plan area serves nearly all new planned development capacity for the remainder of the city. The plan has the following growth “caps”:
• New commercial development of 330,000 square feet.
• New residential development up to 680 new homes were planned. • New hotel rooms up to 38021
The single-family districts are predominantly white, with the exception of the Belle Haven neighborhood in Council District 1. The Ballot Measure would effectively prohibit new affordable housing units in single-family areas. Affordable units will then have to be located elsewhere in the City including in the Bayfront area near Belle Haven which has the most capacity for affordable units because of higher existing densities. The Ballot Measure can then be seen to continue the 18 Menlo Park Land Use Element. Adopted November 29, 2016. Page I-7. 19 City of Menlo Park. 6th Cycle Housing Element: 2023-2031. Public Review Draft. Published May 11, 2022. https://beta.menlopark.org/files/sharedassets/public/community-development/documents/housingelement-annual-progress-reports/2023-2031-menlo-park-housing-element-public-review-draft.pdf 20 Menlo Park Land Use Element. Adopted November 29, 2016. Page LU-11. 21 Menlo Park El Camino Real/Downtown Specific Plan. Adopted July 12, 2012. Pages A4 and C20.

Page J-1.39

CITY OF MENLO PARK
BALLOT MEASURE IMPACT ANALYSIS | Pursuant to Election Code 9212 P37 same cycle of putting the highest densities and most affordable units in the area of the community that is predominately lower income, marginalized, and communities of color.22 To the extent that the Ballot Measure discourages, delays and/or prevents affordable housing to be provided in or near existing single-family areas throughout the entire city, it will function as a continuation of this historic use of strict land use controls to perpetuate unequal and unfair governmental aims by enforcing and “locking in” residential racial and economic segregation.

Impact of the Former Flood School Site on Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing Development of affordable housing at the former Flood School site, as envisioned by the Ravenswood City Elementary School District, would help to affirmatively further fair housing in Menlo Park. HCD and the State Tax Credit Allocation Committee (TCAC) convened an independent group of organizations and research institutions under the umbrella of the California Fair Housing Task Force, which produces an annual set of Opportunity Maps. The maps identify areas within every region of the state “whose characteristics have been shown by research to support positive economic, educational, and health outcomes for low-income families – particularly long-term outcomes for children”23TCAC and HCD created these “Opportunity Maps,” using reliable and publicly available data sources to derive 21 indicators to calculate Opportunity Index scores for Census tracts in each region of California. The TCAC/HCD Opportunity Map categorizes Census tracts into the following five groups based on the Opportunity Index scores:
• Highest Resource
• High Resource
• Moderate Resource/Moderate Resource (Rapidly Changing) • Low Resource
• High Segregation & Poverty
Before an area receives an Opportunity Index score, some Census tracts are filtered into the High Segregation & Poverty category. The filter identifies Census tracts where at least 30 percent of population is below the federal poverty line and there is a disproportionate share of households of color. After filtering out High Segregation and Poverty areas, the TCAC/HCD Opportunity Map allocates the 20 percent of tracts in each region with the highest relative Opportunity Index scores to the Highest Resource designation and the next 20 percent to the High Resource designation.

The remaining non-filtered tracts are then evenly divided into Low Resource and Moderate Resource categories.

As illustrated in Figure 4, the former Flood School site is located in a high resource area, with high access to opportunity for residents that live there. Furthermore, the site is located in one of the highest-income Census Block Groups in the City, with an estimated median annual household income over $175,000 as of 2019, as shown in Figure 5. Figure 6 shows that the site is located in one of the areas of Menlo Park with the lowest proportions of households with incomes below the federal poverty level. As shown in Figure 7, the site is also located outside of the areas of 22 ABAG/MTC Housing Needs Data Report: Menlo Park, April 2021; U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 5-Year Data (2015-2019)
23 California Fair Housing Task Force. December 2020. Methodology for the 2021 TCAC/HCD Opportunity Map. Available at: https://www.treasurer.ca.gov/ctcac/opportunity/2021-hcd-methodology.pdf Page J-1.40

CITY OF MENLO PARK
BALLOT MEASURE IMPACT ANALYSIS | Pursuant to Election Code 9212 P38 Menlo Park that have the most significant existing concentrations of non-White residents, though it has a relatively racially and ethnically diverse population.

Due to these factors, developing affordable housing on the former Flood School site would help to improve access to opportunity for lower-income households by providing affordable housing in a high-resource area. Affordable housing on the site would also help to overcome existing patterns of economic and racial ethnic segregation by providing affordable housing in an area of Menlo Park where lower-income households and non-White residents are currently underrepresented. By preventing or delaying the construction of affordable housing on the former Flood School site, passage of the Ballot Measure would have a negative impact on racial and economic equity and affirmatively furthering fair housing.

Impact of Other Single-Family Sites on Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing In addition to impacting the former Flood School Site, the Ballot Measure would impact the likelihood of future development on other single-family sites throughout Menlo Park in a manner that could have a negative impact on racial and economic equity and affirmatively furthering fair housing. While most sites that are zoned single-family are currently developed with detached single-family homes and would be unlikely to be rezoned and redeveloped regardless of the outcome of the Ballot Measure, there are some sites in Menlo Park with a single-family zoning that are vacant or developed with multifamily and non-residential uses that could be opportunity sites for multifamily development in the future.

As shown in Table 7 below, single-family sites that are not developed with detached single-family homes and could be potential future sites for multifamily development are concentrated in areas of Menlo Park with high access to opportunity, existing high-income populations, and higher proportions of White residents. These sites are comprised of 53 parcels totaling 116 acres. Of these parcels, those that are located in high-resource areas account for 95 percent of the total acreage, those that are located in Census block groups with an annual household income of $100,000 or more account for 94 percent of the total acreage, and those are located in Census block groups where White Non-Hispanic residents comprise more than 50 percent of the population account for 97 percent of the total acreage.

