It should be noted that since this project would not trigger the East Palo Alto’s Settlement Agreement, East Palo Alto study intersections are not included in this scope.
In addition, the project’s effect on neighborhood traffic conditions will be evaluated on the street segments identified below.
Street Segments:
1. O’Brien Drive between Willow Road and Kavanaugh Drive, and
2. O’Brien Drive between University Avenue and Kavanaugh Drive CEQA Analysis
1. Bicycle, Pedestrian, and Transit Facilities. A qualitative analysis of the project’s impact on transit service in the area and on bicycle and pedestrian circulation in the study area will be included in the traffic report. Any impacts of the project on the nearby facilities will be identified and improvements recommended to mitigate the impacts.
2. VMT Analysis. The vehicle miles travelled (VMT) associated with the proposed project will be evaluated using the citywide travel demand model. The project is likely to have a VMT impact. It is assumed that the project applicant will provide a Transportation Demand Management (TDM) Plan. Hexagon’s TDM Plan peer review findings (Task 3) will inform whether or not additional VMT mitigation measures are necessary. If so, Hexagon will work with City staff to determine the additional mitigation measures necessary to fully mitigate the project VMT impact.
3. Peer Review of TDM Plan. It is assumed that the project applicant will provide a TDM plan. Hexagon will peer review the TDM Plan and determine a) whether the TDM Plan satisfies the City’s TDM ordinance, b) whether the TDM Plan is sufficient to eliminate the project’s VMT impact, and c) whether the TDM Plan satisfies the City/County Association of Governments’ TDM Checklist requirements. Hexagon will summarize our findings in a separate memorandum.
4. Project Impact on Hazards and Emergency Vehicle Access. A qualitative analysis of the project’s impact on hazards due to a geometric design feature or incompatible use, as well as the project’s impact on emergency vehicle access will be conducted. Findings will also be informed by Task 15 below (site access and on-site circulation).
5. Provision of Data to Air Quality and Noise Consultants. It is anticipated that the Air Quality and Noise consultants will need traffic and VMT data for their analysis. This task includes Hexagon staff time to coordinate with the consultants and the data needs, formats, and to provide the requested data.
Non-CEQA Analysis
6. Site Reconnaissance. The physical characteristics of the site and the surrounding roadway network will be reviewed to identify existing roadway cross-sections, intersection lane configurations, traffic control devices, and surrounding land uses.
7. Observation of Existing Traffic Conditions in the Study Area. Field observations of existing traffic conditions will be limited to field-verifying signal timing at signalized intersections during peak hours. Due to COVID conditions, field observations of intersection-level operations issues are not included in this proposal.
Page G-3.296
Ms. Kirsten Chapman
December 15, 2022
8. Data Collection. Existing weekday AM (7:00 – 9:00 AM) and PM (4:00 – 6:00 PM) peakhour traffic volumes at the study intersections and existing average daily traffic volumes for the study roadway segments will be obtained from the City of Menlo Park and previous studies with counts conducted in year 2019 or 2020. This task does not include collection of new turning movement counts.
9. Evaluation of Existing Conditions. Existing traffic conditions will be evaluated based on existing traffic volumes at the study intersections. The existing traffic conditions at the study intersections within the City of Menlo Park will be evaluated using the software VISTRO, which employs the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) 6 th Edition methodology for
intersection analyses.
10. Evaluation of Background Conditions. Background traffic volumes represent the existing volumes plus the anticipated volumes from approved developments that have not yet been constructed and occupied. Hexagon proposes to reference the 1075 O’Brien Drive traffic study for background traffic volumes. Intersection levels of service under background conditions will be evaluated.
11. Project Trip Generation, Distribution, and Assignment. Estimates of trips to be added to the surrounding roadway network by the proposed development will be based on the trip generation rates recommended by the Institute of Traffic Engineers’ Trip Generation Manual,11
th Edition. Hexagon will work with City staff on the methodology to estimate trip generation for the ground-floor commercial use, as well as for any potential credits for the existing buildings on site that are to be demolished. A 20% transportation demand management (TDM) reduction will be applied in accordance with Menlo Park requirements.
The directional distribution of site-generated traffic will reference the 1075 O’Brien Drive traffic study. The proposed trip generation estimation and project trip distribution patterns will be sent to the City to review. The site-generated net traffic will be assigned to the roadway network based on the City approved trip generation and distribution pattern.
12. Evaluation of Background Plus Project Conditions. Project-generated traffic will be added to the background condition traffic volumes. Intersection level of service calculations will be conducted to estimate project traffic conditions during the AM and PM peak hours after project completion. Intersection adverse effects associated with the development of the proposed project will be evaluated relative to background conditions.
13. Cumulative Conditions. The latest 2040 model run, conducted for the City’s proposed Housing Element Update, included full buildout of the Menlo Park General Plan and relevant General Plan Amendments, and approved and pending projects within the City of East Palo Alto up to December 2020. This model run will be used to develop intersection volume forecasts at study intersections. Since the proposed project is within the development capacity allowed under the Menlo Park General Plan, the new model run will represent the cumulative plus project conditions for the project. Project traffic will be subtracted to represent the cumulative no project conditions. Intersection adverse effects associated with the development of the proposed project will be evaluated relative to cumulative no project conditions.
14. Roadway AADT Analysis. Hexagon will evaluate the project effects on roadway AADT under the cumulative with project scenario. Adverse effects will be identified in accordance with Menlo Park’s guidelines.
Page G-3.297
Ms. Kirsten Chapman
December 15, 2022
15. Site Access and On-Site Circulation. A review of the project site plan will be performed to determine the overall adequacy of the site access and on-site circulation in accordance with generally accepted traffic engineering standards and to identify any access or circulation issues that should be improved. Sight distance will be checked at the project driveways. Parking will be evaluated relative to the City of Menlo Park Parking Code.
16. Evaluation of Vehicle Queuing. For selected locations where the project would add a significant number of left-turning vehicles, the adequacy of existing/planned storage at turn pockets will be assessed by means of comparison with expected maximum vehicle queues. Vehicle queues will be estimated using the Vistro software.
17. Description of Recommendations. The results of the level of service calculations will be used to identify the locations and types of necessary improvements or modifications.
Improvements could include street widenings, lane additions, changes in lane usage, or modifications to existing traffic signals, which will be consistent with the mitigation measures proposed in the City’s General Plan Update - ConnectMenlo. Improvements could also include improvements to transit, bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure, as well as the development of measures that promote multi-modal travel and reduce the use of single-occupant automobile travel for the purpose of VMT reduction goals.
Reports and Meetings
18. Meetings. The fee estimate includes Hexagon staff attendance at five staff meetings and one public hearing in connection with the project. Additional meeting attendance would be provided as additional services and will be billed based on staff time plus expenses.
19. Class 32 Infill Exemption Transportation Section. Hexagon will author the Transportation section of the Class 32 Infill Exemption, which would include findings of Task 1 through Task 4 above. A summary of the non-CEQA analysis may also be included if deemed necessary. This task includes three rounds of report revisions.
20. Non-CEQA TIA Report. Hexagon’s findings and recommendations for the non-CEQA analysis tasks (Task 6 through Task 17) will be summarized in a standalone TIA document. This task includes two rounds of report revisions.
Page G-3.298
Ms. Kirsten Chapman
December 15, 2022
Time of Performance
Barring any unforeseen delays, an administrative draft traffic analysis report will be submitted approximately ten weeks after 1) authorization to proceed, and (2) approval of project trip generation, distribution and assignment assumptions. The final traffic report will be delivered one week after receipt of all review comments. The major project milestones are described below.
Major Milestones
Week Milestone
Week 1 Provide draft trip generation, distribution and assignment for City review and approval (assume 2-week City review time)
Week 2 Provide preliminary VMT results for City review (assume 2-week City review time)
Week 4 Provide preliminary results for non-CEQA analyses (assume 2-week City review time)
Week 6 Provide required data for AQ/Noise consultants
Week 8 Provide administrative draft TIA report
Week 10 Provide administrative draft Class 32 Infill Exemption Transportation Section
Cost of Services
The fee for the scope of services will be based on time and expenses up to a maximum budget of $69,000 (see Table 1 for budget breakdown). Work not specifically specified in this scope are considered out-of-scope (such as analyzing additional intersections, revised project description after project initiation), and will require additional budget authorization.
We appreciate your consideration of Hexagon Transportation Consultants for this assignment. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call.
Sincerely,
HEXAGON TRANSPORTATION CONSULTANTS, INC.
Ollie Zhou, T.E.
Vice President
Page G-3.299
Ms. Kirsten Chapman
December 15, 2022
Table 1
Budget Breakdown
# Task President
Principal
Associate Associate
Admin/
Graphics Budget
1 Bicycle, Pedestrian, and Transit Facilities 4 8 2,900$ 2 VMT Analysis 8 2,280$
3 Peer Review of TDM Plan 1 20 2 6,270$
4 Project Impact on Hazards and Emergency Vehicle Access 4 1,140$ 5 Provision of Data to AQ/Noise 4 4 2,020$
6 Site Reconnaissance 4 $ 880
7 Traffic Condition Observations 8 1,760$
8 Data Collection 4 $ 880
9 Evaluation of Existing Conditions 2 8 2,330$
10 Background Conditions 4 $ 880
11 Trip Generation, Distribution, Assignment 1 4 8 2 3,470$ 12 Background + Project Conditions 4 $ 880
13 Cumulative Conditions 8 8 4,040$
14 Roadway AADT Analysis 4 $ 880
15 Site Access, On-Site Circulation, Parking 4 8 2,900$ 16 Vehicle Queuing 8 1,760$
17 Description of Recommendations 4 8 8 5,360$
18 Meetings 5 10 4,500$
19 Class 32 Infill Exemption Transportation Section 4 20 4 7,500$ 20 Non-CEQA TIA Report 4 20 40 8 16,780$
Total 19 116 128 16 69,000$
Hours
Page G-3.300
Appendix C Preliminary Schedule
Page G-3.301
ID Task Name Notes Duration Scheduled Start Scheduled Finish 0 1030 O'Brien Drive Project Class 32 Infill Exemption Document 315 days Thu 6/16/22 Wed 8/30/23 1 Project Initiation & Data Needs 18 days Wed 2/1/23 Fri 2/24/232 ICF is Under Contract Timing is estimated 1 day Wed 2/1/23 Wed 2/1/233 Kick‐off Meeting Timing is estimated 1 day Thu 2/9/23 Thu 2/9/234 Data Needs Process 17 days Thu 2/2/23 Fri 2/24/235 Project Sponsor Provides Preliminary Project Description & Other Materials Prepared for the Project 2 days Thu 2/2/23 Fri 2/3/236 ICF Submits Data Needs Request 3 days Fri 2/10/23 Tue 2/14/237 City & Project Sponsor Respond to Data Needs Request 1 wk Wed 2/15/23 Tue 2/21/238 ICF Reviews Data Needs Responses & Confirms Everything is Ready for Use in the Infill Exemption Document
Another round of data needs review may be needed if ICF identifies any follow‐up questions
3 days Wed 2/22/23 Fri 2/24/23
9 Project Description 13 days Mon 2/27/23 Wed 3/15/23
10 ICF Submits Draft Project Description 1 wk Mon 2/27/23 Fri 3/3/2311 City Reviews Draft Project Description Assumes comments are consolidated and conflicting comments are resolved 1 wk Mon 3/6/23 Fri 3/10/2312 ICF Submits Final Project Description 3 days Mon 3/13/23 Wed 3/15/2313 Standalone Technical Reports 257 days Thu 6/16/22 Fri 6/9/2314 Arborist Report Peer Review 30 days Mon 2/6/23 Fri 3/17/2315 ICF Submits Arborist Report Peer Review Memorandum 3 wks Mon 2/6/23 Fri 2/24/2316 Project Sponsor's Consultant Addresses Comments in Arborist Report Peer Review Memorandum Assumes comments are consolidated and conflicting comments are resolved 2 wks Mon 2/27/23 Fri 3/10/2317 ICF Confirms Comments in Arborist Report Peer Review Memorandum Are Addressed 1 wk Mon 3/13/23 Fri 3/17/2318 Biological Resources Asssessment 35 days Thu 6/16/22 Wed 8/3/2219 ICF Submits Draft Biological Resources Assessment 4 wks Thu 6/16/22 Wed 7/13/2220 City & Applicant Review Draft Biological Resources Assessment Assumes comments are consolidated and conflicting comments are resolved 2 wks Thu 7/14/22 Wed 7/27/2221 ICF Submits Final Draft Biological Resources Assessment 1 wk Thu 7/28/22 Wed 8/3/2222 Built Resources and Archaeological Resources Technical Memoranda 80 days Thu 2/2/23 Wed 5/24/2323 ICF Prepares Notification Letters for Tribal Contacts 2 wks Thu 2/2/23 Wed 2/15/2324 ICF Conducts Records Search 7 wks Thu 2/2/23 Wed 3/22/2325 Built Resources Technical Memorandum 45 days Thu 3/23/23 Wed 5/24/2326 ICF Submits Draft Built Resources Technical Memorandum 5 wks Thu 3/23/23 Wed 4/26/2327 City Reviews Draft Built Resources Technical Memorandum Assumes comments are consolidated and conflicting comments are resolved 2 wks Thu 4/27/23 Wed 5/10/2328 ICF Submits Final ICF Submits Draft Built Resources Technical Memorandum 2 wks Thu 5/11/23 Wed 5/24/2329 Archaeological Resources Technical Memorandum 45 days Thu 3/23/23 Wed 5/24/2330 ICF Submits Draft Archaeological Resources Technical Memorandum 5 wks Thu 3/23/23 Wed 4/26/2331 City Reviews Draft Archaeological Resources Technical Memorandum Assumes comments are consolidated and conflicting comments are resolved 2 wks Thu 4/27/23 Wed 5/10/2332 ICF Submits Final ICF Submits Draft Archaeological Resources Technical Memorandum 2 wks Thu 5/11/23 Wed 5/24/2333 Transportation Impact Analysis Report 65 days Mon 3/13/23 Fri 6/9/2334 Hexagon Submits Draft Trip Generation, Distribution, and Assignment 1 wk Mon 3/13/23 Fri 3/17/2335 City Reviews Draft Trip Generation, Distribution, and Assignment 2 wks Mon 3/20/23 Fri 3/31/2336 Hexagon Submits Preliminary VMT results 2 wks Mon 3/13/23 Fri 3/24/2337 City Reviews Preliminary VMT Results 2 wks Mon 3/27/23 Fri 4/7/2338 Hexagon Submits Preliminary Results for Non‐CEQA Analyses 4 wks Mon 3/13/23 Fri 4/7/2339 City Reviews Preliminary Results for Non‐CEQA Analyses 2 wks Mon 4/10/23 Fri 4/21/2340 Hexagon Provides Required Data for AQ & Noise Analyses 6 wks Mon 4/3/23 Fri 5/12/2341 Hexagon Submits Administrative Draft TIA Report 8 wks Mon 4/3/23 Fri 5/26/2342 Hexagon Submits Administrative Draft Transportation Section of the Infill Exemption Document 10 wks Mon 4/3/23 Fri 6/9/2343 Infill Exemption Document 78 days Mon 5/15/23 Wed 8/30/2344 ICF Submits Administrative Draft Infill Exemption Document This task includes the preparation of the AQ and Noise analysis as well as the incorporation of the results of the standalone technical reports into the Infill Exemption document
5 wks Mon 5/15/23 Fri 6/16/23
45 City Reviews Administrative Draft Infill Exemption Document Assumes comments are consolidated and conflicting comments are resolved 2 wks Mon 6/19/23 Fri 6/30/2346 ICF Submits Screencheck Draft Infill Exemption Document 2 wks Mon 7/3/23 Fri 7/14/2347 City Reviews Screencheck Draft Infill Exemption Document Assumes comments are consolidated and conflicting comments are resolved 1 wk Mon 7/17/23 Fri 7/21/2348 ICF Submits Final Infill Exemption Document 1 wk Mon 7/24/23 Fri 7/28/2349 City Approves Final Infill Exemption Document 3 days Mon 7/31/23 Wed 8/2/2350 ICF Submits Administrative Record for the Infill Exemption Document 1 wk Mon 7/31/23 Fri 8/4/2351 Public Hearing Timing is estimated 1 day Mon 8/28/23 Mon 8/28/2352 ICF Prepares Notice of Exemption 1 day Tue 8/29/23 Tue 8/29/2353 City Files Notice of Exemption 1 day Wed 8/30/23 Wed 8/30/23 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep
Qtr 1, 2023 Qtr 2, 2023 Qtr 3, 20232023
Preliminary Schedule for the 1030 O'Brien Drive Project Class 32 Infill Exemption *This schedule is preliminary and is subject to change* Thu 1/5/23 10:27 AM Page 1
Page G-3.302
Appendix D Cost Estimate
Page G-3.303
Cost Estimate for the 1030 O'Brien Drive Project Infill Exemption Document Viramontes Chung Chapman Yoon Webber Matsui Schumaker Holland Watson Lassell Felicetti Barrera Sukola Mathias Conley Read Jessica Victoria Kirsten Laura Lisa Cory Noah Lora Megan Susan Nicole Mario Katrina John John Brent Project Role
Project
Director
Project
Manager Senior Advisor Senior AQ Biologist
Senior Noise
and AQ Noise Archaeo Archaeo Historic Historic Hazards Water Quality Editor Graphics GIS Transportation Labor Classification Proj Dir Sr Consult I Sr Consult III Tech Dir Sr Consult III Sr Consult II Assoc Consult I Sr Consult II Assoc Consult II Proj Dir Assoc Consult II Sr Consult I Assoc Consult I Assoc Consult III Sr Consult I Sr Consult II Sub Mark‐up:
Task Subtotal Subtotal 10% Labor Total Direct Costs Total Price Task 1: Project Initiation 4.0 10.0 2.0 2.0 $2,870 $0 $0 $2,870 $2,870.00 Task 2: Project Description 2.0 18.0 1.0 2.0 2.0 $3,865 $0 $0 $3,865 $3,865.00Task 3: Administrative Draft Infill Exemption Document and Technical Studies 10.0 44.0 6.0 6.0 50.0 126.0 90.0 45.0 20.0 10.0 48.0 16.0 6.0 16.0 4.0 4.0 $75,880 $69,000 $69,000 $6,900 $151,780 $151,780.00 Task 4: Screencheck Draft Infill Exemption Document 4.0 20.0 4.0 2.0 8.0 10.0 6.0 4.0 2.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 2.0 2.0 1.0 $11,290 $0 $0 $11,290 $11,290.00Task 5: Final Infill Exemption Document 2.0 10.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 2.0 $3,490 $0 $0 $3,490 $3,490.00 Task 6: Public Review and Hearing $0 $0 $0 $0 $0.00
Task 6: Project Management, Meetings, and Public Hearing 4.0 24.0 4.0 $5,160 $0 $0 $5,160 $5,160.00Total hours 669.0 26.0 126.0 16.0 9.0 58.0 139.0 99.0 50.0 23.0 12.0 51.0 19.0 8.0 22.0 7.0 4.0Billing Rates $205.00 $150.00 $185.00 $230.00 $185.00 $170.00 $105.00 $170.00 $125.00 $200.00 $125.00 $150.00 $105.00 $135.00 $150.00 $170.00 Subtotal $5,330.00 $18,900.00 $2,960.00 $2,070.00 $10,730.00 $23,630.00 $10,395.00 $8,500.00 $2,875.00 $2,400.00 $6,375.00 $2,850.00 $840.00 $2,970.00 $1,050.00 $680.00 $102,555.00 $69,000 $69,000 $6,900 $178,455.00Other Direct Costs 523.02 Reproductions $2,000.00523.04 Postage and Delivery $200.00523.05 Travel, Auto, incld. Mileage at current IRS rate (.625/mile) (site visits, public hearing, etc.) $600.00523.07 Surveys and Reports (cultural records search) $1,000.00 Mark‐up on Direct Expenses : 10% $380.00
Direct expense subtotal $4,180.00Unbillable Charges
Total price (without optional tasks or contingency fee) $182,635.00Contingency Fee $18,263.50Total price with Contingency fee (without optional tasks) $200,898.50 Optional Task 1: Noise Monitoring (see Noise section of scope of work) $9,500.00 Optional Task 2: Operational HRA (see Air Quality section of scope of work) $8,500.00Total price (with optional tasks and with contingency fee) $218,898.50 Consulting Staff Subcontractors
Employee Name Hexagon
Date printed 1/5/2023 12:25 PM Approved by Finance { sh } RM_Properties_AppendixD_Cost_010523(client) Page G-3.304
icf.com
twitter.com/ICF
linkedin.com/company/icf-international
facebook.com/ThisIsICF
#thisisicf
About ICF
ICF (NASDAQ:ICFI) is a global consulting and digital services company with more than 8,000 full- and part-time employees, but we are not your typical consultants. At ICF, business analysts and policy specialists work together with digital strategists, data scientists, and creatives. We combine unmatched industry expertise with cutting-edge engagement capabilities to help organizations solve their most complex challenges. Since 1969, public and private sector clients have worked with ICF to navigate change and shape the future. Learn more at icf.com.
