City of Menlo Park 701 Laurel St., Menlo Park, CA 94025 tel 650-330-6600 menlopark.gov City Council
SPECIAL AND REGULAR MEETING AGENDA
Date: 5/9/2023
Time: 5:00 p.m.
Locations: Zoom.us/join – ID# 814 7839 7160 and
City Council Chambers
751 Laurel St., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Members of the public can listen to the meeting and participate using the following methods. If you have issues viewing the meeting, please email the city clerk at [email protected].
How to participate in the meeting
• Submit a written comment online up to one-hour before the meeting start time:
• [email protected]
• Access the meeting real-time online at:
Zoom.us/join – Meeting ID 814 7839 7160
• Access the meeting real-time via telephone at:
(669) 900-6833
Meeting ID 814 7839 7160
Press *9 to raise hand to speak
Watch meeting:
• Cable television subscriber in Menlo Park, East Palo Alto, Atherton and Palo Alto:
Channel 26
• City Council Chambers
Subject to Change: The format of this meeting may be altered or the meeting may be cancelled. You may check on the status of the meeting by visiting the city website menlopark.gov. The instructions for logging on to the webinar and/or the access code is subject to change. If you have difficulty accessing the webinar, please check the latest online edition of the posted agenda for updated information (menlopark.gov/agendas).
5:00 p.m. – Special Meeting
A. Call To Order
B. Roll Call
C. Closed Session
C1. Closed session conference with labor negotiators pursuant to Government Code §54957.6 regarding labor negotiations with the Service Employees International Union Local 521 (SEIU), American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees Local 829 (AFSCME), and Confidential employees
Agency designated representatives: City Manager Justin I.C. Murphy, Administrative Services Director Brittany Mello, Assistant City Manager Stephen Stolte, City Attorney Nira Doherty, Special City of Menlo Park 701 Laurel St., Menlo Park, CA 94025 tel 650-330-6600 menlopark.gov City Council Special and Regular Meeting Agenda
May 9, 2023
Counsel Charles Sakai
Not a California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) project.
C2. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL - EXISTING LITIGATION Paragraph (1) of subdivision (d) of §54956.9)
Name of case: David Fogel et al. v. City of Menlo Park, Case No. 21-CIV-06674 Not a CEQA project.
6:00 p.m. – Regular Meeting
D. Call To Order
E. Agenda Review
F. Report from Closed Sessions
G. Public Comment
Under “Public Comment,” the public may address the Commission on any subject not listed on the agenda. Each speaker may address the Commission once under Public Comment for a limit of three minutes. The Commission cannot act on items not listed on the agenda and, therefore, the Commission cannot respond to non-agenda issues brought up under Public Comment other than to provide general information.
H. Presentations and Proclamations
H1. Presentation: UC Berkeley students regarding affordable housing opportunities on the Cityowned parking plazas in downtown (Presentation) (Presentation) Not a CEQA project.
H2. Proclamation: Recognizing Public Works Week (Attachment) Not a CEQA project.
H3. Proclamation: May 2023 Mental Health Month (Attachment) Not a CEQA project.
H4. Proclamation: Recognizing May 2023 as Bike Month (Attachment) Not a CEQA project.
H5. Proclamation: Jewish American Heritage Month (Attachment) Not a CEQA project.
H6. Proclamation: Asian American Pacific Islander Heritage Month (Attachment) Not a CEQA project.
I. Consent Calendar
I1. Accept the City Council meeting minutes for April 4 and 18, 2023 (Attachment) City of Menlo Park 701 Laurel St., Menlo Park, CA 94025 tel 650-330-6600 menlopark.gov City Council Special and Regular Meeting Agenda
May 9, 2023
Not a CEQA project.
I2. Confirm Complete Streets Commission recommendation to make the Ravenswood Avenue bike lane pilot permanent (Staff Report #23-107-CC)
Not a CEQA project.
I3. Authorize the Mayor to execute the second amended and restated joint powers agreement with the San Francisco Creek Joint Powers Authority (Staff Report #23-108-CC) Not a CEQA project.
I4. Authorize the Mayor to sign a letter on behalf of the City Council to PG&E regarding recent extended power outages (Staff Report #23-109-CC)
Not a CEQA project.
I5. Receive annual City Council priority and goal setting workshop final report (Staff Report #23-110-CC)
Not a CEQA project.
I6. Receive and file the investment portfolio as of March 31, 2023 (Staff Report #23-114-CC) Not a CEQA project.
I7. Adopt a resolution to authorize the city manager to execute a community funding agreement with Habitat for Humanity Greater San Francisco (Habitat) in the amount of $1.2 million for the preservation of existing housing in Belle Haven through their Homeownership Preservation Program (Staff Report #23-117-CC)
Not a CEQA project.
J. Regular Business
J1. Provide direction on the five-year capital improvement plan (Staff Report #23-115-CC) Not a CEQA project.
K. Informational Items
K1. City Council agenda topics: May 23 – June 13 (Staff Report #23-116-CC) Not a CEQA project.
K2. Transmittal of city attorney billing (Staff Report #23-111-CC) Not a CEQA project.
K3. Update on pilot quick build intersection improvements at Menlo Avenue and University Drive (Staff Report #23-112-CC)
Not a CEQA project.
K4. Update on the Willow Road-U.S. 101 Interchange landscaping (Staff Report #23-113-CC) Not a CEQA project.
(Presentation)
City of Menlo Park 701 Laurel St., Menlo Park, CA 94025 tel 650-330-6600 menlopark.gov City Council Special and Regular Meeting Agenda
May 9, 2023
L. City Manager Report's
M. City Councilmember Reports
N. Closed Session
N1. Closed session conference with labor negotiators pursuant to Government Code §54957.6 regarding labor negotiations with the Service Employees International Union Local 521 (SEIU), American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees Local 829 (AFSCME), and Confidential employees
Agency designated representatives: City Manager Justin I.C. Murphy, Administrative Services Director Brittany Mello, Assistant City Manager Stephen Stolte, City Attorney Nira Doherty, Special Counsel Charles Sakai
N2. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL - EXISTING LITIGATION Paragraph (1) of subdivision (d) of §54956.9)
Name of case: David Fogel et al. v. City of Menlo Park, Case No. 21-CIV-06674 O. Adjournment
At every regular meeting of the commission, in addition to the public comment period where the public shall have the right to address the commission on any matters of public interest not listed on the agenda, members of the public have the right to directly address the commission on any item listed on the agenda at a time designated by the chair, either before or during the commission’s consideration of the item.
At every special meeting of the commission, members of the public have the right to directly address the commission on any item listed on the agenda at a time designated by the chair, either before or during consideration of the item.
For appeal hearings, appellant and applicant shall each have 10 minutes for presentations.
If you challenge any of the items listed on this agenda in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the City of Menlo Park at, or before, the public hearing.
Any writing that is distributed to a majority of the commission by any person in connection with an agenda item is a public record (subject to any exemption under the Public Records Act) and is available by request by emailing the city clerk at [email protected]. Persons with disabilities, who require auxiliary aids or services in attending or participating in commission meetings, may call the City Clerk’s Office at 650-330-6620.
Agendas are posted in accordance with California Government Code §54954.2(a) or §54956. Members of the public can view electronic agendas and staff reports by accessing the city website at menlopark.gov/agendas and can receive email notification of agendas by subscribing at menlopark.gov/subscribe. Agendas and staff reports may also be obtained by contacting the city clerk at 650-330-6620. (Posted: 5/4/2023)
() !"#$%&!"'" * "'"#
AR
CC
HOUSING
H1-PRESENTATION
"
+,
%-
++,
%.
+++,
+-,/
-,
#
!
"
#
$
%
&''("
)
)
#
*
0
!
"
1
23
1
#!
1
)
1
23
1
*4
!
!
"#"$
5
$%
*
6
6
*
$
)
)+
$
$
%
%
,
$
$
-
+
.)
%
$$
/
7
%-
&
%
8
%-
&
% (
)493"'"$:
455
+#'17'; < 4=">*
?
$
%-
&
%
(
*
@
)4.3"'#':
405
+#'17'; < 480>*
?"=$>
?
=
%-
&
% ) *
)4A"'#:
4#"B##
+#'17'; < 4#"B$>*
?
'
%-
&
%
<1(
)
.)
< <
!"#
($%
&
!
@
)4A"'#(
)
4#0>B4? < 457>*
?0=7>
?
'(
)
*))'+
)
,*'
-.. /
0 /#
1 -#10
-.20/2
-
1(
13 -0.
44 1
1110
12.510
6 1// /225
10 6
-
77 4444
*))'+
)
+'
(*8(3) (*
)
(99)
(*
)
(99)
(*:9,
(*(
)
),9*
'+
9,
5 '98(*)
),)*
),9*
'+
9,
,,4(*
))8
(*:9,
(*(
)
(*8(3)(*8(3)(*8(3)
(*:)4*() *),(8)
;,')
(*:9,
<
(*)*
(*:)
(*:9,
<
(*)*
(*:)
(*:9,
(*(
)
A9 ( : + ( * ( C+ :*
%-
&
% *),(8)
,*' *),(8)
+'
"
=
(%&>
#7!
3D
?%
=
7 .
<
&
%-
&
%
#
%
&
'
(
%-
&
%
$%
0
(
# ' (
) *+
,
5
*
(-*'-
(.
%-
&
% #"/
)
, ,
7
9,(,9,
*++*)
*))'+
)
,*'
E 01 -(
E
+
2
E
/
3
F
-
1(
13 1.-
*))'+
)
+'
@-1# @
@
@ 7#:@
/ :@
/-:
@-17
@-#@-/@
- @-2
@-
@-
@-.
@/
*),(8)
;,')
(*:9,
<
(*)*
(*:)
4
E
"
G)
!
#
(
$
%
E
4
E
(
H
E 51(
H"H(
E 6
(6
E
#(
(
6
!
#
6
+
2
E 51(
H"H(
E6
(6
E
#(
(
6
!
#
6
+
2
(*:9,
(*(
)
*),(8)
,*'
*),(8)
+'
A9
( (/
-: .:/+
*A:
%-
&
%
8
?
*%
'
I
((
+%
0 1$
0! 2
3
0
4
*
$
3
$1
5
1
03
06
7%
8
%
3
%-
&
%
$
>
3=
%
%-
%.
=
>
3=
%
%-
%.
"'
>
3=
%
%-
%.
"
>
3=
%
%-
%.
""
8 ?
%-
%.
"#
8 ?
%-
%.
"0
%-
%.
"5
&
,
&
%-
%.
8
%
"7
8
AR
CC
HOUSING
%-
%.
8
%
$3
3
7
6
*
$
"8
%-
%.
8
%
:
"$
%-
%.
8
%
:
"=
%-
%.
8
%
:
#'
%-
%.
8
%
:
#
%-
%.
8
% .-
''
#"
%-
%.
8
% *
'!'
##
%-
%.
8
% -
2
'!'
#0
%-
%.
8
%
*
2
)*
#5
%-
%.
/
%
!
"
#
$
%
&''("
)
)
#
*
#7
%-
%.
/
%
36580%
+ Sustainability + Optionality + Multigenerational Program
"#
$
%
&''(")
)#
*
#8
#$
&=
A
#=
&=
A
*3
3
2
3
& C3 9C
C)*
6
$$
9 ),4
$
4
*
$
9 ),4
$
4
*
$
+
:
)
%
$
;
%
+
%
*
7 $$
*
$
6<
*
MENLO PARK DOWNTOWN MASTERPLAN
B Y P A A DTHE NEW MEDIUM
AT MENLO
H1-PRESENTATION
Planner
Architect Architect Developer
PAADWHO WE ARE
K A T E H A MJ O N O C O L E SS O P H I E S C H N I E T ZRE E N A Z H A N G
DEVELOPMENT MISSION
a mixed-income, multi-generational
community,high density yet medium-riseaffordable housing, andactivated outdoor spaces thatintegrate our development intoMenlo Park's existing streetscape.
Cultivate a vibrant downtown thatfeatures...
THE NEW MEDIUM
DESIGN PHILOSOPHYHigh Density HousingCost Effective Building StrategiesIntegrated Outdoor Space
MASTER PLAN
PHASE I
91 AffordableLarge Family Unitsin 2028
PHASE II
64 Townhomes 48 Market Rate 16 BMRPublic Garageby 2030
MASTER PLAN
PHASE III
150 Hybrid Affordable Senior - 60 Units Large Family - 90 Unitsby 2032
MASTER PLAN
PHASE IV
Hybrid Affordable 9% Deal - 60 Units 4% Deal - 90 Unitsby 2034
MASTER PLAN
PHASE III & IV
Urban Greenway Public plaza Farmer's market Economic Revitalization
MASTER PLAN
453 400
Total Housing Units Affordable Housing Units
49% AMI 150 DUA
Average Income AMI Rental Apartments
608 0.7 : 1
Public Parking Spots Replacement Public Parking
Large FamiliesSeniorsVeteransSpecial NeedsModerate-Income Families
MASTER PLAN OVERVIEW RESIDENTS
COMMUNITY BENEFITS
Early Child Care CenterSenior Community CenterUrban GreenwayPublic PlazaPublic ArtPublic Parking Garage PHASE I: LARGE FAMILY
91 units, 30%-60% AMIStudios, 1Bed, 2 Bed, 3 Bed92% Efficiency89 parking spots 1 2 3
4 5
2 91 Units
90,000sqft$63M Hard Cost
91 Units74,000sqft$52M Hard Cost
75% Efficiency
92% Efficiency
CA AB835
1 Means of egress for R-2Primary Author: Alex LeeVerdict Jan. 1, 2025
Master Plan
$492 MM
Phase I Phase II Phase III Phase IV
$84 MM $102 MM $144 MM $162 MM
$790 K / Door
FINANCIAL SNAPSHOT
PHASE I
AHSC as back-upSolar Tax Credit - 45L
Gap Funding Highlight
Family Friendly AmenitiesResident ServiceCase Manager
Resident Amenities
PHASE II
48 townhome for Sale16 BMR townhome for Sale
Townhomes
57%
Market Rate Contribution
43%
Debt
Public Garage Funding Mix
5-Story Public Parking GarageFully-subsidized by townhomes development anddebt leveraged from parking fees Parking Garage
PHASE III & IV
Hybrid Deal StructureShorten Development Timeline
Funding Highlight
Senior Community CenterVeteran ServicesEarly Child Care CenterCase ManagersShuttle to Menlo Park Community Campus Resident Amenities
RECAP
Mixed-incomeMulti-generationalMedium-rise, high densityEfficiently BuiltQuality Living Space
WHAT MAKES TH E NEW
MEDIUM AT MENLOEXCEPTIONAL?
Proclamation
RECOGNIZING MAY 21-27, 2023 AS
PUBLIC WORKS WEEK
WHEREAS, public works professionals focus on infrastructure, facilities and services that are of vital importance to sustainable and resilient communities and to the public health, high quality of life and the well-being of the people of the City of Menlo Park; and WHEREAS, these infrastructure, facilities and services could not be provided without the dedicated efforts of public works professionals, who are engineers, managers, and employees at all levels of government and the private sector; and
WHEREAS, public works professionals are responsible for rebuilding, improving, and protecting our nation's transportation, water supply, water treatment and solid waste systems, public buildings, and other structures and facilities essential for our citizens; and WHEREAS, it is in the public interest for the citizens, civic leaders and children in the City of Menlo Park to gain knowledge of and to maintain an ongoing interest and understanding of the importance of public works and public works programs in their respective communities; and WHEREAS the year 2023 marks the 63nd annual National Public Works Week sponsored by the American Public Works Association/Canadian Public Works Association; and NOW, THEREFORE BE IT PROCLAIMED I, Jen Wolosin, Mayor, do hereby designate the week May 21 - 27, 2023 as National Public Works Week; I urge all citizens to join with representatives of the American Public Works Association and government agencies in activities, events, and ceremonies designed to pay tribute to our public works professionals, engineers, managers, and employees and to recognize the substantial contributions they make to protecting our national health, safety, and quality of life.
Jen Wolosin, Mayor
May 9, 2023
AGENDA ITEM H-2 Page H-2.1
Proclamation
MENTAL HEALTH AWARENESS MONTH MAY 2023
WHEREAS, mental health conditions are among the most common health conditions and more than half the world’s population will live with a mental health condition in their lifetime; and WHEREAS, in 2021, the U.S. Surgeon General issued a health advisory on the youth mental health crisis that has been further exposed by the COVID-19 pandemic; and WHEREAS, one out of every 24 Californians with a serious mental health condition have difficulty functioning in everyday life and if left untreated, have life expectancies 25 years shorter than the general population; and
WHEREAS, every day, millions of people face stigma related to mental health and substance use conditions and may feel isolated and alone, going years before receiving any help, and communities of color with mental health conditions are less likely to receive mental health services compared to their white counterparts; and
WHEREAS, mental health and substance use conditions are treatable health conditions, and people who have mental health and substance use conditions can recover and lead full and meaningful lives; and
WHEREAS, this year’s May Mental Health Month theme, #Share4MH, encourages everyone to take actionable steps towards addressing mental health and substance use conditions by sharing self-care and mental wellness practices and unpacking harmful stigma around mental health; and WHEREAS, in 2022, Menlo Park joined the San Mateo County Mayors Mental Health Initiative where mayors across the 20 cities in San Mateo County have come together with the mission of promoting awareness of and access to mental health resources in their communities; and WHEREAS, the Menlo Park’s City Council wishes to increase the public's knowledge of signs and symptoms of mental health and substance use conditions, professional and self-help resources and self-care practices; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT PROCLAIMED, I, Jen Wolosin, Mayor of the City of Menlo Park, on behalf of the City Council and City, hereby recognize May 2023 as Mental Health Awareness Month, to enhance public awareness of mental health to help end the stigma and direct members of the community to resources and support for mental health and substance use conditions.
Jen Wolosin, Mayor
May 9, 2023
AGENDA ITEM H-3 Page H-3.1
Proclamation
RECOGNIZING MAY 2023 AS BIKE MONTH
WHEREAS, National Bike Month was established in 1956 to recognize the month of May as an annual recognition of bicycling as a convenient, fun, popular, and healthy form of transportation in the United States; and
WHEREAS, the City of Menlo Park acknowledges that whether traveling to work, school, or simply running errands, bicycling is an integral commute mode in the multimodal transportation network which alleviates traffic congestion, reduces air pollution, and decreases fuel consumption; and WHEREAS, bike-to-work, bike-to-school and bike-to-wherever days have proven effective in promoting adults and children to bicycle and educating residents about the environmental importance and many benefits of biking to work, school or wherever regularly; and WHEREAS, the City of Menlo Park encourages both its residents and visitors to bike in order to improve air quality, reap the health benefits of cycling and to reduce overall traffic congestion; and WHEREAS, the City of Menlo Park Safe Routes to School program encourages children to bicycle and walk to school to develop life-long skills and independence; and WHEREAS, the City of Menlo Park has repeatedly demonstrated its commitment to Vision Zero and Complete Streets by actively working to build out its biking infrastructure to enable safer travel by people of all ages and abilities; and
WHEREAS, the Bay Area will participate in the 12th Annual National Bike-to-School Day on Wednesday, May 3, 2023 and the 29th Annual Bike-to-Work/Wherever Day event on Thursday, May 18, 2023 partnering with local bicycle coalitions, public school districts, private schools, and nonprofit agencies in promoting a month-long message that bicycling is a fun, healthy, and environmentally viable form of transportation; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT PROCLAIMED, I, Jen Wolosin, Mayor of the City of Menlo Park, on behalf of the City Council and City, do hereby proclaim the month of May 2023 as Bike Month in the City of Menlo Park.