These parcels include 23 parcels that are at least half an acre in size, which is a threshold used by HCD to screen sites for the viability of affordable housing development. Of these 23 parcels, all but two are in high resource areas and block groups with an annual median household income of $100,000 or more. All but one of the parcels that are at least half an acre in size are in block groups where White Non-Hispanic residents comprise more than 50 percent of the population.

This data indicates that passage of the Ballot Measure would primarily impact the potential for future development of multifamily housing on single-family sites in areas of Menlo Park where the development of multifamily housing could help to improve racial and economic equity and affirmatively further fair housing.

Page J-1.41

CITY OF MENLO PARK
BALLOT MEASURE IMPACT ANALYSIS | Pursuant to Election Code 9212 P39 Table 7 – AFFH Characteristics of Sites Zoned Single-Family that are Vacant or Developed with Multifamily or Non-Residential Uses
Total # of
Parcels
Total
Acreage
Average
Parcel
Size
(acres)
Maximum
Parcel
Size
(acres)
# of Parcels
Larger than 0.5
acres
Access to Opportunity
Low or Moderate
Resource Areas
12 5.6 0.5 2.9 2
High or Highest
Resource Areas
41 110.3 2.7 41.0 21
Income Characteristics (Median Annual Household Income) <$100,000 10 6.9 0.7 2.9 2
$100,000 or more 43 109.0 2.5 41.0 21
Race and Ethnicity Characteristics (% White Non-Hispanic Households) 50% or less 8 4.0 0.5 2.9 1
>50% 45 111.9 2.5 41.0 22
More generally, Figures 4, 5, 6, and 7 below demonstrate that the areas of Menlo Park with a single-family land use designation (see Figure 1, General Plan Land Use Designations) are primarily located in areas of Menlo Park where the population is predominantly non-Hispanic White and where households tend to have high incomes, as well as in high-resource and higherresource areas.

Passage of the Ballot Measure would effectively prohibit affordable units in single-family areas, which would require that affordable units be located elsewhere in the City. Other areas where affordable units could be located include the Bayfront Area, which has existing capacity for affordable units due to higher density zoning and would not be impacted by restrictions on rezoning under the Ballot Measure. As a result, other than the Downtown, the Ballot Measure would redirect the highest residential densities and largest quantities of affordable units into an area of Menlo Park that is predominately lower income and communities of color.

Page J-1.42

CITY OF MENLO PARK
BALLOT MEASURE IMPACT ANALYSIS | Pursuant to Election Code 9212 P40 Figure 4: 2021 TCAC/HCD Opportunity Map by Census Tract, Menlo Park Sources: California Tax Credit Allocation Committee; HCD; U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey, 2014-2018 five-year sample data; BAE, 2021.

Figure 4 shows “low resource”, “moderate resource”, “high resource”, and “highest resource” areas across Menlo Park based on maps published by HCD and the California Tax Credit Allocation Committee. The maps identify the extent to which Census Tracts throughout the state have characteristics that have been shown to support positive economic, educational, and health outcomes for low-income families.

Page J-1.43

CITY OF MENLO PARK
BALLOT MEASURE IMPACT ANALYSIS | Pursuant to Election Code 9212 P41 Figure 5: Distribution of Median Household Income by Block Group, Menlo Park Sources: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey, 2015-2019 five-year sample period; BAE, 2021.

Figure 5 shows the median annual household income in each Census Block Group in Menlo Park based on estimates from the 2015-2019 US Census American Community Survey.

Page J-1.44

CITY OF MENLO PARK
BALLOT MEASURE IMPACT ANALYSIS | Pursuant to Election Code 9212 P42 Figure 6: Poverty Status by Census Tract, Menlo Park
Sources: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey, 2015-2019 five-year sample period; BAE, 2021.

Figure 6 shows the proportion of households with incomes below the federal poverty threshold in each Census Tract in Menlo Park based on estimates from the 2015-2019 US Census American Community Survey.

Page J-1.45

CITY OF MENLO PARK
BALLOT MEASURE IMPACT ANALYSIS | Pursuant to Election Code 9212 P43 Figure 7: Census Block Groups by Percent Non-White, Menlo Park Note: Includes all categories except White non-Hispanic persons.

Sources: U.S. Census Bureau, 2020 Decennial Census; BAE, 2021.

Figure 7 shows the proportion of the population in each Census Block Group in Menlo Park that identifies with any racial or ethnic group other than White non-Hispanic/Latino, based on estimates from the 2015-2019 US Census American Community Survey. This includes Black or African American, Native American Indian or Alaska Native, Asian, and Native Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander residents, as well as individuals identifying with Two or More Races or Some Other Race. It also includes all residents that identify as Hispanic or Latino, regardless of race.

Page J-1.46

CITY OF MENLO PARK
BALLOT MEASURE IMPACT ANALYSIS | Pursuant to Election Code 9212 P44 Cost Burdened Households
Cost Burden, as defined by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, considers housing to be affordable for a household if the household spends less than 30% of its income on housing costs. A household is considered “cost-burdened” if it spends more than 30% of its monthly income on housing costs, while those who spend more than 50% of their income on housing costs are considered “severely cost-burdened.”
In Menlo Park, 17.3% of households spend 30-50% of their income on housing, while 16.3% of households are severely cost burden and use the majority of their income for housing. Lowincome residents are the most impacted by high housing costs and experience the highest rates of cost burden. Spending such large portions of their income on housing puts low-income households at higher risk of displacement, eviction, or homelessness.

There is a distinct racial disparity of cost-burdened households, as 50% of Black or African American households and 55% of Hispanic or Latinx households are cost burdened, while 31% of Asian/API households and 29% of white households are cost burdened. 24 This disparity and displacement risk was cited overwhelmingly as a concern during the outreach process for the housing element. The Housing Element acknowledges the historic and presentday patterns of segregation that have led to disproportionate housing needs for communities in low-access to opportunity areas and the displacement risk felt by the communities in these areas, which are located north of U.S. 101. Housing production that can allay this risk and provide greater numbers of affordable units is crucial to affirmatively furthering fair housing in Menlo Park.

The Ballot Measure would be expected to have a disparate impact on Black and Brown communities of color. The lack of affordable housing opportunities in high opportunity areas would likely continue into the future as a result of the added Ballot box barrier to adding new housing in the existing single-family, primarily White-occupied areas of the city.