Page G-3.305
Public Works
City of Menlo Park 701 Laurel St., Menlo Park, CA 94025 tel 650-330-6600 menlopark.gov
STAFF REPORT
City Council
Meeting Date: 2/28/2023
Staff Report Number: 23-040-CC
Consent Calendar: Award a construction contract to Radius Earthwork Inc. for the Ravenswood Avenue Resurfacing
project and determine this action is categorically
exempt under California Environmental Quality Act
Guidelines §15301 and §15304 exemption for
existing facilities
Recommendation
Staff recommends that the City Council award a $802,590 construction contract, with rubberized asphalt per bid alternate A, to Radius Earthwork Inc. (Attachment A), approve contingency in the amount of $121,000 (held by the City), approve construction administration fees in the amount of $150,000, and determine that this action is categorically exempt under California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines §15301 and §15304 for the Ravenswood Avenue Resurfacing project.
Policy Issues
This project is consistent with the City’s goal of maintaining and enhancing its municipal infrastructure and extending the life and safety of its roadway network.
Background
Menlo Park uses a Pavement Management System (PMS) that is approved by the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC.) Through grants provided by MTC, a pavement management technical assistance program report is generated every two years. This report evaluates the City’s street network and develops a list of potential street maintenance projects, over a five-year span, based on pavement conditions and budgeting. This program is an effective tool for managing the City’s street network and to keep streets at an appropriate condition. Ravenswood Avenue was identified for resurfacing in the City’s PMS and technical assistance program report, and it is included in the capital improvement program.
Ravenswood Avenue is classified as “Avenue – mixed use” in the General Plan (equivalent to a minor arterial street per the Federal Highway Administration.) The scope of paving work on Ravenswood Avenue is from El Camino Real to Laurel Street. A portion of the work overlaps the jurisdictions of Caltrans (at El Camino Real) and Caltrain (railroad crossing), therefore, encroachment permits from these agencies will be required for these areas. Staff is coordinating encroachment permits from both agencies which are anticipated to be issued before construction in April 2023.
Rubberized asphalt concrete (bid alternate)
In 2021, the City Council held a study session (Attachment B) to review rubberized asphalt concrete and hot mix asphalt pavement resurfacing options for upcoming capital projects. Rubberized asphalt is composed of recycled tires, reduces noise from tires, and has a 20-year typical life expectancy compared to 15 years for hot mix asphalt. However, rubberized asphalt also costs 20 to 35 percent more than hot mix asphalt and is AGENDA ITEM G-4 Page G-4.1
Staff Report #: 23-040-CC
City of Menlo Park 701 Laurel St., Menlo Park, CA 94025 tel 650-330-6600 menlopark.gov generally more labor intensive to install. The City Council directed staff to pursue rubberized asphalt concrete as a bid alternative to hot mix asphalt for:
• Projects proposing a 1.2 to 2.4-inch top-lift overlay • Projects along arterial or collector streets
• Projects planned for summer construction
The project description meets the above criteria, therefore, rubberized asphalt was included as substitute for hot mix asphalt per bid alternate A.
Coordination with related projects
At its April 26, 2022, meeting, City Council directed staff to pursue closing the gaps in the bicycle network on Ravenswood Avenue between Laurel Street and El Camino Real in both directions (Attachment C provides a hyperlink to the staff report from that meeting.) On the south side of Ravenswood Avenue, the resurfacing project will add a continuous bicycle lane between El Camino Real and Laurel Street by making minor adjustments to lane widths. On the north side of the street, between Alma Street and El Camino Real, there is sufficient street width to accommodate bicycle lanes by making minor adjustments to lane widths.
From Noel Drive to Alma Street, City Council directed staff to pursue a pilot to add the missing 300 feet of bikeway in place of the existing travel lane. With this change, Ravenswood Avenue would open from one to two automobile lanes at Alma Street instead of at Noel Drive as it does today. The pilot lane modification is anticipated to be installed by March 3, weather permitting, and more information is provided below in the Analysis section.
The City is concurrently working with Caltrans to add the missing crosswalk across El Camino Real at Ravenswood Avenue/Menlo Avenue. Staff are coordinating between the two projects to avoid duplication of effort. The City received a $200,000 grant from the San Mateo County Transportation Authority (SMCTA) Alternative Commute Reduction/Transportation Demand Management program to help fund this improvement.
Analysis
Project description
The work to be done generally includes the following modifications on Ravenswood Avenue from El Camino Real to Laurel Street:
• Installing a 2.4-inch mill and asphalt overlay using rubberized asphalt (per bid alternate A) • Installing six-inch deep asphalt base repairs for roadway areas exhibiting signs of settlement • Adjusting utility structures (manholes, valves etc.) to align with the new roadway surface where overlapping the resurfacing work
• Installing 9 new accessible curb ramps
• Installing 3-inch mountable curb
• Replacing signs and installing new striping (including the bike lane pilot from Noel Drive to Alma Street) Construction bidding
On December 9, 2022, the City solicited bids from prospective contractors for the project. Hot mix asphalt was included as a base bid item, with rubberized asphalt as a bid alternate. Project bids were opened January 19, 2023 with results listed per Table 1. Of the seven bids received, Radius Earthwork Inc. was identified as the apparent low bidder with a base bid price of $694,700. Their bid was 17 percent lower than the engineer’s estimate of $840,000. Additionally, the apparent low bidder’s total including bid alternate A was $802,590 which is 14 percent lower than the engineer’s estimate of $932,400.
Page G-4.2
Staff Report #: 23-040-CC
City of Menlo Park 701 Laurel St., Menlo Park, CA 94025 tel 650-330-6600 menlopark.gov Table 1: Bid results
Bidder Base bid
(hot mix asphalt)
Total bid, including
bid Alternate A
(rubberized asphalt)
Engineer’s estimate $840,000 $932,400
Radius Earthwork, Inc. $694,700 $802,590
G. Bortolotto & Company, Inc. $816,186 $838,116
Cato’s Paving $888,148 $1,018,468
O’Grady Paving, Inc. $896,480 $925,930
Graniterock Company $914,675 $1,044,475
JV Lucas Paving $945,694 $1,005,694
Granite Construction Company $1,178,985 $1,279,675
City staff has found the lowest bidder to be experienced with projects involving similar scopes of work for asphalt and concrete improvements. Staff also determined the low bidder to be both responsive and responsible per public contracting code requirements. Subject to the City Council’s award of contract, the project is tentatively scheduled for construction from April 2023 to early June 2023.
Staff anticipates paving work to occur over two weekends (from 8 a.m. to 5 p.m.) to minimize traffic impacts along Ravenswood Avenue. Furthermore, the paving work may require a full closure of the street to expedite project delivery. Any closures or detours required to facilitate traffic controls during construction will be published on the City’s project webpage, and posted on message boards, in advance of work. Staff will also distribute construction notices to nearby businesses, residents, churches and Menlo Atherton High School before construction. Additionally, any impacts to El Camino Real or the Alma Street Rail crossing will be coordinated with Caltrans and Caltrain representatives, respectively.
Bicycle lane pilot
As described above, staff is working to install a pilot segment of bicycle lane on Ravenswood Avenue westbound between Noel Drive and Alma Street. The pilot will begin at the beginning of March and continue through the repaving project. Staff, with support from data collection contractors, will gather the data identified in the April 26, 2022, staff report, including collision data, queuing, and multimodal use and report back to City Council, tentatively planned for May 2023. The main issue of concern is if the small reduction in vehicle capacity required to complete the bicycle lane creates queuing issues at the Ravenswood Avenue and Laurel Street traffic signal. Because spring is a relatively busy time of year, introducing the pilot before paving will allow quick identification of any concerns and to pivot quickly if issues are observed since paving is imminent. Depending on the results of the evaluation, the pilot could be continued for a longer period of time, made permanent or ended, depending on City Council direction.
Impact on City Resources
The project is included in the fiscal year 2022-23 capital improvement program, and has $940,000 available from the highway user (gas) tax funds remaining.
The estimated construction budget is $1,073,590 as summarized in Table 2 and includes a 15 percent construction contingency to account for unforeseen field issues (including provisions for additional traffic control measures at El Camino Real and Alma Street.) Construction administration fees are estimated at Page G-4.3
Staff Report #: 23-040-CC
City of Menlo Park 701 Laurel St., Menlo Park, CA 94025 tel 650-330-6600 menlopark.gov $150,000 and include construction management, consultant services for engineering, inspection and arborist support, and fees pertaining to the procurement of encroachment permits from Caltrans and Caltrain.
To provide sufficient funding for the use of rubberized asphalt, $140,000 in additional funding would be required and is currently available in the street resurfacing project budget. Staff recommends utilizing $140,000 of SB 1 funds from the street resurfacing project. The use of this funding will not impact the funding needed to deliver the 2023 street resurfacing project expected to be awarded later this spring and constructed this summer as well.
Table 2: Construction budget
Item Base bid
(hot mix asphalt)
Total bid, including
bid Alternate A
(rubberized asphalt)
Construction Subtotal $694,700 $802,590
Contingency $104,205 $121,000
Construction Administration $150,000 $150,000
Total budget $948,905 $1,073,590
Project funds $940,000 $940,000
Additional SB 1 funding from
street resurfacing project - $140,000
Total available funding $1,080,000
Staff recommends that the City Council award a $802,590 construction contract, with rubberized asphalt, to Radius Earthwork Inc., approve contingency in the amount of $121,000 (held by the City), and approve construction administration fees in the amount of $150,000 for the Ravenswood Avenue Resurfacing project.
The cost to implement the bicycle lane pilot between Noel Drive and Alma Street is anticipated to cost less than $20,000 and will be implemented through the City’s existing on-call contracts.
Environmental Review
The project is categorically exempt under Section 15301 – Class 1 and Section 15304 – Class 4 of the current CEQA Guidelines. Both sections allow for minor alternations of existing facilities, including existing highways and streets, sidewalks, gutters, bicycle and pedestrian access, and similar facilities, as long as there is negligible or no expansion of use.
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
Page G-4.4
Staff Report #: 23-040-CC
City of Menlo Park 701 Laurel St., Menlo Park, CA 94025 tel 650-330-6600 menlopark.gov A. Construction contract
B. Hyperlink – April 20, 2021 RAC study session staff report:
menlopark.org/DocumentCenter/View/27934/D1-20210420-CC-Rubbarized-asphalt C. Hyperlink – Ravenswood pedestrian and bicycle pilot from April 26, 2022:
menlopark.gov/files/sharedassets/public/agendas-and-minutes/city-council/2022- meetings/agendas/20220426-city-council-agenda-packet.pdf Report prepared by:
Mitchell Supan, Associate Engineer
Report reviewed by:
Tanisha Werner, Assistant Public Works Director – Engineering Page G-4.5
CONSTRUCTION AGREEMENT
City Manager’s Office
701 Laurel St., Menlo Park, CA 94025
tel 650-330-6620
Agreement #:
AGREEMENT FOR SERVICES BETWEEN
THE CITY OF MENLO PARK AND FIRST PARTY
THIS CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT (“Contract”) is made and entered into this ____ day of __________, ______ (“Execution Date”) by and between the CITY OF MENLO PARK, a California municipal corporation, (“City”) and Radius Earthwork, Inc (“Contractor”).
RECITALS
A. Contractor is a California Corporation duly organized and in good standing in the State of California, License Number 1059010. Contractor represents and warrants that it has the background and experience set forth in the Contractor’s responses to the notice inviting bids.
B. Contractor represents that it is duly licensed by the State of California and has the background, knowledge, experience and expertise to perform the obligations set forth in this Contract.
C. On December 9, 2022, the City issued a Notice to Contractors inviting bids for the Project. A copy of the Contractor’s Bid proposal and List of Subcontractors is attached herein and incorporated by this reference.
D. The City desires to retain Contractor as an independent contractor to provide the construction and other services identified in this Contract for the Project upon the terms and conditions contained herein.
AGREEMENT
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of performance by the parties of the promises, covenants and conditions contained herein, the parties hereby agree as follows:
1. DEFINITIONS. Capitalized terms used throughout the Contract Documents shall have the meanings set forth in this Contract and/or the Special Provisions. If there is a conflict between the definitions in this Contract and the Special Provisions, the definitions in this Contract shall prevail.
2. PROJECT. The project is the construction of Ravenswood Avenue Street Resurfacing Project, No. CPS009 (“Project”). The work includes all labor, materials, equipment, services, permits, licenses and taxes, and all other things necessary for Contractor to perform its obligations and complete the Project, including, without limitation, any Change Orders executed by City and Contractor in
ATTACHMENT A Page G-4.6
accordance with the requirements of the Contract Documents (“Work”).
3. CONTRACT DOCUMENTS.
3.1 List of Documents. The Contract Documents (sometimes collectively referred to as “Agreement” or “Bid Documents”) consist of the following documents which are on file with the Public Works Department and are hereby incorporated by reference. 1) Change Orders
2) Field Orders
3) Contract
4) Bidding Addenda
5) Special Provisions
6) Project Plans and Drawings
7) Technical Specifications
8) City Standard Details
9) State of California Department of Transportation Specifications, 2006 Edition (Cal Trans specifications)
10) Notice to Contractors
11) Contractor's Bid
12 Bidder Certifications, Questionnaire and Statements
13) Reports listed in the Contract Documents
14) City of Menlo Park Waste Management Form, Waste Management Daily Transport Report 15) City of Menlo Park Truck Route Map and Regulations
16) Performance, Payment and Maintenance Bonds
3.2 Order of Precedence. For the purposes of construing, interpreting and resolving inconsistencies between and among the provisions of this Contract, the Contract Documents shall have the order of precedence as set forth in the preceding section. If a claimed inconsistency cannot be resolved through the order of precedence, the City shall have the sole power to decide which document or provision shall govern as may be in the best interests of the City.
4. PERMITS. Contractor, at its sole expense, shall obtain and maintain during the term of this Contract, all appropriate permits, licenses and certificates that may be required in connection with the performance of the Work, including, but not limited to, a City business license.
5. DEPARTMENT OF INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS. Contractor and any subcontractor performing Work on this Project shall be registered with the Department of Industrial Relations (“DIR”) pursuant to Labor Code Section 1725.5. No contractor or subcontractor may be listed on a bid proposal for a public works project unless registered with the DIR pursuant to Labor Code Section 1725.5, with limited exceptions from this requirement for bid purposes only under Labor Code Section 1771.1(a). This Project is subject to compliance monitoring and enforcement by the DIR. It is the responsibility of the Contractor to ensure all DIR requirements and regulations are met and stay current. For more information, see http://dir.ca.gov/Public-Works/SB854.html.
6. TERM. This Contract is effective on the Execution Date set forth in the initial paragraph of Page G-4.7
this Contract and shall remain in effect until the Project has been satisfactorily completed by Contractor, unless earlier terminated pursuant to the terms of this Contract.
7. TIME OF COMPLETION. Time is of the essence with respect to all time limits set forth in the Contract Documents. Contractor shall commence the Work on the date specified in the City’s Notice to Proceed. Contractor shall diligently prosecute the Work to Substantial Completion within the working days specified per the contract documents and the City’s Notice to Proceed (“Contract Time”). The Contract Time may only be adjusted for extensions of time approved by the City and agreed to by Change Order executed by City and Contractor in accordance with the requirements of the Contract Documents.
8. COMPENSATION. The City agrees to compensate Contractor for its satisfactory completion of the Work in compliance with the Contract Documents for the not to exceed amount of eight hundred and two thousand five hundred ninety ($802,590) (“Contract Sum”).
Payment shall be as set forth in the Plans, Special Provisions and/or Technical Specifications.
The Contract Sum may only be adjusted by Change Orders issued, executed and satisfactorily performed by Contractor in accordance with the requirements of the Contract Documents. The Contract Sum shall be adjusted (upward or downward) only to account for Change Orders.
The Contract Sum is and shall be full compensation for all Work performed by Contractor. The Contract Sum shall cover all losses arising out of the nature of the Work or from the elements or any unforeseen difficulties or obstructions which may arise or be encountered in performance of the Work until its Acceptance by the City, all risks connected with the Work and any and all expenses incurred due to the suspension or discontinuance of the Work.
9. STANDARD OF PERFORMANCE. As a material inducement to the City to enter into this Contract, Contractor hereby represents and warrants that it has the qualifications and experience necessary to undertake the Work to be provided and the Project to be completed pursuant to this Contract. Contractor agrees that the Work shall be performed by qualified, experienced and well-supervised personnel. The Work performed pursuant to this Contract shall be performed in a manner consistent with the standard of care under California law applicable to those who specialize in providing such services for projects of the type, scope and complexity of the Project.
10. COMPLAINCE WITH LAW. This Project constitutes a public work within the meaning of California Labor Code Section 1720 et. seq. and is subject to prevailing wage laws. The Work performed by Contractor pursuant to this Contract shall be provided in accordance with all ordinances, resolutions, statutes, rules and regulations of the City, and any federal, state or local governmental agency having jurisdiction in effect at the time the work is rendered.
11. REPRESENTATIVE. Janamjit Gondara is hereby designated as the project manager/superintendent/foreman of Contractor authorized to act on its behalf with respect to the Work specified in this Contract. It is expressly understood that the experience, knowledge, capability and reputation of Radius Earthwork, Inc. were a substantial inducement for City to enter into this Contract. Therefore, Janamjit Gondara shall be responsible during the term of this Contract for directing all activities of Contractor and devoting sufficient time to personally supervise the services hereunder. The representative may not be changed by Contractor Page G-4.8
without the express written approval of the City.
12.LIQUIDATED DAMAGES.
12.1 Entitlement. City and Contractor acknowledge and agree that if Contractor fails to fully and satisfactorily complete the Work within the Contract Time, the City will suffer, as a result of Contractor’s failure, substantial damages which are both extremely difficult and impracticable to ascertain. Such damages may include, but are not limited to: (a) loss of public confidence in the City and its contractors; (b) loss of public use of public facilities; and (c) extended disruption to public.
12.2 Daily Amount. City and Contractor have reasonably endeavored, but failed, to ascertain the actual damage that the City will incur if the Contractor fails to achieve Substantial Completion of the Work within the Contract Time. Therefore, the parties agree that in addition to all other damages to which the City may be entitled other than delay damages, in the event the Contractor shall fail to achieve Substantial Completion of the Work within the Contract Time, Contractor shall pay City as liquidated damages the amount of Five Hundred Dollars ($500) per day for each calendar day after the expiration of the Contract Time until Contractor achieves Substantial Completion of the Work. The liquidated damages amount is not a penalty, but a reasonable estimate of the amount of damages the City will suffer.
12.3 Apportionment. Such liquidated damages shall be subject to reduction for delays for which Contractor is entitled to receive an extension of time under the Contract Documents (“Apportionment”). Such Apportionment shall not be affected by the fact that liquidated damages may not be applied for periods of time during which delays have occurred that are caused by both City and Contractor. It is agreed that the liquidated damages shall not be applied for portions of the Work completed prior to the expiration of the Contract Time.
12.4 Exclusive Remedy. City and Contractor acknowledge and agree that this Section 11, Liquidated Damages, shall be the City’s only remedy for delay damages caused by the Contractor’s failure to achieve Substantial Completion of the Work within the Contract Time.
12.5 Damages upon Abandonment. In the event that the Contractor either abandons the Work or is terminated for default in accordance with the provisions of this Contract, City shall have the right, in its sole discretion exercised by written notice issued either before or after Substantial Completion, to elect to either assert or waive its right to liquidated damages. If City elects to assert its right to liquidated damages, then the liquidated damages shall be calculated from expiration of the Contract Time to the date that Substantial Completion of the Work is achieved by the City or its replacement contractor employed to complete Contractor’s performance. If City elects to waive its right to liquidated damages, then Contractor shall be liable to the City, in lieu of the liquidated damages, for all actual Losses (as defined in the General Conditions) proximately resulting from Contractor’s failure to complete the Work within the Contract Time.
12.6 Other Remedies. The parties further acknowledge and agree that the City is entitled to any and all available legal and equitable remedies City may have where City’s Losses are Page G-4.9
caused by any reason other than Contractor’s failure to achieve Substantial Completion of the Work within the Contract Time.
13. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR. Contractor is, and shall at all times remain as to the City, a wholly independent contractor and not an agent or employee of the City. Contractor shall receive no premium or enhanced pay for work normally understood as overtime, nor shall Contractor receive holiday pay, sick leave, administrative leave, or pay for any other time not actually worked. The intention of the parties is that Contractor shall not be eligible for benefits and shall receive no compensation from the City except as expressly set forth in this Contract.
Contractor shall have no power to incur any debt, obligation, or liability on behalf of the City or otherwise act on behalf of the City as an agent. Neither the City, nor any of its agents shall have control over the conduct of Contractor, any of Contractor’s employees, or any subcontractors, except as set forth in this Contract. Contractor shall at no time, or in any manner, represent that it or any of its agents or employees or subcontractors are in any manner employees of the City. Contractor agrees to pay all required taxes on amounts paid to Contractor under this Contract, and to indemnify and hold the City harmless from any and all taxes, assessments, penalties, and interest asserted against the City by reason of the independent contractor relationship created by this Contract. Contractor shall fully comply with the worker’s compensation law regarding Contractor, Contractor’s employees and subconsultants. Contractor further agrees to indemnify and hold the City harmless from any failure of Contractor and any subconsultants to comply with applicable worker’s compensation laws.
14. CONFLICT OF INTEREST. Contractor covenants that it presently has no interest and shall not acquire any interest, direct or indirect, which may be affected by the work to be performed by Consultant under this Contract, or which would conflict in any manner with the performance of its services hereunder. Contractor further covenants that, in performance of this Contract, no person having any such interest shall be employed by it. Furthermore, Contractor shall avoid the appearance of having any interest which would conflict in any manner with the performance of the work pursuant to this Contract. Contractor agrees not to accept any employment during the term of this Contract which is or may make Contractor financially interested, as provided in California Government Code Sections 1090 and 87100, in any decision made by the City on any matter in connection with which Contractor has been retained pursuant to this Contract. However, nothing herein shall preclude Contractor from accepting other engagements with the City.