Jen Wolosin, Mayor
May 9, 2023
AGENDA ITEM H-4 Page H-4.1
Proclamation
JEWISH AMERICAN HERITAGE MONTH
WHEREAS, President George W. Bush issued the first Presidential Proclamation in 2006 designating May as Jewish American Heritage Month and every United States president since that time has issued similar proclamations annually; and
WHEREAS, for centuries, Jewish refugees fleeing oppression and discrimination abroad have fought for religious freedom, defining bedrock principles upon which America was built; and WHEREAS, Union soldiers celebrated Passover in the midst of the Civil War, Jewish suffragists fought to expand freedom and justice, and Jewish faith leaders linked arms with giants of the Civil Rights Movement to demand equal rights for all; and
WHEREAS, Jewish Americans enrich every part of American life as educators and entrepreneurs, athletes and artists, scientists and entertainers, public officials and activists, labor and community leaders, diplomats and military service members, public health heroes, and more; and WHEREAS, there is also a history of racism, bigotry, and other forms of injustice towards Jewish Americans, including attacks on synagogues, bricks thrown through windows of Jewish businesses, swastikas defacing cars and cemeteries, Jewish students harassed on college campuses, and antisemitic conspiracy theories are rampant online; and WHEREAS, our communities strive to heal these wounds and overcome these challenges, acknowledging and celebrating the crucial contributions that Jewish Americans have made to our collective struggle for a more just and fair society; and WHEREAS, the City of Menlo Park recognizes both the continuity of the Jewish people and the intergenerational responsibility we have to heal the community for our children; and WHEREAS, during Jewish American Heritage Month, we honor Jewish Americans who, inspired by Jewish values and American ideals, have engaged in the ongoing work of forming a more perfect union; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT PROCLAIMED, I, Jen Wolosin, Mayor of the City of Menlo Park, on behalf of the City Council and City, hereby recognize May 2023 as Jewish American Heritage Month in celebration of the enduring heritage of Jewish Americans, whose values, culture, and contributions have helped to shape our character as a Nation.
Jen Wolosin, Mayor
May 9, 2023
AGENDA ITEM H-5 Page H-5.1
Proclamation
ASIAN AMERICANS AND PACIFIC ISLANDERS
HERITAGE MONTH MAY 2023
WHEREAS, California is home to more than 6 million individuals of Asian or Pacific Islander descent, and Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders (AAPI) hold the fastest population growth rate among all racial and ethnic groups in our country; and
WHEREAS, the AAPI community has a long and rich history in California, migrating during the Gold Rush Era and planting their roots in the San Francisco Bay Area ever since, brave immigrants who, motivated by the promise of possibilities, picked up their lives and found new homes here; and WHEREAS, a number of policies – including the 1882 Chinese Exclusion Act, the internment of Japanese Americans, and the “alien ineligible for citizenship” status imposed on Asian immigrants into the 1950s and 1960s – have been systemic and wrongful violations of their rights; and WHEREAS, the perseverance, hope, and hard work of the APPI community as artists and activists, educators and elected officials, service men and women and business owners, and more has enriched our communities and helped to drive our communities forward; and WHEREAS, despite the immeasurable ways Asian American and Pacific Islanders enrich this country, we continue to see persistent racism, harassment, and hate crimes that have left too many families afraid to leave their homes and too many loved ones traumatized; and WHEREAS, in the aftermath of the devastating murder of eight victims in Atlanta, six of whom were women of Asian descent, and the shootings in Monterey Park and Half Moon Bay, we have grieved with our AAPI friends and neighbors and witnessed their resilience, heroism, and courage; and WHEREAS, it is imperative that we confront past and present racism and fight for the safety and inclusion of our APPI friends and neighbors and acknowledge that AAPI communities are an invaluable part of the rich fabric of our communities at large; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT PROCLAIMED, I, Jen Wolosin, Mayor of the City of Menlo Park, on behalf of the City Council and City, hereby recognize May 2023 as Asian American and Pacific Islander Heritage Month in celebration of the diversity of cultures, breadth of achievement, and remarkable contributions of the AAPI community.
Jen Wolosin, Mayor
May 9, 2023
AGENDA ITEM H-6 Page H-6.1
City of Menlo Park 701 Laurel St., Menlo Park, CA 94025 tel 650-330-6600 menlopark.gov City Council
REGULAR MEETING MINUTES – DRAFT
Date: 4/4/2023
Time: 6:00 p.m.
Locations: Teleconference and
Belle Haven Branch Library
413 Ivy Dr., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Regular Session
A. Call To Order
Mayor Wolosin called the meeting to order at 6:08 p.m.
B. Roll Call
Present: Combs, Doerr, Nash, Taylor, Wolosin
Absent: None
Staff: City Manager Justin I. C. Murphy, City Attorney Nira F. Doherty, Assistant to the City Manager/City Clerk Judi A. Herren
C. Agenda Review
None.
D. Public Comment
• Darryl spoke on their organization, which works to house Menlo Park homeless. • Pam Jones requested that additional public engagement be done outside of digital/online, an evaluation on current public engagement be conducted, and for the City to take into consideration the Latino population when scheduling public meetings.
E. Presentations and Proclamations
E1. Proclamation: Recognizing April 2023 as National Poetry Month (Attachment) Mayor Wolosin introduced the proclamation (Attachment).
E2. Proclamation: Recognizing April 22, 2023 as Earth Day (Attachment) Mayor Wolosin introduced the proclamation (Attachment).
F. Consent Calendar
F1. Accept the City Council meeting minutes for March 18, 2023 (Attachment) F2. Award a construction contract to G. Bortolotto & Company, Inc., for the 2023 Street Resurfacing project (Staff Report #23-085-CC)
AGENDA ITEM I-1 Page I-1.1
City of Menlo Park 701 Laurel St., Menlo Park, CA 94025 tel 650-330-6600 menlopark.gov City Council Regular Meeting Minutes – DRAFT
April 4, 2023
F3. Authorize the city manager to execute a service agreement with Caltrain to advance the Middle Avenue Caltrain crossing project (Staff Report #23-086-CC) ACTION: Motion and second (Taylor/ Nash), to approved the consent calendar, passed unanimously.
G. Public Hearing
G1. Consider an appeal of the Planning Commission approval of a use permit to demolish an existing single-story, single-family residence and construct a new two-story residence with an attached garage on a substandard lot at 440 University Drive (Staff Report #23-097-CC) Associate Planner Chris Turner made a presentation (Attachment).
Appellant Elizabeth Houck made a presentation (Attachment).
Applicant Aaron Hollister made a presentation (Attachment).
Appellant Elizabeth Houck made a rebuttal.
Mayor Wolosin opened the public hearing.
• Jenny Michel spoke in support of an ADU (accessory dwelling unit) for multi-family and increased labor stabilization.
Mayor Wolosin closed the public hearing.
The City Council received clarification on substandard width in the R-1-U (Single Family Urban Residential) zoning district, Planning Commission’s original decision, relocating the proposed project two or two and a half feet, engagement between the applicant and neighbor, and the number of projects in Menlo Park currently worked on by the applicant.
The City Council discussed City Council options and substandard lot current requirements.
ACTION: Motion and second (Doerr/ Nash), to adopt a resolution denying the appeal and upholding the Planning Commission’s approval of a use permit to demolish an existing one-story, single-family residence and construct a new two-story residence with an attached garage on a substandard lot with regard to minimum lot width and area in the R-1-U (Single Family Urban Residential) zoning district located at 440 University Drive, passed unanimously.
H. Regular Business
H1. Provide direction on the proposed programming plan elements for the Menlo Park Community Campus (Staff Report #23-087-CC)
Library and Community Services Director Sean Reinhart, Interim Assistant Community Services Director Rondell Howard, and Library and Community Services Supervisor Natalya Jones made a presentation (Attachment).
• Jacqui Cebrian spoke in support of programming with input from the Parks and Recreation and Library Commissions, prioritizing Menlo Park residents, and recognizing input from Belle Haven Page I-1.2
City of Menlo Park 701 Laurel St., Menlo Park, CA 94025 tel 650-330-6600 menlopark.gov City Council Regular Meeting Minutes – DRAFT
April 4, 2023
neighborhood residents.
• Sheryl Bims with donated time from Harry Bims spoke on blending the public and private project and in support of the library public services, green initiative programs. • Rose Bickerstaff spoke on the controversy for naming the new facility and ways to consider and respect the community.
• Kenneth Harris spoke on naming the new community center Onetta Harris and in support of the programming process.
The City Council took a recess at 8 p.m.
The City Council reconvened at 8:21 p.m.
The City Council received clarification on who the facility will serve and how to prioritize residents, seniors, and the Belle Haven community, options at the center for food and beverage, the Working Group timeline, and resident and non-resident rates.
The City Council discussed the subcommittee considerations and recommendations, covered senior outdoor area, senior community engagement, field use approval, student inclusion and access, aquatics services best practices, providing and accessibility to technology, ways to prioritize programming and implementing to accomplish as many programs as possible, utilizing the electronic signboard with meeting information, increasing public engagement and working with non-profits, a focus on the things that can be delivered well, designing programs for the Belle Haven community, Red Cross Emergency Shelter information and acknowledgment, and electric activity shuttles.
The City Council directed staff to research food and beverage options, Civics 101 and environmental education, updating the facility rental policy to minimize corporate rentals, annual or half-year report out on resident access to public amenities (e.g., tennis and pickleball courts and fields).
H2. Receive and file report on labor relations and receive public input on upcoming labor negotiations with Service Employees International Union Local 521 and American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees Local 829 (Staff Report #23-070-CC) Administrative Services Director Brittany Mello made the presentation.
The City Council received clarification on the process of labor negotiations.
ACTION: Motion and second (Combs/ Doerr), to receive and file report on employee compensation and receive public input on upcoming labor negotiations with (SEIU) and (AFSCME), passed unanimously.
I. City Council Initiated Items
I1. Direction on advisory body and commissioner stipends (Staff Report #23-088-CC) • Pam Jones spoke in support of the consideration of commissioner stipends. • Adina Levin spoke in support of the consideration of commissioner stipends and the creation of an interpretation and translation policy.
The City Council received clarification on the options before the City Council.
Page I-1.3
City of Menlo Park 701 Laurel St., Menlo Park, CA 94025 tel 650-330-6600 menlopark.gov City Council Regular Meeting Minutes – DRAFT
April 4, 2023
The City Council discussed stipends for CalPERS credit, stipend piloting with the Planning Commission, and fiscal and infrastructure impacts resulting for a stipend.
The City Council directed the following to be researched:
• Flat stipend at $200 month
• Pilot with Planning Commission
• Starting at the 2024 annual advisory body recruitment • Return to City Council after completion of the pilot
ACTION: Motion and second (Wolosin/ Taylor), to direct staff to build in the budget development a stipend for $200 a month as a pilot for Planning Commission beginning April 2024, 4-1 (Combs dissenting).
J. Informational Items
J1. City Council agenda topics: April 18 – May 9, 2023 (Staff Report #23-092-CC) J2. Update on Belle Haven traffic calming plan implementation (Staff Report #23-089-CC) J3. Belle Haven School redesign update – Ravenswood City School District (Staff Report #23-090-CC) J4. Update on Kelly Park athletic field synthetic turf and track renovation project (Staff Report #23-093-CC)
J5. Update on West Bay encroachment agreement for work near Bedwell Bayfront Park (Staff Report #23-094-CC)
• Chris MacIntosh spoke on concerns on the trail closure and requested clarification on public engagement before the start of the project and parking impacts at Bedwell Bayfront Park.
The City Council received clarification on trail closures, public engagement, and parking impacts at Bedwell Bayfront Park
K. City Manager's Report
City Manager Justin Murphy reported out on the next City Council meeting on April 18.
L. City Councilmember Reports
City Councilmember Combs reported out on the heritage tree ordinance.
City Councilmember Nash reported out on Environmental Quality Commission subcommittee.
Mayor Wolosin reported out on upcoming Love our Earth festival on April 22 and a progress seminar hosted by San Mateo County Chamber of Commerce on April 21.
M. Adjournment
Mayor Wolosin adjourned the meeting at 10:04 p.m.
Page I-1.4
City of Menlo Park 701 Laurel St., Menlo Park, CA 94025 tel 650-330-6600 menlopark.gov City Council Regular Meeting Minutes – DRAFT
April 4, 2023
Judi A. Herren, Assistant to the City Manager/City Clerk Page I-1.5
City of Menlo Park 701 Laurel St., Menlo Park, CA 94025 tel 650-330-6600 menlopark.gov City Council
SPECIAL MEETING MINUTES – DRAFT
Date: 4/18/2023
Time: 6:00 p.m.
Locations: Teleconference and
City Council Chambers
751 Laurel St., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Regular Session
A. Call To Order
Mayor Wolosin called the meeting to order at 6:06 p.m.
B. Roll Call
Present: Combs, Doerr, Nash, Taylor, Wolosin
Absent: None
Staff: City Manager Justin I. C. Murphy, City Attorney Nira F. Doherty, Assistant to the City Manager/City Clerk Judi A. Herren
C. Special Business
C1. Interviews of Planning Commission applicants (Attachment) (Note: No action will be taken at this meeting. Appointments are scheduled for the April 25, 2023 City Council meeting.)
The City Council interviewed the following Planning Commission applicants:
• Paul Studemeister
• Andrew Ehrich
• Ross Silverstein
• Katie Ferrick
D. Closed Session
D1. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL – EXISTING LITIGATION Paragraph (1) of subdivision (d) of Section 54956.9
Name of case: Tobias Kunze and Liliana Kunze Briseno v. City of Menlo Park (Case No. 3- CIV00590)
• Richard Heintze spoke in support of the removal of the “dangerous dog” designation to the Kunze’s dog.
• Stacy Deks spoke in support of the removal of the “dangerous dog” designation to the Kunze’s dog.
• Jenna McGrath spoke in support of the removal of the “dangerous dog” designation to the Kunze’s dog.
• Scott Stocker spoke in support of the removal of the “dangerous dog” designation to the Kunze’s dog.
Page I-1.6
City of Menlo Park 701 Laurel St., Menlo Park, CA 94025 tel 650-330-6600 menlopark.gov City Council Special Meeting Minutes – DRAFT
April 18, 2023
• Scout Tweedie-Yates spoke in support of the removal of the “dangerous dog” designation to the Kunze’s dog.
• Candace Hathaway spoke in support of new mechanisms to manage neighbor disputes. • Steve Schmidt spoke in support of the removal of the “dangerous dog” designation to the Kunze’s dog.
• Kathleen Hohalek spoke in support of the removal of the “dangerous dog” designation to the Kunze’s dog.
• Deborah Denny, through Scout Tweedie-Yates, spoke in support of the removal of the “dangerous dog” designation to the Kunze’s dog.
• Preeti Sharma requested information on the number of animal control hearing conducted by San Mateo County.
• Nancy Tomkins spoke in support of the removal of the “dangerous dog” designation to the Kunze’s dog.
D2. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL – ANTICIPATED LITIGATION Significant exposure to litigation pursuant to paragraph (2) of subdivision (d) of Section 54956.9:
(One potential case)
D3. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL – ANTICIPATED LITIGATION Initiation of litigation pursuant to paragraph (4) of subdivision (d) of Section 54956.9: (One potential case)
E. Adjournment
Mayor Wolosin adjourned to the closed session at 7:26 p.m.
Mayor Wolosin adjourned the meeting at 11:25 p.m.
Judi A. Herren, Assistant to the City Manager/City Clerk Page I-1.7
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: 5/9/2023
Staff Report Number: 23-107-CC
Consent Calendar: Confirm Complete Streets Commission
recommendation to make the Ravenswood Avenue
bike lane pilot permanent
Recommendation
Staff recommends that the City Council confirm the recommendation from the Complete Streets Commission (CSC) to make the Ravenswood bike lane pilot permanent as part of the resurfacing of Ravenswood Avenue, which began at the end of April 2023 and will be complete by June 2023.
Policy Issues
This project is consistent with policies stated in the General Plan Circulation Element (e.g., CIRC-1.2, CIRC1.7, CIRC-2.7, etc.). These policies seek to maintain a safe, efficient, attractive, user-friendly circulation system that promotes a healthy, safe and active community and quality of life throughout Menlo Park. It is also consistent with the City’s Transportation Master Plan. This project is included in the City’s five-year Capital Improvement Program (CIP).
Background
Ravenswood Avenue, from El Camino Real to Middlefield Road, is classified as an Avenue – Mixed Use in the General Plan Circulation Plan, which is intended to provide balanced service for people on all modes. It is a primary east-west route in the City, providing access to key destinations including the Menlo Park Caltrain Station, downtown Menlo Park, Burgess Park, Civic Center and Menlo-Atherton High School. It is a primary emergency response route that is signed for 25 miles per hour between El Camino Real and Laurel Street. This route also serves local businesses and residential units.
On March 9, 2022, the CSC received an update on the Ravenswood Avenue resurfacing project, including the project scope and potential pedestrian and bicycle enhancements. The project will resurface Ravenswood Avenue between El Camino Real and Laurel Street. The CSC unanimously supported implementing pedestrian and bicycle enhancements that could be implemented by reducing automobile lane widths and piloting improvements that require eliminating one of two westbound travel lanes on Ravenswood Avenue between Noel Drive and Alma Street, or approximately 300 feet.
On April 26, 2022, the City Council received an update on the Ravenswood Avenue resurfacing project and supported the same set of proposed improvements, including the pilot of the westbound bicycle lane and removal of one travel lane between Noel Drive and Alma Street. A hyperlink to the City Council staff report is provided as Attachment A. A schematic plan showing the changes supported by the CSC and City Council is included in Attachment B.
On Feb. 28, the City Council awarded a contract to Radius Earthwork, Inc. to resurface Ravenswood Avenue between El Camino Real and Laurel Street. The resurfacing project began at the end of April 2023 AGENDA ITEM I-2 Page I-2.1
Staff Report #: 23-107-CC
City of Menlo Park 701 Laurel St., Menlo Park, CA 94025 tel 650-330-6600 menlopark.gov with completion expected by June 2023. The first phase of the resurfacing project includes reconstruction of curb ramps and the median.
After the concrete work is complete, the contractor will repave the street, which is anticipated to take place in late May. This work will require short-term closure of Ravenswood Avenue and is planned to be conducted on a weekend to limit the impact on traffic. After the resurfacing is complete, the final phase will be the replacement of the lane markings.
On March 2, staff worked with an on-call contractor to install the pilot of the westbound bike lane between Noel Drive and Alma Street. Staff began the pilot in advance of the resurfacing project to provide information to the CSC and City Council to inform the future design of the road.