State of California Housing Oversight
To the extent the Ballot Measure is viewed by the general public, housing advocates and/or housing developers as discouraging or preventing new housing to be built in or near existing single-family neighborhoods, additional State-level oversight of the City of Menlo Park may be invited by the Ballot Measure.

The California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) has a new unit devoted to enforcement of housing element law. This new unit is called the Housing Accountability Division of HCD. As part of the 2021-2022 State budget, HCD received additional staff to increase its accountability efforts. This led to the creation of the Housing Accountability Unit (HAU). The purpose of this new unit is to increase housing accountability efforts by the State. The HAU is charged with holding jurisdictions accountable for meeting their housing element commitments and complying with applicable State housing laws. Violations of these State laws may lead to 24 ABAG/MTC Housing Needs Data Report: Menlo Park, April 2021; U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 5-Year Data (2015-2019)
Page J-1.47

CITY OF MENLO PARK
BALLOT MEASURE IMPACT ANALYSIS | Pursuant to Election Code 9212 P45 consequences including revocation of housing element certification and/or referral to the California Office of the Attorney General.25

10. Educational Equity - Impact on Ravenswood City School District (RCSD)
The following topic is included at the direction of the City Council on June 28, 2022, and is not specifically identified by Election Code Section 9212.

There are four separate elementary (Kindergarten through 8th grade) school districts that serve Menlo Park. Table 8 below summarizes some key data points for each school district:

Table 8 – Menlo Park K-8 School Districts at a Glance26 School
District
(S.D.)
Students No. of
Schools
Percent
Proficient
- Reading
Percent
Proficient
- Math
Free or
Reduced
Lunch (%
of
students)
Average
Teacher
Salary
Teachers
in 1st/2nd
Year
Expenses
per
Student
Las
Lomitas
Elem. S.D.
1,208 2 86% 82% 4.2% $142,523 20.6% $24,418
Menlo Park
City Elem.

S.D.
2,922 4 83% 82% 7% $124,317 6.3% $20,859
Ravenswo
od Elem.

S.D.
2,061 6 18% 12% 89.1% $82,367 31.3% $14,889
Redwood
City Elem.

S.D.
7,196 12 54% 46% 57.4 $87,396 23.7% $12,362
As shown by the table above, there is a considerable disparity between the Ravenswood City School District (RCSD) and the Las Lomitas and Menlo Park City School Districts. The RCSD has much lower test scores in both reading and math, and a very high percentage of students receiving free or reduced lunch. The teachers are paid much lower in the Ravenswood district, a 25 HCD website. Accountability and Enforcement. Accessed on July 6, 2022, https://www.hcd.ca.gov/accountability-and-enforcement. 26 Source: Niche.com. Accessed on July 6, 2022.

Page J-1.48

CITY OF MENLO PARK
BALLOT MEASURE IMPACT ANALYSIS | Pursuant to Election Code 9212 P46 higher percentage of 1st and 2nd year teachers and much less budget available per student. Similar disparities exist between the Ravenswood Elementary School District and the Redwood City School District, though to a lesser extent. Ravenswood Elementary School students are diverse and multilingual as noted by the District on their website:

Ravenswood is proud of our diversity, with 99% of district students identifying as Latinx, African American, Pacific Islander, and/or multiple races - over half of whom are multilingual learners.27
As evidenced by the Tinsley Voluntary Transfer Program, a 1985 settlement order, the educational achievement problem in RCSD is long standing. The settlement order is the result of a 1976 lawsuit that aims to correct educational inequities due to racial isolation of minority students living in RCSD. Under the Voluntary Transfer Program, 24 minority students in RCSD are allowed to transfer to school districts in nearby communities with higher proportions of nonminority students. The six districts include: Las Lomitas, Menlo Park City, Palo Alto Unified, Portola Valley, San Carlos, and Woodside. Through the transfer program, non-minority students may also transfer into the RCSD.28
The former Flood School site is owned by the RCSD and the District is planning on entering into a long-term lease with a housing developer. The envisioned project would be 100% affordable housing for teachers and staff from RCSD as well as staff from other school districts located in the County.29 Under the long-term lease, the developer would provide a payment of approximately $500,000 to the District per year. This represents about 1-2% of the District’s annual budget. As noted by the District, the intent is for the funds to go towards closing the salary gap in salaries, especially teaching salaries, between Ravenswood and surrounding districts. The District also sees this as an opportunity to both address funding inequities with the other districts in the County and to address retention of existing teachers and staff.30 The school district conducted a survey of their staff in May 2022 and reported the following results:
 2% of respondents do not have access to reliable housing, and only a third of respondents report having a “safe, secure and affordable housing option”  43% of respondents are considering leaving the district because of the cost of housing or the length the of their commute
 Over 70% of respondents indicated an interest in workforce housing; over 60% of those responded that housing would make them “much more likely” to stay with RCSD 27 Ravenswood City Elementary School District website. About Ravenswood. Accessed on July 7, 2022, http://www.ravenswoodschools.org/About-Ravenswood/index.html 28 Menlo Park City School District website. Tinsley Volunteer Transfer Program. Accessed on July 18, 2022, https://district.mpcsd.org/Page/336. 29 Ravenswood City School District website. Former Flood School Fact Sheet. Accessed on July 12, 2022, http://www.ravenswoodschools.org/About-Ravenswood/Facilities/Facilities-Planning/AdditionalInformation-About-the-Former-Flood-School-Site-/index.html. 30 City of Menlo Park website. Questions and responses summary from May 3, 2022, Flood School Site community meeting (Issue date: July 1, 2022). Accessed on July 7, 2022, https://beta.menlopark.org/files/sharedassets/public/community-development/documents/flood-schoolsite-community-meeting-questions-and-responses-summary.pdf.

Page J-1.49

CITY OF MENLO PARK
BALLOT MEASURE IMPACT ANALYSIS | Pursuant to Election Code 9212 P47  85% of respondents had incomes and household sizes that would make them eligible for affordable housing; of those, a further 85% are interested in workforce housing RCSD finds they would need over 200 units of affordable housing to meet the needs of staff.