15. INDEMNIFICATION.
15.1 To the fullest extent permitted by law, Contractor shall indemnify, defend, with independent counsel approved by the City, and hold harmless the City, and its elective or appointive boards, officers, employees agents and volunteers (“Indemnitee”) from and against any and all claims, losses, or liability that may arise out of or result from damages to property or personal injury received by reason of, or in the course of work performed under this Contract due to the acts or omissions of Contractor or Contractor’s officers, employees, agents or subcontractors. The indemnification provisions survive completion of the Work or the termination of this Contract. The acceptance of such services shall not operate as a waiver of Page G-4.10
such right of indemnification. Notwithstanding the foregoing, nothing contained herein shall be construed as obligating Contractor to indemnify any Indemnitee for any claims, losses or liability resulting from the sole or active negligence or willful misconduct of the Indemnitee.
Contractor shall pay City for any costs incurred in enforcing this provision.
15.2 The City does not and shall not waive any rights that they may possess against Contractor because of the acceptance by the City or the deposit with the City of any insurance policy or certificate required pursuant to this Contract. This hold harmless and indemnification provision shall apply regardless of whether or not any insurance policies are determined to be applicable to the claim, demand, damage, liability, loss, cost or expense.
15.3 Pursuant to Public Contract Code Section 9201, the City shall timely notify Contractor upon receipt of any third-party claim relating to the Contract.
16.ASSIGNABILITY. The parties agree that the experience and qualifications of Contractor as set forth in the Contractor’s Bid are material considerations for the City entering into this Contract. Consultant shall not assign or transfer any interest in this Contract, without the prior written consent of the City, and any attempt by Contractor to do so shall be void and of no effect and a breach of this Contract. For purposes of this section, the sale, assignment, transfer or other disposition of any of the issued and outstanding capital stock of Contractor or of any general partner or joint venturer or syndicate member of Contractor, if a partnership or joint venture or syndicate or co-tenancy exists, which shall result in changing the control of Contractor, shall be construed as an assignment of this Construction Contract. Control means more than fifty percent (50%) of the voting power of the corporation or other entity.
17. INSURANCE AND BOND REQUIREMENTS.
17.1 Prior to the commencement of any Work, the Contractor shall provide the City with evidence that it has obtained the insurance required by this Section and all bonds, including, but not limited to, payment and performance bonds, required in the Special Provisions. Failure to obtain and maintain the required insurance and bonds to so shall be deemed a material breach of this Contract.
17.2 Insurance Requirements. Contractor shall obtain the following insurance.
A. Worker’s Compensation and Employer’s Liability Insurance: The CONTRACTOR shall have in effect during the entire life of this Contract workers' compensation and Employer's Liability Insurance providing full statutory coverage. In signing this Contract, the CONTRACTOR makes the following certification, required by Section 18161 of the California Labor Code: "I am aware of the provisions of Section 3700 of the California Labor Code which require every employer to be insured against liability for workers' compensation or to undertake self-insurance in accordance with the provisions of the Code, and I will comply with such provisions before commencing the performance of the work of this Contract." B. Commercial General Liability Insurance: The CONTRACTOR shall take out and maintain during the life of this Contract such Bodily Injury Liability and Property Damage Liability Page G-4.11
Insurance (Commercial General Liability Insurance) on an occurrence basis as shall protect it while performing work covered by this Contract from any and all claims for damages for bodily injury, including accidental death, as well as claims for property damage which may arise from the CONTRACTOR's operations under this Contract, whether such operations be by CONTRACTOR or by any sub-consultant or by anyone directly or indirectly employed by either of them. The amounts of such insurance shall be not less than two million dollars ($2,000,000) per occurrence and four million dollars ($4,000,000) in aggregate, or four million dollars ($4,000,000) combined single limit bodily injury and property damage for each occurrence.
CONTRACTOR shall provide the City with acceptable evidence of coverage, including a copy of all declarations of coverage exclusions.
C. Automobile Liability Insurance: CONTRACTOR shall maintain Automobile Liability Insurance pursuant to this Contract in an amount of not less than one million dollars ($1,000,000) for each accident combined single limit or not less than one million dollars ($1,000,000) for any one (1) person, and one million dollars ($1,000,000) for any one (1) accident, and Three Hundred Thousand Dollars, ($300,000) property damage.
17.3 CITY and its subsidiary agencies, and their officers, agents, employees and servants shall be named as additional insured on any such policies of Commercial General Liability and Automobile Liability Insurance, (but not for the workers' compensation), which shall also contain a provision that the insurance afforded thereby to the CITY, its subsidiary agencies, and their officers, agents, employees, and servants shall be primary insurance to the full limits of liability of the policy, and that if the CITY, its subsidiary agencies and their officers and employees have other insurance against a loss covered by a policy, such other insurance shall be excess insurance only.
17.4 In the event of the breach of any provision of this Section, or in the event any notice is received which indicates any required insurance coverage will be diminished or canceled, CITY, at its option, may, notwithstanding any other provision of this Contract to the contrary, immediately declare a material breach of this Contract and suspend all further work pursuant to this Contract.
17.5. Before the execution of this Contract, any deductibles or self-insured retentions must be declared to and approved by CITY.
18.SUSPENSION. The City may, at any time and from time to time, without cause, order Contractor, in writing (“Suspension Order”), to suspend, delay, or interrupt the Work in whole or in part for such period of time, up to an aggregate of fifty percent (50%) of the Contract Time, as City may determine, with such period of suspension to be computed from the date of the Suspension Order. Upon receipt of a Suspension Order, Contractor shall, at City’s expense, comply with its terms and take all reasonable steps to minimize costs allocable to the Work covered by the Suspension Order during the period of work stoppage. Within the period of the above noted aggregate time, or such extension to that period as is agreed upon by Contractor and City, City shall either cancel the Suspension Order or delete the work covered by the Suspension Order by issuing a Change Order. If a Suspension Order is canceled or expires, Contractor shall resume and continue with the Work. A Change Order will be issued to cover Page G-4.12
any adjustments of the Contract Sum or the Contract Time necessarily caused by such suspension.
19.BOOKS AND RECORDS. Contractor shall keep full and detailed accounts and exercise such controls as may be necessary for proper financial management under this Contract in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles and practices consistently applied.
City and City's accountants shall be afforded access at all times during normal business hours, to inspect, audit and copy Contractor's records, books, estimates, take-offs, cost reports, ledgers, schedules, correspondence, instructions, drawings, receipts, subcontracts, purchase orders, vouchers, memoranda and other data relating to this Project, and Contractor shall preserve these for a period of three years after the later of (i) final payment or (ii) final resolution of all Contract Disputes and other disputes or for such longer period as may be required by law. Contractor’s compliance with any request by City pursuant to this Section18 shall be a condition precedent to filing or maintenance of any legal action or proceeding by Contractor against City and to Contractor's right to receive further payments under the Contract Documents. Any failure by Contractor to provide access to its business records for inspection or copying by City shall be specifically enforceable by issuance of a writ or a provisional or permanent mandatory injunction by a court of competent jurisdiction based on affidavits submitted to such court, without the necessity of oral testimony.
20.WAIVER. Waiver by either party of any breach or violation of any one or more terms or conditions of this Contract shall not be deemed to be a waiver of any other term or condition contained herein or a waiver of any subsequent breach or violation of the same or any other term or condition. Acceptance by the City of the performance of any work by the Contractor shall not be deemed to be a waiver of any term or condition of this Contract. In no event shall the City’s making of any payment to Contractor constitute or be construed as a waiver by the City of any breach of this Contract, or any default which may then exist on the part of Contractor, and the making of any such payment by the City shall in no way impair or prejudice any right or remedy available to the City with regard to such breach or default.
21.DEFAULT. In the event the City determines, in its sole discretion, that Contractor has failed or refused to perform any of the obligations set forth in the Contract Documents, or is in breach of any provision of the Contract Documents, the City may give written notice of default to Contractor in the manner specified for this giving of notices in this Contract. Except for emergencies, Contractor shall cure any default in performance of its obligations under the Contract Documents within two (2) business days after receipt of written notice. However, if the breach cannot be reasonably cured within such time, Contractor will commence to cure the breach within two (2) days and will diligently and continuously prosecute such cure to completion within a reasonable time, which shall in no event be later than ten (10) days after receipt of such written notice.
22.CITY RIGHTS AND REMEDIES.
22.1 Remedies Upon Default. In the event that Contractor fails to cure any default of this Contract within the time period set forth in Section 20, then City may pursue any remedies available under law or equity, including, without limitation, the following: (1) the City may, Page G-4.13
without terminating the Contract, delete certain portions of the Work, reserving to itself all rights to losses related thereto; (2) the City may, without terminating the Contract, engage others to perform the Work or portion of the Work that has not been performed by the Contractor and withhold the cost thereof to City from future payments to the Contractor, reserving to itself all rights to Losses related thereto; or (3) the City may, without terminating the Contract and reserving to itself all rights to Losses related thereto, suspend all or any portion of this Construction Contract for as long a period of time as City determines, in its sole discretion, appropriate, in which event City shall have no obligation to adjust the Contract Sum or Contract Time, and shall have no liability to Contractor for damages if City directs Contractor to resume Work; (4) the City may terminate all or any part of this Contract for default, reserving to itself all rights of Losses related thereto; or (5) the City may, without terminating the Contract and reserving to itself all rights to Losses related thereto, exercise its rights under the Performance Bond.
22.2 Additional Provisions. All of City’s rights and remedies under this Contract are cumulative, and shall be in addition to those rights and remedies available in law or in equity. Designation in the Contract Documents of certain breaches as material shall not be construed as implying that other breaches not so designated are not material nor shall such designations be construed as limiting City’s right to terminate the Contract, or the exercise of its other rights or remedies for default, to only material breaches. City’s determination of whether there has been noncompliance with the Contract so as to warrant exercise by City of its rights and remedies for default under the Contract, shall be binding on all parties. No termination or action taken by City after such termination shall prejudice any other rights or remedies of City provided by law or equity or by the Contract Documents upon such termination; and City may proceed against Contractor to recover all liquidated damages and Losses suffered by City.
22.3 Delays by Sureties. Without limitation to any of City’s other rights or remedies under the law, City has the right to suspend the performance by Contractor’s sureties in the event of any of the following: (1) failure of the sureties to begin Work within a reasonable time in such manner as to insure full compliance with the Contract within the Contract Time; (2) abandonment of the Work; (3) if at any time City is of the opinion the Work is unnecessarily or unreasonably delayed; (4) willful violation of any terms of the Contract; (5) failure to perform according to the Contract Documents; or (6) failure to follow instructions of City for its completion within the Contract Time. City will serve notice of such failure upon the sureties and in the event the sureties neglect or refuse to cure the breach within the time specified in such notice, City shall have the power to suspend the performance or any part thereof of the sureties.
22.4 Damages to the City. The City will be entitled to recovery of all Losses under law or equity in the event of Contract’s default under the Contract Documents. In the event that City's Losses arise from Contractor’s default under the Contract Documents, City shall be entitled to withhold monies otherwise payable to Contractor until Final Completion, as defined in the General Conditions, of the Project. If City incurs Losses due to Contractor’s default, then the amount of Losses shall be deducted from the amounts withheld. Should the amount withheld exceed the amount deducted, the balance will be paid to Contractor or its designee upon Final Completion of the Project. If the Losses incurred by City exceed the amount withheld, Page G-4.14
Contractor shall be liable to City for the difference and shall promptly remit same to City.
22.5 Termination of the Contract for Default. Without limitation to any of City’s other rights or remedies at law or in equity, and reserving to itself all rights to Losses related thereto, City shall have the right to terminate this Contract, in whole or in part, upon the failure of Contractor to promptly cure any default. City’s election to terminate the Contract for default shall be communicated by giving Contractor a written notice of termination in the manner specified for the giving of notices in the Contract. Any notice of termination given to Contractor by City shall be effective immediately, unless otherwise provided therein.
22.6 Termination Without Cause. City shall have the option, at its sole discretion and without cause, of terminating this Contract in part or in whole by giving thirty (30) days written notice to Contractor. Contractor agrees to accept such sums as allowed under this Section as its sole and exclusive compensation and waives any claim for other compensation or Losses, including, but not limited to, loss of anticipated profits, loss of revenue, lost opportunity, or other consequential, direct, indirect or incidental damages of any kind.
22.7 Compensation. Following termination without cause and within forty-five (45) days after receipt of a billing from Contractor seeking payment of sums authorized by this Section, City shall pay to Contractor as its sole compensation for performance of the Work the following: (1) the amount of the Contract Sum allocable to the portion of the Work properly performed by Contractor as of the date of termination, less sums previously paid to Contractor; (2) reasonable costs of Contractor and its Subcontractors and Sub-subcontractors for demobilizing and administering the close-out of its participation in the Project (including, without limitation, all billing and accounting functions, not including attorney or expert fees) for a period of no longer than thirty (30) days after receipt of the notice of termination in an amount not to exceed the daily sum payable to Contractor for Compensable Delays; (3) previously unpaid cost of any items delivered to the Project Site which were fabricated for subsequent incorporation in the Work.
22.8 Subcontractors. Contractor shall include provisions in all of its subcontracts, purchase orders and other contracts permitting termination for convenience by Contractor on terms that are consistent with this Contract and that afford no greater rights of recovery against Contractor than are afforded to Contractor under this Section.
22.9 Contractor’s Duties Upon Termination. Upon receipt of a notice of termination for default or for convenience, Contractor shall, unless the notice directs otherwise, do the following: (1) immediately discontinue the Work to the extent specified in the notice; (2) place no further orders or subcontracts for materials, equipment, services or facilities, except as may be necessary for completion of such portion of the Work as is not discontinued; (3) provide to City a description, in writing no later than fifteen (15) days after receipt of the notice of termination, of all subcontracts, purchase orders and contracts that are outstanding, including, without limitation, the terms of the original price, any changes, payments, balance owing, the status of the portion of the Work covered and a copy of the subcontract, purchase order or contract and any written changes, amendments or modifications thereto, together with such other information as City may determine necessary in order to decide whether to accept assignment Page G-4.15
of or request Contractor to terminate the subcontract, purchase order or contract; (4) promptly assign to City those subcontracts, purchase orders or contracts, or portions thereof, that City elects to accept by assignment and cancel, on the most favorable terms reasonably possible, all subcontracts, purchase orders or contracts, or portions thereof, that City does not elect to accept by assignment; and (5) hereafter do only such Work as may be necessary to preserve and protect Work already in progress and to protect materials, plants, and equipment on the Project Site or in transit thereto.
23. CONTRACTOR’S RIGHTS AND REMEDIES. Contractor may terminate this Construction Contract for cause only upon the occurrence of one of the following: (1) the Work is stopped for sixty (60) consecutive days, through no act or fault of Contractor, any subcontractor or any employee or agent of Contractor or any subcontractor, due to issuance of an order of a court or other public authority other than City having jurisdiction or due to an act of government, such as a declaration of a national emergency making material unavailable; or (2) if the City does not make payment of sums that are not in good faith disputed by the City and does not cure such default within ninety (90) days after receipt of notice from Contractor, then upon an additional thirty (30) days’ notice to City, Contractor may terminate the Contract.
23.1 Damages to Contractor. In the event of termination for cause by Contractor, City shall pay Contractor the sums provided for in Section 21 above. Contractor agrees to accept such sums as its sole and exclusive compensation and agrees to waive any claim for other compensation or Losses, including, but not limited to, loss of anticipated profits, loss of revenue, lost opportunity, or other consequential, direct, indirect and incidental damages, of any kind.
24. NOTICES. Any notices or other communications required or permitted to be given under this Contract shall be given in writing by personal delivery, by a recognized courier service, or by U.S. mail, postage prepaid, and return receipt requested, addressed to the respective parties as follows:
To City: To Contractor:
Assistant Public Works Director - Engineering Radius Earthwork, Inc.
City of Menlo Park 197 E Hamilton Ave, Suite 204
City Hall, 701 Laurel St. Campbell, CA 95008
Menlo Park, CA 94025
25. Notice shall be deemed communicated on the earlier of actual receipt or 48 hours after deposit in the U.S. mail, or the date of delivery shown on deliverer’s receipt. In the event of any change of address, the moving party is obligated to notify the other party of the change of address in writing within a reasonable period of time.
In addition, copies of all Claims by Contractor under this contract shall be provided to the City Attorney as follows:
Page G-4.16
To City Attorney:
City Attorney
Burke, Williams & Sorensen, LLP
181 Third Street, Suite 200
San Rafael, CA 94901
All claims shall be delivered personally or sent by certified mail.
26.NON-DISCRIMINATION AND EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY. In the performance of this Contract, Contractor shall not discriminate against any employee, subcontractor or applicant for employment because of race, color, creed, religion, sex, marital status, sexual orientation, national origin, ancestry, age, physical or mental handicap, or medical condition. Contractor will take affirmative action to ensure that employees are treated without regard to race, color, creed, religion, sex, marital status, sexual orientation, national origin, ancestry, age, physical or mental handicap, or medical condition.
27.CONTRACT DOCUMENTS AND PRECEDENCE. The Contract Documents shall consist of the following documents. In case of inconsistencies between Contract Documents, the documents are listed in order of precedence.
28.PUBLIC WORKS CLAIMS. This Contract is subject to Public Contracts Code Section 9204 governing contractor claims.
29. ATTORNEYS’ FEES; VENUE. In the event that any party to this Contract commences any legal action or proceeding to enforce or interpret the provisions of this Contract, the prevailing party in such action or proceeding shall be entitled to recover reasonable attorneys’ fees and other costs incurred in that action or proceeding, in addition to any other relief to which the successful party may be entitled. The venue for any litigation shall be San Mateo County.
30. COOPERATION. In the event any claim or action is brought against the City relating to Contractor’s performance or services under this Agreement, Contractor shall render any reasonable assistance and cooperation which City might require.
31. NUISANCE. Contractor shall not maintain, commit, nor permit the maintenance or commission of any nuisance in connection with the performance of services under this Contract.
32. GOVERNING LAW. This Contract shall be construed in accordance with and governed by the laws of the State of California.
33. COMPLETE AGREEMENT; SEVERABILITY. This Contract, and any other documents incorporated herein by reference, represent the entire and integrated agreement between the City and Contractor. This Contract supersedes all prior oral and written negotiations, representations or agreements. No prior oral or written understanding shall be of any force or effect with respect to those matters covered hereunder. This Contract may only be modified by Page G-4.17
a written amendment duly executed by the parties to this Contract. In case a provision of this Contract is held to be invalid, illegal or unenforceable, the validity, legality and enforceability of the remaining provisions shall not be affected.
34. COUNTERPARTS. This Contract may be signed in multiple counterparts, which shall, when executed by all the parties constitute a single binding contract.
Signatures on next page.
Page G-4.18
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this agreement on the day and year first above written.
FOR FIRST PARTY:
Signature Date
Printed name Title
Tax ID#
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Nira F. Doherty, City Attorney Date
FOR CITY OF MENLO PARK:
Justin I. C. Murphy, City Manager Date
ATTEST:
Judi A. Herren, City Clerk Date
Page G-4.19
Public Works
City of Menlo Park 701 Laurel St., Menlo Park, CA 94025 tel 650-330-6600 menlopark.gov
STAFF REPORT
City Council
Meeting Date: 2/28/2023
Staff Report Number: 23-041-CC
Consent Calendar: Adopt a resolution supporting the City’s shuttle program for application for the San Mateo County
Shuttle Program fiscal year 2023-24 and 2024-25
and authorize the city manager to enter into funding
agreements
Recommendation
Staff recommends that the City Council adopt a resolution (Attachment A) in support of the Citywide shuttle program, for the San Mateo County Transportation Authority Shuttle Program fiscal years 2023-24 and 2024-25 to continue funding for operations and administration of the program and authorize the city manager to enter into necessary funding agreements and any subsequent amendments within the budgeted amounts with grant agencies.
Policy Issues
This project is consistent with the General Plan goal and policies to support local and regional transit that is efficient, frequent, convenient and safe. These policies seek to promote the use of public transit and to promote the use of alternatives to the single-occupant automobile. The grant requires an adopted resolution of support by the City Council as part of the application.
Background
The City of Menlo Park manages a shuttle program that provides transit service to many residents, employees and visitors. The program is primarily funded by grants provided by the San Mateo City/County Association of Governments (C/CAG), San Mateo County Transportation Authority (SMCTA) and Metropolitan Transportation Commission (via the San Mateo County Transit District.) These funds typically include a competitive application process, an executed agreement between parties, and a demonstrated adherence to the agreement details.
On January 13, C/CAG and SMCTA issued a joint call for shuttle projects for fiscal year 2023-24 and 2024-
25. The program includes $11,000,000 for this two-year funding cycle, and direct costs for operations, marketing, and administration of shuttles are eligible for funding. The February 14 City Council agenda included an item to authorize submitting an application, but staff withdrew the item to update the resolution (Attachment A) to be consistent with grant program requirements. The City will submit an application by the February 24 deadline. The City’s shuttles are currently supported by a grant through this program, expiring June 30.