Analysis
As described in the April 26, 2022, staff report to the City Council, staff identified several potential metrics to evaluate the pilot. Table 1 summarizes the data collected over the last several weeks, with a focus on vehicle queuing, community feedback and safety.
Table 1: Ravenswood Avenue pilot metrics
Metric Source Variables Preliminary findings
Morning / evening peak
hour vehicular queues
Video
observations
• Queue distance
relative to Laurel Street
• When Caltrain gates are up, limited impact
on queuing
• When Caltrain gates are down for 2 or more
minutes, vehicles have to wait a cycle to
progress through the Ravenswood/Laurel
signal
Pre- and post- pilot
vehicular volumes (on
Ravenswood Avenue
and Oak Grove
Avenue)
Counts • Change in vehicular
volumes
• Survey responses suggest some route
shifting by drivers
• Post-pilot volume data collection to be
scheduled, pending City Council direction
Pre- and post- pilot
bicycle volumes Counts
• Change in bicycle
volumes
• Pedestrian crossing
volumes at Alma Street
• Staff have observed a small increase in
bicycling along Ravenswood
• Post-pilot volume data collected to be
scheduled, pending City Council direction
Community feedback
survey Online survey
• Percent support
• Perceived
safety/comfort
• Half of respondents who drive indicated no
increase in congestion; respondents who do
not use other modes more likely to indicate
increased congestion
• Nearly three quarters of bicyclists indicate
increased feeling of safety
Bicycle and pedestrian
collisions
Police
department • Number of collisions • No collisions during pilot• Two total bicycle collisions since 2019 Queuing
Staff collected queuing data on Ravenswood Avenue in the westbound direction for the six weekdays from March 1 to March 8. This data was collected using video during the peak periods and included:
• Counts of the number of vehicles traveling in the westbound direction on Ravenswood Avenue • The length of vehicle queues east of Noel Drive, including those that cross Laurel Street • The number of pedestrians and bicyclists in the crosswalk across Ravenswood Avenue at Alma Street Page I-2.2
Staff Report #: 23-107-CC
City of Menlo Park 701 Laurel St., Menlo Park, CA 94025 tel 650-330-6600 menlopark.gov • The times when the Caltrain gates were down
The data for March 1 are from before the pilot began. The pilot was then installed March 2, with the bike lane striping completed by midday. From the afternoon on, the data reflect the conditions with the pilot bike lane installed.
Attachment C provides a detailed summary of the data collected during the pilot period. Staff also conducted in person observations both during video data collection and during subsequent weeks. Key findings of the data collected and staff observations include:
• There were relatively few queuing issues March 1, before the pilot began. • Construction activity March 2 led to substantial delays in the a.m. peak. • During the p.m. peak period March 2, signal detection issues at Ravenswood Avenue and Laurel Street created substantial queuing.
• After pilot installation and resolution of signal detection issues, the removal of the travel lane did not create constant, continuous queuing. Each of the peak periods from March 3 to March 8 show one or two incidents where queuing spilled past Laurel Street, but these events were occasional and generally limited in duration.
• Queuing issues were most common when the Caltrain gates are down for an extended period and when there are relatively high vehicle volumes. These generally occur between 8:30 a.m. and 8:45 a.m. and between 5:30 p.m. and 5:45 p.m. At these times, vehicles trying to turn from northbound Laurel Street onto westbound Ravenswood Avenue sometimes have to wait for a signal cycle to make the turn, generally impacting five to 10 vehicles.
• Staff have observed a decline in overall traffic speed during this period.
Staff observations were consistent with the data shown in Attachment C. Staff conducted observations in the most impacted time periods for eight additional days.
Public survey
On March 15, staff released a public input survey about the bike lane pilot. Staff distributed the survey via the City’s weekly digest, through signs with QR codes posted on Ravenswood Avenue, via social media, including posts to NextDoor by the City, and via a changeable message sign. The survey included questions about how people travel on Ravenswood Avenue, how frequently they travel, and their experience of Ravenswood Avenue since the start of bike lane pilot. It also included some demographic questions. Staff closed the survey April 28.
There were 204 responses to the survey, though several did not respond to all questions. Attachment D provides a report summarizing the responses to the survey and listing the comments received. Key findings from the survey include:
• Respondents use Ravenswood Avenue frequently (over half use it daily), for many different purposes, and using all different modes. Auto was the most frequent at 93%, but walking (52%) and bicycling (48%) were also common. Few respondents (12 total) used transit. • Over half of people who drive on Ravenswood Avenue indicated that the pilot has had no impact on congestion, but 38% indicated that there was somewhat or much more congestion. Respondents who drive daily or who use Ravenswood Avenue to commute were somewhat more likely to say Ravenswood has become more congested. Respondents who drive but do not use other modes were much more likely to indicate there was increased congestion.
• About three quarters of respondents who bicycle indicated that the pilot increased bicycle safety. Less Page I-2.3
Staff Report #: 23-107-CC
City of Menlo Park 701 Laurel St., Menlo Park, CA 94025 tel 650-330-6600 menlopark.gov than 5% of respondents indicated that bicycling safety was worse during the pilot. • Over half of respondents who walked indicated that there was no change in crossing safety, with 37% indicating that it was somewhat or much safer to cross. The initial pilot did not include a wider median and staff did not expect there to be a noticeable change in crossing safety until the wider median is installed with resurfacing.
• Respondents who drive and live within walking distance of Ravenswood Avenue were more likely to say that congestion was somewhat or much worse (44% compared to 36%) and less likely to say that the pilot had no impact on congestion (46% compared to 55%). • Respondents who live near Ravenswood Avenue and walk or bicycle expressed similar opinions about bicycle and pedestrian safety as respondents living elsewhere in the City.
Collisions
According to records from the police department, there have been 21 collisions since 2019 on Ravenswood Avenue between Laurel Street and Alma Street. The most recent recorded collisions on this segment of Ravenswood were in December 2022. From 2019 to 2023, there were two collisions between a motor vehicle and a bicycle, one in 2021 and one in 2022, both yielding minor injuries. Most collisions (14 of 21) were between two motor vehicles.
Since the pilot commenced, no collisions were reported to the police department on this segment of Ravenswood Avenue. Staff will continue to monitor collision records to identify if there is any change in collision patterns.
Complete Streets Commission review
On April 17, the CSC received an update on the pilot, including the queuing data described in this report and a preliminary report on the public survey. The current public survey report (Attachment D) has additional responses but the findings are substantially the same as in the report for at the CSC meeting.
For the CSC meeting, staff deployed a changeable message sign on Ravenswood Avenue to notify street users of the meeting and emailed individuals who expressed interest through the survey or reached out to staff. One public comment was received at the meeting asking if the goal of the pilot was to replace a lane with shared markings with an exclusive bike lane and the origin of the request. Staff confirmed that the intent of the pilot was to test installation of a permanent bike lane as the Noel Street to Alma Street location would be the only remaining gap in bicycle lanes once the pilot was complete.
The CSC received additional updates on the design of Ravenswood Avenue, the process for conducting outreach, how many vehicles fit within the lane converted to a bicycle lane, the ideal timing of a pilot, the opportunity cost of extending the pilot, and the potential impact of future Parkline development at the SRI site. CSC members also asked if there was an opportunity to extend the left turn pocket on westbound Ravenswood Avenue at Laurel Street, which staff is examining. Finally, the CSC asked that staff work to make it easier for residents to find surveys similar the one used for this project on the City’s website.
The CSC voted unanimously (with one commissioner absent) to recommend making the pilot permanent.
The CSC also requested that staff look at additional opportunities to enhance the safety of pedestrian crossings of Ravenswood Avenue at Alma Street and to update the CSC at a future meeting on what additional pedestrian safety elements were added.
Staff recommends that the City Council accept the CSC recommendation. The City Council could also direct staff to extend the pilot for six more months with additional data collection or to restore the street to the prior condition (i.e., two automobile lanes, no bicycle lanes, and a narrower median between Noel Street and Page I-2.4
City of Menlo Park 701 Laurel St., Menlo Park, CA 94025 tel 650-330-6600 menlopark.gov Staff Report #: 23-107-CC
Alma Street). Restoring the prior condition would not require reconstructing concrete, only adjusting striping and bollards.
Impact on City Resources
Staff installed the pilot using existing resources from the City’s on-call pavement contractor. The resurfacing of Ravenswood Avenue is included in the fiscal year 2022-23 capital improvement plan. Continuing the pilot would require additional staff time to collect data and prepare presentations to the CSC and City Council. If required, additional data would be collected using existing on-call traffic data collection contractors.
Environmental Review
The Ravenswood Avenue resurfacing project is categorically exempt under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Article 19, § 15301 Existing Facilities - Class 1. Class 1 allows for minor alterations of existing facilities, including 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
A. Hyperlink – April 26, 2022 staff report: menlopark.gov/files/sharedassets/public/agendas-andminutes/city-council/2022-meetings/agendas/20220426-city-council-agenda-packet.pdf#page=106 B. Ravenswood Avenue bicycle lane additions
C. Queuing analysis
D. Public survey analysis
Report prepared by:
Hugh Louch, Assistant Public Works Director – Transportation Report reviewed by:
Nicole H. Nagaya, Deputy City Manager
Page I-2.5
Pilot Bulb
Outs
A
Repaving extent - El Camino Real to Laurel Street
Ravenswood Repaving Project: Bike Lane Pilot
Bike Lanes
Existing
Added w/repaving
Pilot
A - Cross Section At Pedestrian Crossing of Ravenswood
Existing Enhanced Pedestrian Refuge
Pilot Bike
Lane
Page I-2.6 ATTACHMENT B
City of Menlo Park 701 Laurel St., Menlo Park, CA 94025 tel 650-330-6600 menlopark.gov Public Works
MEMORANDUM
Date: 4/17/2023
To: Complete Streets Commission
From: Hugh Louch, Assistant Public Works Director – Transportation Re: Ravenswood bike lane pilot queuing analysis
This memorandum summarizes the queuing analysis findings for the Ravenswood bike lane pilot being conducted in advance of resurfacing of Ravenswood Avenue between Laurel Street and El Camino Real.
The memo includes the following topics:
• Background
• Data collection
• Findings
Background
The Ravenswood bike lane pilot is exploring the addition of a bike lane on westbound Ravenswood Avenue between Noel Drive and Alma Street, a distance of about 300 feet. This pilot is being conducted as part of the Ravenswood resurfacing project, which will repave Ravenswood Avenue between Laurel Street and El Camino Real, and include a number of bicycle and pedestrian enhancements (Figure 1).
The resurfacing project will add bike lanes in two areas of the street that do not require any change in vehicle capacity:
• New bike lanes eastbound between the railroad tracks and the existing bike lanes near Laurel Street.
• New bike lanes on westbound Ravenswood between Alma Street and El Camino Real.
The project also included adding the remaining westbound bike lane gap between Noel Drive and Alma Street as a pilot because it requires removing one of the two westbound travel lanes. As part of this pilot, the project will provide a wider refuge median for pedestrians crossing Ravenswood Avenue at Alma Street.
The pilot elements were installed on March 2, in advance of resurfacing to test the impact of the automobile lane removal.
Page I-2.7 ATTACHMENT C
City of Menlo Park 701 Laurel St., Menlo Park, CA 94025 tel 650-330-6600 menlopark.gov 2 Figure 1. Ravenswood Resurfacing Bicycle and Pedestrian Enhancements Data collection
This analysis is focused on the potential impact on vehicular queuing. To support this analysis, the City hired a data collection contractor to collect the following data:
• Counts of the number of vehicles traveling in the westbound direction on Ravenswood Avenue
• The length of vehicle queues east of Noel Drive, including those that cross Laurel Street
• The number of pedestrians and bicyclists in the crosswalk across Ravenswood Avenue at Alma Street
• The times when the Caltrain gates were down, including the duration Data were collected during the a.m. and p.m. peak periods (7 a.m. to 9 a.m. and 4 p.m. to 6 p.m.) for 6 weekdays between March 1 and March 8, including:
• March 1 – before pilot started
• March 2 – the day the pilot was installed. Data from the a.m. peak reflect the impact of ongoing work during the peak period and data from p.m. peak reflect the installation of the bike lane. There were also signal detection issues and Laurel Street and Ravenswood Avenue that added delay.
• March 3 to March 8 – pilot was installed and signal was functioning normally.
Page I-2.8
City of Menlo Park 701 Laurel St., Menlo Park, CA 94025 tel 650-330-6600 menlopark.gov 3 Findings
The following charts show the data for each of the individual data items collected.
Vehicle counts
Vehicle volumes fluctuate throughout the a.m. and p.m. peak periods. In the morning, the volumes generally increased steadily until about 8:15 or 8:30 a.m., and then declined slightly (Figure 2). In the evening peak, volumes are more consistent across the period, with slightly higher volumes between 5 and 6 p.m. (Figure 3). 0 10
20 30
40 50
60 70
80 90
7:00 7:15 7:30 7:45 8:00 8:15 8:30 8:45 9:00
Figure 2. Auto Volumes by Day (AM Peak 5-min increments) Mar 1 (Wed) Mar 2 (Thu) Mar 3 (Fri) Mar 6 (Mon) Mar 7 (Tue) Mar 8 (Wed) Page I-2.9
City of Menlo Park 701 Laurel St., Menlo Park, CA 94025 tel 650-330-6600 menlopark.gov 4 Pedestrian and bicycle crossings of Ravenswood at Alma Pedestrian and bicycle crossing counts vary by day, depending on school schedules and weather. During this period, there were days of clear weather, but also days of rain.
The greatest use of the crosswalk during the morning was between 7:45 and 8:30 a.m. (Figure 4), corresponding with the timing of travel to school. In the evening, pedestrian and bicycle crossings were highest between 4:00 and 4:45 p.m. (Figure 5), and were generally slightly higher overall than the morning.
Caltrain gate down time
Figure 6 and 7 show the times when Caltrain gates were down through the morning and evening peaks by day. The length of the bars indicates a longer train crossing.
Several times a day, when there are multiple trains passing, the gates are down for periods lasting two or more minutes.
0 10
20 30
40 50
60 70
4:00 PM 4:15 PM 4:30 PM 4:45 PM 5:00 PM 5:15 PM 5:30 PM 5:45 PM 6:00 PM Figure 3. Auto Volumes by Day (PM Peak - 5-min increments) Mar 1 (Wed) Mar 2 (Thu) Mar 3 (Fri) Mar 6 (Mon) Mar 7 (Tue) Mar 8 (Wed) Page I-2.10
City of Menlo Park 701 Laurel St., Menlo Park, CA 94025 tel 650-330-6600 menlopark.gov 5 0
5 10
15 20
25 7:00 7:15 7:30 7:45 8:00 8:15 8:30 8:45 9:00
Figure 4. Pedestrian & Bicycle Volumes in Crosswalk (AM Peak) 1-Mar 2-Mar 3-Mar 6-Mar 7-Mar 8-Mar
0 5
10 15
20 25
16:00 16:15 16:30 16:45 17:00 17:15 17:30 17:45 18:00
FIgure 5. Pedestrian & Bicycle Volumes in Crosswalk (PM Peak) 1-Mar 2-Mar 3-Mar 6-Mar 7-Mar 8-Mar
Page I-2.11
City of Menlo Park 701 Laurel St., Menlo Park, CA 94025 tel 650-330-6600 menlopark.gov 6 7:00 AM 7:15 AM 7:30 AM 7:45 AM 8:00 AM 8:15 AM 8:30 AM 8:45 AM 9:00 AM Mar 1 (Wed)
Mar 2 (Thu)
Mar 3 (Fri)
Mar 6 (Mon)
Mar 7 (Tue)
Mar 8 (Wed)
Figure 6. Caltrain Gate Down Times at Ravenswood (AM Peak) 4:00 PM 4:15 PM 4:30 PM 4:45 PM 5:00 PM 5:15 PM 5:30 PM 5:45 PM 6:00 PM Mar 1 (Wed)
Mar 2 (Thu)
Mar 3 (Fri)
Mar 6 (Mon)
Mar 7 (Tue)
Mar 8 (Wed)
Figure 7. Caltrain Gate Down Times at Ravenswood (PM Peak) Page I-2.12
City of Menlo Park 701 Laurel St., Menlo Park, CA 94025 tel 650-330-6600 menlopark.gov 7 Queuing Data
The final data item collected is the length of the queues. These were collected using a camera positioned on a pole just east of Noel Drive. Staff observation showed that queuing to Noel Drive was routine before the pilot began, so the focus was on queues that extend to or beyond Laurel Street.
Figure 8 presents the number of vehicles that were queuing during the morning and evening peak periods. The dots show the number of vehicles past the position of the camera. Approximately seven additional vehicles can fit within Ravenswood past this point.
The worst queuing was observed on March 2 during the installation of the pilot. The pilot installation began at 8 a.m. and created substantial queues. That evening, signal detection issues also generated one substantial queue because Ravenswood Avenue was receiving much less green time than it normally does. These issues were resolved that evening.
0 5
10 15
20 25
30 7:00 AM 8:00 AM 9:00 AM 10:00 AM 11:00 AM 12:00 PM 1:00 PM 2:00 PM 3:00 PM 4:00 PM 5:00 PM Figure 8. Queuing past Noel Drive (# of vehicles) - All Days 2-Mar 3-Mar 6-Mar 7-Mar 8-Mar
Queuing past
Laurel Street
Capacity of Ravenswood Avenue
Page I-2.13
City of Menlo Park 701 Laurel St., Menlo Park, CA 94025 tel 650-330-6600 menlopark.gov 8 Combined analysis
The following charts show the combined impact of vehicle volumes, pedestrian and bicycle crossings, and Caltrain gate down times on vehicle queues. On the following charts, incidents of queuing past Noel Drive are shown with gold colored dots by day and time of day (a.m. and p.m.). The gold line represents the capacity of Ravenswood Avenue during the pilot.
Key findings include:
• March 1 – pre-pilot. There was one morning (Figure 9) and three evening (Figure 10) incidences of queuing, none of which extended past Laurel Street. As anticipated, queuing was generally observed following extended Caltrain gate down time.
• March 2 – pilot installation. The most significant queuing occurred on this day. In the morning (Figure 11), the installation began around 8 a.m. and led to the longest queues observed. In the evening (Figure 12), the combination of ongoing pilot installation and signal detection issues created numerous queuing observations, but few that exceeded the capacity of Ravenswood Avenue. • March 3 – first full day. There were four observations of queuing in the morning (Figure 13) and seven in the evening (Figure 14), of which two (one in the morning and one in the evening) exceeded the capacity of Ravenswood. All observations occurred during extended gate down time. Most, but not all, of the queues were associated with higher vehicle volumes.
• March 6 – Monday during pilot. There were five observations of queuing in the morning (Figure 15) and six in the evening (Figure 16). Only two observations, both in the morning, exceeded the capacity of Ravenswood Avenue and only by one or two vehicles.
• March 7 – Tuesday during pilot. There were three observations of queuing in the morning (Figure 17) and three in the evening (Figure 18). Despite much higher vehicle volumes than other days, only a single incidence of queuing was observed that exceeded the capacity of Ravenswood Avenue.