Impact on Ravenswood City School District’s Strategic Plan and Budget The Ballot Measure is likely to have a negative impact on the Ravenswood City School District’s Strategic Plan, budget outlook, and staff recruitment and retention. Priority 5 in the Ravenswood City School District’s 2019 Five-Year Strategic Plan is to “manage people, time and budget responsibly, equitably and strategically in service of students.” One of the milestones that the Strategic Plan identifies based on Priority 5 is to “conduct a thorough analysis of district properties to identify opportunities for lease revenue….” Accordingly, in 2021 the District identified two properties that offer opportunities for lease revenue: 2120 Euclid Avenue in East Palo Alto and the former Flood School site in Menlo Park.

According to a September 9, 2021 presentation provided by the Ravenswood City School District, lease revenue from these two properties is key to ensuring that the Ravenswood City School District’s budget is in line with other districts in San Mateo County. The presentation stated that the District was anticipated to receive a record amount of funding in the 2021-2022 school year, though much of the funding was due to one-time stimulus funds and a significant donation to the Ravenswood Education Foundation.

Even with these one-time funds, after adjusting for student needs the District’s per-student funding levels would be approximately average for the County, approximately $4,700 less than the Menlo Park City School District, approximately $10,100 less than the Las Lomitas School District, and approximately $3,700 higher than the Redwood City School District. Without the one-time funds, the District would have the lowest per-pupil revenue in the County. The presentation highlighted lease revenue from the Euclid Avenue site and the former Flood School site as a key source of ongoing revenue to support the District’s financial stability and to allow the District to compete financially with nearby affluent communities.

According to an email that the Ravenswood City School District submitted to the Menlo Park City Council on April 22, 2022, the District is currently in exclusive negotiations with Alliant Strategic Development regarding a potential ground lease for the former Flood School site, with a plan to construct up to 90 residential units on the site. If the Ballot Measure were to prevent the development of these units on the former Flood School site, it would have a direct negative impact on the implementation of the District’s Strategic Plan and on District’s ability to lease the site as a potential source of District revenue.

The Ballot Measure is also likely to have a negative impact on the Ravenswood City School District’s ability to recruit and retain staff. As noted above, the District conducted a survey of teachers and staff in May 2022 and found that 43% of respondents were considering leaving the District because of the cost of housing or the length of their commute, while over 60% responded that housing would make them much more likely to stay with the District. By potentially impacting the District’s ability to use the former Flood School site for multifamily housing, the Ballot Measure could impact the District’s worker attraction and retention efforts.

Page J-1.50

CITY OF MENLO PARK
BALLOT MEASURE IMPACT ANALYSIS | Pursuant to Election Code 9212 P48 The Ballot Measure would definitely delay or prevent the District’s plans for the former Flood School site, possibly make it prohibitively expensive to garner voter approval and possibly be rejected at the ballot box. In any likely scenario, the Ballot Measure represents a significant obstacle that the planned housing project would have to overcome. This has the effect of continuing the inequity that the school district operates under and has a disparate impact on the low-income community of color that is served by the District.

11. Impact on Climate and Traffic Congestion
The following topic is included at the direction of the City Council on June 28, 2022 and is not specifically identified by Election Code Section 9212.

Analysis Scope
This analysis consists of a qualitative analysis on Vehicle-Miles Travelled (VMT), which is the CEQA transportation impact metric, as well as a qualitative analysis on intersection level of service (LOS), which is a non-CEQA operational metric maintained by the City of Menlo Park.

Menlo Park is currently preparing its HEU, which plans for the rezoning of the former Flood School site, currently zoned single-family, to allow multifamily housing. With this initiative, that rezoning may not occur. No other single-family parcels are planned for rezoning within the HEU. Beyond the planning horizon of the HEU, which is year 2031, there could be demand to rezone other single-family parcels that are not currently developed with single-family homes. There are 53 such parcels within Menlo Park, and with this initiative, that rezoning may not occur. The transportation impacts of these two scenarios are discussed below.

Flood School Site
The former Flood School site at 320 Sheridan Drive is the only single-family zoned opportunity site planned for rezoning within the proposed HEU. The Flood School site is assumed with 90 units in the Draft Housing Element. If the Ballot Measure passes and voters do not approve of the proposed development at the former Flood School site, this site would not be developed with higher density residential uses. Without the former Flood School site, the proposed HEU would include adequate units that would still allow the City to meet RHNA 6th cycle Housing Element requirements.

VMT and LOS Effect of the Ballot Measure on the RHNA 6th Cycle VMT and LOS analysis of the proposed HEU have separately been analyzed. The proposed HEU at a plan-level would lower the citywide average residential VMT per resident. However, the VMT analysis acknowledged that not all parcels within the HEU are located in low residential VMT areas, and some may trigger a VMT impact at a project-level. The former Flood School site is located in a high VMT area and may trigger a VMT impact at a project-level, depending on the characteristics of the development. If there is an impact, it may also be able to be mitigated by a transportation demand management plan for the development. Therefore, if the 85 units associated with this site were removed from the HEU or relocated to another site, the VMT Page J-1.51

CITY OF MENLO PARK
BALLOT MEASURE IMPACT ANALYSIS | Pursuant to Election Code 9212 P49 associated with the HEU may be slightly lower, though because of the small number of units and trips, it would be by a minimal and unnoticeable amount.

The development of 85 residential units on the former Flood School site would generate roughly 30 to 35 trips during the AM and PM commute peak hours, based on the Institute of Transportation Engineers Trip Generation Manual, 11th Edition. Whether these units remained at the Flood School site, were removed from the HEU, or reallocated elsewhere in the City, this small number of trips would not be noticeable on the surrounding roadway network. The proposed HEU’s LOS analysis would not change in any noticeable way.