The City’s shuttles provide “around town” transportation to many residents, employees and visitors. The program includes the following services (Attachment B provides a hyperlink to the City’s website, providing additional details):
AGENDA ITEM G-5 Page G-5.1
Staff Report #: 23-041-CC
City of Menlo Park 701 Laurel St., Menlo Park, CA 94025 tel 650-330-6600 menlopark.gov • The M1-Crosstown shuttle provides an all-day, fixed-route service between Belle Haven and Sharon Heights. It serves several senior housing facilities, Menlo Park senior center facilities (and the Menlo Park Community Campus project once completed), the current Belle Haven library, the Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Menlo-Atherton High School, the main library, Caltrain station, Little House, Safeway, Stanford Medical Center, Stanford Shopping Center, Palo Alto Medical Foundation, and a regional transit hub in downtown Palo Alto.
• The M3-Marsh Road shuttle provides fixed-route, peak-hour service between the Caltrain station and the business parks and office complexes along Marsh Road, Bohannon Drive and the Bayfront Area. This shuttle also currently serves TIDE Academy, housing complexes along Haven Avenue, and will serve new housing currently under construction in the Bayfront Area. • The M4-Willow Road shuttle provides fixed-route, peak-hour service between the Caltrain station and the business parks and office complexes along Willow Road and O’Brien Drive. This shuttle also serves MidPeninsula High School. • The Shoppers’ Shuttle is a door-to-door service, which operates three days per week providing transportation for those not near a shuttle route or that have limited mobility. Destinations include Little House, Menlo Park Senior Center, downtown Menlo Park, the main library, Safeway, Caltrain station, Stanford Shopping Center, and retail destinations in Menlo Park and Redwood City.
The City is about to start a shuttle evaluation study, which is funded in part by a Caltrans sustainable transportation planning grant. This grant application was authorized by City Council October 12, 2021, with a successful award in spring 2022. This comprehensive study will look at existing shuttle routes and ridership, existing transit services, new shuttle technologies (such as on demand or flex route service), reach out to the community for feedback and input, and provide recommendations for route changes or new service, and identify funding opportunities and partnerships. Staff will also coordinate with the Willow Village development to identify how the shuttle approved as a condition of that development could be integrated with or impact operations of the City’s shuttles. The Willow Village shuttle is not expected to begin operation within the timeframe of the current grant cycle. The findings from this study will inform future budgets and funding for the shuttle program. Staff is currently reviewing proposals from consultants and anticipates bringing an item on approval of the consultant agreement to the City Council in the coming months.
Analysis
By applying for funds through the San Mateo County Shuttle Program Call for projects, the City of Menlo Park is seeking to ensure continuity of the City’s current shuttle services.
The effectiveness of the City’s shuttle program is evaluated by considering ridership, cost and how it enhances accessibility, especially for groups with significant need. SMCTA considers two numerical metrics, the average number of riders per service hour and the cost per rider, compared to defined benchmarks for the type of service. Tables 1 and 2 summarize these metrics for each route from fiscal year 2018-19 (Table 1) and fiscal year 2021-22 (Table 2.) The benchmarks for service are set bi-annually by C/CAG and SMCTA based on operations of the current routes in San Mateo County and shuttle management best practice information. These data are used by the grant selection committee to compare shuttles against one another.
The Shoppers’ shuttle and Crosstown shuttle also provide enhanced accessibility for the groups with significant transportation needs within Menlo Park. The Shopper’s shuttle provides a travel option for populations that have limited mobility or access to fixed-route transit. The M1-Crosstown shuttle connects Belle Haven and senior residents with vital services. Similar to many transit services in the Bay Area, Page G-5.2
Staff Report #: 23-041-CC
City of Menlo Park 701 Laurel St., Menlo Park, CA 94025 tel 650-330-6600 menlopark.gov shuttles continue to provide vital transportation links that would be difficult to recover and implement again if they were cut.
Tables 1 and 2 reflect two different realities, one of a world pre-pandemic and one during the pandemic. As shown in Table 1, the program’s cost effectiveness (cost per rider) and ridership (passengers per hour) exceeded the County’s standards for commuter shuttles (M3-Marsh Road and M4-Willow Road.) The performance of the M1-Menlo Midday, M2-Belle Haven and Shoppers’ shuttles did not meet the benchmarks, and reflect several challenges experienced during that period, including a driver shortage, and service disruptions, and suspension of a second vehicle for both the M2-Belle Haven and M3-Marsh shuttles between October 2017 to April 2019.
Table 2 reflects ridership numbers that are still stabilizing as we adjust to the pandemic. Since March 2020, transit ridership plummeted 90 percent in the Bay Area. The rise of work-from-home and the need for shelter-in-place kept transit ridership low until 2021, when the advent of vaccines and decrease in hospitalizations led to slight increases in transit ridership. With long term employer work-from-home policies continuing to evolve, the near-term demand for transit remains unclear.
Table 1: Benchmark metrics, by shuttle route
(Before COVID-19 Pandemic)
Passengers per service hour Cost per rider
Shuttle route Actual
(FY 2018-19)
Service benchmark
(FY 2018-20)
Actual
(FY 2018-19)
Service benchmark
(FY 2018-20)
M3-Marsh Road 17.4 Above 15 $ 6.60 Less than $8.00
M4-Willow Road 26.1 Above 15 $ 6.90 Less than $8.00
M1-Menlo Midday1 1.1 Above 10 $74.31 Less than $10.00
M2-Belle Haven 6.3 Above 10 $14.11 Less than $10.00
Shoppers’ 2.3 Above 2 $36.45 Less than $20.00
Note: FY 2018-19 data are presented as the most recent complete fiscal year. 1 Entire route suspended as of September 2018; benchmarks reflect poor ridership, drivers not complying with schedules, and ridership data from only two months of the fiscal year.
Table 2: Benchmark metrics, by shuttle route
(COVID-19 Pandemic)
Passengers per service hour Cost per rider
Shuttle route Actual
(FY 2021-22)
Service benchmark
(FY 2020-22)
Actual
(FY 2021-22)
Service benchmark
(FY 2020-22)
M3-Marsh Road 5.0 Above 15 $ 23.33 Less than $9.00
M4-Willow Road 3.8 Above 15 $ 58.03 Less than $9.00
M1-Crosstown1 1.1 Above 10 $89.60 Less than $11.00
Shoppers’ 2.8 Above 2 $36.81 Less than $22.00
Note: FY 2021-22 data are presented as the most recent complete fiscal year. 1 M2-Belle Haven took over part of M1-Menlo Midday route, renamed to M1-Crosstown in November 2020.
Page G-5.3
Staff Report #: 23-041-CC
City of Menlo Park 701 Laurel St., Menlo Park, CA 94025 tel 650-330-6600 menlopark.gov Many other shuttles in San Mateo County are experiencing similar ridership decreases, with shuttles serving industries such as biotechnology and the medical field performing better because work-from-home is less common. The M3-Marsh Road and M4-Willow Road shuttles continue to have lower ridership due to fewer workers, but the return of high schools to in-person education has helped ridership rebound slightly. The M1-Crosstown shuttle has lower ridership, but provides vital connections between Belle Haven and senior centers, retail, medical and transit facilities. The Shoppers’ shuttle recovered the fastest during the pandemic, exceeding pre-pandemic ridership in 2021 and continuing to date.
The San Mateo County Shuttle Program grant criteria include the ridership and cost metrics, assessments of impact on greenhouse gas metrics and vehicle miles of travel, and assessments of how the shuttles provide enhanced accessibility to equity priority communities and amenities to riders.
Proposed program budget
The City’s shuttle program is currently funded through several sources, including grants from C/CAG, SMCTA, the Metropolitan Transportation Commission’s (MTC) Lifeline Grant Program, and the City’s Development Shuttle Fee. Table 3 summarizes the program budget for the three prior fiscal years, and the estimated budget for fiscal years 2023-24 and 2024-25, the two years covered in this San Mateo County Shuttle Program grant cycle.
Table 3: Program budget
Shuttle route FY 2020-21 FY 2021-22 FY 2022-23 FY 2023-24 Proposed
FY 2024-25
Proposed
M1-Crosstown $408,600 $414,200 $421,700 $432,700 $441,200 M3-Marsh Road1 $310,200 $314,600 $189,100 $188,000 $192,000 M4-Willow Road $164,700 $167,500 $171,200 $169,100 $172,800 Shoppers’ $68,300 $69,600 $70,600 $74,300 $76,100
Total $951,800 $965,900 $852,600 $864,100 $882,100
Note: San Mateo County Shuttle Program FY 2020-22 grant extended one year for FY 2022-23 due to COVID-19. 1 Funding request for FY 2022-23 reduced due to second vehicle being suspended since March 2020.
If awarded, the San Mateo County Shuttle Program will fund up to 75 percent of program costs, with remaining program funds coming from sources outlined in Tables 4 and 5 below. As in past years, staff recommends not applying for funding for the Shoppers’ shuttle, as this route has not met the benchmarks to be competitive in the call for projects. Despite the Shoppers’ shuttle returning to its pre-pandemic ridership that ridership is still well below the recommended benchmark metrics.
Staff has prepared two funding allocation scenarios for the shuttle program: one where the City continues to be awarded funds from the MTC Lifeline grant program (Table 4), and one where the match is drawn entirely from local sources (Table 5.) Shuttles serving elderly and low-income residents, such as the M1- Crosstown are eligible for Lifeline funding. These two scenarios are presented since the Lifeline program funding is determined on a different cycle, and cannot be guaranteed for the two fiscal years in the San Mateo County Shuttle Program call for projects. Grant applications for Lifeline Cycle 7 funding are expected later in 2023. Historically, Lifeline has funded up to 40 percent of the M1-Crosstown shuttle, with the other 60 percent funded by the San Mateo County Shuttle Program. If the City does not receive Lifeline funding, the City would need to contribute 25 percent from local funds to continue running the service, with the remaining 75 percent coming from the San Mateo County Shuttle Program. Otherwise, the service would Page G-5.4
Staff Report #: 23-041-CC
City of Menlo Park 701 Laurel St., Menlo Park, CA 94025 tel 650-330-6600 menlopark.gov need to be suspended.
If the City continues to receive Lifeline funding, the City’s contribution toward shuttle operations is estimated at up to $98,200 in fiscal year 2023-24 and $102,100 in fiscal year 2024-25, for a total of $200,300 during the current grant cycle (Table 4.) If the City does not receive Lifeline funding, the City’s contribution toward shuttle operations is estimated at $206,400 in fiscal year 2023-24 and $212,400 in fiscal year 2024-25, totaling $418,800 during the current grant cycle (Table 5.) This portion of the local match has historically been funded by San Mateo County Measure A funds. An additional $65,000 a year comes from developer contributions to the City’s shuttle program. These estimates would maintain current service levels. If the City is not successful with these grants, staff would return to City Council to receive direction on whether and how to continue shuttle services within the City.
Table 4: Allocation of program budget by source fund
(with MTC Lifeline award)
Funding source SMCTA and
C/CAG request
MTC
Lifeline1 award Developer fees2 Local match Total
FY 2023-24 $527,500 $173,100 $65,300 $98,200 $864,100
FY 2024-25 $538,200 $176,500 $65,300 $102,100 $882,100
2 Year Total $1,065,700 $349,600 $130,600 $200,300 $1,746,200 1 MTC Lifeline funding is anticipated to be a two-year cycle. 2 Approximately $65,300 per year comes from developer contributions to the City’s shuttle program. The local match includes 100 percent of the cost for the Shoppers’ shuttle (approximately $75,000 annually.) Table 5: Allocation of program budget by source fund
(without MTC Lifeline award)
Funding source SMCTA and
C/CAG request Developer fees1 Local match2 Total
FY 2023-24 $592,400 $65,300 $206,400 $864,100
FY 2024-25 $604,400 $65,300 $212,400 $882,100
2 Year Total $1,196,800 $130,600 $418,800 $1,746,200
1The City collects approximately $65,300 per year from developer-required contributions to the City’s shuttle program. 2The local match includes 100 percent of the cost for the Shoppers’ shuttle (approximately $75,000 annually.) As the City pursues funding to continue operation of the shuttles, staff have also been coordinating with Commute.org about the operation of the commuter shuttles. The City officially joined Commute.org in 2022 and Mayor Wolosin currently sits on their Board. Commute.org operates most of the other commuter shuttles in San Mateo County and the existing shuttles all use Commute.org branded vehicles, for ease of deployment and efficiency in contracting. Commute.org is willing to take on the operations of the City’s two commuter shuttles starting with the new grant funding, subject to a 4 percent fee (of the total operating cost) to cover their administrative expenses. Some activities currently conducted by staff related to coordination, shuttle management, and marketing would be handled by Commute.org, which would offset the additional expense by freeing up about 20 hours of staff time per month for other transportation-related activities. The City would maintain responsibility for the Crosstown and Shoppers’ shuttles, which are outside the purview of Commute.org.
The current contract between SamTrans and the shuttle operator, which expires at the end of fiscal year Page G-5.5
Staff Report #: 23-041-CC
City of Menlo Park 701 Laurel St., Menlo Park, CA 94025 tel 650-330-6600 menlopark.gov 2024-25, includes the use of gas-powered vehicles. Funding from this grant source can only be used to fund shuttles contracted via this existing contract. After this contract, the City can work with Samtrans and Commute.org to pursue a zero emission bus (ZEB) fleet. Starting in 2026, the California Air Resources Board (CARB) will require smaller transit agencies to purchase ZEBs for at least 25 percent of their fleet, growing to 100 percent in 2029. Attachment C provides a hyperlink to a CARB fact sheet about the CARB Innovative Clean Transit regulations.
Impact on City Resources
If the City is successful with these grant applications, staff will include funding for the shuttles in each of the next two annual budget cycles. The estimated total annual cost of the M1-Crosstown, M3-Marsh Road, M4- Willow Road, and Shoppers’ shuttle services is $864,100 in fiscal year 2023-24 and $882,100 in fiscal year 2024-25. The funding for the City’s share of 25 percent comes from the City’s Development Shuttle Fee (approximately $65,000 per year), Measure A funds, and the MTC Lifeline Grant Program (this program provides a maximum of 40 percent for the M1-Crosstown shuttles.) Environmental Review
This action is not a project within the meaning of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines §§ 15378 and 15061(b)(3) as it will not result in any direct or indirect physical change in the environment.
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: menlopark.gov/shuttles
C. Hyperlink: ww2.arb.ca.gov/resources/fact-sheets/innovative-clean-transit-ict-regulation-fact-sheet Report prepared by:
Nicholas Yee, Associate Transportation Planner
Report prepared by:
Hugh Louch, Assistant Public Works Director - Transportation Page G-5.6
RESOLUTION NO. XXXX
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MENLO PARK SUPPORTING THE CITY’S SHUTTLE PROGRAM AND SUBMITTING AN
APPLICATION FOR SAN MATEO COUNTY SHUTTLE PROGRAM FUNDING WHEREAS, there is a need for “around town” transportation to serve many residents, employees and visitors; and
WHEREAS, City of Menlo Park manages a Shuttle Program to provide commuter service to and from the Menlo Park Caltrain station and community service to link residents to vital community services and destinations; and
WHEREAS, the cost of the City’s Shuttle Program is estimated to be $1,746,200 over fiscal years 2023-24 and 2024-25; and
WHEREAS, the City wishes to sponsor the City’s Shuttle Program (the Project); and WHEREAS, the City seeks up to $1,196,800 for the Project in fiscal years 2023-24 and 2024- 25; and
WHEREAS, June 7, 1988, the voters of San Mateo County approved a ballot measure to allow the collection and distribution by the San Mateo County Transportation Authority (TA) of a halfcent transactions and use tax in San Mateo County for 25 years, with the tax revenues to be used for highway and transit improvements pursuant to the Transportation Expenditure Plan presented to the voters (Original Measure A); and
WHEREAS, November 2, 2004, the voters of San Mateo County approved the continuation of the collection and distribution by the TA the half-cent transactions and use tax for an additional 25 years to implement the 2004 Transportation Expenditure Plan beginning January 1, 2009 (New Measure A); and
WHEREAS, the Board of Directors of the City/County Association of Governments (C/CAG) of San Mateo County at its February 14, 2002 meeting approved the Congestion Relief Plan and subsequently reauthorized the Congestion Relief Plan in 2007, 2010, 2015, and 2019; and WHEREAS, a component of the C/CAG Congestion Relief Plan is to support Local and Employer Based Shuttle Programs; and
WHEREAS, the TA and C/CAG issued a joint Call for Projects for the San Mateo County Shuttle Program on January 13, 2023; and
WHEREAS, the TA and C/CAG require a governing board resolution from the City in support of the City’s application for $1,196,800 from the San Mateo County Shuttle Program for the Project; and
WHEREAS, TA and C/CAG require the City’s a governing board to adopt a resolution:
1. Supporting the Project and the City's application for $1,196,800 in TA Measure A Shuttle Program funds for the Project;
Page G-5.7 ATTACHMENT A
Resolution No. XXXX
2. Committing the City to the completion of the Project, including the commitment of matching funds in the amount of $549,400 needed for implementation;
3. Certifying that any funds awarded by the TA or C/CAG will be used to supplement existing funds for program activities, and will not replace existing funds or resources; and
4. If funds are awarded, authorizing the City Manager, or designee, to sign a funding agreement or memorandum of understanding (MOU) with the TA and, if necessary, C/CAG, for Shuttle Program funding for the Project and to take any other actions necessary to give effect to this resolution.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Menlo Park
1. Directs staff to submit an application for funding from the San Mateo County Shuttle Program for $1,196,800 for the Project.
2. Authorizes the City Manager, or designee, to execute a funding agreement or MOU with the San Mateo County Transportation Authority and, if necessary, the City/County Association of Governments of San Mateo County to encumber San Mateo County Shuttle Program funds.
3. Commits to completing the Project, including contributing $549,400 of matching funds needed for Project implementation, if the requested funds are awarded.
4. Certifies that any funds awarded by the SMCTA or C/CAG will be used to supplement existing funds for program activities, and will not replace existing funds or resources.
5. Authorizes the City Manager, or designee, to take any other actions necessary to give effect to this resolution.
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-eighth day of February, 2023, 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 ____, 2023.
Judi A. Herren, City Clerk
Page G-5.8
Library and Community Services
City of Menlo Park 701 Laurel St., Menlo Park, CA 94025 tel 650-330-6600 menlopark.gov
STAFF REPORT
City Council
Meeting Date: 2/28/2023
Staff Report Number: 23-046-CC
Consent Calendar: Adopt a resolution to accept and appropriate a San Mateo County 2023 Summer Enrichment Grant in
the total amount of $13,000 to support and expand
summer camp enrichment programs for children at
the Belle Haven Youth Center
Recommendation
Staff recommends that City Council adopt a resolution (Attachment A) accepting and appropriating a San Mateo County 2023 Summer Enrichment Grant in the total amount of $13,000 to support and expand summer camp enrichment programs for children at the Belle Haven Youth Center.
Policy Issues
City Council authorizes the acceptance of grant awards to support City of Menlo Park operations, services and projects.
Background
On February 6, 2023, San Mateo County awarded the City of Menlo Park a San Mateo County 2023 Summer Enrichment Grant in the total amount of $13,000 to support and expand summer camp enrichment programs for 12 middle school youth at the Belle Haven Youth Center (Attachment B.) The City of Menlo Park was awarded and accepted a similar grant from San Mateo County in 2022. The 2022 award included additional funding for Camp Menlo, however the Camp Menlo program was not selected for an award in 2023.
Analysis
The San Mateo County 2023 Summer Enrichment Grant Program’s goals are:
• Expand access to out-of-school care programs for low-income youth and youth from historically marginalized or underrepresented backgrounds or communities (e.g., students with special needs, in foster care, English language learners, youth experiencing homelessness); • Support the social-emotional well-being of youth to mitigate the setbacks and hardships associated with COVID-19; and
• Provide opportunities for youth to re-inspire and propel learning to counterbalance the loss of learning opportunities attributed to the COVID-19 pandemic and distance learning.
City staff submitted a successful application for $13,000 from the San Mateo County 2023 Summer Enrichment grant funding to support and expand programs for 12 middle school youth in the Middle Camp summer camp program at Belle Haven Youth Center. This funding will be used to support the continued and AGENDA ITEM G-6 Page G-6.1
Staff Report #: 23-046-CC
City of Menlo Park 701 Laurel St., Menlo Park, CA 94025 tel 650-330-6600 menlopark.gov expanded program serving middle school youth.
The program provides community service opportunities and summer programing to rising sixth through eighth grade children. Funding will be utilized to subsidize tuition, partial costs of personnel salaries, and program supplies (i.e., apparel, materials to support service projects, and general supplies.) This program is especially important as some of the elementary school participants will be aging out of the camp programs and have limited structured options for the summer which has a potential to increase learning loss.
Impact on City Resources
There is no new impact to the City’s general fund operating budget associated with this grant as general costs will be covered by the program fees and existing budgets. Should the City Council adopt the resolution in Attachment A, then the City will receive a grant award in the amount of $13,000 toward the Middle Camp summer camp program at Belle Haven Youth Center.
Environmental Review
This action is not a project within the meaning of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines §15378 and §15061(b)(3) as it will not result in any direct or indirect physical change in the environment.
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. Preliminary grant award notification letter
Report prepared by:
Sheriann Chaw, Library and Community Services Supervisor Nick Szegda, Assistant Library Service Director
Report reviewed by:
Sean S. Reinhart, Library and Community Services Director Page G-6.2
RESOLUTION NO. XXXX
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MENLO PARK ACCEPTING AND APPROPRIATING A SAN MATEO COUNTY 2023 SUMMER ENRICHMENT GRANT IN THE TOTAL AMOUNT OF $13,000 TO SUPPORT MIDDLE CAMP SUMMER PROGRAM.