• March 8 – Wednesday during pilot. This day had the greatest number of queuing observations – 10 in the morning (Figure 19) and 13 in the evening (Figure 20). It also had generally higher vehicle volumes than other days, especially in the morning. However, there were no incidents of queuing that exceeded the capacity of Ravenswood Avenue during either peak period.
Overall, the individual observations reveal that during periods of extended gate down time, especially when there are higher peaks of vehicle time, there are queues toward Laurel Street and sometimes extend past. Staff have used the data from this analysis to inform further observations. When queues reach Laurel Street, it generally has a greater impact on left turns from Laurel Street onto Ravenswood Avenue westbound.
In these instances, vehicles sometimes have to wait for a second cycle to make the turn onto Ravenswood Avenue, but the queue clears quickly once the Caltrain gates reopen.
Page I-2.14
City of Menlo Park 701 Laurel St., Menlo Park, CA 94025 tel 650-330-6600 menlopark.gov 9 0
10 20
30 40
50 60
70 7:00 AM 7:10 AM 7:20 AM 7:30 AM 7:40 AM 7:50 AM 8:00 AM 8:10 AM 8:20 AM 8:30 AM 8:40 AM 8:50 AM 9:00 AM Figure 9. Queuing on Ravenswood - 3/1 (Wed) Pre-Pilot AM Peak Peds/Bikes in Crosswalk Vehicle Volumes Queuing Ravenswood Capacity Gates Down 0 10
20 30
40 50
60 70
4:00 PM 4:10 PM 4:20 PM 4:30 PM 4:40 PM 4:50 PM 5:00 PM 5:10 PM 5:20 PM 5:30 PM 5:40 PM 5:50 PM 6:00 PM Figure 10. Queuing on Ravenswood - 3/1 (Wed) Pre-Pilot PM Peak Peds/Bikes in Crosswalk Vehicle Volumes Queuing Ravenswood Capacity Gates Down Page I-2.15
City of Menlo Park 701 Laurel St., Menlo Park, CA 94025 tel 650-330-6600 menlopark.gov 10 0
10 20
30 40
50 60
70 7:00 AM 7:10 AM 7:20 AM 7:30 AM 7:40 AM 7:50 AM 8:00 AM 8:10 AM 8:20 AM 8:30 AM 8:40 AM 8:50 AM 9:00 AM Figure 11. Queuing on Ravenswood - 3/2 (Thu) - AM Peak
Peds/Bikes in Crosswalk Vehicle Volumes Queuing Ravenswood Capacity Gates Down Pilot installaton began during this time
Note: signal detection issues were
present throughout the day on 3/2
0 10
20 30
40 50
60 70
4:00 PM 4:10 PM 4:20 PM 4:30 PM 4:40 PM 4:50 PM 5:00 PM 5:10 PM 5:20 PM 5:30 PM 5:40 PM 5:50 PM 6:00 PM Figure 12. Queuing on Ravenswood - 3/2 (Thu) PM Peak
Peds/Bikes in Crosswalk Vehicle Volumes Queuing Ravenswood Capacity Gates Down Note: signal detection issues were
present throughout the day on 3/2
Page I-2.16
City of Menlo Park 701 Laurel St., Menlo Park, CA 94025 tel 650-330-6600 menlopark.gov 11 0
10 20
30 40
50 60
70 7:00 AM 7:10 AM 7:20 AM 7:30 AM 7:40 AM 7:50 AM 8:00 AM 8:10 AM 8:20 AM 8:30 AM 8:40 AM 8:50 AM 9:00 AM Figure 13. Queuing on Ravenswood - 3/3 (Fri) AM Peak
Peds/Bikes in Crosswalk Vehicle Volumes Queuing Ravenswood Capacity Gates Down 0 10
20 30
40 50
60 70
4:00 PM 4:10 PM 4:20 PM 4:30 PM 4:40 PM 4:50 PM 5:00 PM 5:10 PM 5:20 PM 5:30 PM 5:40 PM 5:50 PM 6:00 PM Figure 14. Queuing on Ravenswood - 3/3 (Fri) PM Peak
Peds/Bikes in Crosswalk Vehicle Volumes Queuing Ravenswood Capacity Gates Down Page I-2.17
City of Menlo Park 701 Laurel St., Menlo Park, CA 94025 tel 650-330-6600 menlopark.gov 12 0
10 20
30 40
50 60
70 7:00 AM 7:10 AM 7:20 AM 7:30 AM 7:40 AM 7:50 AM 8:00 AM 8:10 AM 8:20 AM 8:30 AM 8:40 AM 8:50 AM 9:00 AM Figure 15. Queuing on Ravenswood - 3/6 (Mon) AM Peak
Peds/Bikes in Crosswalk Vehicle Volumes Queuing Ravenswood Capacity Gates Down 0 10
20 30
40 50
60 70
4:00 PM 4:10 PM 4:20 PM 4:30 PM 4:40 PM 4:50 PM 5:00 PM 5:10 PM 5:20 PM 5:30 PM 5:40 PM 5:50 PM 6:00 PM Figure 16. Queuing on Ravenswood - 3/6 (Mon) PM Peak
Peds/Bikes in Crosswalk Vehicle Volumes Queuing Ravenswood Capacity Gates Down Page I-2.18
City of Menlo Park 701 Laurel St., Menlo Park, CA 94025 tel 650-330-6600 menlopark.gov 13 0
10 20
30 40
50 60
70 7:00 AM 7:10 AM 7:20 AM 7:30 AM 7:40 AM 7:50 AM 8:00 AM 8:10 AM 8:20 AM 8:30 AM 8:40 AM 8:50 AM 9:00 AM Figure 17. Queuing on Ravenswood - 3/7 (Tue) AM Peak
Peds/Bikes in Crosswalk Vehicle Volumes Queuing Ravenswood Capacity Gates Down 0 10
20 30
40 50
60 70
4:00 PM 4:10 PM 4:20 PM 4:30 PM 4:40 PM 4:50 PM 5:00 PM 5:10 PM 5:20 PM 5:30 PM 5:40 PM 5:50 PM 6:00 PM Figure 18. Queuing on Ravenswood - 3/7 (Tue) PM Peak
Peds/Bikes in Crosswalk Vehicle Volumes Queuing Ravenswood Capacity Gates Down Page I-2.19
City of Menlo Park 701 Laurel St., Menlo Park, CA 94025 tel 650-330-6600 menlopark.gov 14 0
10 20
30 40
50 60
70 7:00 AM 7:10 AM 7:20 AM 7:30 AM 7:40 AM 7:50 AM 8:00 AM 8:10 AM 8:20 AM 8:30 AM 8:40 AM 8:50 AM 9:00 AM Figure 19. Queuing on Ravenswood - 3/8 (Wed) AM Peak
Peds/Bikes in Crosswalk Vehicle Volumes Queuing Ravenswood Capacity Gates Down 0 10
20 30
40 50
60 70
4:00 PM 4:10 PM 4:20 PM 4:30 PM 4:40 PM 4:50 PM 5:00 PM 5:10 PM 5:20 PM 5:30 PM 5:40 PM 5:50 PM 6:00 PM Figure 20. Queuing on Ravenswood - 3/8 (Wed) PM Peak
Peds/Bikes in Crosswalk Vehicle Volumes Queuing Ravenswood Capacity Gates Down Page I-2.20
City of Menlo Park 701 Laurel St., Menlo Park, CA 94025 tel 650-330-6600 menlopark.gov Public Works
MEMORANDUM
Date: 4/17/2023
To: Complete Streets Commission
From: Hugh Louch, Assistant Public Works Director – Transportation Re: Ravenswood bike lane pilot public survey analysis
This memorandum summarizes the results of the survey for the Ravenswood bike lane pilot being conducted in advance of resurfacing of Ravenswood Avenue between Laurel Street and El Camino Real.
As of April 10, there were 132 responses to the survey. The survey will remain open through the end of April and this memo will be updated with the latest set of responses at that time.
The memo includes the following topics:
• Who took the survey?
• How do respondents use Ravenswood?
• What are respondent’s reactions to the pilot?
Who took the survey?
The distribution of respondents by gender is relatively even with 52% female, 40% male and 8% decline to state (Figure 1). Respondents were primarily working aged adults from 46 to 65 (44%) or 31 to 45 (26%). To date 16 students have responded to the survey.
0 10
20 30
40 50
60 70
80 Middle School High School 18 to 30 31 to 45 46 to 65 Over 65 Figure 1. Respondent Age and Gender
Female Male Prefer not to state
Page I-2.21 ATTACHMENT D
City of Menlo Park 701 Laurel St., Menlo Park, CA 94025 tel 650-330-6600 menlopark.gov 2 Over a third of the respondents live within walking distance of Ravenswood Avenue and over half live somewhere else in Menlo Park, with a handful responding who live elsewhere in the Bay Area
(Figure 2).
How do Respondents Use
Ravenswood?
Respondents used Ravenswood
Avenue for a variety of trip
purposes, including commuting,
getting to school, visiting local
business and visiting parks
(Figure 3).
Visiting local businesses was the
most common, followed by school.
Almost all respondents use
Ravenswood Avenue daily or a few
times a week, with a small portion
using it less frequently.
0 20
40 60
80 100
120
140
Commute School Visit Businesses Visit Parks
Figure 3. Number of responses by trip purpose and frequency Daily A few times per week A few times per month Several times per year Figure 2. Respondent Residence
Walking distance from Ravenswood Elsewhere in Menlo Park Neighboring Community Elsewhere in the Bay Area
Page I-2.22
City of Menlo Park 701 Laurel St., Menlo Park, CA 94025 tel 650-330-6600 menlopark.gov 3 Respondents used all different modes of travel on Ravenswood Avenue (Figure 4) and most used multiple modes. Nearly everyone who responded to the survey traveled in a vehicle for their trips on Ravenswood Avenue, over half walked and almost half biked. Only 12 respondents used transit. About one quarter of respondents indicating that driving was their only mode.
Respondent Reactions to the Pilot
Figure 5 summarizes respondent’s reactions to potential impacts and benefits by each mode, including:
• Automobile users: over half indicated there was no change in congestion, while 38% indicated there was some or much more congestion.
• Bicycle: almost three quarters indicated that the pilot increased bicycle safety. • Pedestrians: over 50% indicated no change in crossing safety; 37% indicated crossing safety was somewhat or very improved.
• Transit users were split on whether the project has increased or reduced transit delay, though there were relatively few transit users (12). 0 20
40 60
80 100
120
140
160
180
200
Auto Bicycle Pedestrian Transit
Figure 4. Mode of Travel
Page I-2.23
City of Menlo Park 701 Laurel St., Menlo Park, CA 94025 tel 650-330-6600 menlopark.gov 4 Impact on Automobile Congestion
While the overall findings indicated that most people who drove or rode in a vehicle did not identify an increase in congestion, these responses varied by frequency of use and other factors (Figure 6), including:
• Respondents who use Ravenswood Avenue to commute were slightly less likely to indicate that there was no change in congestion (49% compared to 51%). • Respondents who drive every day were more likely to indicate that the road was somewhat or much more congested (46%) compared to all people who said they drive on Ravenswood Avenue (38%).
• Respondents who only drove and did not bicycle, walk or take transit were much less likely to indicate there was no change in congestion (38%) and more likely to indicate that Ravenswood Avenue is somewhat or much more congested since the pilot (51%). Of this group, over 10% indicated that Ravenswood Avenue was somewhat or much less congested.
38%
10%
22%
36%
27%
22% 51%
21%
55%
17%
4%
11%
21%
33%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Auto Queuing Bicycle Safety Pedestrian Safety Transit Delay Figure 5. Respondent Reactions to the Pilot
Much better Somewhat better No change Somewhat worse Much Worse Page I-2.24
City of Menlo Park 701 Laurel St., Menlo Park, CA 94025 tel 650-330-6600 menlopark.gov 5 Respondents who drive were also asked if they changed their route at all during the pilot (Figure 7). Overall, 80% of respondents indicated they continue to use Ravenswood Avenue for their travel. This share was the same for people who use Ravenswood to commute, but somewhat lower for respondents who drive every day (76%) or who indicated that they only drive and do not use other modes (73%). Most people who are not using Ravenswood Avenue indicated that they use Oak Grove, with a small portion indicating they use other routes.
Staff are planning to review data from Streetlight to evaluate potential shifts in route choice. Streetlight uses cellphone location data and similar sources to estimate vehicle volumes. Data for March 2023 will be available in a few months. 51%
45% 38%
49%
17%
16% 29%
19%
21% 30% 23% 19%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
All Drivers Drive Every Day Only Drive (No other mode) Commuters Figure 6. Perception of Congestion by Several User Groups Much less congested Less congested No change More congested Much more congested 81% 76% 73% 81%
14% 20% 19%
13%
5% 4% 8% 6%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
All drivers Daily drivers Only drivers Commuters
Figure 7. Drivers Route Choice Changes
Continue to drive on Ravenswood More likely to use Oak Grove More likely to use another route Page I-2.25
City of Menlo Park 701 Laurel St., Menlo Park, CA 94025 tel 650-330-6600 menlopark.gov 6 People who drive or travel in
vehicles were also asked if the pilot
had increased the visibility of
pedestrians crossing Ravenswood
Avenue (Figure 8). About 30% of
drivers indicated that pedestrians
were more visible to drivers and
almost two-thirds indicated no
change. These numbers were
similar for respondents who only
drove and all respondents.
After resurfacing, the pilot will
include a wider median that will
provide more visibility to pedestrians
crossing.
Bicycle Users
Respondents who bicycle were also
asked if the long-term plans for
Ravenswood would change their
likelihood of bicycling. Once the City
completes resurfacing, continuous
bike lanes will be available on both
sides of Ravenswood Avenue
between Laurel Street and El
Camino Real if the pilot is found to
be successful.
Respondents who bicycle indicated
that the availability of continuous
bike lanes would make them more
likely to bicycle (Figure 9). This was
true for respondents who bike on
Ravenswood Avenue today, as well
as respondents who say they use
other routes. Only six respondents
indicated that they ride on the
sidewalk on Ravenswood Avenue.
Figure 8. Are Pedestrians more Visible to
Drivers?
More visible No change Less visible
All respondents
Respondents who only drive
0 10
20 30
40 50
60 70
Bike on Ravenswood
today
No, bike on sidewalk No, bike on other route
Figure 9. Will You Bike More on Ravenswood
When Lanes Are Complete?
Yes No
Page I-2.26
City of Menlo Park 701 Laurel St., Menlo Park, CA 94025 tel 650-330-6600 menlopark.gov 7 Respondent Reactions by Location
Figure 10 compares the reactions to the pilot for people who live within walking distance of Ravenswood Avenue and those who live elsewhere in Menlo Park. Data for people who live outside the City and for transit users are not shown because of the low number of responses. Key comparisons include:
• Drivers who live nearby were more likely to indicate that auto queuing has increased (44% compared to 36%).
• Bicyclists were equally likely to indicate that bicycle safety was somewhat or much better since the pilot.
• Pedestrians who live nearby were slightly more likely to indicate that pedestrian crossing safety was unchanged compared to those who live elsewhere in Menlo Park (55% compared to 50%).
Respondent Reactions by Trip Purpose
Figures 11, 12, and 13 identify respondent reactions to automobile queuing, bicycle safety, and pedestrian safety by trip purpose. Respondents were allowed to select all relevant trip purposes, so there are overlaps across the three charts.
For people who drive or travel in a vehicle, there were relatively small differences in perceptions of automobile queuing by trip purpose (Figure 11). Similarly, people who bicycle had similar reactions to bicycle safety, with more respondents indicating that there was no change in safety for people who visit local businesses or parks compared to people who indicate they commute or travel to school (Figure 12). 41% 37%
13% 8%
33% 37%
25% 35%
46% 56%
19% 23%
55% 50% 16%
20%
5%
28%
16%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Walking Distance
to Ravenswood
Elsewhere in Menlo
Park
Walking Distance
to Ravenswood
Elsewhere in Menlo
Park
Walking Distance
to Ravenswood
Elsewhere in Menlo
Park
Auto Queuing Bicycle Safety Pedestrian Safety
Figure 10. Respondent Reactions by Location
Much better Somewhat better No change Somewhat worse Much Worse Page I-2.27
City of Menlo Park 701 Laurel St., Menlo Park, CA 94025 tel 650-330-6600 menlopark.gov 8 49% 44% 48%
50%
19% 18% 17%
17%
19% 23% 24% 19%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Commute School Visit Local Business Visit Parks
Figure 11. Respondent Perceptions of Queuing by Trip Purpose Much better Somewhat better No change Somewhat worse Much Worse 47% 47%
31% 28%
33% 33%
35% 38%
17% 17%
25% 28%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Commute School Visit Local Business Visit Parks
Figure 12. Respondent Perceptions of Bicycle Safety by Trip Purpose Much better Somewhat better No change Somewhat worse Much Worse Page I-2.28
City of Menlo Park 701 Laurel St., Menlo Park, CA 94025 tel 650-330-6600 menlopark.gov 9 Figure 13 identifies pedestrian perceptions of safety by trip purpose. Respondents commuting, traveling to school, and visiting local businesses were equally likely to indicate that the pilot has not changed crossing safety (55%). Respondents visiting parks were less likely to indicate that there was no change in pedestrian crossing safety (41%) and more likely to indicate that pedestrian crossing safety improved (47 percent).
11% 5% 11% 15%
25% 35% 25%
32%
55%
55%
55%
41%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Commute School Visit Local Business Visit Parks
Figure 13. Respondent Perceptions of Pedestrian Safety by Trip Purpose Much better Somewhat better No change Somewhat worse Much Worse Page I-2.29
City of Menlo Park 701 Laurel St., Menlo Park, CA 94025 tel 650-330-6600 menlopark.gov 10 Appendix – Comments on the Survey
Respondents were able to comment on individual question and provide general comments at the end of the survey. All comments received are provided below by question and organized by the level of impact identified.
Have you changed your driving route since the pilot?
Do you experience
more congestion?
Comment
b. Somewhat less
queueing and
congestion Traffic tends to be better getting to M-A from Oak Grove. c. No change in
queueing and
congestion
Please keep the bike lane extension and car lane elimination. Add green treatment to new bike lane. Add a pedestrian refuge in the middle of Ravenswood when crossing near alma c. No change in
queueing and
congestion generally select oak grove due to ravenswood congestion c. No change in
queueing and
congestion
I plan my route & time based on commute & school times. Generally, I never leave home (North Fair Oaks) during those times. If it’s time for M-A to start/end, I don’t go down Middlefield at all, but use El Camino. Mostly I’m on Ravenswood to get to Draeger’s, Stanford or Burgess Park. If traffic is backed up on Ravenswood, I cross over on Laurel or Mill to Oak Grove.
d. Somewhat more
queueing and
congestion At certain times of the day, Ravenswood is too backed up with one lane. d. Somewhat more
queueing and
congestion
Coming from Laurel Ave, depending on my destination I choose between queuing on Ravenswood or crossing the tracks at Oak Grove or Encinal Ave. d. Somewhat more
queueing and
congestion
I like this route because it’s more visually pleasing than Oak Grove and sometimes I see a friend who bike commutes there. But if the queuing gets worse, I’ll have to change. Turning left onto Laurel at Ravenswood has gotten much easier.
d. Somewhat more
queueing and
congestion
Oak Grove now looks like a better route for me back to downtown and Valparaiso Ave; maybe go all the way to Glenwood, but that is not ideal. My observation is that there is a much longer weekday evening backup before the RR tracks now. Let's face it, this pilot isn't doing anything to improve vehicle traffic flow OR biking safety. d. Somewhat more
queueing and
congestion
Before the pilot, Biking Oak Grove was safer because of less traffic and larger sidewalks.