Parcels with Non-Single-Family Uses, and Not in the Draft Housing Element Aside from the Flood School site, there are 52 other single-family-zoned parcels in the City that currently have non-single-family uses (see Figure 2). These include churches, golf courses, nursing homes, higher-density residential complexes, schools, and vacant lots. These sites are not identified as opportunity sites in the proposed HEU to meet the RHNA 6th cycle requirements.

However, there is likely to be continued demand for new housing in Menlo Park beyond the current HEU, beyond year 2031. If current single-family properties cannot be rezoned, there are two potential future scenarios: housing goals will be met on other sites, or housing goals will not be met. These scenarios are discussed below.

If the City Can Meet Future RHNA Requirements Without These Sites As discussed above, future RHNA requirements may require these sites to be rezoned to allow for higher residential density. The proposed Ballot Measure would limit residential growth on these parcels if voters do not approve any further development on these parcels. In such a scenario, the City may need to further up-zone other parcels in the City or convert non-residential zoned parcels to allow for residential land use. Sites that can accommodate further up-zoning or rezoning are mostly located near Downtown and El Camino Real, Sharon Heights, and in the northern section of the City (north of U.S. 101 and the Bohannon Business Park District). Sites near El Camino Real are in low residential VMT areas, whereas sites in the northern section of the City are in high residential VMT areas. Therefore, in this scenario, the Ballot Measure’s effect on VMT is likely minimal as the two general areas that can accommodate further residential growth average each other out from a residential VMT perspective.

From a LOS perspective, a higher concentration of traffic in one area could lead to further traffic congestion, compared to if traffic were dispersed across the 53 single-family sites.

If the City Cannot Meet Future RHNA Requirements Without These Sites If the Ballot Measure passes and voters do not approve any non-single-family residential development on these 53 sites, for this analysis, it is possible to consider that the City may not have a sufficient number of parcels (up-zoning, rezoning or not) to meet future RHNA requirements. Any RHNA-required units that cannot be accommodated in the City would still likely occur given the housing demands, just now outside of the City. This would worsen the City’s jobshousing balance and would result in more people commuting into or through the City for jobs. The Page J-1.52

CITY OF MENLO PARK
BALLOT MEASURE IMPACT ANALYSIS | Pursuant to Election Code 9212 P50 increase in trip lengths would result in a potentially significant negative impact on regional VMT and local traffic congestion
Because of significant employment levels in Menlo Park and surrounding communities, a reduction in housing potential in Menlo Park would not result in a reduction in traffic volume on City streets. Given that housing needs would be met elsewhere, Menlo Park would experience an increase in in-commuting to jobs within the City and through traffic from nearby cities. Also, longer trip lengths would provide fewer options for alternative modes of transportation, such as bike, walk or local transit. Finally, reduction of housing opportunities away from employment sites would likely increase traffic congestion and safety issues in other cities due to the expected increase in trip lengths and times.

Transportation Analysis Conclusion
The transportation analysis for the proposed Ballot Measure focused on its potential VMT and LOS effects for the City’s future residential development in anticipation of future RHNA requirements. Overall, the following qualitative conclusions can be made if the Ballot Measure passes:
• There would be minimal and likely unnoticeable changes to citywide average residential VMT per resident in the near term.
• There would be minimal and likely unnoticeable effects on traffic congestion and intersection operations in the near term or far term.
• If the Ballot Measure resulted in less citywide residential development in the far term, there would be a negative effect on regional VMT due to resulting longer trip lengths.

Page J-1.53

INITIATIVE MEASURE TO BE DIRECTLY SUBMITTED TO THE VOTERS The people of the City ofMenlo Park do ordain as follows:

SECTION 1. Title.

A Citizen-Sponsored Initiative Measure to Amend the Land Use Element of the General Plan to Prohibit the City Council of the City of Menlo Park from ReDesignating or Re-Zoning Certain Properties Designated and Zoned for Single Family Detached Homes.

SECTION 2. Findings and Purpose.

A. Findings. The people of the City of Menlo Park ("City") find and declare the following:

1. Menlo Park is a vibrant city that is prized for its livable residential neighborhoods, active commercial districts, and hub of investment and scientific innovation.

2. The City's General Plan notes that the "existing pattern of land use in Menlo Park ... is highly valued by the community." Accordingly, the General Plan designates certain areas of the City for Very Low Density and Low Density Residential and this is an important part of the City's existing pattern of land use.

3. The Land Use Element of the City's General Plan is organized around nine (9) "Guiding Principles." These Guiding Principles were established by the Menlo Park community to "describe the kind of place that community members want Menlo Park to be." Those principles include "protecting the character of residential neighborhoods." Guiding Principle 7-"Complete Neighborhoods and Commercial Corridors"-provides that "Menlo Park neighborhoods are complete communities, featuring well integrated and designed development along vibrant commercial corridors with a live-work-play mix of community-focused businesses that conveniently serve adjacent neighborhoods while respecting their residential character."

4. The People of Menlo Park further express their strong desire that the City,pursue opportunities to develop badly-needed housing, including affordable housing, that is consistent with the residential character of these neighborhoods (in compliance with any applicable, controlling state law requirements and mandates, which may allow for multiple units of low-density housing on lots with "single family" zoning), rather than converting residential properties in these neighborhoods to different uses such as industrial, commercial, office, mixed use, or high-density residential, which would create traffic and otherwise strain the infrastructure of existing neighborhoods that were designated as low density, residential-only uses.

5. Accordingly, the people of the City of Menlo Park desire to amend the General Plan to enact new policies to ensure that, as the City continues to grow and attract new industry, businesses, and residents, new development remains consistent the General Plan's stated goal of protecting the existing pattern of land use in the City and the character of its existing residential neighborhoods.