WHEREAS, the City of Menlo Park operates the Belle Haven Youth Center and its associated summer programs including Middle Camp; and
WHEREAS, the purpose of the summer programs operated out of the Belle Haven Youth Center, in part, is to provide a safe and healthy environment for children to learn and develop; and
WHEREAS, the City of Menlo Park has been awarded a San Mateo County 2023 Summer Enrichment Grant award in the amount of $13,000 to support the Middle Camp Summer Program.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council accepts and appropriates the San Mateo County 2023 Summer Enrichment Grant award in the amount of $13,000 to support the Middle Camp Summer Program in the calendar year 2023.
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-eighth day of February, 2023, 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 __, 2023.
Judi A. Herren, City Clerk
Page G-6.3 ATTACHMENT A
From: SMC_summerenrichment
To: Chaw, Sheriann J
Subject: Award Notification: 2023 SMC Summer Enrichment Grant Date: Monday, February 6, 2023 5:02:17 PM
Attachments: 2023 Grant Agreement-Summer Enrichment - REVIEW COPY.pdf Importance: High
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Unless you recognize the sender's email address and know the content is safe, DO NOT click links, open attachments or reply.
Dear City of Menlo Park,
Congratulations! Middle Camp (AKA Summer of Service) has been selected to receive a San Mateo County 2023 Summer Enrichment grant in the amount of $13,000. Unfortunately, Camp Menlo was not selected for an award.
The grant is contingent on completing the following steps by 5:00pm on Wednesday, February 15, 2023.
1. Review the attached Grant Agreement and provide contact information for page 4. Once we receive the contact information, the County will finalize the grant agreement and send it back to you for signature by your authorized representative. The attached version is for review only—please do not fill or sign the attached file.
2. Submit an electronic W-9 available online Form W-9 (Rev. October 2018) (irs.gov). Once we have executed the grant agreement, the funding check will be mailed via priority express mail to the address provided on the W-9 form.
If you have any questions, please email us at [email protected].
Sincerely,
San Mateo County Grant Team
Page G-6.4 ATTACHMENT B
Library and Community Services
City of Menlo Park 701 Laurel St., Menlo Park, CA 94025 tel 650-330-6600 menlopark.gov
STAFF REPORT
City Council
Meeting Date: 2/28/2023
Staff Report Number: 23-047-CC
Regular Business: Identify a preferred aquatics operator and authorize the city manager to negotiate an agreement for an
aquatics operator at Burgess Pool and the future
Menlo Park Community Campus aquatics center;
and form an ad hoc City Council subcommittee to
advise the agreement negotiation process
Recommendation
City staff recommends that City Council:
• Identify request for proposals (RFP) respondent, Team Sheeper, Inc., as the preferred aquatics operator for Burgess Pool and the future Menlo Park Community Campus (MPCC) aquatics center • Authorize the city manager to enter negotiations with Team Sheeper, Inc., for a draft aquatics operator agreement at Burgess Pool and the future MPCC aquatics center, to take effect September 1, at terms in accordance with City Council’s direction regarding desired elements of the aquatics program and as specified in the RFP. The resulting draft agreement would be subject to City Council authorization, tentatively scheduled March 28.
• Form an ad hoc subcommittee comprised of two City Councilmembers appointed by the City Council to advise and support City staff during the agreement negotiation process.
Policy Issues
City Council provides policy direction to the city manager regarding service provision to the community; provides authorization to the city manager to negotiate and execute professional services agreements with service providers; and sets prioritization for the use of City resources to serve the community.
Background
On February 8, 2022, City Council directed staff to prepare an RFP to be issued in autumn 2022 for an aquatics operator at Burgess Pool and the future MPCC aquatics center.
On August 23, 2022, City Council reviewed an aquatics program analysis and provided direction to staff regarding desired elements of the RFP.
On October 11, 2022, City Council reviewed a draft RFP and process timeline and authorized staff to issue the RFP. The RFP was issued October 24, 2022
The City received three proposals in response to the RFP by the November 30, 2022 submittal deadline.
A review panel comprised of experienced aquatics managers from East Bay municipalities that have no prior connections or preferences for any of the RFP respondents, City staff, and the Parks and Recreation AGENDA ITEM H-1 Page H-1.1
Staff Report #: 23-047-CC
City of Menlo Park 701 Laurel St., Menlo Park, CA 94025 tel 650-330-6600 menlopark.gov Commission chairperson independently evaluated all three proposals, then met December 15, 2022, to jointly evaluate the proposals.
On December 21, 2022, the review panel conducted follow-up interviews with two of the respondents to seek clarification to various aspects of their respective proposals, and in January 2023 conducted initial reference checks with municipalities where those respondents are currently operating aquatics programs.
On February 14, 2023, City Council reviewed the three proposals and preliminary considerations for selecting an aquatics operator (Attachment A.) Several public comments were received in support of the Team Sheeper, Inc. proposal. Some public comments were received that expressed concerns about Team Sheeper, Inc.’s current programs and schedule. City Councilmembers offered a number of questions and comments about specific desired programming and schedules, community input, city-operated aquatics programs, resident fees and non-resident fees, prioritizing residents’ access to pools, and forming an ad hoc subcommitee to advise the negotiation process.
Analysis
RFP key priorities
Per City Council’s feedback and direction when the RFP was authorized October 11, 2022, key priorities were incorporated into the RFP. The RFP was structured to offer some flexibility to RFP respondents to develop proposals that balance the City’s key priorities with respondents’ operational needs. Proposals from qualified aquatics operators that demonstrated a high degree of responsiveness to most or all these priorities in addition to the basic capabilities and competencies that are required to operate quality aquatics programs were deemed more competitive for selection:
1. Operate the Burgess Pool and the future MPCC aquatics center for public access year-round, seven days per week, no fewer than 63 hours per week at each location as calculated by average applied over the course of a full calendar year—with exceptions for closures to observe major holidays or to complete necessary maintenance or repair work.
2. Operate Burgess Pool and MPCC aquatics center with comparable or equivalent operating schedules and programs at both locations, with allowance for some variances to respond to hyperlocal needs and other unique considerations of each site and the neighborhoods in which they are located.
3. Seek City approval for new aquatics user fees or modifications to existing aquatics user fees, with the mutual understanding by City and operator that: a) user fees are the primary source of revenue necessary for operator to deliver and sustain safe, quality aquatics operations for the community; and, b) user fees can and do present barriers to entry for some residents, especially residents who are most vulnerable, and barriers can persist even with the availability of scholarship or subsidy programs.
4. Enter into a revenue sharing agreement with the City to offset a portion of the City’s facility maintenance costs at Burgess Pool and the MPCC aquatics center, preferably at a “medium” cost recovery rate to the City of 30 percent to 70 percent. The City’s total costs to maintain the Burgess Pool facility were approximately $645,000 in fiscal year 2021-2022.
5. Dedicate operating hours and pool space to open swim/community swim for play and social time during times that are deemed convenient and accessible to Menlo Park resident children and families, as measured in part by community satisfaction surveys to be jointly administered by operator and the City.
6. Offer aqua wellness and/or therapeutic classes in formats and at times that are deemed convenient and accessible to Menlo Park for seniors and others who benefit from such programs, as measured in part by community satisfaction surveys to be jointly administered by operator and the City.
7. Recognize the City’s desire to ensure that every Menlo Park resident child has meaningful access to effective water safety instruction at City aquatics centers regardless of their family’s ability to pay user fees. Respondent proposes to provide these services to individuals or families who cannot afford the market rate fees.
Page H-1.2
Staff Report #: 23-047-CC
City of Menlo Park 701 Laurel St., Menlo Park, CA 94025 tel 650-330-6600 menlopark.gov
8. Diversity, equity, inclusion, belonging
A. Provide meaningful employment opportunities in City aquatics facilities to qualified Menlo Park residents, especially residents who live in the immediate vicinity of City aquatics centers.
B. Foster an organizational culture that is based on foundations of equity, inclusion, belonging and justice to create a safe and welcoming environment in City aquatics facilities for all Menlo Park residents regardless of background, income, race, religion, sexual orientation, gender identity, and other lived experiences that contribute to a vibrant and accepting community.
C. Reduce and/or remove barriers to entry for City residents who are most vulnerable, including children and families who reside in low-income households, seniors and people with disabilities.
Proposals
Three proposals were received in response to the RFP. The proposals were provided to City Council February 14 to give City Council and the community sufficient time to review the proposals and to identify preliminary considerations for City Council feedback and direction (Attachment A.) Because no operator has been selected and no agreement has been negotiated, some sensitive information was redacted from the proposals such as contact phone numbers and confidential financial details in respect to the privacy of individuals and proprietary business information.
During the review of the proposals, the RFP review panel identified several considerations for City Council’s awareness, which were previewed to City Council February 14. • Two of the proposals (Team Sheeper, Inc., and The Swimming Swan, LLC) are from respondents that currently operate public aquatics facilities, and in the opinion of City staff and the RFP review panel, demonstrate sufficient capabilities and experience to operate the Burgess Pool and future MPCC aquatics center
• Team Sheeper, Inc. is the City’s current operator that has operated Burgess Pool since 2006 and previously operated Belle Haven Pool from 2011 until 2021 when the Belle Haven Pool was demolished to make way for construction of a new aquatics center as part of the MPCC project • The Swimming Swan, LLC is a qualified operator that is based in southern California and recently expanded its operations to Santa Clara County and Las Vegas, Nevada • SOLO Aquatics is from a local aquatics program that currently operates as a program subcontractor to the current operator of Burgess Pool
• Based on the key priorities and requirements that City Council established in the RFP, some changes to the current operations and programs are expected and desired, however, minimizing disruption and preserving the continuity of popular services and programs to the extent possible also is important • Remaining with the current qualified operator (Team Sheeper, Inc.) would probably result in relatively less disruption to current programs and operations from the perspective of current pool users, and negotiating a new agreement with Team Sheeper, Inc. would provide the opportunity for the City to implement some desired changes to the aquatics program
• Selecting a new qualified operator (e.g., The Swimming Swan, LLC) would probably result in relatively more disruption to current programs and operations from the perspective of current pool users, particularly in regard to the unique challenges and opportunities of transitioning from one operator to another operator.
Based on the information received during the RFP process, City staff is confident and prepared to work with either qualified aquatics operator and/or execute any direction City Council may provide regarding the desired future operations of the City’s aquatics program.
Page H-1.3
Staff Report #: 23-047-CC
City of Menlo Park 701 Laurel St., Menlo Park, CA 94025 tel 650-330-6600 menlopark.gov RFP review panel evaluation
Proposals were evaluated by the review panel for the necessary qualifications, background, and experience operating municipal aquatics centers, and according to the selection criteria outlined in the RFP. For reference, the proposals and RFP are included with this report in Attachment A.
The review panel found that Team Sheeper, Inc.’s and The Swimming Swan, LLC’s proposals both demonstrated the necessary qualifications, background and experience operating municipal aquatics centers, and found both proposals to be sufficiently responsive to the RFP selection criteria to be deemed competitive for selection. The proposal from SOLO Aquatics demonstrated experience running aquatics programs like swim teams, however it did not demonstrate experience operating aquatics centers of the scale and complexity of Burgess Pool and the future MPCC aquatics center, and was significantly less comprehensive overall, and was not deemed competitive for selection.
What follows is a summary of the RFP review panel’s evaluation of the proposals that were deemed competitive, from Team Sheeper, Inc. and The Swimming Swan, LLC. • Basic qualifications, experience and organizational capacity. The review panel found that both Team Sheeper, Inc.’s and The Swimming Swan, LLC’s proposals demonstrated sufficient qualifications and experience to effectively operate the Burgess Pool and future MPCC aquatics center. Team Sheeper, Inc., is the current operator of Burgess Pool and operated the former Belle Haven Pool, demonstrating experience operating aquatics centers in the local area and specifically Menlo Park. The Swimming Swan, LLC, is a qualified operator that is based in southern California and recently expanded its operations to Santa Clara County and Las Vegas, Nevada. The review panel also found that both Team Sheeper, Inc.’s and The Swimming Swan, LLC’s proposals demonstrated sufficient staffing and management capacity, staff training and development, and related organizational and administrative systems necessary to effectively operate the Burgess Pool and future MPCC aquatics center. • Quality assurance and risk management. The review panel found that both Team Sheeper, Inc.’s and The Swimming Swan’s proposals demonstrated the necessary qualifications and capacity to provide sufficient quality assurance and risk management for operating the Burgess Pool and future MPCC aquatics center. Team Sheeper, Inc.’s proposal noted its existing relationship and experience with the San Mateo County Environmental Health agency, which oversees quality assurance and conducts inspections at aquatics facilities in the county, including Burgess Pool and the future MPCC aquatics center. The Swimming Swan, LLC’s proposal provided general assurances, backed by its experience operating aquatics centers in other communities that it follows all local, state, and federal regulations and is in compliance with health department guidelines.
• Schedule. The review panel found that both Team Sheeper, Inc.’s and The Swimming Swan, LLC’s proposals demonstrated responsiveness to the RFP priority of operating both pools year-round, seven days per week, no fewer than 63 hours per week at each location. Team Sheeper, Inc.’s proposal included a greater number of operating hours than the other proposals, and proposed to open at 6 a.m. most days of the year. The Swimming Swan, LLC’s proposal included hours above the minimum required, however its proposal was to open the Burgess Pool later in the morning most days of the year, at 7 a.m. or 10 a.m.
• Programs. The review panel found that both Team Sheeper, Inc.’s and The Swimming Swan, LLC’s proposals demonstrated responsiveness to the RFP priority to operate Burgess Pool and MPCC aquatics center with comparable or equivalent operating schedules and programs. The review panel noted that both proposals included a variety of aquatics programs that overall meet these criteria, and that the details of specific programs likely could be refined or revised during a subsequent agreement negotiation process with the selected operator. One distinction noted by the review panel is that Team Sheeper, Page H-1.4
Staff Report #: 23-047-CC
City of Menlo Park 701 Laurel St., Menlo Park, CA 94025 tel 650-330-6600 menlopark.gov Inc.’s proposal included sample programs for both pools, whereas The Swimming Swan, LLC’s proposal included a sample program for the Burgess Pool and indicated that the MPCC aquatics program would follow a similar model. The review panel found that both Team Sheeper, Inc.’s and The Swimming Swan, LLC’s proposals demonstrated some responsiveness to the requirement to dedicate operating hours and pool space to open swim for play and social time for Menlo Park resident children and families. The review panel also found that both Team Sheeper, Inc.’s and The Swimming Swan, LLC’s proposals demonstrated responsiveness to the RFP priority to offer aqua wellness and/or aquafit classes in formats and at times that are convenient and accessible. The review panel additionally noted that The Swimming Swan, LLC, appears to offer more robust programming in this area and employs its own in-house dedicated staff for aqua wellness programs, whereas Team Sheeper, Inc., proposed to offer such programs through a qualified subcontractor.
• Provide meaningful access to effective water safety instruction for every Menlo Park child. The review panel found that both Team Sheeper, Inc.’s and The Swimming Swan, LLC’s proposals demonstrated responsiveness to the minimum requirements of this priority. Both proposals address this priority through third party nonprofits that offer scholarships to cover user fees for eligible children. • Public communication, marketing and registration. The review panel found that both Team Sheeper, Inc.’s and Swimming Swan, LLC’s proposals demonstrated sufficient public communication, marketing and registration capabilities to effectively promote and inform the public about aquatics programs in Menlo Park. One distinction noted by the review panel regarding registration capabilities is that Team Sheeper, Inc.’s proposal indicated that it uses the Xplor Recreation platform (formerly known as PerfectMind), which the City independently selected in 2021-22 for the City’s new recreation registration platform, whereas The Swimming Swan, LLC’s proposal indicated that it uses an unspecified “secure and encrypted,” “custom proprietary software built on a multi-site platform.” • Fees and revenue sharing. The review panel found that both Team Sheeper, Inc.’s and Swimming Swan, LLC’s proposals demonstrated some responsiveness to these criteria. The review panel found that both proposals included similar fee structures, and both expressed interest and willingness to work with the City before implementing new aquatics user fees or modifying existing aquatics user fees. Team Sheeper, Inc.’s proposal includes a specific revenue sharing plan in tiers, between 1 percent to 2.5 percent of revenues depending on the revenue tier; whereas The Swimming Swan, LLC’s proposal appears to indicate some willingness to explore a revenue sharing arrangement of 30 percent to the City above an unspecified minimum revenue threshold but offers no specific details. • Financial Information. The review panel found that both Team Sheeper, Inc.’s and The Swimming Swan, LLC’s proposals demonstrated sufficient responsiveness and administrative capabilities to meet the requirements of this criteria. Team Sheeper, Inc., included summary unaudited financial statements, and proposed operating budgets for both Burgess Pool and the future MPCC aquatics center. The Swimming Swan, LLC, included detailed profit and loss statements, and included summary revenue, pricing and attendance projections but no specific operating budget proposal for either aquatic center.
Overview - The Swimming Swan, LLC
Based on the evaluations provided by the RFP review panel, City staff finds that the proposal from The Swimming Swan, LLC, demonstrates sufficient capabilities and experience to effectively operate the Burgess Pool and future MPCC aquatics center, and is competitive for selection. Major factors in this finding include that The Swimming Swan, LLC, currently operates aquatics facilities in southern California, Santa Clara County and Las Vegas, Nevada; has proven experience operating aquatics programs in multiple locations and communities; and has experience navigating the transitions into new communities as incoming aquatics operator. However, a transition to a new aquatics operator would inevitably result in Page H-1.5
Staff Report #: 23-047-CC
City of Menlo Park 701 Laurel St., Menlo Park, CA 94025 tel 650-330-6600 menlopark.gov some disruption to current pool users, and would create some economic uncertainty for the aquatics program depending on how well the operator transition is received by the community and how well the transition is managed by the new aquatics operator with the support of City Council and staff. Had the review panel’s evaluation found that the proposal from The Swimming Swan, LLC, had achieved a significantly stronger level of competitiveness than Team Sheeper, Inc.’s proposal, then City staff would have been comfortable recommending The Swimming Swan, LLC, for selection despite the above-noted risks. However, the review panel did not find The Swimming Swan, LLC’s proposal to be significantly more competitive than Team Sheeper, Inc.’s proposal, and therefore City staff does not recommend The Swimming Swan, LLC, for selection at this time. That said, if City Council ultimately selects The Swimming Swan, LLC, as the preferred operator, City staff is confident in the City’s ability to work with The Swimming Swan, LLC, and help manage a successful transition to a new aquatics operator.
Overview – Team Sheeper, Inc.
City staff recommends that City Council identify Team Sheeper, Inc., as the preferred aquatics operator.
Major determining factors in this recommendation include that Team Sheeper, Inc., is headquartered in Menlo Park; possesses deep experience providing aquatics programs to the Menlo Park community; has proven capacity to simultaneously operate two City-owned aquatics centers in Menlo Park; and has developed a large and loyal clientele of local aquatics users which is essential to sustain an aquatics center.
In its proposal, Team Sheeper, Inc. provided clear, specific responses to the key City priorities and requirements outlined in the RFP, and was the only proposal that provided detailed and well-considered operating budgets for both Burgess Pool and the future MPCC aquatics center. Negotiating a new agreement with Team Sheeper, Inc. would provide the City the opportunity to implement some desired changes to the aquatics program, while minimizing disruption to current pool users.
Overview – City-operated aquatics
At City Council’s request, City staff prepared a rough-order-of-magnitude (ROM) estimate of the cost, staffing, and other resources that would be necessary for the City to directly operate Burgess Pool and the future MPCC aquatics center. The ROM estimate was first provided to City Council August 23, 2022, and is reiterated in the Impact on City Resources section of this report. Based on that preliminary analysis, and after having received and evaluated proposals from qualified aquatics operators in response to the RFP, City staff does not recommend pursuing a City-operated aquatics program at this time.
Requirements and agreement terms
Per City Council’s feedback and direction, various terms were incorporated into the RFP and staff will advise the selected operator that these terms should be included in the operator agreement. A partial list of these terms includes:
1. Provider will prepare and submit a detailed annual performance report to City staff no later than January 30 of each year, including but not limited to the following information:
A. Total program hours by program area
B. Participation statistics by program area including resident and non-resident percentages C. Community satisfaction survey results
D. User group feedback by program area
E. Pool schedule and allocation by program for previous year and projections to the upcoming year F. Fees by program area and a fee comparison to other public pools in the region G. Annual audits and reviews demonstrating standards of care are met H. Risk management documentation
I. Training certifications listed by staff member.
2. Provider will coordinate with City staff to present operator’s annual performance report to City Council no later than March 31 of each year.
3. Provider will submit to City staff quarterly financial statements no later than 45 days after the end of Page H-1.6
Staff Report #: 23-047-CC
City of Menlo Park 701 Laurel St., Menlo Park, CA 94025 tel 650-330-6600 menlopark.gov each fiscal quarter, and annual financial statements no later than 45 days after the close of the fiscal year. Financial statements submitted to the City shall be considered public records subject to applicable government transparency law.
4. Provider will consult with City staff before altering the operating hours, launching new aquatics programs, making significant changes to existing programs, or significantly altering any other substantive aspects of Provider’s operations and programs at City aquatics centers.
5. Provider will seek City approval before engaging the services of subcontractors or other parties not directly employed by Provider to deliver aquatics programs and/or services in City aquatics facilities.