But Driving is still faster than Oak Grove with the pilot. d. Somewhat more
queueing and
congestion
Ravenswood is getting more backed up at more times of the day. Oak Grove tends not to back up nearly as much because drivers don't seem to use it as a way to get to 101 as often as Ravenswood.
e. Much more
queueing and
congestion
Because the Ravenswood is so backed up and a left turn onto Ravenswood is impossible and I have to sit through at least 3 stop lights for a left turn only if I am lucky!!! Laurel's left turn lane has 8 or more cars trying to turn and no one moves as the Ravenswood lane is already backed up.
e. Much more
queueing and
congestion
Between the light at Laurel and the train tracks, the congestion during peak hours is unbearable; my commute time home is nearly doubled when I take this route. e. Much more
queueing and
congestion
Between the train tracks and regular congestion, the traffic was already congested, now it’s even more and it backs up down Laurel now too (towards Willow). It’s frustrating.
Page I-2.30
City of Menlo Park 701 Laurel St., Menlo Park, CA 94025 tel 650-330-6600 menlopark.gov 11 Do you experience
more congestion?
Comment
e. Much more
queueing and
congestion Lane is often backed up all the way to Laurel. e. Much more
queueing and
congestion
Ravenswood is now backed up at the Laurel intersection! Sometimes there’s no way to turn left onto Ravenswood because the traffic is so backed up! We need the extra lane back!
e. Much more
queueing and
congestion
The traffic situation at the tracks has been bad for years, and taking a car lane out at this point has added congestion and confusion to cars heading towards El Camino Real. e. Much more
queueing and
congestion
Too much congestion taking it down to 1 lane. I NEVER see the bike lane in use since installed
e. Much more
queueing and
congestion
Turn right on Alma by the library to get to Willow Rd. More traffic for that neighborhood. I'm sure the residents don't appreciate this.
e. Much more
queueing and
congestion Wrong place for this. Major traffic route, more congestion and not any safer for anyone. e. Much more
queueing and
congestion
You can’t get out from Noel Drive. In addition cars speed down the bike lane when they don’t want to wait.
e. Much more
queueing and
congestion Traffic issues and RR Tracks scare me a little on a busy street like Ravenwood. e. Much more
queueing and
congestion
Go to Palo Alto for shopping, especially after 4 pm. Ravenswood is awful and will only get worse with all the new construction on el camino
e. Much more
queueing and
congestion It’s a mess! Hate it!
e. Much more
queueing and
congestion Traffic backs up on Ravenswood and can't make a left turn from Laurel on to Ravenswood e. Much more
queueing and
congestion Oak Grove or Glenwood
e. Much more
queueing and
congestion
I take a left from Laurel on to Ravenswood, due to the new change, cars are backed up and it’s impossible to turn.
Do you feel safer bicycling along Ravenswood Avenue?
Do you feel safer
biking?
Comment
a. Feels much safer
bicycling
Because it is now a dedicated bike lane, but it needs green treatment so cars understand it is not for them.
a. Feels much safer
bicycling designated area for bikes is much safer.
a. Feels much safer
bicycling Have own lane. Cars stay in their lane.
Page I-2.31
City of Menlo Park 701 Laurel St., Menlo Park, CA 94025 tel 650-330-6600 menlopark.gov 12 Do you feel safer
biking?
Comment
a. Feels much safer
bicycling I'm no longer squeezed by cars
a. Feels much safer
bicycling
Knowing that cars won't try to speed past.me or merge into that lane while I'm in it makes me feel much safer than I expected.
a. Feels much safer
bicycling Lots of cars criss-crossing across the bike's path before. This is a big improvement. a. Feels much safer
bicycling More space feels safer
a. Feels much safer
bicycling More space when cars are passing
a. Feels much safer
bicycling
While in the past I have avoided biking on that stretch of Ravenswood and have not biked on it since the implementation of the pilot in early March, I will try it the next opportunity. I replied as I did because with the extended bike lane, I would feel much safer and comfortable using it due to less proximity to the cars, that I do not trust when that close on a busy stretch of street.
a. Feels much safer
bicycling
There used to be two lanes on the right side of the road and there was no space for bikes to get by without using the sidewalk. Sometimes cars would come up from behind and squish us, on bikes, right up to the curb, to the point where you couldn’t bike because there wasnt enough space. Especially when there were busses in the right lane, it was impossible to get by, and if you got stuck between the car and the curb you had no way of knowing if the car was turning right (potentially cutting you off) and it was hard to see the crosswalk. It’s much much better now with the bike lane :) it still comes up probably once a week with my friends on the way home from school how much easier and less stressful it is to be there now
a. Feels much safer
bicycling
I dont have to squeeze between a car and the curb with a 3 in space between my handle bar and the car while both of us are trying to move forward a. Feels much safer
bicycling
I no longer have to go on the sidewalk when biking on ravenswood. Before, I had to go on the sidewalk when there were cars in both lanes, and that was scary because there were sometimes people walking there or I had to navigate around someone who wanted to cross the crosswalk. If I stayed on the street, sometimes there wasn’t enough space for my bike and I had to stop really quickly. Now, I can stay on the street safely. a. Feels much safer
bicycling Less vehicle congestion. Safer route.
a. Feels much safer
bicycling
I used to have to ride on the sidewalk in front of the exercise place as there would be no room for bicycles. This solution is perfect!!! Please do the same on the other side of the street (going towards Middlefield.)
a. Feels much safer
bicycling
The separation is much better. Before the change, there wasn’t enough room for cars and bikes in the right lane and bikes would often get squeezed into the curb or be forced to take the sidewalk.
a. Feels much safer
bicycling bike lanes are good
a. Feels much safer
bicycling
Much more space between vehicles and bikes. Before a Bicycle lane, cars had to move to the opposite lane to safely pass bikes.
a. Feels much safer
bicycling More space and freedom.; More space.
a. Feels much safer
bicycling
the separation of a dedicated bike lane, as well as the buffer zone (white dashed lines) is much safer than before. Previously cars would drive too close or try to pass unsafely. a. Feels much safer
bicycling
* The extra feet of space on side feels less worried about a car clipping me. It also feels like a dedicated lane for bikes, instead of bikes being shoehorned into an existing infrastructure. From a perception/feeling standpoint, feels like care and thought for bicyclist's wellbeing was taken into account
Page I-2.32
City of Menlo Park 701 Laurel St., Menlo Park, CA 94025 tel 650-330-6600 menlopark.gov 13 Do you feel safer
biking?
Comment
* Much longer sight lines between me and the railroad crossing. Ability to see people crossing from the library is much easier.
b. Feels somewhat
safer bicycling A little bit more clear to me and to autos where everyone belongs on the road b. Feels somewhat
safer bicycling
Less likely to get rear-ended by a driver who doesn't realize I'm going to stop for a pedestrian at the crosswalk.
b. Feels somewhat
safer bicycling more physical barrier protection would improve bike safety on this high speed route b. Feels somewhat
safer bicycling
Need bollards to create a safety barrier for bikes. Also, the green strip to give that visibility to vehicles. Crossing the train tracks is still dangerous since vehicles can back up turning right on to El Camino from Ravenswood.
b. Feels somewhat
safer bicycling
The one feels safer but cars don’t always stop for the cross walk at Ravenswood and Alma. I’ve seen a couple close calls with kids crossing on their way to school. b. Feels somewhat
safer bicycling
The westbound bike lane is better. However, it still suddenly ends at Alma St. Should be extended to ECR.
b. Feels somewhat
safer bicycling
I feel that some drivers understand that cycles have the right of way with the new markings.
b. Feels somewhat
safer bicycling
The new layout calms the traffic flows. There is no longer an opportunity for impatient drivers to pass other drivers, at a location where pedestrians cross, and where the bikers eventually have to share the driving lanes at the railroad tracks. b. Feels somewhat
safer bicycling
More space between cars and bikes. Additionally, if I'm continuing straight across El Camino Real, there is more separation before the train tracks to judge if cars will try to cut me off to get to the right turn lane.
b. Feels somewhat
safer bicycling Paint is still very unclear but at least there's a little space b. Feels somewhat
safer bicycling Cars still travel very fast and do not respect cyclists on the road b. Feels somewhat
safer bicycling
Drivers aren't careful enough on my high school student's bike ride to M-A from West Menlo Park. In Oct. 2022, she was hit by a car while riding her bike across El Camino and going toward Ravenswood.
b. Feels somewhat
safer bicycling
Wider bike lane helps make cyclist feel safer, but cars are passing by faster than 25 mph, which doesn't feel safe.
b. Feels somewhat
safer bicycling Needs protected lanes
c. No change in
feeling of safety
I have still been avoiding Ravenswood Avenue most of the time. Although Ravenswood is often the more direct route and I'd like to ride there more often - it has just always felt unsafe so I've been avoiding it for years on my bike. If the extended bike lanes are made permanent, I will switch some of my routes and ride on Ravenswood. It's just that as a temporary measure, I haven't bothered to change things up c. No change in
feeling of safety I won't feel much safer without much more extensive fully protected bike lanes c. No change in
feeling of safety
It’s just paint. The drivers still treat it like a 2nd lane. Install some physical barrier (flex posts)
c. No change in
feeling of safety
This project was done on the wrong side of the road. Heading toward ECR there was already at least space for two lanes of cars and bikes even if it was a horrible 'sharrow' configuration. Heading toward Laurel in that block, there is a loss of a lane and bikes are already sharing the right lane. So all vehicles get squeezed in one place. Inevitably the 2 ton steel boxes force there way MUCH too close to the bicycles in that area. This experiment should have moved the center line northwest a few feet to have some form of bike lane on the block between Alma and Laurel. I'm not one to complain about additional bike infrastructure, but this was a failure of prioritization.
Page I-2.33
City of Menlo Park 701 Laurel St., Menlo Park, CA 94025 tel 650-330-6600 menlopark.gov 14 Do you feel safer
biking?
Comment
c. No change in
feeling of safety
Cars are not paying much attentions to cyclist in general. They regularly run the flashing lights at the crosswalk across Ravenswood as well
c. No change in
feeling of safety
Vehicles do not seem to pay any attention to bikes or pedestrians. There is so much traffic along Ravenswood including traffic turning on and off that it's very hectic. I have not observed vehicles abiding by the new striping to one lane the block before the tracks. This is such a busy corridor that the City and County need to move forward with grade separation.
c. No change in
feeling of safety It was fine before
c. No change in
feeling of safety
My primary reason for biking on Ravenswood is go to Kepler's, Barrone, Little Sky from Downtown Palo Alto. I'm writing in to say I would bike more but it's virtually impossible to cross the stupid rubber blocks in the middle of Ravenswood. You cannot cross on a bike and returning is just awful. Please consider the bike experience and access from the Willows and downtown Palo Alto holistically in the improvements on Ravenswood c. No change in
feeling of safety Not enough buffer from cars. Too afraid of distracted drivers. d. Feels somewhat
less safe bicycling So many people drive in the bike lane every morning making it more dangerous d. Feels somewhat
less safe bicycling Sometimes cars are still passing in that area that makes me feel unsafe. e. Feels much less
safe bicycling Vehicles cut me off and wouldn’t recognize me as a bike rider e. Feels much less
safe bicycling Frustrated drivers cutting you off
Do you feel safer crossing Ravenswood Avenue at Alma Street? Do you feel safer
crossing
Ravenswood?
Comment
a. Feels much safer
crossing Ravenswood
Avenue
Reducing the number of motor vehicle travel lanes on Ravenswood and has meant that I perceive slower vehicle speeds and also that the distance I need to cover within the motor vehicle travel lanes is approximately halved. I'm delighted by the reduction in the number of lanes on Ravenswood Avenue at the intersection with Alma Street and I strongly encourage the City of Menlo Park to apply similar treatments that reduce the width of roads and reduce the travel speeds of drivers across the city. a. Feels much safer
crossing Ravenswood
Avenue
Stepping into the bicycle lane is much safer than stepping into the lane of traffic. With two lanes, a bus would often block visibility of pedestrians or flashing lights for a car traveling in the second lane. This was dangerous when crossing towards the park. a. Feels much safer
crossing Ravenswood
Avenue
With only one lane of traffic, cars go slower and can see me crossing more easily. With a dog and a baby, it was sometimes scary crossing the second lane and hoping that the cars noticed us — and very frustrating and dangerous the many times they did not. a. Feels much safer
crossing Ravenswood
Avenue See previous answers
a. Feels much safer
crossing Ravenswood
Avenue Flashing light alerts cars of red. crossing. However, you still have to carefully cross b. Feels somewhat
safer crossing
Ravenswood Avenue I’ve noticed the cars stopping more frequently than before Page I-2.34
City of Menlo Park 701 Laurel St., Menlo Park, CA 94025 tel 650-330-6600 menlopark.gov 15 b. Feels somewhat
safer crossing
Ravenswood Avenue
It feels safer because cars can see you from the westbound lanes. In the previous configuration, two westbound lanes could block site lines. b. Feels somewhat
safer crossing
Ravenswood Avenue
Single lane of traffic to watch out for, but there are some drivers who still drive in that bike lane.
b. Feels somewhat
safer crossing
Ravenswood Avenue
We need a refuge in the middle when crossing. There is room to create one by moving the west bound land somewhat to the north thereby creating space for the crossing refuge. b. Feels somewhat
safer crossing
Ravenswood Avenue
When there are two cars going the same direction, one will zoom past a stopped one and almost hit you. With one side reduced to a lane, you can at least see bicycles coming more easily.
b. Feels somewhat
safer crossing
Ravenswood Avenue
I have to wait for fewer lanes of traffic and it’s easier to see when I’m able to cross, which makes it safer
b. Feels somewhat
safer crossing
Ravenswood Avenue less cars to worry about
b. Feels somewhat
safer crossing
Ravenswood Avenue
While I feel more visible, it is still dependent on drivers paying attention. Easier to make sure everyone is stopping when there's only one lane, though! This is a bit of a trade off, as if you were able to get the car in the closest lane to stop, it was far more likely to get the other lane to stop as well
b. Feels somewhat
safer crossing
Ravenswood Avenue Cars still travel very fast and do not yield to pedestrians. I don’t think they see us b. Feels somewhat
safer crossing
Ravenswood Avenue Mas seguro
b. Feels somewhat
safer crossing
Ravenswood Avenue I feel more sure that drivers can see me and my small children while we're waiting to cross. b. Feels somewhat
safer crossing
Ravenswood Avenue
I often cross with my children. It’s stressful to make sure two lanes of car traffic can see us.
Especially when people went from one lane to two, it felt like they’d often zoom past anyone stopped… even if those people were stopped for a pedestrian crossing. b. Feels somewhat
safer crossing
Ravenswood Avenue
1 lane of car reduces the proportion of cars to pedestrians and drivers' views are not blocked by the car next to them.
c. No change in
feeling of safety
crossing Ravenswood
Avenue
Being a pedestrian and a commuter i find the blinking lights at the cross walk to be far more effective than the lane. Adding the bike lane did not increase visibility what so ever.
In fact it made it worse as road rage drivers illegally go in the bike lane now to move around traffic
c. No change in
feeling of safety
crossing Ravenswood
Avenue Cars still drive too fast
c. No change in
feeling of safety
crossing Ravenswood
Avenue Don't notice anything different
c. No change in
feeling of safety
crossing Ravenswood
Avenue
Honestly, I use that crosswalk all the time, including today, but it doesn't feel any more or less safe to me now. However, I didn't cross at normal commute times today and I imagine it would feel more safe when crossing during commute hours when there is heavy traffic Page I-2.35
City of Menlo Park 701 Laurel St., Menlo Park, CA 94025 tel 650-330-6600 menlopark.gov 16 c. No change in
feeling of safety
crossing Ravenswood
Avenue I just haven't noticed a difference
c. No change in
feeling of safety
crossing Ravenswood
Avenue
If you cross Ravenswood as a pedestrian at Alma Street, the traffic from El Camino headed East backs up on to the tracks. There needs to be signage not to enter the intersection while pedestrians are in the walkways or have a timed crosswalk sign for pedestrians. Make pedestrians and bikes wait like they do at an lighted intersection.
Pedestrians need to be ware that when they cross can back up traffic on the tracks. Have the light up signs on a solar power with back up for evenings. c. No change in
feeling of safety
crossing Ravenswood
Avenue
It has always been a matter of the cars paying attention, people are are in a rush to be somewhere. That has been my experience. And they are still backing up on the tracks when some stops for someone crossing Alma and Ravenswood c. No change in
feeling of safety
crossing Ravenswood
Avenue Not all cars stop for the flashing lights. Some speed up. c. No change in
feeling of safety
crossing Ravenswood
Avenue Same frequency of cars stopping and not stopping. c. No change in
feeling of safety
crossing Ravenswood
Avenue
Too often cars do not stop for flashing yellow lights. Visibility of yellow lights insufficient in daytime and not strong enough to get driver's attention at night. Illumination of cross-walk needed.
c. No change in
feeling of safety
crossing Ravenswood
Avenue no difference
c. No change in
feeling of safety
crossing Ravenswood
Avenue
I don't use the crosswalk. ; If I have to cross, I do it when there is no traffic, without a crosswalk.
c. No change in
feeling of safety
crossing Ravenswood
Avenue
As said before: a lot of drivers just don't pay attention. I wear a neon yellow vest now, hoping to get more visibility
c. No change in
feeling of safety
crossing Ravenswood
Avenue
I would never, ever cross at the pedestrian crosswalk. Vehicles DO NOT notice pedestrians even with the lights and flags. There are near misses every time I pass through. Please move forward with grade separation.
c. No change in
feeling of safety
crossing Ravenswood
Avenue I'm a very careful pedestrian
c. No change in
feeling of safety
crossing Ravenswood
Avenue It’s still a crappy location.
c. No change in
feeling of safety What changed? It still feels like I'm throwing myself into traffic Page I-2.36
City of Menlo Park 701 Laurel St., Menlo Park, CA 94025 tel 650-330-6600 menlopark.gov 17 crossing Ravenswood
Avenue
c. No change in
feeling of safety
crossing Ravenswood
Avenue
Between the cars and the unpredictability of when a train will come and impact traffic, it feels like drivers are distracted, and even with the crosswalk, I fear that drivers aren't looking for pedestrians or bicyclists.
c. No change in
feeling of safety
crossing Ravenswood
Avenue
I have always been very safety conscious at this intersection, and my behavior has not changed
c. No change in
feeling of safety
crossing Ravenswood
Avenue Drivers just don't always stop.
c. No change in
feeling of safety
crossing Ravenswood
Avenue The crosswalk already has flashing lights and flags that can be held when crossing. c. No change in
feeling of safety
crossing Ravenswood
Avenue
It's still a dangerous crossing. You can press the lighted sign and wave all you want, there's always one driver that doesn't see you to stop or doesn't care to stop or doesn't bother to wait until you finished crossing before speeding so close you feel the wind. c. No change in
feeling of safety
crossing Ravenswood
Avenue
This crossing is still horribly scary for peds because of the car speeds and even worse for bikes who do not have a clear space to travel. Biking in the ped crosswalk is unacceptable.