6. This Initiative will only impact those properties that are designated in the City's General Plan as Very Low Density Residential or Low Density Residential, and/ or zoned with a corresponding zoning designation, as of April 15, 2022. It will not impact properties that are not designated, as of April 15, 2022, Very Low Density Residential or Low Density Residential and/or zoned with a corresponding zoning designation. The relevant very low and low density residential land use designations are provided in Section 3, below, and the relevant very low and low density residential zoning designations are attached hereto for informational purposes as Exhibit B. In order to illustrate the location of properties in the City currently assigned these very low and low density residential zoning designations, a map showing the City's zoning, as depicted on 1 ATTACHMENT A
Page J-1.54
Page J-1.55
Page J-1.56
Page J-1.57
Page J-1.58
Page J-1.59
Page J-1.60
Page J-1.61
Page J-1.62
Page J-1.63
Page J-1.64
Page J-1.65
Page J-1.66
Page J-1.67
Page J-1.68
Page J-1.69
Page J-1.70
Page J-1.71
Page J-1.72
Page J-1.73
APN LotArea (SF) Lot Area (AC) SitusStreetNo SitusStreetName PUCCodeDescription Notes 062460090 1787861.0 41.0 320 MIDDLEFIELD Educational Facility St. Patrick's Seminary 061370030 418269.0 9.6 250 OAK GROVE Church Vallombrosa Center 074451030 344206.9 7.9 Golf Course Golf course
061370040 217772.0 5.0 1250 LAUREL School Nativity School 071071070 211908.4 4.9 1105 VALPARAISO Church LDS Church 74260740 191267.5 4.4 2650 SAND HILL Church St Bede's Episcopal Church 074351100 172115.1 4.0 2250 AVY Church St Denis Parish
071071030 171123.0 3.9 School St. Raymond School
71071060 149050.5 3.4 1100 SANTA CRUZ School
061360030 131865.9 3.0 1250 LAUREL Church
055260230 124752.8 2.9 50 TERMINAL School Beechwood
71084190 118548.7 2.7 950 SANTA CRUZ Church Menlo Church 055303110 113094.0 2.6 320 SHERIDAN School074452040 92788.3 2.1 Golf Course 71071040 85775.2 2.0 Church St. Raymond Catholic Church 062460100 85343.7 2.0 320 MIDDLEFIELD C/I Misc. Menlo Park Fire Station 1 062460050 82310.7 1.9 Vacant Land Seminary Oaks Park
055303310 67850.0 1.6 260 VAN BUREN Residential: Five or More Units 61021550 63018.9 1.4 71 BAY Church Home of Christ
071263030 55008.0 1.3 1100 MIDDLE Church New Community Church 063425260 45459.8 1.0 211 OAK Water Co. O'Connor Water Company 062390050 43749.4 1.0 201 RAVENSWOOD Church First Church of Christ Scienti 74311600 40343.3 0.9 Vacant Land
062385040 14100.1 0.3 614 CENTRAL Residential: Fourplex 074211010 12494.5 0.3 735 MONTE ROSA Nursing, Convalescent Home 74086360 12453.7 0.3 2100 SHARON Residential: Duplex
062272330 12107.9 0.3 231 WILLOW Residential: Combination of Unit Types 71213010 12029.0 0.3 1080 COTTON Vacant Land
062284110 11218.1 0.3 641 COLEMAN School071382250 10885.0 0.2 1239 MIDDLE Nursing, Convalescent Home 55321020 9349.6 0.2 203 TERMINAL School
063452390 9294.7 0.2 Vacant Land
71082170 9204.2 0.2 1353 UNIVERSITY Residential: Combination of Unit Types 055342470 9189.4 0.2 1306 CHILCO Church063441020 9034.7 0.2 2030 MENALTO Nursing, Convalescent Home 55351080 7994.4 0.2 Highways & Streets Community Garden 055323180 7844.9 0.2 205 MARKET Residential: Fourplex
062370160 7444.2 0.2 525 POPE Residential: Duplex
55323190 7315.4 0.2 1108 DEL NORTE Residential: Fourplex 062365040 6999.8 0.2 404 LAUREL Residential: Combination of Unit Types062205170 6999.0 0.2 Vacant Land 074311590 6903.7 0.2 Golf Course
063453080 6309.4 0.1 Vacant Land
055341070 6122.8 0.1 1410 CHILCO Church055292490 5992.4 0.1 168 HEDGE School 62311270 5955.8 0.1 575 GILBERT Residential: Duplex
071405200 5708.6 0.1 880 CAMBRIDGE Residential: Duplex062366020 4999.9 0.1 402 CENTRAL Residential: Combination of Unit Types055342480 4817.3 0.1 1310 CHILCO Church055342460 4383.6 0.1 1315 HENDERSON Church074230420 3993.8 0.1 920 SHARON PARK Water Co. Menlo Park Pump Station 63142120 3497.0 0.1 2168 MENALTO Vacant Land
074184100 2803.9 0.1 Highways & Streets
Attachment B: Non-Single-Family Sites Affected by the Ballot Measure Source: Menlo Park Geographic Information Systems (GIS)

ATTACHMENT B
Page J-1.74
City Attorney
City of Menlo Park 701 Laurel St., Menlo Park, CA 94025 tel 650-330-6600 www.menlopark.org

STAFF REPORT
City Council
Meeting Date: 7/26/2022
Staff Report Number: 22-142-CC
Public Hearing: Determination of action, pursuant to Elections Code Section 9215, regarding the proposed initiative
measure entitled “A Citizen-Sponsored Initiative
Measure to Amend the Land Use Element of the
General Plan to Prohibit the City Council of the City
of Menlo Park from Re-Designating or Re-Zoning
Certain Properties Designated and Zoned for Single
Family Detached Homes”
Recommendation
Staff recommends the City Council take one of the following actions as required by California Elections Code Section 9215:

A. Adopt an ordinance of the City Council of the City of Menlo Park adopting the citizen sponsored initiative measure to amend the Land Use Element of the General Plan to prohibit the City Council of the City of Menlo Park from re-designating or re-zoning certain properties designated and zoned for single family detached homes (Attachment A); or
B. Adopt a resolution of the City Council of the City of Menlo Park adopting the citizen sponsored initiative measure to amend the Land Use Element of the General Plan to prohibit the City Council of the City of Menlo Park from re-designating or re-zoning certain properties designated and zoned for single family detached homes; establishing the schedule for submission of ballot arguments; and authorizing and requesting the County of San Mateo conduct the election (Attachment B.) Background
Through the General Plan and Zoning Ordinance, the City Council of the City of Menlo Park has designated certain property in the City of Menlo Park for single family detached homes. Under the General Plan, many such properties have a “Very Low Density Residential” or “Low Density Residential” land use designation.