6. Provider will assign sufficient qualified staffing to maintain safe and effective operations at City aquatics facilities. Provider’s staff will have the required qualifications and certifications for each position.
7. Provider will maintain appropriate and safe ratios of lifeguards to pool users at all times, consistent with industry best practices and applicable regulations.
8. Provider will maintain reasonable evidence and documentation of its hiring practices, background checks, certifications and training, including documentation of pre-service/employment orientation, onthe-job training, regular in-service training, and certification training for each employee. Provider will furnish these records to the City for inspection on request.
9. Provider will demonstrate adequate risk management planning and practices by conducting annual audits and reviews by qualified external experts in coordination and with oversight by City staff.
Ad hoc subcommittee – aquatics operator agreement
City staff recommends that the City Council appoint an ad hoc subcommittee comprised of two City Councilmembers to advise and support City staff during the agreement negotiation process. The ad hoc subcommittee members would be tasked with working with City staff to review the agreement terms and requirements with City staff, provide detailed feedback and suggestions to City staff during the negotiation process, and aid the development of the draft agreement’s terms and scope of work. City staff anticipates that the ad hoc subcommittee would meet on 2 or 3 occasions beginning March 1, in addition to reviewing the draft terms and scope of work, and could provide a written subcommittee report to the City Council before City Council authorization of the draft agreement tentatively March 28.
Impact on City Resources
There is no new direct impact to the General Fund associated with the recommended action. Potential impacts to the General Fund will be associated with the authorization of a new operator agreement by City Council tentatively March 28. The City is responsible for maintenance of the Burgess Pool facility including recurring expenditures for mechanical maintenance and repairs, custodial and landscaping services, utilities (water, sewer, electricity, gas, telephone and internet), and pool maintenance chemicals and supplies; and one-time expenditures for equipment replacements and minor facility renovations. Total expenses to the City related to maintenance of Burgess Pool were approximately $645,000 in fiscal year 2021-22. City Council’s adopted fiscal year 2022-23 operating budget has sufficient resources allocated toward these anticipated expenditures in the current fiscal year. The City also will be responsible for maintenance of the MPCC aquatics center when it is completed; the new center is tentatively scheduled to open in early 2024.
Budgetary considerations related to maintaining that facility will be addressed during City Council’s fiscal year 2023-24 budget deliberations in the spring of 2023. The aquatics operator RFP identifies revenue sharing as a key priority to help offset a portion of the City’s cost of maintaining its aquatics facilities at a preferred “medium” cost recovery rate to the City of 30 percent to 70 percent.
Rough order of magnitude (ROM) estimate – City-operated aquatics City staff does not recommend pursuing a City-operated aquatics program at this time. Should City Council direct staff to directly operate Burgess Pool and/or the future MPCC aquatics center, it is within the City’s capabilities to do so, given the necessary time, staff and resources. The City of Menlo Park has not directly Page H-1.7
Staff Report #: 23-047-CC
City of Menlo Park 701 Laurel St., Menlo Park, CA 94025 tel 650-330-6600 menlopark.gov operated Burgess Pool since 2006 nor the former Belle Haven Pool since 2011, and currently lacks the necessary staff and resources to operate an aquatics program. Major, ongoing appropriations by City Council of limited City resources would be necessary for the City to operate the aquatics program, during a time of significant economic uncertainty.
Several preparatory steps would be needed before the City assumed direct operations of Burgess Pool and/or the new MPCC pool, including substantial budget authorizations, adjustments to the salary schedule for new classifications, personnel recruitments, and regulatory certifications in a process that would extend several months and involve hundreds of hours of staff time and effort. Staff’s preliminary review of other area jurisdictions’ staffing models and expenditures, along with analysis of Menlo Park’s current salary schedule, job classifications, facility maintenance and capital expenditures, indicates that in order to directly operate Burgess Pool and the MPCC pool seven days per week, year-round, the City of Menlo Park would need to:
• Increase benefited personnel by 4.0 to 7.0 full time equivalent (FTE), including a full-time aquatics supervisor, two full-time aquatics coordinators, two to four office and program assistants, and between 90-150 part-time, temporary non-benefited employees such as lifeguards, instructors and attendants, depending on season – approximately $0.75 million to $1.0 million per year for benefited personnel, plus approximately $1.0 million to $1.7 million per year for non-benefitted personnel. • Continue to bear the costs to operate and maintain the Burgess Pool and MPCC Pool facilities, including the costs of utilities, equipment replacement and repair, minor renovation projects, and supplies like pool chemicals – approximately $0.65 million to $1.0 million per year. • Bear new administrative costs related to pool operator certifications, risk management, records management and financial administration – approximately $0.10 million per year.
Based on this preliminary analysis, a ROM estimate for the City to directly operate Burgess Pool and MPCC pool year-round, seven days per week is total annual expenditures between $2.5 million to $3.8 million per year; with potential annual revenue (cost recovery) between $0.75 million to $2 million per year. These estimated ranges of expenditures and revenues track with each other, that is, the lower end of the expenditure range would result in the lower end of the potential revenues, and the higher end of the expenditure range would result in the higher end of the potential revenues.
Should City Council so direct, staff can develop a budget proposal for a City-run aquatics program including specific staff positions and compensation, hours of operation, programs, certifications, supplies and services, facility maintenance and capital expense, revenue projections, and other financial and operating considerations, and present it to City Council in April. City staff estimates that developing a detailed budget proposal would require approximately 80 total hours of staff time and effort, which would significantly divert limited resources away from other priority projects including the development of the MPCC facility’s programming, staffing, and budgetary proposals tentatively set for City Council consideration during the fiscal year 2023-24 budget process in spring 2023.
Environmental Review
The requested action is not a project within the meaning of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines §§ 15378 and 15061(b)(3) as it will not result in any direct or indirect physical change in the environment.
Public Notice
Public notification was achieved by posting the agenda, with the agenda items being listed, at least 72 Page H-1.8
Staff Report #: 23-047-CC
City of Menlo Park 701 Laurel St., Menlo Park, CA 94025 tel 650-330-6600 menlopark.gov hours prior to the meeting.
Attachments
A. Hyperlink – February 14, City Council Staff Report #23-036-CC:
menlopark.gov/files/sharedassets/public/agendas-and-minutes/city-council/2023- meetings/agendas/20230214-city-council-regular-agenda-packet.pdf#page=187 Report prepared by:
Tricia Mullan, Library and Community Services Supervisor Sean S. Reinhart, Library and Community Services Director Page H-1.9
SELECT A PREFERRED AQUATICS OPERATOR;
AUTHORIZE NEGOTIATION; AD HOC SUBCOMMITTEECity Council – February 28, 2023 H1-PRESENTATION
Recommendation
• Identify Team Sheeper, Inc., as the preferred aquatics operator for Burgess Pool and the future Menlo Park Community Campus (MPCC) aquatics center • Authorize the city manager to enter negotiations with Team Sheeper, Inc., for a draft aquatics operator agreement. The resulting draft agreement would be subject to City Council authorization, tentatively scheduled March 28 • Form an ad hoc subcommittee comprised of two City Councilmembers appointed by the City Council to advise and support City staff during the agreement negotiation process. 2 Timeline*
• February 14 – Proposals released for City Council and community review and preliminary City Council discussion and feedback • February 28 – City Council recommend preferred operator; authorize the city manager to negotiate agreement; form ad hoc subcommittee • March 1 – City enter negotiations with the preferred operator identified by City Council, with support from ad hoc subcommittee
• March 28 – City Council review and approve the aquatics operator agreement; agreement executed shortly thereafter
• September 1 – Agreement takes effect.
* All dates are tentative and subject to change 3
4 Proposals
• Team Sheeper, Inc. proposal is from the City’s current operator that has operated Burgess Pool since 2006 and previously operated Belle HavenPool from 2011 until 2021 when the Belle Haven Pool was demolished to make way for construction of a new aquatics center as part of the MPCC project
• Swimming Swan, LLC proposal is from a qualified operator that is based in southern California and recently expanded its operations to SantaClara County and Las Vegas, Nevada • SOLO Aquatics proposal is from a local aquatics program that operates as a program subcontractor to the current operator of Burgess Pool. 5 RFP review panel evaluation
• Proposals were evaluated by the review panel for the necessary qualifications and experience operating municipal aquatics centers, and according to the selection criteria outlined in the RFP • The review panel found that Team Sheeper, Inc.’s and The Swimming Swan, LLC’s proposals both demonstrated the necessary qualifications, background and experience operating municipal aquatics centers, and found both proposals to be deemed competitive for selection • The proposal from SOLO Aquatics demonstrated experience running aquatics programs like swim teams, however it did not demonstrate experience operating aquatics centers, and was significantly less comprehensive overall, and was not deemed competitive for selection. 6 RFP review panel evaluation
Summary evaluations of the two competitive proposals based on key RFP criteria are in the staff report:• Basic qualifications, experience and organizational capacity• Quality assurance and risk management• Schedule and programs• Meaningful access to water safety instruction for children• Public communication, marketing, registration• Fees and revenue sharing• Financial information 7 8
Overview – The Swimming Swan, LLC
• Proposal demonstrates sufficient capabilities and experience to effectively operate the Burgess Pool and future MPCC aquatics center, and is competitive for selection
• Proven experience operating aquatics programs in multiple locations and communities, and navigating transitions into new communities • Transition to new operator in Menlo Park would cause some disruption to current pool users and would create some economic uncertainty • If City Council ultimately selects The Swimming Swan, LLC, as the preferred operator, City staff is confident in the City’s ability to work withThe Swimming Swan, LLC, and help manage a successful transition. 9 Overview – Team Sheeper, Inc.
• City staff recommends that City Council identify Team Sheeper, Inc., as the preferred aquatics operator
• Headquartered in Menlo Park; experience providing aquatics programs to the Menlo Park community; has proven capacity to simultaneously operate two City-owned aquatics centers in Menlo Park; and has developed a large and loyal clientele of local aquatics users which is essential to sustain an aquatics center • Negotiating a new agreement with Team Sheeper, Inc. would provide the City the opportunity to implement some desired changes to the aquatics program, while minimizing disruption to current pool users. 10 Overview – City-operated aquatics
• At City Council’s request, City staff prepared a rough-order-of-magnitude (ROM) estimate of the cost, staffing, and other resources that would benecessary for the City to directly operate Burgess Pool and the future MPCC aquatics center
• ROM estimate was first provided to City Council August 23, 2022, and is reiterated in the Impact on City Resources section of the staff report • Based on that preliminary analysis, and after having received and evaluated proposals from qualified aquatics operators in response to the RFP, City staff does not recommend pursuing a City-operated aquaticsprogram at this time. 11 Ad hoc subcommittee
• City staff recommends that the City Council appoint an ad hoc subcommittee comprised of two City Councilmembers to advise and support City staff during the agreement negotiation process • Would work with City staff to review the agreement terms and requirements with City staff, provide detailed feedback and suggestions to City staff during the negotiation process, and aid the development of the draft agreement’s terms and scope of work • City staff anticipates that the ad hoc subcommittee would meet on 2 or 3 occasions beginning March 1, in addition to reviewing the draft terms and scope of work, before City Council authorization of the draft agreement tentatively March 28. 12 13
Recommended actions and next steps
• Identify Team Sheeper, Inc., as the preferred aquatics operator for Burgess Pool and the future Menlo Park Community Campus (MPCC) aquatics center • Authorize the city manager to enter negotiations with Team Sheeper, Inc., for a draft aquatics operator agreement. The resulting draft agreement would be subject to City Council authorization, tentatively scheduled March 28 • Form an ad hoc subcommittee comprised of two City Councilmembers appointed by the City Council to advise and support City staff during the agreement negotiation process. 14 City Manager's Office
City of Menlo Park 701 Laurel St., Menlo Park, CA 94025 tel 650-330-6600 menlopark.gov
STAFF REPORT
City Council
Meeting Date: 2/28/2023
Staff Report Number: 23-045-CC
Regular Business: Appoint a City Council liaison to the Finance and Audit Committee
Recommendation
Staff recommends that the City Council appoint a City Council liaison to the Finance and Audit Committee.
Policy Issues
According to CC-23-004 (Attachment A), there shall be seven members on each commission/committee and City Councilmembers are assigned to serve in a liaison capacity with one or more City commission/committee.
Background
On January 10, the City Council made annual appointments to represent the City or liaison for City Council (Attachment B.) During that deliberation, the City Council directed staff to return the composition of the Finance and Audit Committee (FAC) membership for City Council consideration. At that meeting, the City Council also approved the regular FAC meeting schedule as the third Thursday of every quarter at 5:30 p.m.
The FAC was established in early 2008 consisting of two City Councilmembers and three residents. In April 2019, the City Council approved the FAC membership expansion from five to seven members with the addition of two residents. This action created a FAC consisting of two City Councilmembers and five residents (Attachments C and D.)
On February 14, the City Council directed staff to recruit to fill the FAC with seven resident members and remove the two City Councilmembers as voting members (Attachment E.) No update to CC-23-004 is required because it does not specify that City Councilmembers must serve as members on the FAC.
Analysis
Staff is recommending the City Council appoint one City Councilmember to serve as a liaison to the FAC.
The purpose of the liaison assignment is to facilitate communication between the City Council and the advisory body. The liaison also helps to increase the City Council's familiarity with the membership, programs and issues of the advisory body. In fulfilling their liaison assignment, City Councilmembers may elect to attend commission/committee meetings periodically to observe the activities of the advisory body or simply maintain communication with the commission/committee chair on a regular basis.
AGENDA ITEM H-2 Page H-2.1
Staff Report #: 23-045-CC
City of Menlo Park 701 Laurel St., Menlo Park, CA 94025 tel 650-330-6600 menlopark.gov Currently, the City’s annual advisory body recruitment is underway through April 7 at 5 p.m. to fill expiring terms. If at the end of annual recruitment the City Council is unable to fill seven FAC resident member seats, staff will return to the City Council recommending that the FAC membership be reduced to five resident members.
Impact on City Resources
There is no impact on City resources.
Environmental Review
This action is not a project within the meaning of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines §§ 15378 and 15061(b)(3) as it is a minor change that will not result in any direct or indirect physical change in the environment.
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. CC-23-004
B. 2023 City Council assignments to regional boards and advisory bodies C. Hyperlink – June 4, 2019, City Council staff report: menlopark.org/DocumentCenter/View/21743/H3- 20190604-FAC-update-and-appoint-CC
D. Hyperlink – June 4, 2019, City Council minutes:
menlopark.org/AgendaCenter/ViewFile/Minutes/_06042019-3287 E. Hyperlink – February 14, 2023, City Council staff report:
menlopark.gov/files/sharedassets/public/agendas-and-minutes/city-council/2023- meetings/agendas/20230214-city-council-regular-agenda-packet.pdf #page=526 Report prepared by:
Judi A. Herren, Assistant to the City Manager/City Clerk Page H-2.2
COMMISSIONS/COMMITTEES POLICIES AND
PROCEDURES, ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES
City Council Policy #CC-23-004
Adopted January 10, 2023
Resolution No. 6803
Purpose
To define policies and procedures and roles and responsibilities for Menlo Park appointed commissions and committees.
Authority
Upon its original adoption, this policy replaced the document known as “Organization of Advisory Commissions of the City of Menlo Park.”
Background
The City of Menlo Park currently has seven active Commissions and Committees. The active advisory bodies are:
Complete Streets Commission, Environmental Quality Commission, Finance and Audit Committee, Housing Commission, Library Commission, Parks and Recreation Commission, and Planning Commission. Those not specified in the City Code are established by City Council ordinance or resolution. Most of these advisory bodies are established in accordance with Resolution No. 2801 and its amendments. Within specific areas of responsibility, each advisory body has a primary role of advising the City Council on policy matters or reviewing specific issues and carrying out assignments as directed by the City Council or prescribed by law.
Six of the seven commissions and committees listed above are advisory in nature. The Planning Commission is both advisory and regulatory and organized according to the City Code (Ch. 2.12) and State statute (Government Code 65100 et seq., 65300-65401).
The City has an adopted Anti-Harassment and Non-Discrimination Policy (CC-21-0022), and a Travel, Meal, and Lodging Policy (CC-19-002), which are also applicable to all advisory bodies.
Policies and Procedures
Relationship to City Council, staff and media
Upon referral by the City Council, the commission/committee shall study referred matters and return their recommendations and advise to the City Council. With each such referral, the City Council may authorize the City staff to provide certain designated services to aid in the study. Upon its own initiative, the commission/committee shall identify and raise issues to the City Council’s attention and from time to time explore pertinent matters and make recommendations to the City Council. At a request of a member of the public, the commission/committee may consider appeals from City actions or inactions in pertinent areas and, if deemed appropriate, report and make recommendations to the City Council. Each commission/committee is required to develop an annual work plan which will be the foundation for the work performed by the advisory body in support of City Council annual work plan. The plan, once finalized by a majority of the commission/committee, will be formally presented to the City Council for direction and approval no later than September 30 of each year and then reported out on by a representative of the advisory body at a regularly scheduled City Council meeting at least annually, but recommended twice a year. The proposed work plan must align with the City Council’s adopted work plan. When modified, the work plan must be taken to the City Council for approval. The Planning Commission is exempt from this requirement as its functions are governed by the Menlo Park municipal code (Chapter 2.12) and State law (Government Code 65100 et seq, 65300-65401). Commissions and committees shall not become involved in the administrative or operational matters of City departments. Members may not direct staff to initiate major programs, conduct large studies or establish department policy. City staff assigned to furnish staff services shall be available to provide general staff assistance, such as preparation of agenda/notice materials and minutes, general review of department programs and activities, and to perform limited studies, program reviews, and other services of a general staff nature.
Commissions/Committees may not establish department work programs or determine department program priorities. The responsibility for setting policy and allocating scarce City resources rests with the City’s duly elected representatives, the City Council.
Additional or other staff support may be provided upon a formal request to the City Council. The staff liaison shall act as the commission/committee’s lead representative to the media concerning matters before the commission/committee. Commission/Committee members should refer all media inquiries to their respective liaisons for response. Personal opinions and comments may be expressed so long as the commission/committee member clarifies that their statements do not represent the position of the City Council. Commission/Committee members will have mandatory training every two years regarding the Brown Act and Page H-2.3
ATTACHMENT A
COMMISSIONS/COMMITTEES POLICIES AND PROCEDURES, ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES City Council Policy #CC-23-004 2
Adopted January 10, 2023
Resolution No. 6803
parliamentary procedures, anti-harassment training, ethics training, and other training required by the City Council or State Law. The commission/committee members may have the opportunity for additional training, such as training for chair and vice chair. Failure to comply with the mandatory training will be reported to the City Council and may result in replacement of the member by the City Council. Requests from commission/committee member(s) determined by the staff liaison to take one hour or more of staff time to complete, must be directed by the City Council.
Role of City Council commission/committee liaison
City Councilmembers are assigned to serve in a liaison capacity with one or more city commission/committee. The purpose of the liaison assignment is to facilitate communication between the City Council and the advisory body.
The liaison also helps to increase the City Council's familiarity with the membership, programs and issues of the advisory body. In fulfilling their liaison assignment, City Councilmembers may elect to attend commission/committee meetings periodically to observe the activities of the advisory body or simply maintain communication with the commission/committee chair on a regular basis.
City Councilmembers should be sensitive to the fact that they are not participating members of the commission/committee, but are there rather to create a linkage between the City Council and commission/committee. In interacting with commissions/committee, City Councilmembers are to reflect the views of the City Council as a body. Being a commission/committee liaison bestows no special right with respect to commission/committee business.
Typically, assignments to commission/committee liaison positons are made at the beginning of a City Council term in December. The Mayor will ask City Councilmembers which liaison assignments they desire and will submit recommendations to the full City Council regarding the various committees, boards, and commissions which City Councilmembers will represent as a liaison. In the rare instance where more than one City Councilmember wishes to be the appointed liaison to a particular commission, a vote of the City Council will be taken to confirm appointments.
City Staff Liaison
The City has designated staff to act as a liaison between the commission/committee and the City Council. The City shall provide staff services to the commission/committee which will include:
Developing a rapport with the Chair and commission/committee members Providing a schedule of meetings to the city clerk’s office and commission/committee members, arranging meeting locations, maintaining the minutes and other public records of the meeting, and preparing and distributing appropriate information related to the meeting agenda. Advising the commission/committee on directions and priorities of the City Council. Informing the commission/committee of events, activities, policies, programs, etc. occurring within the scope of the commission/committee’s function.
Ensuring the city clerk is informed of all vacancies, expired terms, changes in offices, or any other changes to the commission/committee.
Providing information to the appropriate appointed official including reports, actions, and recommendations of the committee/commission and notifying them of noncompliance by the commission/committee or chair with City policies.
Ensuring that agenda items approved by the commission/committee are brought forth in a timely manner taking into consideration staff capacity, City Council priorities, the commission/committee work plan, and other practical matters such as the expense to conduct research or prepare studies, provided appropriate public notification, and otherwise properly prepare the item for commission/committee consideration. Take action minutes; upon agreement of the commission, this task may be performed by one of the members (staff is still responsible for the accuracy and formatting of the minutes) Maintain a minute book with signed minutes
Recommendations, requests and reports
As needed, near the beginning of City Council meetings, there will be an item called “Advisory Body Reports.” At this time, commissions/committees may present recommendations or status reports and may request direction and support from the City Council. Such requests shall be communicated to the staff liaison in advance, including any written materials, so that they may be listed on the agenda and distributed with the agenda packet. The materials being Page H-2.4
COMMISSIONS/COMMITTEES POLICIES AND PROCEDURES, ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES City Council Policy #CC-23-004 3
Adopted January 10, 2023
Resolution No. 6803
provided to the City Council must be approved by a majority of the commission/committee at a commission/committee meeting before submittal to the City Council. The City Council will receive such reports and recommendations and, after suitable study and discussion, respond or give direction.