This intersection still needs major improvements to ensure pedestrian and bicycle safety.
The cars can wait a few more seconds with a stop sign or other means of ensuring people's slow down in order to allow pedestrians and bikes to safely cross. c. No change in
feeling of safety
crossing Ravenswood
Avenue
Cars travel fast in both directions, and there are two lanes of traffic coming from El Camino. You have to hope all traffic will see the flashing lights and stop. I've almost been run over there as I stepped into the crosswalk by drivers who didn't see the lights or ignored them.
c. No change in
feeling of safety
crossing Ravenswood
Avenue it still feels unsafe. like always
d. Feels somewhat
less safe crossing
Ravenswood Avenue Bikes don’t usually stop for pedestrians and have gotten very close to me. d. Feels somewhat
less safe crossing
Ravenswood Avenue
Cars traveling west on Ravenswood are now backed up past the Ravenswood/Laurel intersection down Laurel towards Burgess and Oak Grove and further down Ravenswood toward Middlefield. This bike lane has caused unnecessary congestion and stress for people trying to drive into Menlo Park. The one west bound lane at the crosswalk is in a hurry to get across the tracks and break free and get into one of the three lanes in front of them.
All the kids who ride their bikes to Hillview have not changed their pattern of riding their bikes to school. They still ride their bikes thru Burgess Park, they are not using the new bike lane on Ravenswood so it's certainly not benefiting them.
I thought when the city took away all the parking spaces on Oak Grove and put in bike lanes, that this was considered a safe bike thoroughfare to downtown Menlo Park. Why are we creating another bike lane a couple of blocks away when it is so disruptive to the traffic and creates unnecessary congestion? Are the planners forgetting that there is going to be a huge complex with many more cars coming to the Ravenswood/Laurel intersection? If we have a safe bike-corridor on Oak Grove, then have bikers use what has been designed and built for them. Let the cars use Ravenswood.
Page I-2.37
City of Menlo Park 701 Laurel St., Menlo Park, CA 94025 tel 650-330-6600 menlopark.gov 18 d. Feels somewhat
less safe crossing
Ravenswood Avenue
That intersection is like playing Russian roulette with your life. You have to be so careful because of the drivers. A bike line only puts one more element into a very unsafe intersection.
e. Feels much less
safe crossing
Ravenswood Avenue Cars having to use just one lane are distracted by navigating that e. Feels much less
safe crossing
Ravenswood Avenue
There are way more cars waiting in one line and the line is now always backed up past the pedestrian crosswalk
e. Feels much less
safe crossing
Ravenswood Avenue Vehicles can’t see you
Has it made your transit trip slower or less reliable?
Impact on transit
trip?
Comment
d. Somewhat slower
and/or less reliable
Congestion is much worse when the caltrain is passing. The missing car lane makes traffic back up on both sides of Laurel and when the railroad signals are going, it often takes 2 full traffic light cycles before I can turn left. I hate it. e. Much slower and/or
less reliable
It has screwed up traffic and made those who have to get out on Noel a nightmare. As soon as my lease is up I’ll move.
e. Much slower and/or
less reliable
It was a horrible idea, if creates much more congestion and gives you less time to get in what lane you need to be in at el camino light.
Page I-2.38
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: 5/9/2023
Staff Report Number: 23-108-CC
Consent Calendar: Authorize the Mayor to execute the second amended and restated joint powers agreement with
the San Francisco Creek Joint Powers Authority
Recommendation
Staff recommends that the City Council authorize the Mayor to execute the second amended and restated joint powers agreement with the San Francisquito Creek Joint Powers Authority (SFCJPA).
Policy Issues
The City has been a member of the SFCJPA since its creation in 1999. The City Council must approve multiagency agreements.
Background
The SFCJPA is a regional government agency. It was created May 18, 1999, via an agreement between the cities of Menlo Park, Palo Alto and East Palo Alto, and the Santa Clara Valley Water District and San Mateo Flood Control District (“Member Entities”). The SFCJPA plans, designs, and implements projects that are comprehensive in geography and function along San Francisquito Creek. Its projects protect and alert communities to the potential for flooding, enhance and restore ecosystems, and connect neighborhoods by improving access to trails.
On Jan. 1, 2020, the San Mateo County Flood Control District was officially reconstituted as the San Mateo County Flood and Sea Level Rise Resiliency District (commonly referred to as OneShoreline) at which time, OneShoreline assumed the revenues and responsibilities of the San Mateo County Flood Control District. In 2020, the first amended and restated joint powers agreement was drafted; it contained updates reflecting OneShoreline’s new role.
Other than the first amendment, the SFCJPA joint powers agreement has not been updated or revised since it was approved almost 24 years ago. During this time span, there have been updates to laws, guidelines and standards, and changes in or clarifications of the SFCJPA’s practices. Given these changes, the joint power authority (JPA) and its Member Entities have pursued development of a second amendment.
Over the past two years technical, policy and legal staff from each member agency have reviewed this second amendment draft, and provided multiple rounds of analysis, edits and comments. The second amended and restated joint powers agreement represents the language agreed to by the technical, policy, and legal staff engaged in this process from all SFCJPA member agencies. The changes resulting from these edits and comments are reflected in the tracked changes version of the second amended and restated joint powers agreement (Attachment A).
AGENDA ITEM I-3 Page I-3.1
Staff Report #: 23-108-CC
City of Menlo Park 701 Laurel St., Menlo Park, CA 94025 tel 650-330-6600 menlopark.gov On March 23, 2023, the SFCJPA Board, approved the draft second amended and restated joint powers agreement and recommended sending it to the governing bodies of all member agencies for approval.
Analysis
Revisions in the recommended second amended and restated SFCJPA members agreement include:
• Reconciliation of original document text to reflect actual practice (for example, hiring of JPA staff and board roles)
• Clarification of SFCJPA authority for and decision-making process of land acquisition • Clarification of OneShoreline representation on the SFCJPA Board to prevent duplicative representation from a single member organization
• Clarification of SFCJPA scope regarding shoreline projects and watershed stewardship • Modernization and simplification of language for clarity • Addition of now-standard clauses common to local government agreements; and • Format reconciliation.
A final version of the joint powers agreement is attached (Attachment B). Upon authorization from all Member Entities, the agreement will be circulated to each agency for execution.
Impact on City Resources
The City pays annual dues to the JPA, which are included in the City’s operating budget. There is no immediate or direct financial impact with the approval of the agreement.
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. Tracked changes version of the joint powers agreement B. Clean copy of the joint powers agreement
Report prepared by:
Tanisha Werner, Assistant Public Works Director - Engineering Report Approved by:
Nikki Nagaya, Deputy City Manager
Page I-3.2
SECOND AMENDED AND RESTATED
JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT
FOR THE
SAN FRANCISQUITO CREEK
JOINT POWERS AGREEMENTAUTHORITY
AMENDED AND RESTATED
as of
__________________, 2023
Page I-3.3 ATTACHMENT A
San 2
SECOND AMENDED AND RESTATED JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT FOR
THE SAN FRANCISQUITO CREEK JOINT POWERS AUTHORITY
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
Page I-3.4
SECOND AMENDED AND RESTATED JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT
FOR THE SAN FRANCISQUITO CREEK JOINT POWERS AUTHORITY
This Second Amended and Restated Agreement Joint Powers Agreement for the San Francisquito Creek Joint Powers Authority (“Agreement”) is made by and among the City of East Palo Alto, the City of Menlo Park, the City of Palo Alto, the City of East Palo Alto, the Santa Clara Valley Water District, and the San Mateo County Flood and Sea Level Rise Resiliency District (“, and the Santa Clara Valley Water District (each a Member Entity and collectively, the Member Entities”), all of which are public entities organized and operating under the laws of the State of California, and each of which is a public agency as defined in California Government Code section 6500. This Agreement is effective upon full execution by all Member Entities (Effective Date).
RECITALS
A. The Joint Exercise of Powers Act, being Government Code sections 6500 et seq. (the “JPA Law”), permits two or more local public entities by agreement to jointly exercise any power common to them.
B. Following years of effort to address environmental and flooding concerns related to the watershed and floodplain of San Francisquito Creek (encompassing approximately 50 square miles from the Santa Cruz Mountains to San Francisco Bay), and soon after the flood of record in 1998 damaged approximately 1,700 properties, the Member Entities established the San Francisquito Creek Joint Powers Authority (Authority) pursuant to that certain “Joint ExercisePowers Agreement Creating the San Francisquito Creek Joint Powers Authority,” dated as of May 18, 1999, to collectively contribute resources and implement policies and projects of mutual interest relating to the primary natural features that unite them, including the San Francisquito Creek (“Creek”).
C. The Joint Powers Agreement Creating the San Francisquito Creek Joint Powers Authority, dated as of May 18, 1999, was thereafter revised pursuant to the Joint Powers Agreement for the San Francisquito Creek Joint Powers Authority, Amended and Restated as of January 1, 2020.
D. Each Member Entity agrees to contribute resources and funding towards implementation of projects of mutual interest and benefit relating to San Francisquito Creek and San Francisco Bay shoreline.
C.E. The governing body of each Member Entity has determined that it is in the Member Entity’s best interest and in the public interest that this Second Amended and Restated Joint Powers Agreement for the San Francisquito Creek Joint Powers Authority be executed to make minor procedural updates, including the change on January 1, 2020 of the San Mateo County Flood Control District to the San Mateo County Flood and Sea Level Rise Resiliency District.
NOW, THEREFORE, the Member Entities, by, between and among themselves, in Page I-3.5
consideration of the mutual benefits, promises, and agreements set forth below, hereby agree as follows:
1. CREATION OF THE SAN FRANCISQUITO CREEK JOINT POWERS AUTHORITY.
1. Creation of the San Francisquito Creek Joint Powers Authority Pursuant to the JPA Law, the Member Entities create a public agency, separate and apart from the Member Entities to be known as the San Francisquito Creek Joint Powers Authority (the “Authority”). Pursuant to Government Code section 6508.1, the debts, liabilities, and obligations of the Authority shall not constitute debts, liabilities, or obligations of any party to this Agreement. A Member Entity may separately contract for or assume responsibility for specific debts, liabilities, or obligations of the Authority. For purposes of, and to the extent required by, Government Code section 6509, in exercising its powers, the Authority shall be subject to the restrictions upon the manner of exercising the powers of the City of Menlo Park, Page I-3.6
except as otherwise authorized or permitted by the JPA Law.
2. Purposes
2. PURPOSES. This Agreement is entered into by Member Entities under the JPA Law for the following purposes:
a. To facilitate and perform bank stabilization, channel clearing and other Creek maintenance.
b. To plan flood control measures for the
a. Develop and maintain projects to reduce the risk of flooding in and around San Francisquito Creek watershed.
b. Develop and maintain projects to reduce the risk of coastal flooding from along the San Francisco Bay shoreline.
c.a. To take actions necessary to preserve and enhance environmental values and instream uses of San Francisquito Creek.Maintain, restore, enhance the environment, and create recreational opportunities, where possible, in implementing the other purposes stated herein. d.b. To coordinate emergency mitigation and response activities relating to San Francisquito Creek.Provide regional information related to flood preparedness and emergency response agencies and others to enhance their ability to communicate about and respond to flood risks. e. To make recommendations to Member Entities for funding and alternatives for long term flood control for Member Entity consideration.Secure and administer funding for the benefit of the Authority’s operations, capital projects, and related work.
3. PARTIES TO AGREEMENT.
c. Each Member Entity certifies that it intends to and does contract with every other Member Entity which is a signatory to this Agreement. Each Member Entity also certifies that the deletion
3. Parties to Agreement
Withdrawal or expulsion of any Member Entity from this Agreement does not affect this Agreement nor each Member Entity’s intent to contract with the Member Entities then remaining. Pursuant to Assembly Bill 825 (Chapter 292, Statutes of 2019), which amended the San Mateo County Flood Control District Act to provide for the San Mateo County Flood and Sea Level Rise Resiliency District, the Member Entities agree that the San Mateo County Flood and Sea Level Rise Resiliency District (OneShoreline) is the entity formerly known as the San Mateo County Flood Control District, and as such is subject to the terms and conditions of this Agreement.
4. TERM OF AGREEMENT.
4. Term of Agreement
This Agreement became effective as of May 18, 1999 and continues in full force until terminated in accordance with Paragraph 18paragraph 17. (Termination and Distribution).
5. POWERS OF THE AUTHORITY.
5. Powers of the Authority
The Authority shall have all powers common to the Member Entities, and such additional powers granted to it by law, necessary to fulfill the purposes of this Agreement. The Authority, through its Board of Directors, is authorized, in its own name and subject to the limitations set forth below, to do all acts necessary to fulfill the purposes of this Agreement referred to in Paragraphparagraph 2. (Purposes) including, but not limited to, each of the following:
Page I-3.7
a. Make and enter into contracts;
b. Incur debts, liabilities, and obligations, provided that no debt, liability, or obligation of the Authority shall be a debt, liability, or obligation of a Member Entity except as separately agreed to by a Member Entity;
c. Receive contributions and donations of property, funds, services, and other forms of assistance from any source;
a. Acquire, hold, and dispose of real property, including, without limitation, the power to convey real property to a Member Entity, as deemed appropriate by the Authority’s Board of Directors, and as accepted by the Member Entity, provided, however, that the Authority shall not exercise the power of eminent domain in the jurisdiction of a Member Entity unless the Member Entity adopts a resolution consenting to the Authority’s exercise of eminent domain within its jurisdiction.
d.b. Sue and be sued in its own name;
e.c. Contract with independent consultants and/or contractors; f. Receive, collect, and disburse monies;
g.d. Carry out other duties as required to accomplish other responsibilities as set forth in this Agreement;
e. Hire staff in conformance with an approved operating budget; h.f. Assign, delegate, or contract with a Member Entity or third party to perform any of the Authority’s duties of the Board including, but not limited to, acting as administrator for the Authority; and
Page I-3.8
i. Exercise all other powers and carry out other duties as necessary and proper to carry outfulfill the provisions of this Agreement.
These powers shall be exercised in the manner provided by applicable law and as expressly set forth in this Agreement.
6. MEMBER ENTITY APPROVALS AND RESPONSIBILITIES.Member Entity Approvals and Responsibilities
Each Member Entity has the approval authority, obligations, and responsibilities set forth in this Agreement. No action of the Authority shall be effective or binding unless and until such action has been approved in accordance with Subparagraph “e.” (Action of the Board) of Paragraph 10. (Board Members) by theThe Member Entities retain the following powers:
g. The designation of each Member Entity’s Director and alternate as specified in paragraph 9. Board of Directors consistent with a budget; h. Approval of an amendment to this Agreement as specified in paragraph 19. Amendments;
i. Approval of the Member Entity’s funding or other contribution for a capital project as specified in paragraph 7. Capital Project Participation; and j. Approval of the Member Entity’s contribution to the annual budget of the Authority as specified in paragraph 12. Operating Budget.
6. Capital Project Participation
The Authority may approve a contract for a capital project or any discrete phase of a capital project in accordance with the following conditions:
a. The Authority’s Board of Directors has determined that the Authority will have the funds necessary to pay for that capital project or that discrete phase of the project being approved; and
Any funding or other contribution from a Member Entity to that capital project or to that discrete phase of the capital project has been approved by independent action of eachthe Member Entity’s governing body.
7. PROJECT PARTICIPATION APPROVAL AUTHORITY.
b. or designee. Each Member EntitiesEntity shall have the right to determine independently whether to participate in any capital improvement project. No capital improvement project shall be approved by the Authority unless and until Member Entities sufficient to fund the project fully have approved the project by independent action of each such funding Member Entity’s governing body.
8.7. MEMBERSHIP.Membership
New Member Entities may be added to the Authority by amending this Agreement, as described in Paragraph 21paragraph 19. (Amendments), and Member Entities may withdraw or be expelled, as described in Paragraph 16paragraph 15. (Withdrawal) and Paragraph 17paragraph 16. (Expulsion).
9.8. BOARD OF DIRECTORS.Board of Directors
a. Directors. There shall be a Board of Directors (the “Board”) to govern the a. affairs of the Authority. The Board of Directors shall be comprised of one director, and one alternate director, fromDirector designated by each Member Entity. Each director hasDirector shall have one vote. An alternate director may cast a vote as a member of on the Board of Directors only in the absence of the director from that same Member Entity. Each director andDirector shall have an alternate director shall be a member of the governing body of the Member Entity and shall be designated by itsthe governing body; provided, however, that no of each Member Entity.
Page I-3.9
No two directorsDirectors and no two alternate directorsAlternate Directors shall be from the same governing body of any Member Entity.
c. Alternates. All references in this Agreement to a Director refer to and include the Director’s alternate, when acting in place of a Director. b.d. Compensation. Directors and alternate directors are not entitled to compensation by the Authority. The Board of Directors may authorize reimbursement of expenses incurred by Directors in connection with serving as a Director. by directors or alternate directors.
e. Term. The term of office of a Director shall terminate when such person ceases to be a member of the governing body of the Member Entity or the Member Entity designates another Director and/or alternate to serve.
c.f. Powers. The powers of the Board of Directors are each of the powers of the Authority
not specifically reserved to the Member Entities by this Agreement. The Member Entities retainNo Action of the Authority shall be effective or binding unless and until such action has been authorized by the Board of Directors and either 1) is consistent with the budget approved by the Board of Directors pursuant to paragraph 12. Operating Budget, or 2) complies with paragraph 7. Capital Project Participation.
the following powers:
(1) The designation of the Board as specified in Subparagraph “a.” of Paragraph 9. (Board of Directors);
(2) Approval of an amendment to this Agreement as specified in Paragraph 21. (Amendments);
Page I-3.10
(3) Approval of actions pursuant to Paragraph 6. (Member Entity Approvals and Responsibilities);
(4) Approval of project participation as specified in paragraph 7. (Project Participation Approval Authority); and
(5) Approval of the annual budget of the Authority as specified in Paragraph 13. (Budget).
10. BOARD MEMBERS.
a.g. Meetings. The Board of Directors shall hold at least one regular meeting each year, at which time the Board of Directors shall elect its officers as appropriate to comply with Paragraph 11pursuant to paragraph 10. (Officers). The Board of Directors shall fix the date, hour, and place at which each regular meeting is to be held. To the extent practicable, each Board of Directors meeting shall be held in Northern Santa Clara County or Southern San Mateo County. The Chair presides at all meetings. A special meeting may be called upon written request by the Chair or at least two directorsDirectors. b.h. Brown Act. Each regular, adjourned regular, or special meeting of the Board of Directors shall be called, noticed, held, and conducted in accordance with the Ralph M.