The Citizen-Sponsored Initiative proposes an amendment to the Land Use Element of the General Plan that would prohibit the City Council of the City of Menlo Park from (1) changing the General Plan designation of properties that were designated very low density residential or low density residential as of April 15, 2022; and (2) re-zoning properties that were zoned Residential Estate (R-E), Residential Estate Suburban (R-ES), Single Family Suburban Residential (R-1-S), Single Family Suburban Residential (Felton Gables) (R-1-S (FG), Single Family Urban Residential (R-1-U), or Single-Family Urban Residential (Lorelei Manor) (R-1-U (LM) as of April 15, 2022.

Under the Citizen-Sponsored Initiative, properties designated very low density residential or low density residential, and properties zoned R-E, R-E-S, R-1-S, R-1-S (FG), R-1-U or R-1-U (LM) as of April 15, 2022, could only be re-designated or re-zoned for other uses or denser residential uses by a majority vote of the people of the City of Menlo Park at a regular election.

AGENDA ITEM J-2 Page J-2.1
Staff Report #: 22-142-CC

City of Menlo Park 701 Laurel St., Menlo Park, CA 94025 tel 650-330-6600 www.menlopark.org The “very low density residential” designation provides for single family detached homes, secondary dwelling units, public and quasi-public uses, and similar and compatible uses at a maximum density of 2.9 units per acre. Properties with a “very low density residential” designation are zoned R-E or R-E-S.

The “low density residential” designation provides for single family detached homes, secondary dwelling units, public and quasi-public uses, and similar and compatible uses at a maximum density of 8.9 units per acre. Properties with a “low density residential” designation are zoned R-1-S (Single Family Suburban Residential), R-1-S (FG) (Single Family Suburban Residential (Felton Gables)), R-1-U (Single Family Urban Residential), and R-1-U (LM) (Single Family Urban Residential (Lorelei Manor.)) Most of the property in the City of Menlo Park designated very low density residential or low density residential is improved with single family homes. However, certain properties with these land use designations currently have other uses (such as public utilities, private schools, churches, child care centers and a fire station) or are unimproved.

The Citizen-Sponsored Initiative only impacts properties designated very low density residential or low density residential, and properties zoned R-E, R-E-S, R-1-S, R-1-S (FG), R-1-U and R-1-U (LM) as of April 15, 2022. It does not impact the City Council’s authority to re-designate or re-zone properties that had other designations and zoning April 15, 2022.

Analysis
On April 15, 2022, the petition for the Proposed Initiative was filed with the city clerk of the City of Menlo Park (Elections Code Section 9208) within the required time following the publication date. The city clerk determined that the proponents submitted 2,011 valid signatures, which exceeded the minimum number of 1,984 signatures required.

The city clerk initiated the review of the petition, according to required Elections Code provisions, including format, content, circulation dates and circulator’s declaration.

Signature verification is performed by the County of San Mateo, Office of the Assessor-County ClerkRecorder and Elections (County.) Having completed the comprehensive review of signatures, by letter dated July 15, 2022, the County signed a certification on sufficiency and notified the proponents of the certification.

Based on the validation of the petition format and content (Elections Code Section 9239) along with the signature verification (Elections Code Sections 9215, 9240), the city clerk certified the petition as sufficient to qualify as an initiative petition for the ballot.

On June 28, 2022, the city clerk certified the sufficiency of the petition to the City Council.

Following certification of the signatures, Elections Code Sections 9211, 9114, and 9115 require that the petition be brought to the City Council at the City Council’s next regular meeting.

Elections Code Section 9215 requires that the City Council choose from one of the following courses of action:

A. Adopt the ordinance, without alteration, at the regular meeting at which the certification of the petition is presented, or within 10 days after it is presented; or
B. Submit the ordinance, without alteration, to the voters pursuant to Elections Code Section 1405; or C. Order a report pursuant to Elections Code Section 9212 at the regular meeting at which the certification Page J-2.2
Staff Report #: 22-142-CC
City of Menlo Park 701 Laurel St., Menlo Park, CA 94025 tel 650-330-6600 www.menlopark.org of the petition is presented. When the report is presented to the City Council, the City Council is required to either adopt the ordinance within 10 days or order an election pursuant to subdivision (b.) On June 28, 2022, staff presented the City Council with the above three options. The City Council unanimously selected option C and ordered a report pursuant to Elections Code Section 9212. Pursuant to Elections Code Section 9212, if the City Council orders the report pursuant to Elections Code Section 9212, the report would need to be presented to the City Council no later than July 28, 2022. That report has been presented to the City Council under separate agenda item at this July 26, 2022, City Council meeting.

Pursuant to Elections Code Section 9212, within 10 days of the report being presented to the City Council, the City Council is required to either adopt the ordinance (Attachment A) or order an election (Attachment B.) Staff recommends that the City Council choose between one of these two options at the July 26, 2022, City Council meeting, as the next regularly scheduled City Council meeting is August 9, which occurs more than 10 days after the report is presented to the City Council. Each of these two options is discussed below.

Adopt the ordinance
If the City Council proceeds with adopting the proposed ordinance without alteration (Attachment A), it would be considered adopted July 26, 2022, and would be effective 30 days from this meeting date. Per Elections Code Section 9217, “No ordinance that is either proposed by initiative petition and adopted by the vote of the legislative body of the city without submission to the voters, or adopted by the voters, shall be repealed or amended except by a vote of the people, unless provision is otherwise made in the original ordinance.” If the City Council elects this option, 30 days following adoption of the ordinance, the General Plan would be amended in the manner set forth in the Proposed Initiative.

Submit ordinance to the voters
If the City Council submits the ordinance to the voters, the City is required to place the measure on the City’s next regular election which would be November 8, 2022 (Elections Code Sections 9215, 1405(a)) (Attachment B.) The Elections Code also authorizes the City Council to schedule a special election to submit an initiative measure to the voters in some circumstances. However, the City Council does not have that option in this case because there are no eligible special election dates between now and the November 8, 2022 general election.