City Council referrals
The city clerk shall transmit to the designated staff liaison all referrals and requests from the City Council for advice and recommendations. The commissions/committees shall expeditiously consider and act on all referrals and requests made by the City Council and shall submit reports and recommendations to the City Council on these assignments.
Public appearance of commission/committee members
When a commission/committee member appears in a non-official, non-representative capacity before the public, for example, at a City Council meeting, the member shall indicate that they are speaking only as an individual. This also applies when interacting with the media and on social media. If the commission/committee member appears as the representative of an applicant or a member of the public, the Political Reform Act may govern this appearance. In addition, in certain circumstances, due process considerations might apply to make a commission/committee member’s appearance inappropriate. Conversely, when a member who is present at a City Council meeting is asked to address the City Council on a matter, the member should represent the viewpoint of the particular commission/committee as a whole (not a personal opinion).
Disbanding of advisory body
Upon recommendation by the Chair or appropriate staff, any standing or special advisory body, established by the City Council and whose members were appointed by the City Council, may be declared disbanded due to lack of business, by majority vote of the City Council.
Meetings and officers
1. Agendas/notices/minutes
All meetings shall be open and public and shall conduct business through published agendas, public notices and minutes and follow all of the Brown Act provisions governing public meetings. Special, canceled and adjourned meetings may be called when needed, subject to the Brown Act provisions. Support staff for each commission/committee shall be responsible for properly noticing and posting all regular, special, canceled and adjourned meetings. Copies of all meeting agendas, notices and minutes shall be provided to the City Council, city manager, city attorney, city clerk and other appropriate staff, as requested. Original agendas and minutes shall be filed and maintained by support staff in accordance with the City’s adopted records retention schedule.
The official record of the commissions/committees will be preserved by preparation of action minutes.
2. Conduct and parliamentary procedures
Unless otherwise specified by State law or City regulations, conduct of all meetings shall generally follow Robert’s Rules of Order.
A majority of commission/committee members shall constitute a quorum and a quorum must be seated before official action is taken.
The chair of each commission/committee shall preside at all meetings and the vice chair shall assume the duties of the chair when the chair is absent.
The role of the commission/committee chair (according to Roberts Rules of Order): To open the session at the time at which the assembly is to meet, by taking the chair and calling the members to order; to announce the business before the assembly in the order in which it is to be acted upon; to recognize members entitled to the floor; to state and put to vote all questions which are regularly moved, or necessarily arise in the course of the proceedings, and to announce the result of the vote; to protect the assembly from annoyance from evidently frivolous or dilatory motions by refusing to recognize them; to assist in the expediting of business in every compatible with the rights of the members, as by allowing brief remarks when undebatable motions are pending, if they think it advisable; to restrain the members when engaged in debate, within the rules of order, to enforce on all occasions the observance of order and decorum among the members, deciding all questions of order (subject to an appeal to the assembly by any two members) unless when in doubt he prefers to submit the question for the decision of the assembly; to inform the assembly when necessary, or when referred to for the purpose, on a point of order to practice pertinent to pending business; to authenticate by their signature, when necessary, all the acts, orders, and proceedings of the assembly declaring it will and in all things obeying its commands.
Page H-2.5
COMMISSIONS/COMMITTEES POLICIES AND PROCEDURES, ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES City Council Policy #CC-23-004 4
Adopted January 10, 2023
Resolution No. 6803
3. Lack of a quorum
When a lack of a quorum exists at the start time of a meeting, those present will wait 15 minutes for additional members to arrive. If after 15 minutes a quorum is still not present, the meeting will be adjourned by the staff liaison due to lack of a quorum. Once the meeting is adjourned it cannot be reconvened. The public is not allowed to address those commissioners present during the 15 minutes the commission/committee is waiting for additional members to arrive. Staff can make announcements to the members during this time but must follow up with an email to all members of the body conveying the same information.
All other items shall not be discussed with the members present as it is best to make the report when there is a quorum present.
4. Meeting locations and dates
Meetings shall be held in designated City facilities, as noticed. All commissions/committees with the exception of the Planning Commission, and Finance and Audit Committee shall conduct regular meetings once a month. Special meetings may also be scheduled as required by the commission/committee. The Planning Commission shall hold regular meetings twice a month and the Finance and Audit Committee shall hold quarterly meetings. Monthly regular meetings shall have a fixed date and time established by the commission/committee. Changes to the established regular dates and times are subject to the approval of the City Council. An exception to this rule would include any changes necessitated to fill a temporary need in order for the commission/committee to conduct its meeting in a most efficient and effective way as long as proper and adequate notification is provided to the City Council and made available to the public.
The schedule of Commission/Committee meetings is as follows:
Complete Streets Commission – Every second Wednesday at 6:30 p.m. Environmental Quality Commission – Every third Wednesday at 6:00 p.m. Finance and Audit Committee – Third Thursday of every quarter at 5:30 p.m., Housing Commission – Every first Wednesday at 6:30 p.m. Library Commission – Every third Monday at 6:30 p.m.
Parks and Recreation Commission – Every fourth Wednesday at 6:30 p.m. Planning Commission – Twice a month on a Monday at 7 p.m.
Each commission/committee may establish other operational policies subject to the approval of the City Council.
Any changes to the established policies and procedures shall be subject to the approval of the City Council.
5. Off-premises meeting participation
While technology allows commission/committee members to participate in meetings from a location other than the meeting location (referred to as “off-premises”), off-premises participation is discouraged given the logistics required to ensure compliance with the Brown Act and experience with technological failures disrupting the meeting. In the event that a commission/committee member believes that their participation is essential to a meeting, the following shall apply:
Any commission/committee member intending to participate from an off-premise location shall inform the staff liaison at least two weeks in advance of the meeting.
The off-premise location must be identified in the notice and agenda of the meeting. Agendas must be posted at the off-premise location.
The off-premise location must be accessible to the public and be ADA compliant. The commission/committee member participating at a duly noticed off-premises location does not count toward the quorum necessary to convene a meeting of the commission/committee. For any one meeting, no more than one commission/committee member may participate from an off-premise location.
All votes must be by roll call.
6. Selection of chair and vice chair
The chair and vice chair shall be selected in May of each year by a majority of the members and shall serve for one year or until their successors are selected.
Each commission/committee shall annually rotate its chair and vice chair.
Page H-2.6
COMMISSIONS/COMMITTEES POLICIES AND PROCEDURES, ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES City Council Policy #CC-23-004 5
Adopted January 10, 2023
Resolution No. 6803
G. Memberships
Appointments/Oaths
The City Council is the appointing body for all commissions/committees. All members serve at the pleasure of the City Council for designated terms.
All appointments and reappointments shall be made at a regularly scheduled City Council meeting, and require an affirmative vote of not less than a majority of the City Council present. Before taking office, all members must complete an Oath of Allegiance required by Article XX, §3, of the Constitution of the State of California. All oaths are administered by the city clerk or their designee. Appointments made during the middle of the term are for the unexpired portion of that term.
Application and selection process
The application process begins when a vacancy occurs due to term expiration, resignation, removal or death of a member.
The application period will normally run for a period of four weeks from the date the vacancy occurs. If there is more than one concurrent vacancy in a Commission, the application period may be extended. Applications are available from the city clerk’s office and on the City’s website. The city clerk shall notify members whose terms are about to expire whether or not they would be eligible for reappointment. If reappointment is sought, an updated application will be required. Applicants are required to complete and return the application form for each commission/committee they desire to serve on, along with any additional information they would like to transmit, by the established deadline.
Applications sent by email are accepted.
After the deadline of receipt of applications, the city clerk shall schedule the matter at the next available regular City Council meeting. All applications received will be submitted and made a part of the City Council agenda packet for their review and consideration. If there are no applications received by the deadline, the city clerk will extend the application period for an indefinite period of time until sufficient applications are received. Upon review of the applications received, the City Council reserves the right to schedule or waive interviews, or to extend the application process in the event insufficient applications are received. In either case, the city clerk will provide notification to the applicants of the decision of the City Council. If an interview is requested, the date and time will be designated by the City Council. Interviews are open to the public.
The selection/appointment process by the City Council shall be conducted at a City Council meeting. The city clerk will ask each City Councilmember for their nominations; the number of nominations is limited to the number of vacancies. The candidate that receives a majority of nominations will be appointed. If there is a tie, multiple rounds of voting will occur.
Following a City Council appointment, the city clerk shall notify successful and unsuccessful applicants accordingly, in writing. Appointees will receive copies of the City’s Non-Discrimination and Sexual Harassment policies, and disclosure statements for those members who are required to file under State law as designated in the City’s Conflict of Interest Code. Copies of the notification will also be distributed to support staff and the commission/committee chair.
An orientation will be scheduled by the city clerk following an appointment (but before taking office) and a copy of this policy document will be provided at that time.
Attendance
A compilation of attendance will be submitted to the City Council at least annually listing absences for all commissions/committee members.
Absences, which result in attendance at less than two-thirds of their meetings during the calendar year, will be reported to the City Council and may result in replacement of the member by the City Council. Any member who feels that unique circumstances have led to numerous absences can appeal directly to the City Council for a waiver of this policy or to obtain a leave of absence. While it is expected that members be present at all meetings, the chair and staff liaison should be notified if a member knows in advance that they will be absent.
When reviewing commissioners for reappointment, overall attendance at full commission meetings will be given significant consideration.
Compensation
Members shall serve without compensation (unless specifically provided) for their services, provided, however, Page H-2.7
COMMISSIONS/COMMITTEES POLICIES AND PROCEDURES, ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES City Council Policy #CC-23-004 6
Adopted January 10, 2023
Resolution No. 6803
members shall receive reimbursement for necessary travel expenses and other expenses incurred on official duty when such expenditures have been authorized by the City Council (See Policy CC-19-002).
Conflict of interest and disclosure requirements
A Conflict of Interest Code has been updated and adopted by the City pursuant to Government Code §87300 et seq. Copies of the conflict of interest code are filed with the city clerk. Pursuant to the adopted Conflict of Interest Code, members serving on the Complete Streets Commission, Housing Commission, and Planning Commission are required to file a Statement of Economic Interest with the city clerk to disclose personal interest in investments, real property and income. This is done within 30 days of appointment and annually thereafter. A statement is also required within 30 days after leaving office. If a public official has a conflict of interest, the Political Reform Act may require the official to disqualify himself or herself from making or participating in a governmental decision, or using their official position to influence a governmental decision. Questions in this regard may be directed to the city attorney.
Qualifications, compositions, number
In most cases, members shall be residents of the City of Menlo Park and at least 18 years of age. Current members of any other City commission/committee are disqualified for membership, unless the regulations for that advisory body permit concurrent membership. Commission/Committee members are strongly advised to serve out the entirety of the term of their current appointment before seeking appointment on another commission/committee.
Commission/Committee members shall be permitted to retain membership while seeking any elective office.
However, members shall not use the meetings, functions or activities of such bodies for purposes of campaigning for elective office.
There shall be seven (7) members on each commission/committee.
Reappointments, resignations, removals
Incumbents seeking a reappointment are required to complete and file an application with the city clerk by the application deadline. No person shall be reappointed to a commission/committee who has served on that same body for two consecutive terms; unless a period of one year has lapsed since the returning member last served on that commission/committee (the one-year period is flexible subject to City Council’s discretion). Resignations must be submitted in writing to the city clerk, who will distribute copies to City Council and appropriate staff.
The City Council may remove a member by a majority vote of the City Council without cause, notice or hearing.
Term of office
Unless specified otherwise, the term of office for all commission/committee shall be four (4) years unless a resignation or a removal has taken place. The Finance and Audit Committee term of office shall be two (2) years.
If a person is appointed to fill an unexpired term and serves less than two years, that time will not be considered a full term. However, if a person is appointed to fill an unexpired term and serves two years or more, that time will be considered a full term.
Terms are staggered to be overlapping four-year terms, so that all terms do not expire in any one year. If a member resigns before the end of their term, a replacement serves out the remainder of that term.
Vacancies
Vacancies are created due to term expirations, resignations, removals or death. Vacancies are posted by the city clerk in the City Council Chambers bulletin board and on the city website. Whenever an unscheduled vacancy occurs in any commission/committee, a special vacancy notice shall be posted within 20 days after the vacancy occurs. Appointment shall not be made for at least 10 working days after posting of the notice (Government Code 54974).
On or before December 31 of each year, an appointment list of all regular advisory commissions/committees of the City Council shall be prepared by the city clerk and posted in the City Council Chambers bulletin board and on the City’s website. This list is also available to the public. (Government Code 54972, Maddy Act).
Page H-2.8
COMMISSIONS/COMMITTEES POLICIES AND PROCEDURES, ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES City Council Policy #CC-23-004 7
Adopted January 10, 2023
Resolution No. 6803
Roles and Responsibilities
Complete Streets Commission
The Complete Streets Commission is charged primarily with advising the City Council on realizing the City's adopted goals for complete streets, vision zero, climate action plan, and provide input on major land use and development projects as it relates to transportation. The Complete Streets Commission's responsibilities include:
To advance the goals of the city’s newly adopted climate action plan by making alternatives to driving safer and more attractive
Advise City Council on the implementation of the transportation master plan. Continue to advocate for and advise the City Council on planning and installing pedestrian and bicycle rail crossing and safe cycling/pedestrian infrastructure.
Continue to support City Council in ongoing initiatives to improve access to Downtown and support downtown businesses.
Continue to support the implementation of the Safe Routes to School strategy and advocate for community engagement, program continuity and engineering implementation. Continue to support City Council’s role as a stakeholder with regard to regional multi-modal and transportation demand management programs projects to increase
Environmental Quality Commission
The Environmental Quality Commission is charged primarily with advising the City Council on matters involving environmental protection, improvement and sustainability. Specific focus areas include:
Preserving heritage trees
Using best practices to maintain city trees
Preserving and expanding the urban canopy
Making determinations on appeals of heritage tree removal permits Administering annual Environmental Quality Awards program Organizing annual Arbor Day Event; typically, a tree planting event Advising on programs and policies related to protection of natural areas, recycling and waste reduction, environmentally sustainable practices, air and water pollution prevention, climate protection, and water and energy conservation.
Finance and Audit Committee
The Finance and Audit Committee is charged primarily to support delivery of timely, clear and comprehensive reporting of the City’s fiscal status to the community at large. Specific focus areas include:
Review the process for periodic financial reporting to the City Council and the public, as needed Review financial audit and annual financial report with the City’s external auditors Review of the resolution of prior year audit findings Review of the auditor selection process and scope, as needed Housing Commission
The Housing Commission is charged primarily with advising the City Council on housing matters including housing supply and housing related problems. Specific focus areas include:
Community attitudes about housing (range, distribution, racial, social-economic problems) Programs for evaluating, maintaining, and upgrading the distribution and quality of housing stock in the City Planning, implementing and evaluating City programs under the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974
Review and recommend to the City Council regarding the Below Market Rate (BMR) program Initiate, review and recommend on housing policies and programs for the City Review and recommend on housing related impacts for environmental impact reports Review and recommend on State and regional housing issues Review and recommend on the Housing Element of the General Plan Library Commission
The Library Commission is charged primarily with advising the City Council on matters related to the maintenance and operation of the City’s libraries and library systems. Specific focus areas include:
The scope and degree of library activities
Page H-2.9
COMMISSIONS/COMMITTEES POLICIES AND PROCEDURES, ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES City Council Policy #CC-23-004 8
Adopted January 10, 2023
Resolution No. 6803
Maintenance and protection of City libraries
Evaluation and improvement of library service
Acquisition of library materials
Coordination with other library systems and long range planning Literacy and ESL programs
Parks and Recreation Commission
The Parks and Recreation Commission is charged primarily with advising the City Council on matters related to City programs and facilities dedicated to recreation. Specific focus areas include:
Those programs and facilities established primarily for the participation of and/or use by residents of the City, including adequacy and maintenance of such facilities as parks and playgrounds, recreation buildings, facilities and equipment
Adequacy, operation and staffing of recreation programs Modification of existing programs and facilities to meet developing community needs Long range planning and regional coordination concerning park and recreational facilities Planning Commission
The Planning Commission is organized according to State Statute. The Planning Commission reviews development proposals on public and private lands for compliance with the General Plan and Zoning Ordinance.
The Commission reviews all development proposals requiring a use permit, architectural control, variance, minor subdivision and environmental review associated with these projects. The Commission is the final decision-making body for these applications, unless appealed to the City Council. The Commission serves as a recommending body to the City Council for major subdivisions, rezoning’s, conditional development permits, Zoning Ordinance amendments, General Plan amendments and the environmental reviews and Below Market Rate (BMR) Housing Agreements associated with those projects. The Commission works on special projects as assigned by the City Council.
Special Advisory Bodies
The City Council has the authority to create standing committees, task forces or subcommittees for the City, and from time to time, the City Council may appoint members to these groups. The number of persons and the individual appointee serving on each group may be changed at any time by the City Council. There are no designated terms for members of these groups; members are appointed by and serve at the pleasure of the City Council.
Any requests of city commissions or committees to create such ad hoc advisory bodies shall be submitted in writing to the city clerk for City Council consideration and approval.
Procedure history
Action Date Notes
Procedure adoption 1991 Resolution No. 3261
Procedure adoption 2001
Procedure adoption 2011
Procedure adoption 2013 Resolution No. 6169
Procedure adoption 2017 Resolution No. 6377
Procedure adoption 6/8/2021 Resolution No. 6631
Procedure adoption 3/1/2022 Resolution No. 6706
Procedure adoption 3/8/2022 Resolution No. 6718
Page H-2.10
COMMISSIONS/COMMITTEES POLICIES AND PROCEDURES, ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES City Council Policy #CC-23-004 9
Adopted January 10, 2023
Resolution No. 6803
Procedure adoption 9/20/2022 Resolution No. 6776
Procedure adoption 1/10/2023 Resolution No. 6803
Page H-2.11
2023 City Council assignments
MAYOR ASSIGNMENTS 2023 Primary 2023 Alternate
Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) Jen Wolosin Cecilia Taylor League of California Cities (Peninsula Division) Jen Wolosin Cecilia Taylor Menlo Park Chamber of Commerce / City liaison position Jen Wolosin Cecilia Taylor Palo Alto Community Fund Advisory Board Jen Wolosin
San Mateo County Council of Cities and City Selection Committee Jen Wolosin Cecilia Taylor
REGIONAL BOARD MEMBERS
Bay Area Water Supply & Conservation Agency (BAWSCA) - through June 25, 2025 and San Francisco Bay Area Regional Water System Financing Authority REGIONAL ASSIGNMENTS 2023 Primary 2023 Alternate
Caltrain Modernization Local Policy Group Jen Wolosin Betsy Nash City/County Association of Governments of San Mateo County (C/CAG) Cecilia Taylor Betsy Nash Emergency Services Council (San Mateo County JPA) Cecilia Taylor Drew Combs Facebook Local Community Fund Betsy Nash Cecilia Taylor Grand Boulevard Task Force
HEART Board Member Agency Committee (MAC) Drew Combs Maria Doerr Home for All Cecilia Taylor n/a
Peninsula Clean Energy (PCE) Community Choice Energy Betsy Nash Maria Doerr Peninsula Traffic Congestion Relief Alliance (Commute.org) Jen Wolosin Drew Combs San Francisquito Creek Joint Powers Authority Drew Combs Cecilia Taylor San Mateo County Mosquito and Vector Control District Catherine Carlton* n/a SFO Airport/Community Roundtable Cecilia Taylor Drew Combs South Bayside Waste Management Authority (SBWMA) Cecilia Taylor Drew Combs Stanford Community Resources Group Betsy Nash Maria Doerr CITY COUNCIL ADVISORY BODY MEMBERS 2023 Member 1 2023 Member 2 Finance and Audit Committee
ADVISORY BODY LIAISONS
Complete Streets Commission
Environmental Quality Commission
Housing Commission
Library Commission
Parks and Recreation Commission
Planning Commission
OUTSIDE AGENCY LIAISONS 2023 Member 1 2023 Member 2
Menlo Park City School District
Menlo Park Fire Protection District
Searsville Advisory Group Betsy Nash
San Mateo County Flood and Sea Level Rise District (FSLR, OneShoreline) Cecilia Taylor Betsy Nash *appointed on December 14, 2021 to serve through December 31, 2024 Maria Doerr
2023 Member
Maria Doerr
2023 Member
Cecilia Taylor
Betsy Nash
Maria Doerr
Jen Wolosin
Drew Combs
Page H-2.12 ATTACHMENT B
City Manager's Office
City of Menlo Park 701 Laurel St., Menlo Park, CA 94025 tel 650-330-6600 www.menlopark.org
STAFF REPORT
City Council
Meeting Date: 2/28/2023
Staff Report Number: 23-042-CC
City Council Intiated Item Direction on City Council role in San Mateo County related animal control efforts
Recommendation
Provide direction to the city attorney and staff on the role of the City Council in San Mateo County (County) related animal control efforts in Menlo Park.
Background
On February 14, City Councilmember Combs requested an addition to the City Council agenda for animal control matters. Specific questions pertain to parameters in which the County enforces and engages with the public and the role of the City Council after County determination in animal control matters.