Brown Act
(Sections 54950, et seq., of the Government Code §54950, et seq.). c.i. Notices, Agendas, Minutes. The Board of Directors shall appoint or hire a Clerk of the Board of Directors who shall draftbe responsible for preparing minutes of each regular and special meeting of the Board, which shall be considered for approval by the Board at a subsequent regular meeting of Directors, and issuing notices and agendas in accordance with the law. d.j. Quorum. No business may be transacted by the Board of Directors without a quorum of members of the Board of Directors being present except that less than a quorum may adjourn from time to
time. A quorum consists of a majority of the members of the Board of Directors. e. Action of the Board of Directors. Except as otherwise specified in this Agreement, or required by law, any action of the Board of Directors shall require a vote of a majority of the Board.
k. 11. OFFICERSDirectors.
7. Officers.
The officers of the Authority are the Chair, and Vice-Chair, and Secretary.
a. Election/Term/Duties.
b. The officers shall be elected or appointed by the
Board of Directors at its first meeting of the calendar year, unless that is delayed by an action of the Board of Directors.
c. The term of office for Chair, and Vice-Chair, and Secretary is one year shall be determined by a vote of the Board of Directors. The officers shall assume the duties of their offices upon being elected or appointed, as appropriate.
If any of the Chair, or Vice-Chair, or Secretary ceases to be a member of the Board of Directors, the Board of Directors shall elect or appoint a new officer at the next regular meeting of the Board of Directors held after the vacancy occurs.
b. Compensation. Officers are not entitled to compensation by the Authority. The Board may authorize reimbursement of expenses incurred by officers. c. Appointment/Contract. The Board may appoint such officers and may Page I-3.11
hire or contract with such persons or firms as it considers necessary to carry out the purposes of
this Agreement.
12. FISCAL YEAR. The first fiscal year of the Authority is July 1, 1999 through d. June 30, 2000.
8. Fiscal Year
Each subsequent fiscal year of the Authority shall begin on July 1st of a calendar year and end on June 30th of the next following calendar year.
Page I-3.12
13 9. Operating Budget
a. BUDGET. The Board of Directors shall adopt an annual operating budget, which shall be
separate from the budget for any capital project of the Authority’s capital projects budget. The operating budget shall include the proposed contribution from each Member Entity for the fiscal year and other sources of income for the fiscal year.
b. The operating budget shall not be effective unless and until the governing body of each Member Entity has approvedapproves that Member Entity’s contribution to the operating budget.
c. A Member Entity contributions’s contribution shall become immediately due and payable to the Authority upon adoption of the annual operating budget, unless expressly provided otherwise in by the Board of Directors and approval of the Member Entity’s contribution to the budget by that Member Entity’s governing body.
10. Annual Audit and Audit Reports
14. ANNUAL AUDIT AND AUDIT REPORTS. The Board of Directors shall cause an annual financial audit to be made by an independent certified public accountant with respect to all Authority receipts, disbursements, other transactions, and entries into the books. A report of the financial audit shall be filed as a public record with each Member Entity. The audit shall be filed no later than as required by State law. The Authority shall pay the cost of the financial audit from its annual operating budget in the same manner as other administrative costs.
15. ESTABLISHMENT AND ADMINISTRATION OF FUNDS.
11. Establishment and Administration of Funds
a. Accountability. The Authority is responsible for the strict accountability of all funds and reports of all receipts and disbursements. It shall comply with every provision of law relating to the establishment and administration of funds, particularly Section 6505 of the Californiain particular, Government Code §6505. The funds shall be accounted for on a full accrual basis. b. Investment/Disbursement. The Authority shall receive and disburse funds only in accordance with policies and procedures established by the Board of Directors and in conformity with
applicable law.
c. Insurance/BondBonds. The Authority shall procure, carry and maintain, in full force and effect, at all times during the term of this Agreement, such insurance and bonds to protect the Authority and its members of the Board of Directors, officers, employees, agents, and Member Entities, as deemed appropriate by the Board of Directors. d. Depository and Auditor Controller. The Board of Directors shall designate one of its officers, employees or a third party to perform all acts required by Government Code Sections §6505 (regarding an annual audit), §6505.1 (regarding charge of and access to property), §6505.5 (regarding the depository and custodian of money), and §6505.6 (regarding independent audit where an officer or employee acts as treasurer, auditor, or both), as such laws are amended from time to time.
16 12. Withdrawal
a. WITHDRAWAL. Member Entities may withdraw from the Authority for Page I-3.13
subsequent fiscal years by providing written notice to the Authority and each Member Entity on or before May 1 of any fiscal year. Withdrawal shall be effective on July 1 of the next fiscal year. This shall be the exclusive means by which a Member Entity may withdraw from the Authority.
b. Any Member Entity that withdraws shall remain liable for any budget contributions or capital improvement project participation approved before withdrawal. c. Any Member Entity that withdraws shall remain liable for any and all demands, claims, or liabilities of any nature, including death or injury to any person, property damage, or any other loss caused by or arising out of that partyMember Entity’s performance or failure to perform the obligations assumed before the Member Entity withdraws from this Agreement. Any Member Entity that withdraws shall remain subject to the provisions of Paragraph 23. (Liability of the Authority; Release and Indemnity) paragraph 21. Indemnification with
Page I-3.14
respect to any event or occurrence taking place before the Member Entity withdraws. 17 13. Expulsion
a. EXPULSION. The Authority may expel a Member Entity from the Authority by a four-fifths (4/5) vote of the Authority Board of Directors for a breach of this Agreement determined by the Board of Directors to be a material breach. b. Any Member Entity that has been expelled pursuant to this paragraph shall have no further liability or obligation pursuant to this Agreement after the effective date of such expulsion; except such Member Entity shall remain liable for any and all demands, claims, or liabilities of any nature, including death or injury to any person, property damage, or any other loss caused by or arising out of that party’s performance or failure to perform the obligations assumed before the Member Entity was expelled, including any budget contributions or capital improvement project participation approved before expulsion. c. Any Member Entity that has been expelled shall remain subject to the provisions of Paragraph 23. (Liability of the Authority; Release and Indemnity)paragraph 21. Indemnification with respect to any event or occurrence taking place before the Member Entity was expelled.
18. TERMINATION AND DISTRIBUTION.
14. Termination and Distribution
a. Termination. This Agreement shall continue until terminated. This Agreement may be terminated by the written consent of four-fifths (4/5) of the Member Entities; provided, however, this. The Agreement and the Authority shall continue to exist after termination for the purpose ofmay only be terminated after disposing of all claims, distribution of assets, and performance of all other functions necessary to conclude the obligationobligations and affairs of the Authority.
b. Surplus. In the event that the Authority is terminated, any surplus money on deposit in any fund or account of the Authority shall be returned in proportion to the contributions made as required by Section 6512 of the California Government CodeConcluding Affairs.
The Board of Directors is vested with all powers of the Authority for the purpose of concluding and dissolving the business affairs of the Authority, including for the disposition, division, or distribution of any property acquired as a result of the joint exercise of powers.
19. NOTICES. Notices to each Member Entity under this Agreement are sufficient if mailed to its respective address on file with the Authority.
b. 20. PROHIBITION AGAINST ASSIGNMENT.
a. Surplus. In the event that the Authority is terminated, any surplus money on deposit in any fund or account of the Authority shall be returned to Member Entities in proportion to the contributions made to that fund or account, as required by Government Code §6512.
b. Property. All real property and any improvements thereon, that were owned by a Member Entity and contributed to the Authority shall be returned to the Member Entity, upon its approval, that contributed such property.
c. Member Entity Obligations. In no event shall any funds or assets be distributed, divided or returned to a Member Entity until such Member Entity has either paid their share of all outstanding debts and obligations that were incurred while they were a Member Entity, or executed a contract with the Authority to pay for all outstanding debts and obligations that were incurred while they were a Member Entity.
Page I-3.15
15. Prohibition Against Assignment
No Member Entity may assign a
right, claim, or interest it may have under this Agreement, and any such assignment shall be void. No creditor, assignee, or third-party beneficiary of a Member Entity has a right, claim, or title to any part, share, interest, fund, or asset of the Authority.
16. Amendments
21. AMENDMENTS. This Agreement may only be amended by approval by the governing body for each and every Member Entity. A proposed amendment must be submitted to each Member Entity at least thirty (30) days in advance of the date when the Member Entity considers iton which it will be considered. An amendment is to be effective immediately unless otherwise designatedupon full execution by all Member Entities.
22. SEVERABILITY. If a portion, term, condition, or
17. Severability
If a court of competent jurisdiction holds any provision of this Agreement is determined by a court to be illegal or in conflict with the law of the State of California, or is otherwise rendered, unenforceable or ineffectual, or invalid in whole or in part for any reason, the validity and enforceability of the remaining portions, terms, conditions, and provisions is, or portions of them, will not be affected.
Page I-3.16
23. LIABILITY OF THE AUTHORITY; RELEASE AND INDEMNITY, unless an essential purpose of this Agreement would be defeated by the loss of the illegal, unenforceable, or invalid provision.
18. Indemnification
a. Funds of the Authority may be used to defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the Authority, any Member Entity, any member of the Board of Directors, and each officer, employee and agent of the Authority or Member Entities, for their actions taken within the scope of their duties while acting on behalf of the Authority. The parties to this Agreement release each other and agree to hold each other harmless, as well as their officers and employees, for any loss or liability arising from their respective activities pursuant to this Agreement.
Except as otherwise provided herein, each party agrees to indemnity, defend b. In lieu of and notwithstanding the pro rata risk allocation, which might otherwise be imposed between the Member Entities pursuant to Government Code Section 895.6, the Member Entities agree that all losses or liabilities incurred by a Member Entity shall not be shared pro rata but, instead, the Member Entities agree that, pursuant to Government Code Section 895.4, each Member Entity hereto shall fully indemnify and hold harmlesseach of the other partiesMember Entities, their officers, agentsboard members, and employees, and agents, harmless from any and all demands, claims, or liabilities of any nature, including death or injury to any person, property damage, or any other loss caused by or arising out of that party’s performance or failure to perform the obligations assumed underclaim, expense or cost, damage or liability imposed for injury (as defined in Government Code 810.8) occurring by reason of the negligent acts or omissions or willful misconduct of the indemnifying Member Entity, its officers, employees, or agents, under or in connection with or arising out of any work, authority, or jurisdiction delegated to such Member Entity pursuant to this Agreement. EachNo Member Entity agrees that legal counsel for any Member Entity may be designated by the Board to represent the Authority by performing legal services, including litigation, and that any potential conflict of interest arising from such representation shall be deemed waived, nor any officer, board member, employees, or agent thereof shall be responsible for any damage or liability occurring by reason of the Authority andnegligent acts or omissions or willful misconduct of the other Member Entity hereto, unless an actual adverse relationship exists between the Member Entity and the Authority with respect to the particular matter. The designation of legal counsel from a Member Entity shall be with the approval of that Member Entityits officers, board members, employees, or agents, under or in connection with or arising out of any work, authority, or jurisdiction delegated to such other Member Entity pursuant to this Agreement. The rights, duties, and obligations of the Member Entities as set forth above in this paragraph 21. Indemnification, survive completion, termination, expiration, and suspension of this Agreement.
19. Choice of Law and Venue
24. GOVERNING LAW. ThisThe Parties agree that this Agreement shallis to be governed by and, construed, and enforced in accordance with the laws of the State of California.
Page I-3.17
25. COUNTERPART The Parties also agree that the venue of any litigation arising out of or connected with this Agreement will lie exclusively in the state trial court or Federal District Court located in Santa Clara County or San Mateo County in the State of California. The Parties consent to jurisdiction over their persons and over the subject matter of any such litigation in such courts, and consent to service of process issued by such courts.
20. Counterparts
This Agreement may be executed in counterparts, each of which shall be an original, but all of which shall constitute one instrument.
21. Agreement Complete
26. AGREEMENT COMPLETE. The foregoing constitutes the full and complete Agreement of the Member Entities. There are no oral understandings or agreements not set forth in writing herein.
22. No Third-Party Beneficiaries
27. NO THIRD-PARTY BENEFICIARIES. Nothing in this Agreement, whether express or implied, shall be construed to give any person or entity, other than the partiesParties hereto,
any legal or equitable right, remedy, or claim under or in respect of this Agreement or any covenants, conditions, or provisions contained herein.
23. Nonwaiver of Rights
The failure of either Party to this Agreement to object to or to take affirmative action with respect to any conduct of the other Party that is in violation of the terms of this Agreement will not be construed as a waiver thereof, or as waiver of any future breach or subsequent wrongful conduct.
24. Agreement Execution
Unless otherwise prohibited by law or policy of any Member Entity, the Member Entities agree that an electronic copy of a signed agreement, or an electronically signed agreement, has the same force and legal effect as an agreement executed with an original ink signature. The term “electronic copy of a signed agreement” refers to a transmission by facsimile, electronic mail, or other electronic means of a copy of an original signed agreement in a portable document format. The term “electronically signed agreement” means an agreement that is executed by applying an electronic signature using technology in compliance with the Electronic Signature Act (California Civil Code §1633).
25. Equal Opportunity
a. Equal Opportunity Employer
Each of the Member Entities is an equal opportunity employer and requires their contractors to have and adhere to a policy of equal opportunity and non-discrimination, including that such contractors will comply with all applicable federal, state, local laws and regulations, and will not discriminate against any subcontractor, employee, or applicant for employment in the recruitment, hiring, employment, utilization, promotion, classification or reclassification, transfer, recruitment advertising, evaluation, treatment, demotion, layoff, termination, rates of pay or other forms of compensation, and selection for professional development training (including apprenticeship), or against any other person, on the basis of sex (which includes pregnancy, childbirth, breastfeeding and medical conditions related to pregnancy, childbirth or breastfeeding), race, religion, color, national origin (including language use restrictions), ancestry, religious creed (including religious dress and grooming practices), political affiliation, disability (mental and physical, including HIV or AIDS), medical condition (cancer and genetic characteristics), genetic Page I-3.18
information, marital status, parental status, gender, age (40 and over), pregnancy, military and veteran status, sexual orientation, gender identity and gender expression, the exercise of family and medical care leave, the exercise of pregnancy disability leave, or the request, exercise, or need for reasonable accommodation.
b. Compliance with Applicable Equal Opportunity Laws
All equal opportunity and non-discrimination policies of Member Entity contractors must be in conformance with applicable state and federal guidelines including the Federal Equal Opportunity Clause, 41 Code of Federal Regulations, Part 60-1, §60-1.4; Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 as amended; the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990; the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (§503 and §504); the Age Discrimination Act of 1975 (42 U.S.C. §6101 et seq.); the California Fair Employment and Housing Act (Government Code §12900 et. seq.); and California Labor Code §1101 and §1102. c. Investigation of Claims
Member Entity contractors must designate a specific position within its organization to be responsible for investigating allegations of non-compliance with the anti-discrimination and anti-harassment provisions of this Section 28. Contractors must conduct a fair, prompt, and thorough investigation of all allegations directed to the contractor by any Member Entity. In cases where such investigation results in a finding of discrimination, harassment, or hostile work environment, the contractor must take prompt, effective action against the offender.
26. Notices
Unless otherwise specified in this Agreement, all requests for written approval or legal notices must be sent to the representatives’ addresses on file with the Authority. All notices are deemed to have been given when made in writing and when delivered or mailed to the representatives at their respective addresses.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the partiesMember Entities hereto have executed this Agreement on the dates
as set forthfor the below.
[(SIGNATURES TO FOLLOW ON SEPARATE PAGES])
04/02/20 9
DATED: , 2020 CITY OF MENLO PARK
By:
Cecilia Taylor, Mayor
ATTEST:
By:
Judi Herren, City Clerk
APPROVE AS TO FORM:
Cara E. Silver
Interim City Attorney
Page I-3.19
04/02/20 10
DATED: , 2020 CITY OF PALO ALTO
By:
Adrian Fine, Mayor
ATTEST:
By:
Beth Minor, City Clerk
APPROVE AS TO FORM:
Cassie Coleman
Assistant City Attorney
04/02/20 11
DATED: , 2020 CITY OF EAST PALO ALTO
By:
Regina Wallace-Jones, Mayor
ATTEST:
By:
Walfred Solorzano, City Clerk
APPROVE AS TO FORM:
Rafael Alvarado
City Attorney
04/02/20 12
DATED: , 2020 SANTA CLARA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT
By:
Nai Hsueh, Chair
ATTEST:
By:
Michele L. King, CMC, Board Clerk
APPROVE AS TO FORM:
District Counsel By
Leslie Orta
Senior Assistant District Counsel
04/02/20 13(REMAINDER OF PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK) Page I-3.20
DATED: , 2023 CITY OF MENLO PARK
By:
Name
Mayor
ATTEST:
By:
Name
City Clerk
APPROVE AS TO FORM:
City Attorney
(REMAINDER OF PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK)
Page I-3.21
DATED: , 2023 CITY OF PALO ALTO
By:
Name
Mayor
ATTEST:
By:
Name
City Clerk
APPROVE AS TO FORM:
City Attorney
(REMAINDER OF PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK)
Page I-3.22
DATED: , 2023 CITY OF EAST PALO ALTO
By:
Name
Mayor
ATTEST:
By:
Name
City Clerk
APPROVE AS TO FORM:
City Attorney
(REMAINDER OF PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK)
Page I-3.23
DATED: , 2023 SANTA CLARA VALLEY WATER
DISTRICT
By:
John L. Varela
Chair, Board of Directors
ATTEST:
By:
Michele L. King, CMC
Clerk, Board of Directors
APPROVE AS TO FORM:
District Counsel
J. Carlos Orellana
(REMAINDER OF PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK)
Page I-3.24
DATED: , 2023 SAN MATEO COUNTY FLOOD
AND
SEA LEVEL RISE RESILIENCY
DISTRICT
By:
Name
Chair, Board of Directors
ATTEST:
By:
Name
Clerk, Board of Directors
APPROVE AS TO FORM:
Brian Kulich
Lead Deputy County Counsel
General Counsel
(REMAINDER OF PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK)
Page I-3.25
SECOND AMENDED AND RESTATED
JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT
FOR THE
SAN FRANCISQUITO CREEK
JOINT POWERS AUTHORITY
AMENDED AND RESTATED
as of
__________________, 2023
Page I-3.26 ATTACHMENT B
i
SECOND AMENDED AND RESTATED JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT FOR
THE SAN FRANCISQUITO CREEK JOINT POWERS AUTHORITY
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
1. CREATION OF THE SAN FRANCISQUITO CREEK JOINT POWERS AUTHORITY ......... 1
2. PURPOSES........................................................................................................................ 2
3. PARTIES TO AGREEMENT ............................................................................................... 2
4. TERM OF AGREEMENT .................................................................................................... 2
5. POWERS OF THE AUTHORITY......................................................................................... 2
6. MEMBER ENTITY APPROVALS AND RESPONSIBILITIES .............................................. 3
7. CAPITAL PROJECT PARTICIPATION ............................................................................... 4
8. MEMBERSHIP.................................................................................................................... 4
9. BOARD OF DIRECTORS ................................................................................................... 4
10. OFFICERS.......................................................................................................................... 5
11. FISCAL YEAR..................................................................................................................... 5
12. OPERATING BUDGET ....................................................................................................... 5
13. ANNUAL AUDIT AND AUDIT REPORTS............................................................................ 6
14. ESTABLISHMENT AND ADMINISTRATION OF FUNDS.................................................... 6
15. WITHDRAWAL ................................................................................................................... 6
16. EXPULSION ....................................................................................................................... 7
17. TERMINATION AND DISTRIBUTION................................................................................. 7
18. PROHIBITION AGAINST ASSIGNMENT............................................................................ 8
19. AMENDMENTS .................................................................................................................. 8
20. SEVERABILITY .................................................................................................................. 8
21. INDEMNIFICATION ............................................................................................................ 8
22. CHOICE OF LAW AND VENUE.......................................................................................... 8
23. COUNTERPARTS .............................................................................................................. 9
24. AGREEMENT COMPLETE................................................................................................. 9
25. NO THIRD-PARTY BENEFICIARIES.................................................................................. 9
26. NONWAIVER OF RIGHTS.................................................................................................. 9
27. AGREEMENT EXECUTION................................................................................................ 9
28. EQUAL OPPORTUNITY..................................................................................................... 9
29. NOTICES...........................................................................................................................10 Page I-3.27
SECOND AMENDED AND RESTATED JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT
FOR THE SAN FRANCISQUITO CREEK JOINT POWERS AUTHORITY
This Second Amended and Restated Agreement Joint Powers Agreement for the San Francisquito Creek Joint Powers Authority (Agreement) is made by and among the City of East Palo Alto, the City of Menlo Park, the City of Palo Alto, the San Mateo County Flood and Sea Level Rise Resiliency District, and the Santa Clara Valley Water District (each a Member Entity and collectively, the Member Entities), all of which are public entities organized and operating under the laws of the State of California, and each of which is a public agency as defined in California Government Code section 6500. This Agreement is effective upon full execution by all Member Entities (Effective Date).