The City of Menlo Park, together with many other jurisdictions in the County of San Mateo, requests election services from the County of San Mateo to consolidate election costs. In so doing, the City realizes significant savings in personnel time and costs associated with running a municipal election. However, to have the County assist with the City’s municipal election, the Elections Code requires that the City Council request such assistance via resolution.

The resolution attached as Attachment B orders the Proposed Initiative submitted to the voters at the November 8, 2022 general election, and requests that the County assist with and conduct the election. The resolution also establishes the following ballot language to be submitted to the voters:

Shall the measure, which prohibits the City Council of the City of Menlo Park from re-zoning or re-designating certain
properties that were zoned and designated for single family detached homes as of April 15, 2022, be adopted?
YES
NO
Page J-2.3
Staff Report #: 22-142-CC

City of Menlo Park 701 Laurel St., Menlo Park, CA 94025 tel 650-330-6600 www.menlopark.org If the City Council elects this option, the ballot language, above, along with the complete text of the Proposed Initiative would be placed on the November 8, 2022 ballot. This measure will require the approval of a majority vote of the City of Menlo Park voters voting on the measure to become effective. If it is approved the measure would become effective ten (10) days following the date the vote is declared by the City Council in accordance with Elections Code Section 9217.

Impact on City Resources
According to the San Mateo County Chief Elections Officer and Assessor-County Clerk-Recorder for election services, the estimated cost of consolidated election services for one ballot measure is approximately between $36,000 and $43,200. The estimated cost of consolidated election services for the three City Council seats and one ballot measure is approximately between $72,300 and $86,800. Funds are included in the fiscal year 2022-23 budget.

Environmental Review
The proposed actions are not projects under CEQA Guidelines Section 15378 (b)(3.) A project under CEQA does not include “[t]he submittal of proposals to a vote of the people of the state or a particular community that does not involve a public agency sponsored initiative.” (Stein v. City of Santa Monica (1980) 110 Cal.

App.3d 458; Friends of Sierra Madre v. City of Sierra Madre (2001) 25 Cal. 4th 165.) Public Notice
Public notification was achieved by posting the agenda, with the agenda items being listed, at least 72 hours prior to the meeting.

Attachments
A. An ordinance of the City Council of the City of Menlo Park Adopting the Citizen Sponsored Initiative Measure to Amend the Land Use Element of the General Plan to Prohibit the City Council of the City of Menlo Park from re-designating or re-zoning certain properties designated and zoned for single family detached homes
B. A resolution of the City Council of the City of Menlo Park Adopting the citizen sponsored initiative measure to amend the Land Use Element of the General Plan to prohibit the City Council of the City of Menlo Park from re-designating or re-zoning certain properties designated and zoned for Single family detached homes; establishing the schedule for submission of ballot arguments; and authorizing and requesting the County of San Mateo conduct the election Report prepared by:

Nira F. Doherty, City Attorney
Report reviewed by:

Judi A. Herren, Assistant to the City Manager/City Clerk Page J-2.4
ORDINANCE NO. XXXX

ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MENLO PARK

ADOPTING THE CITIZEN-SPONSORED INITIATIVE MEASURE TO AMEND

THE LAND USE ELEMENT OF THE GENERAL PLAN TO PROHIBIT THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MENLO PARK FROM RE-DESIGNATING OR REZONING CERTAIN PROPERTIES DESIGNATED AND ZONED FOR SINGLE

FAMILY DETACHED HOMES
WHEREAS, on April 15, 2022, a Notice of Intent to Circulate a Petition was filed with the City’s Elections Official with a request that a title and summary be prepared for the measure; and WHEREAS, the City Attorney provided a title and summary for the proposed Initiative to the proponents; and
WHEREAS, the Petition regarding the Initiative was filed with the Election’s Official on May 24, 2022 bearing 2,976 unverified signatures; and
WHEREAS, to qualify for the ballot, proponents were required to obtain 1,984 valid signatures on the Petition; that number representing ten percent (10%) of the registered voters of the City; and
WHEREAS, the County Elections Division has examined the records of voter registration and has certified that the Petition contains more than the requisite number of valid signatures to qualify for election; and
WHEREAS, the City Elections Official (City Clerk) certified the sufficiency of the signatures on June 28, 2022; and
WHEREAS, having obtained sufficient signatures, Elections Code section 9215 provides that the City Council is required to either (1) order a report pursuant to Elections Code section 9212, (2) submit the ordinance, without alteration, to the voters, pursuant to Elections Code section 1405, or (3) adopt the ordinance, without alteration, at the meeting at which the certification of the petition is presented (June 28, 2022), or within 10 days after it is presented; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Menlo Park desires to adopt the Initiative entitled “A Citizen-Sponsored Initiative Measure to Amend the Land Use Element of the General Plan to Prohibit the City Council of the City of Menlo Park from Re-Designating or Re-Zoning Certain Properties Designated and Zoned for Single Family Detached Homes.” NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Menlo Park does hereby adopt the Initiative entitled “A Citizen-Sponsored Initiative Measure to Amend the Land Use Element of the General Plan to Prohibit the City Council of the City of Menlo Park from ReDesignating or Re-Zoning Certain Properties Designated and Zoned for Single Family Detached Homes,” which is attached hereto as Exhibit A.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Menlo Park does hereby direct that the City of Menlo Park General Plan be amended as set forth in the text of the Initiative attached hereto as Exhibit A.

ATTACHMENT A Page J-2.5
INTRODUCED AND ADOPTED as an ordinance of the City of Menlo Park at a regular meeting of said City Council on the twenty-sixth day of July, 2022, by the following votes:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

APPROVED:
________________________
Betsy Nash, Mayor
ATTEST:
_________________________
Judi A. Herren, City Clerk
Exhibits:

A. Text of the measure
Ordinance No. XXXX

Page 2 of 6 ends

Menlo Park City CouncilJuly 26, 2022

Menlo Park City Council
July 26, 2022