Analysis
Pursuant to City Council Procedure #CC-20-013 (Attachment A), the City Council may discuss the item and ask staff questions regarding preliminary scope, analysis and resource requirements. After discussion, with a motion and second, the City Council may take one of the following actions:
• Direct the city manager to prioritize staff resources to prepare a formal staff report for further City Council consideration and/or action, or
• Direct the item to an advisory body for preparation of a formal staff report with no additional staff support required, or
• Direct the city manager to prepare a formal staff report for further City Council consideration as resources are available, or
• Defer action to the City Council’s annual goal setting process.
Impact on City Resources
Determined by City Council direction.
Environmental Review
This action is not a project within the meaning of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines§§ 15378 and 15061(b)(3) as it will not result in any direct or indirect physical change in the environment.
Public Notice
Public notification was achieved by posting the agenda, with the agenda items being listed, at least 72 AGENDA ITEM I-1 Page I-1.1
Staff Report #: 23-042-CC
City of Menlo Park 701 Laurel St., Menlo Park, CA 94025 tel 650-330-6600 www.menlopark.org hours prior to the meeting.
Attachments
A. City Council Procedure #CC-20-013
Report prepared by:
Justin Murphy, City Manager
Page I-1.2
CC 20200825
CITY COUNCILMEMBER REQUESTS
City Council Policy #CC-20-013
Adopted August 25, 2020
Purpose
The purpose of this procedure is to provide transparency into requests by individual City Councilmembers that result in the use of staff time. The policy applies to all City Councilmembers equally and allows the full City Council to determine how to use limited city resources.
For this procedure, a “City Councilmember request” is defined as a request to use city resources in a manner that exceeds the City Council approved budget, priorities, or work plan. This includes requests directed to the city manager, city attorney, and all city staff members. This procedure also applies to City Council appointed commissions and committees.
Requests to add items to a future agenda
To make a request
To request consideration of an item at future City Council meetings, City Councilmembers may send the request via email to the city manager, with a copy to the Mayor and Vice Mayor, or via email to [email protected]. The request must be received no later than two (2) business days prior to publication of the meeting agenda. The request will automatically appear under “City Council initiated items” at the end of the City Council’s regular agenda.
Initial City Council consideration of request
As an agendized item under “City Council initiated items” the City Council may discuss the item and ask staff questions regarding preliminary scope, analysis, and resource requirements. After discussion, with a motion and second, the City Council may take one of the following actions:
Direct the city manager to prioritize staff resources to prepare a formal staff report for further City Council consideration and/or action, or
Direct the item to an advisory body for preparation of a formal staff report with no additional staff support required, or
Direct the city manager to prepare a formal staff report for further City Council consideration as resources are available, or
Defer action to the City Council’s annual goal setting process.
If the request does not receive sufficient City Council support, the item is not considered further.
City Council action
When the staff report is available, the report will be placed under “City Council initiated items” for City Council discussion and action at the next City Council meeting, regardless of agenda load management exercised by the Mayor, Vice Mayor, and city manager.
Request to modify operations or for special projects
To make a request
To request consideration of a change in operations or for a special project, a City Councilmember may send the request via email to the city manager, with a copy to the Mayor and Vice Mayor, or via email to [email protected]. The request must be received no later than two (2) business days prior to publication of the meeting agenda. The request will automatically appear under “City Council initiated items” at the end of the City Council’s regular agenda.
Initial City Council consideration of request
As an agendized item under “City Council initiated items” the City Council may discuss the item and ask the city manager the preliminary assessment of the scope, analysis, and resource requirements of the request. After discussion, with a motion and second, the City Council may take one of the following actions:
Direct the city manager to prioritize staff resources to prepare a formal staff report for further City Council consideration and/or action, or
Direct the city manager to prepare a formal staff report for further City Council consideration as resources are available, or
Defer action to the City Council’s annual budget process.
If the request does not receive sufficient City Council support, the item is not considered further.
City Council action
When the staff report is available, the report will be placed under “City Council initiated items” for City Council discussion
ATTACHMENT A
Page I-1.3
CITY COUNCILMEMBER REQUESTS
City Council Policy #CC-20-013 2
Adopted August 25, 2020
and action at the next City Council meeting, regardless of agenda load management exercised by the Mayor, Vice Mayor, and city manager.
Emergency and non-agendized items
Emergency and non-agendized items may be added to an agenda only in accordance with state law. Emergency items are only those matters affecting public health or safety such as work stoppages, disasters and other severe emergencies.
Adding an emergency item requires a majority vote. Emergency items are very rare. An item that the City Council would like to act on after agenda posting is considered a non-agendized item.
Non-agendized items may be added to the agenda only if the City Council makes findings that (1) the need to consider the item arose after the posting of the agenda, and; (2) there is a need to take immediate action at this meeting of the City Council. These findings must be approved by a four-fifths vote; if less than five members of the City Council are present, the findings require a unanimous vote of those present.
Emergency and non-agendized items are not be used to bypass the City Councilmember request process above.
Procedure history
Action Date Notes
Draft procedure presented July 18, 2020 City Council continued item to August 25, 2020 Procedure adoption August 25, 2020 Draft procedure amended at City Council direction. Staff edit to clarify definition of a “non-agendized item”
Page I-1.4
City Manager's Office
City of Menlo Park 701 Laurel St., Menlo Park, CA 94025 tel 650-330-6600 menlopark.gov
STAFF REPORT
City Council
Meeting Date: 2/28/2023
Staff Report Number: 23-051-CC
Informational Item: City Council agenda topics: March 14 – March 28, 2023
Recommendation
The purpose of this informational item is to provide the City Council and members of the public access to the anticipated agenda items that will be presented to the City Council. The mayor and city manager set the City Council agenda so there is no action required of the City Council as a result of this informational item.
Policy Issues
In accordance with the City Council procedures manual, the mayor and city manager set the agenda for City Council meetings.
Analysis
In an effort to provide greater access to the City Council’s future agenda items, staff has compiled a listing of anticipated agenda items, Attachment A, through March 28, 2023. The topics are arranged by department to help identify the work group most impacted by the agenda item.
Specific dates are not provided in the attachment due to a number of factors that influence the City Council agenda preparation process. In their agenda management, the mayor and city manager strive to compile an agenda that is most responsive to the City Council’s adopted priorities and work plan while also balancing the business needs of the organization. Certain agenda items, such as appeals or State mandated reporting, must be scheduled by a certain date to ensure compliance. In addition, the meeting agendas are managed to allow the greatest opportunity for public input while also allowing the meeting to conclude around 11 p.m. Every effort is made to avoid scheduling two matters that may be contentious to allow the City Council sufficient time to fully discuss the matter before the City Council.
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. City Council agenda topics: March 14 – March 28, 2023 Report prepared by:
Judi A. Herren, Assistant to the City Manager/City Clerk AGENDA ITEM J-1 Page J-1.1
Through March 28, 2023
Tentative City Council Agenda
# Title Department Item type City Council action1 December 2022 quarterly investment report ASD Consent Receive and file2 Mid-year budget amendment ASD Regular Adopt resolution3 Receive the annual comprehensive financial report for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2022 ASD Consent Receive and file4 Report out of 2/28 closed session CAO Closed Session Report out5 Accept the 2022 Housing Element annual progress report and the annual housing successor report CDD Consent Approve6 Authorize the City Manager to execute a contract amendment with M-Group for the Housing Element Update CDD Consent Approve7 Introduce an ordinance-Senate Bill 9 (SB 9) CDD Public Hearing First read/intro ordinance8 Parkline/SRI NOP comment review and Parkline - Senate Bill 7 CDD Regular Approve9 SB 9 - second reading CDD Consent Second read/adopt ordinance10 Vesting Tentative Map Extension for 201 El Camino Real CDD Public Hearing Adopt resolution11 Adopt a resolution authorizing the annual destruction of obsolete records CMO Consent Adopt resolution 12 Annual conflict of interest code update CMO Consent Adopt resolution 13 Appoint City Councilmembers to various standing and ad hoc subcommittees, and disband inactive ad hoc subcommittees CMO Regular Decide 14 City Council procedure manual CMO Informational No action 15 Environmental Quality Commission Chair Report CMO Presentation No action 16 First reading/intro: Outdoor dining ord CMO Regular Second read/adopt ordinance 17 Receive and file City Council and advisory body annual attendance report for March 2022 – February 2023 CMO Consent Receive and file 18 Reach Codes 2.0 CMO Study Session No action19 Transmittal of city attorney billing (Jan 2023) CMO Informational No action20 Grand Jury PRA report policies response CMO, CA Informational No action21 Adopt a resolution to update City Council Procedure CC-86-0001, “Naming and/or changing the name of facilities” LCS Consent Adopt resolution 22 Belle Haven School renovation project update LCS Informational Info from staff 23 Budget amendments related to and supporting the Menlo Park Community Campus project LCS Regular Adopt resolution 24 Reimagining Public Safety Update PD Informational No action25 Adopt a resolution initiating the Menlo Park landscape assessment district proceedings for fiscal year 2023-24 PW Consent Adopt resolution 26 Adopt resolution - Priority Water Service for Affordable Housing Developments PW Consent Adopt resolution27 Approve service agreement with Caltrain for Middle Avenue undercrossing project PW Consent Contract award or amend 28 Authorize the city manager to execute an agreement to develop a shuttle evaluation study PW Consent Contract award or amend 29 Consider an appeal of the Complete Streets Commission decision to remove two parking spaces on Roble Avenue PW Regular Adopt resolution, Decide ASD-Administrative Services
CMO- City Manager's Office
CDD-Community Development
LCS-Library and Community Services
PD-Police
PW-Public Works
ATTACHMENT A
Page J-1.2
Through March 28, 2023
Tentative City Council Agenda
# Title Department Item type City Council action30 Street Resurfacing Program PW Consent Approve31 Update on five-year capital program PW Informational No action32 Water Storage/Supply Project - Info Item + Corp Yard Well Update PW Informational No action33 Goal setting Various Special Direction to staff ASD-Administrative Services
CMO- City Manager's Office
CDD-Community Development
LCS-Library and Community Services
PD-Police
Page J-1.3
PW-Public Works
City Manager's Office
City of Menlo Park 701 Laurel St., Menlo Park, CA 94025 tel 650-330-6600 menlopark.gov
STAFF REPORT
City Council
Meeting Date: 2/28/2023
Staff Report Number: 22-043-CC
Informational Item: Annual City Council priority setting workshop March 18, 2023
Recommendation
This is an informational item and does not require City Council action.
Policy Issues
The City Council holds an annual priority setting workshop to provide direction to the city manager on priority projects for the next year. The City Council identifies top priorities to receive significant attention and resources, as well as a variety of work plan projects that will potentially receive resources based on workforce capacity and funding availability.
Background
The City Council last held a priority setting workshop January 30, 2021, and carried over those identified priorities through 2022. The City Council received the final 2021-2022 work plan progress report at the January 24 City Council meeting (Attachment A.)
Analysis
The City Council is scheduled to hold the annual priority setting workshop Saturday, March 18, from 10 a.m. to 2 p.m. in a hybrid format. Priority setting is informed through public participation, input from City Councilmembers, input from staff based on City Council actions and direction, needs identified in various master planning efforts, and review of remaining work plan items from 2022. A professional facilitator will develop the workshop agenda, present findings on priority topics, facilitate a priority setting discussion, and produce a workshop final report.
Tentative agenda topics (subject to change):
• Welcome
• Public comment
• Introduction and review of agenda
• Context for priority setting discussions
• Break
• Establish top priorities through fiscal year 2023-24
• Next steps
Public engagement:
Staff will launch a dedicated webpage to provide transparency on priority setting actions by the City Council and updates on progress over the next year.
AGENDA ITEM J-2 Page J-2.1
Staff Report #: 23-043-CC
City of Menlo Park 701 Laurel St., Menlo Park, CA 94025 tel 650-330-6600 menlopark.gov An online web form will be released to the public to solicit input on community-identified priorities. Results will be available to City Council during the priority setting workshop.
Staff will encourage members of the public to attend and share their input through a variety of public communication platforms leading up to the workshop.
Impact on City Resources
This informational item has no impact on city resources.
Environmental Review
This action is not a project within the meaning of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines §§ 15378 and 15061(b)(3) as it will not result in any direct or indirect physical change in the environment.
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. Hyperlink – January 24 Staff Report #23-015-CC: menlopark.gov/files/sharedassets/public/agendasand-minutes/city-council/2023-meetings/agendas/20230124-city-council-agenda-packet.pdf #page=45 Report prepared by:
Stephen Stolte, Assistant City Manager
Page J-2.2
Library and Community Services
City of Menlo Park 701 Laurel St., Menlo Park, CA 94025 tel 650-330-6600 menlopark.gov
STAFF REPORT
City Council
Meeting Date: 2/28/2023
Staff Report Number: 23-044-CC
Informational Item: Proposed process and timeline to develop a focused addendum to the Parks and Recreation
Facilities Master Plan to include pickleball
Recommendation
No City Council action is requested at this time. City staff recommends that City Council review this informational report outlining a proposed process and timeline for developing a focused addendum to the Parks and Recreation Facilities Master Plan (PRFMP) to include emerging community interest in pickleball.
Policy Issues
City Council provides policy direction to the city manager regarding services to the community; allocates resources to support City services and capital projects; reviews and approves master plans; and sets prioritization for the use of City resources to serve the community.
Background
The PRFMP was accepted by City Council October 15, 2019 (Attachment A.) The PRFMP is designed to provide a comprehensive road map to guide decision-making for the City of Menlo Park to maintain, manage and develop its parks, open spaces and recreation facilities for the next 20 years, and to help provide the community with the recreational opportunities that they desire.
At the time the PRFMP was developed and approved in 2019, pickleball had not yet emerged as a sport requiring use of current and/or future recreation facilities in Menlo Park, and as a result, pickleball is not included in the PRFMP.
In September 2020, in response to community member requests for rapid implementation of a new service not included in the PRFMP, the Parks and Recreation Commission (PRC) recommended a pickleball pilot program to gauge community interest in pickleball. The pickleball pilot program was launched in November 2020, then was later extended and expanded. The pilot program currently includes eight pickleball courts located on converted tennis courts – four at Kelly Park and four at Nealon Park.
On October 26, 2022, the PRC recommended converting additional Nealon Park tennis courts to pickleball.
Due to concerns about potential impacts to tennis users including the Hillview Middle School tennis team, the recommendation has not been implemented, pending the development of a focused addendum to address pickleball needs in a holistic manner that is integrated into the context of the overall PFRMP.
AGENDA ITEM J-3 Page J-3.1
Staff Report #: 23-044-CC
City of Menlo Park 701 Laurel St., Menlo Park, CA 94025 tel 650-330-6600 menlopark.gov Analysis
Key considerations
The success of the pickleball pilot program indicates that there exists sufficient interest and demand for pickleball to warrant developing a focused addendum to the PRFMP to include pickleball. Developing a focused addendum to the PRFMP to include pickleball is an essential preparatory step to place future pickleball-related capital projects or expansions in the context of the City’s overall system of recreation and sports facilities, and will include the following key considerations:
1. Alignment of potential future pickleball-related capital projects with the goals, prioritization, and timelines in the Parks and PRFMP
2. Evaluate options for user fees related to pickleball and tennis, including but not limited to the following considerations:
A. Ensure that Menlo Park residents of all backgrounds, income levels and lived experiences have meaningful, equitable, inclusive access to public recreation amenities, including tennis courts and pickleball courts
B. Prioritize use by Menlo Park residents and deprioritize use by non-residents C. Evaluate current and potential user fees, including pickleball court fees, tennis court fees and court reservation fees
D. Evaluate user fees for City-sponsored tennis and pickleball programming E. Evaluate rental fees for use of City courts for private instruction F. All fees are subject to City Council authorization in the City of Menlo Park Master Fee Schedule
3. Estimated costs and timelines for potentially creating additional purpose-built pickleball courts in city parks
4. Impacts to tennis users of potentially converting additional existing tennis courts to pickleball
5. Changes in pickleball usage resulting from the potential construction of new, purpose-built pickleball courts at Willow Oaks Park during the planned second phase of park improvements.
Proposed process and timeline
City staff proposes the following process and timeline to develop a focused addendum to the PRFMP to include pickleball. All dates are tentative and subject to change. • February 22 – PRC reviewed informational item outlining the proposed process and timeline, and expressed general assent with the process and timeline as presented • February 28 – City Council reviews informational item outlining the proposed process and timeline • March 22 – PRC reviews pickleball usage and facility data, including benchmark data from other Peninsula cities that provide pickleball courts, and evaluation of tennis and pickleball user fees • March-April– City staff conducts robust outreach and engagement with community stakeholders, including current pickleball and tennis users, to collect input and data about current and future community needs related to pickleball play in Menlo Park • April 26 – PRC reviews community input and makes recommendations for a draft PRFMP addendum to include pickleball
• May 9 – City Council reviews the progress of the PRFMP addendum’s development, including considerations for potential changes to tennis and/or pickleball user fees • May 24 – PRC recommends PRFMP addendum to City Council for approval • Summer – City Council approves the PRFMP addendum and any changes to the master fee schedule related to tennis and/or pickleball user fees.
Impact on City Resources
There are no substantive direct impacts to the City’s General Fund associated with the proposed PRFMP Page J-3.2
Staff Report #: 23-044-CC
City of Menlo Park 701 Laurel St., Menlo Park, CA 94025 tel 650-330-6600 menlopark.gov addendum.
Environmental Review
This informational report is not a project within the meaning of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines §§ 15378 and 15061(b)(3) as it will not result in any direct or indirect physical change in the environment.
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. Hyperlink – PRFMP (2019): menlopark.gov/Government/Open-government/Master-plans Report prepared by:
Tricia Mullan, Library and Community Services Supervisor Sean S. Reinhart, Library and Community Services Director Page J-3.3
City Manager's Office
City of Menlo Park 701 Laurel St., Menlo Park, CA 94025 tel 650-330-6600 menlopark.gov
STAFF REPORT
City Council
Meeting Date: 2/28/2023
Staff Report Number: 23-049-CC
Informational Item: Expiration of local emergencies
Recommendation
This is an informational item and does not require City Council action.
Policy Issues
City Council sets policy and goals and provides direction to staff regarding municipal services to the Menlo Park community; allocates resources to support and maintain city facilities and operations and provide services to residents; and ratifies and/or rescinds local emergency orders.
Background
COVID-19
On March 11, 2020, the Director of Emergency Services proclaimed the existence of a local emergency in the City of Menlo Park based on COVID-19. On March 11, 2020, the City Council of the City of Menlo Park ratified the Director’s proclamation. As a result of the local emergency, the City is empowered to take actions to preserve and protect the health and safety of the community. On March 23, 2020, the Director issued the City of Menlo Park director of emergency services/city manager order (“Order”) No. 1 temporarily suspending all construction activity in the City of Menlo Park. On March 27, 2020, the City of Menlo Park issued Emergency Order No. 2 that closed all City facilities to the public, including the Arrillaga Family Gymnasium, City Council Chambers, City Hall, and the Arrillaga Family Gymnastics Center. This precaution was necessary to protect public health by minimizing opportunities for congregation, both public and employee, during the COVID-19 pandemic. On April 17, 2020, the Director issued Order No. 3 closing additional public facilities (Bedwell Bayfront Park.) On June 10, 2020, the Director issued Order No. 6 opening certain public facilities (Burgess and Belle Haven Pools) subject to the County safety precautions.
On April 27, 2021, the City Council reviewed a four-phase plan for safely reopening City facilities to limited indoor public access, including the Arrillaga Family Gymnasium, City Council Chambers, City Hall, and the Arrillaga Family Gymnastics Center tentatively in Fall 2021.
On June 15, 2021, the State of California rescinded multiple public health restrictions and issued new guidance which allows local communities to reopen these facilities with some precautions to prevent the spread of COVID-19 in workplaces.
AGENDA ITEM J-4 Page J-4.1
Staff Report #: 23-049-CC
City of Menlo Park 701 Laurel St., Menlo Park, CA 94025 tel 650-330-6600 menlopark.gov Rain events
On January 5, 2023, the City Council adopted a resolution ratifying the Director of Emergency Services proclamation of local emergency, pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.5 related to the extreme atmospheric river rain events, which occurred in the final days of December 2022 and threatened to continue in the coming hours and days of January 2023, which events had caused flooding in and around San Francisquito Creek and the Atherton Channel, as well as areas that drain to these waterways.
Analysis
COVID-19
Pursuant to Government Code §8630, local authorities must renew a local emergency every 60 days or the local emergency will expire. However, the Governor’s March 4, 2020, Proclamation of a State of Emergency regarding COVID-19 provided “the 60-day time period in Government Code §8630, within which local government authorities must renew a local emergency, is hereby waived for the duration of this statewide emergency. Any local emergency proclaimed will remain in effect until each local governing authority terminates its respective local emergency.” Because of this proclamation, the City did not need to renew its local COVID-19 emergency declaration every 60 days. However, once the Statewide emergency ends, the City will be required to renew its local COVID-19 emergency declaration, or the local emergency will too expire for lack of renewal every 60 days.
Rain events
Resolution No. 6800, adopted January 5, 2023, declared a local emergency due to extreme weather conditions and will expire 60 days after adoption.
Impact on City Resources
There is no impact on City resources.
Environmental Review
This action is not a project within the meaning of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines §§ 15378 and 15061(b)(3) as it is a minor change that will not result in any direct or indirect physical change in the environment.
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
None.
Report prepared by:
Judi A. Herren, Assistant to the City Manager/City Clerk Page J-4.2