RECITALS
A. The Joint Exercise of Powers Act, Government Code sections 6500 et seq. (JPA Law), permits two or more local public entities by agreement to jointly exercise any power common to them.
B. Following years of effort to address environmental and flooding concerns related to the watershed and floodplain of San Francisquito Creek (encompassing approximately 50 square miles from the Santa Cruz Mountains to San Francisco Bay), and soon after the flood of record in 1998 damaged approximately 1,700 properties, the Member Entities established the San Francisquito Creek Joint Powers Authority (Authority) pursuant to that certain “Joint Powers Agreement Creating the San Francisquito Creek Joint Powers Authority,” dated as of May 18, 1999, to collectively contribute resources and implement policies and projects of mutual interest relating to the primary natural features that unite them, including the San Francisquito Creek.
C. The Joint Powers Agreement Creating the San Francisquito Creek Joint Powers Authority, dated as of May 18, 1999, was thereafter revised pursuant to the Joint Powers Agreement for the San Francisquito Creek Joint Powers Authority, Amended and Restated as of January 1, 2020.
D. Each Member Entity agrees to contribute resources and funding towards implementation of projects of mutual interest and benefit relating to San Francisquito Creek and San Francisco Bay shoreline.
E. The governing body of each Member Entity has determined that it is in the Member Entity’s best interest and the public interest that this Second Amended and Restated Joint Powers Agreement for the San Francisquito Creek Joint Powers Authority be executed.
NOW, THEREFORE, the Member Entities, by, between and among themselves, in consideration of the mutual benefits, promises, and agreements set forth below, hereby agree as follows:
1. Creation of the San Francisquito Creek Joint Powers Authority Pursuant to the JPA Law, the Member Entities create a public agency, separate and apart from the Member Entities to be known as the San Francisquito Creek Joint Powers Authority (Authority). Pursuant to Government Code section 6508.1, the debts, liabilities, Page I-3.28
and obligations of the Authority shall not constitute debts, liabilities, or obligations of any party to this Agreement. A Member Entity may separately contract for or assume responsibility for specific debts, liabilities, or obligations of the Authority. For purposes of, and to the extent required by, Government Code section 6509, in exercising its powers, the Authority shall be subject to the restrictions upon the manner of exercising the powers of the City of Menlo Park, except as otherwise authorized or permitted by the JPA Law.
2. Purposes
This Agreement is entered into by Member Entities under the JPA Law for the following purposes:
a. Develop and maintain projects to reduce the risk of flooding in and around San Francisquito Creek.
b. Develop and maintain projects to reduce the risk of coastal flooding from along the San Francisco Bay shoreline.
c. Maintain, restore, enhance the environment, and create recreational opportunities, where possible, in implementing the other purposes stated herein. d. Provide regional information related to flood preparedness and emergency response agencies and others to enhance their ability to communicate about and respond to flood risks.
e. Secure and administer funding for the benefit of the Authority’s operations, capital projects, and related work.
3. Parties to Agreement
Withdrawal or expulsion of any Member Entity from this Agreement does not affect this Agreement nor each Member Entity’s intent to contract with the Member Entities then remaining. Pursuant to Assembly Bill 825 (Chapter 292, Statutes of 2019), which amended the San Mateo County Flood Control District Act to provide for the San Mateo County Flood and Sea Level Rise Resiliency District, the Member Entities agree that the San Mateo County Flood and Sea Level Rise Resiliency District (OneShoreline) is the entity formerly known as the San Mateo County Flood Control District, and as such is subject to the terms and conditions of this Agreement.
4. Term of Agreement
This Agreement continues in full force until terminated in accordance with paragraph 17. Termination and Distribution.
5. Powers of the Authority
The Authority shall have all powers common to the Member Entities, and such additional powers granted to it by law, necessary to fulfill the purposes of this Agreement. The Authority, through its Board of Directors, is authorized to do all acts necessary to fulfill Page I-3.29
the purposes of this Agreement referred to in paragraph 2. Purposes including, but not limited to, each of the following:
a. Make and enter into contracts;
b. Incur debts, liabilities, and obligations, provided that no debt, liability, or obligation of the Authority shall be a debt, liability, or obligation of a Member Entity except as separately agreed to by a Member Entity; c. Receive contributions and donations of property, funds, services, and other forms of assistance from any source;
d. Acquire, hold, and dispose of real property, including, without limitation, the power to convey real property to a Member Entity, as deemed appropriate by the Authority’s Board of Directors, and as accepted by the Member Entity, provided, however, that the Authority shall not exercise the power of eminent domain in the jurisdiction of a Member Entity unless the Member Entity adopts a resolution consenting to the Authority’s exercise of eminent domain within its jurisdiction. e. Sue and be sued in its own name;
f. Contract with independent consultants and contractors; g. Receive, collect, and disburse monies;
h. Hire staff in conformance with an approved operating budget; i. Assign, delegate, or contract with a Member Entity or third party to perform any of the Authority’s duties including, but not limited to, acting as administrator for the Authority; and
j. Exercise all other powers and carry out other duties as necessary and proper to fulfill the provisions of this Agreement.
6. Member Entity Approvals and Responsibilities
Each Member Entity has the approval authority, obligations, and responsibilities set forth in this Agreement. The Member Entities retain the following powers:
a. The designation of each Member Entity’s Director and alternate as specified in paragraph 9. Board of Directors;
b. Approval of an amendment to this Agreement as specified in paragraph 19. Amendments;
c. Approval of the Member Entity’s funding or other contribution for a capital project as specified in paragraph 7. Capital Project Participation; and d. Approval of the Member Entity’s contribution to the annual budget of the Authority as specified in paragraph 12. Operating Budget.
Page I-3.30
7. Capital Project Participation
The Authority may approve a contract for a capital project or any discrete phase of a capital project in accordance with the following conditions:
a. The Authority’s Board of Directors has determined that the Authority will have the funds necessary to pay for that capital project or that discrete phase of the project being approved; and
b. Any funding or other contribution from a Member Entity to that capital project or to that discrete phase of the capital project has been approved by the Member Entity’s governing body or designee. Each Member Entity shall have the right to determine independently whether to participate in any capital project.
8. Membership
Member Entities may be added to the Authority by amending this Agreement, as described in paragraph 19. Amendments, and Member Entities may withdraw or be expelled, as described in paragraph 15. Withdrawal and paragraph 16. Expulsion.
9. Board of Directors
a. Directors. There shall be a Board of Directors to govern the Authority. The Board of Directors shall be comprised of one Director designated by each Member Entity. Each Director shall have one vote on the Board of Directors.
Each Director shall have an alternate designated by the governing body of each Member Entity. No two Directors and no two Alternate Directors shall be from the same governing body of any Member Entity.
b. Alternates. All references in this Agreement to a Director refer to and include the Director’s alternate, when acting in place of a Director. c. Compensation. Directors are not entitled to compensation by the Authority. The Board of Directors may authorize reimbursement of expenses incurred by Directors in connection with serving as a Director.
d. Term. The term of office of a Director shall terminate when such person ceases to be a member of the governing body of the Member Entity or the Member Entity designates another Director and/or alternate to serve.
e. Powers. The powers of the Board of Directors are each of the powers of the Authority not specifically reserved to the Member Entities by this Agreement. No Action of the Authority shall be effective or binding unless and until such action has been authorized by the Board of Directors and either 1) is consistent with the budget approved by the Board of Directors pursuant to paragraph 12. Operating Budget, or 2) complies with paragraph 7. Capital Project Participation. f. Meetings. The Board of Directors shall hold at least one regular meeting each year, at which time the Board of Directors shall elect its officers pursuant to paragraph 10. Officers. The Board of Directors shall fix the date, hour, and place at which each regular meeting is to be held. To the extent practicable, each Board of Directors meeting shall be held in Northern Santa Clara County or Southern San Mateo County. The Chair presides at all meetings. A special Page I-3.31
meeting may be called upon written request by the Chair or at least two Directors.
g. Brown Act. Each regular, adjourned regular, or special meeting of the Board of Directors shall be called, noticed, held, and conducted in accordance with the Ralph M. Brown Act (Government Code §54950, et seq.).
h. Notices, Agendas, Minutes. The Board of Directors shall appoint or hire a Clerk of the Board of Directors who shall be responsible for preparing minutes of each regular and special meeting of the Board of Directors, and issuing notices and agendas in accordance with the law.
i. Quorum. No business may be transacted by the Board of Directors without a quorum of members of the Board of Directors being present except that less than a quorum may adjourn from time to time. A quorum consists of a majority of the members of the Board of Directors.
j. Action of the Board of Directors. Except as otherwise specified in this Agreement, or required by law, any action of the Board of Directors shall require a vote of a majority of the Directors.
10. Officers
a. The officers of the Authority are the Chair, and Vice-Chair. b. The officers shall be elected or appointed by the Board of Directors at its first meeting of the calendar year unless delayed by an action of the Board of Directors.
c. The term of office for Chair and Vice Chair shall be determined by a vote of the Board of Directors. The officers shall assume the duties of their offices upon being elected or appointed, as appropriate.
d. If the Chair or Vice Chair ceases to be a member of the Board of Directors, the Board of Directors shall elect or appoint a new officer at the next regular meeting of the Board of Directors held after the vacancy occurs.
11. Fiscal Year
Each fiscal year of the Authority shall begin on July 1 of a calendar year and end on June 30 of the next following calendar year.
12. Operating Budget
a. The Board of Directors shall adopt an annual operating budget, which shall be separate from the budget for any capital project of the Authority. The operating budget shall include the proposed contribution from each Member Entity and other sources of income for the fiscal year.
b. The operating budget shall not be effective unless and until the governing body of each Member Entity approves that Member Entity’s contribution to the operating budget.
c. A Member Entity’s contribution shall become due and payable to the Authority upon adoption of the annual operating budget by the Board of Directors and Page I-3.32
approval of the Member Entity’s contribution to the budget by that Member Entity’s governing body.
13. Annual Audit and Audit Reports
The Board of Directors shall cause an annual financial audit to be made by an independent certified public accountant with respect to all Authority receipts, disbursements, other transactions, and entries into the books. A report of the financial audit shall be filed as a public record with each Member Entity. The audit shall be filed no later than as required by State law. The Authority shall pay the cost of the financial audit from its annual operating budget in the same manner as other administrative costs.
14. Establishment and Administration of Funds
a. Accountability. The Authority is responsible for the strict accountability of all funds and reports of all receipts and disbursements. It shall comply with every provision of law relating to the establishment and administration of funds, in particular, Government Code §6505. The funds shall be accounted for on a full accrual basis.
b. Investment/Disbursement. The Authority shall receive and disburse funds only in accordance with policies and procedures established by the Board of Directors and in conformity with applicable law.
c. Insurance/Bonds. The Authority shall procure, carry and maintain, in full force and effect, at all times during the term of this Agreement, such insurance and bonds to protect the Authority and the Board of Directors, officers, employees, agents, and Member Entities, as deemed appropriate by the Board of Directors. d. Depository and Auditor Controller. The Board of Directors shall designate one of its officers, employees or a third party to perform all acts required by Government Code §6505 (regarding an annual audit), §6505.1 (regarding charge of and access to property), §6505.5 (regarding the depository and custodian of money), and §6505.6 (regarding independent audit where an officer or employee acts as treasurer, auditor, or both), as such laws are amended from time to time.
15. Withdrawal
a. Member Entities may withdraw from the Authority for subsequent fiscal years by providing written notice to the Authority and each Member Entity on or before May 1 of any fiscal year. Withdrawal shall be effective on July 1 of the next fiscal year. This shall be the exclusive means by which a Member Entity may withdraw from the Authority.
b. Any Member Entity that withdraws shall remain liable for any budget contributions or capital project participation approved before withdrawal. c. Any Member Entity that withdraws shall remain liable for any and all demands, claims, or liabilities of any nature, including death or injury to any person, property damage, or any other loss caused by or arising out of that Member Entity’s performance or failure to perform the obligations assumed before the Member Entity withdraws from this Agreement. Any Member Entity that withdraws shall remain subject to the provisions of paragraph 21. Indemnification Page I-3.33
with respect to any event or occurrence taking place before the Member Entity withdraws.
16. Expulsion
a. The Authority may expel a Member Entity from the Authority by a four-fifths (4/5) vote of the Authority Board of Directors for a breach of this Agreement determined by the Board of Directors to be a material breach. b. Any Member Entity that has been expelled pursuant to this paragraph shall have no further liability or obligation pursuant to this Agreement after the effective date of such expulsion; except such Member Entity shall remain liable for any and all demands, claims, or liabilities of any nature, including death or injury to any person, property damage, or any other loss caused by or arising out of that party’s performance or failure to perform the obligations assumed before the Member Entity was expelled, including any budget contributions or capital project participation approved before expulsion.
c. Any Member Entity that has been expelled shall remain subject to the provisions of paragraph 21. Indemnification with respect to any event or occurrence taking place before the Member Entity was expelled.
17. Termination and Distribution
a. Termination. This Agreement shall continue until terminated. This Agreement may be terminated by the written consent of four-fifths (4/5) of the Member Entities. The Agreement may only be terminated after disposing of all claims, distribution of assets, and performance of all other functions necessary to conclude the obligations and affairs of the Authority.
b. Concluding Affairs. The Board of Directors is vested with all powers of the Authority for the purpose of concluding and dissolving the business affairs of the Authority, including for the disposition, division, or distribution of any property acquired as a result of the joint exercise of powers.
c. Surplus. In the event that the Authority is terminated, any surplus money on deposit in any fund or account of the Authority shall be returned to Member Entities in proportion to the contributions made to that fund or account, as required by Government Code §6512.
d. Property. All real property and any improvements thereon, that were owned by a Member Entity and contributed to the Authority shall be returned to the Member Entity, upon its approval, that contributed such property. e. Member Entity Obligations. In no event shall any funds or assets be distributed, divided or returned to a Member Entity until such Member Entity has either paid their share of all outstanding debts and obligations that were incurred while they were a Member Entity, or executed a contract with the Authority to pay for all outstanding debts and obligations that were incurred while they were a Member Entity.
Page I-3.34
18. Prohibition Against Assignment
No Member Entity may assign a right, claim, or interest it may have under this Agreement, and any such assignment shall be void. No creditor, assignee, or third-party beneficiary of a Member Entity has a right, claim, or title to any part, share, interest, fund, or asset of the Authority.
19. Amendments
This Agreement may only be amended by approval by the governing body for each and every Member Entity. A proposed amendment must be submitted to each Member Entity at least thirty (30) days in advance of the date on which it will be considered. An amendment is effective upon full execution by all Member Entities.
20. Severability
If a court of competent jurisdiction holds any provision of this Agreement to be illegal, unenforceable, or invalid in whole or in part for any reason, the validity and enforceability of the remaining provisions, or portions of them, will not be affected, unless an essential purpose of this Agreement would be defeated by the loss of the illegal, unenforceable, or invalid provision.
21. Indemnification
a. Funds of the Authority may be used to defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the Authority, any Member Entity, any member of the Board of Directors, and each officer, employee and agent of the Authority or Member Entities, for their actions taken within the scope of their duties while acting on behalf of the Authority. b. In lieu of and notwithstanding the pro rata risk allocation, which might otherwise be imposed between the Member Entities pursuant to Government Code Section 895.6, the Member Entities agree that all losses or liabilities incurred by a Member Entity shall not be shared pro rata but, instead, the Member Entities agree that, pursuant to Government Code Section 895.4, each Member Entity hereto shall fully indemnify and hold each of the other Member Entities, their officers, board members, employees, and agents, harmless from any claim, expense or cost, damage or liability imposed for injury (as defined in Government Code 810.8) occurring by reason of the negligent acts or omissions or willful misconduct of the indemnifying Member Entity, its officers, employees, or agents, under or in connection with or arising out of any work, authority, or jurisdiction delegated to such Member Entity pursuant to this Agreement. No Member Entity, nor any officer, board member, employees, or agent thereof shall be responsible for any damage or liability occurring by reason of the negligent acts or omissions or willful misconduct of the other Member Entity hereto, its officers, board members, employees, or agents, under or in connection with or arising out of any work, authority, or jurisdiction delegated to such other Member Entity pursuant to this Agreement. The rights, duties, and obligations of the Member Entities as set forth above in this paragraph 21. Indemnification, survive completion, termination, expiration, and suspension of this Agreement.
22. Choice of Law and Venue
The Parties agree that this Agreement is to be governed, construed, and enforced in accordance with the laws of the State of California. The Parties also agree that the Page I-3.35
venue of any litigation arising out of or connected with this Agreement will lie exclusively in the state trial court or Federal District Court located in Santa Clara County or San Mateo County in the State of California. The Parties consent to jurisdiction over their persons and over the subject matter of any such litigation in such courts, and consent to service of process issued by such courts.
23. Counterparts
This Agreement may be executed in counterparts, each of which shall be an original, but all of which shall constitute one instrument.
24. Agreement Complete
The foregoing constitutes the full and complete Agreement of the Member Entities.
There are no oral understandings or agreements not set forth in writing herein.
25. No Third-Party Beneficiaries
Nothing in this Agreement, whether express or implied, shall be construed to give any person or entity, other than the Parties hereto, any legal or equitable right, remedy, or claim under or in respect of this Agreement or any covenants, conditions, or provisions contained herein.
26. Nonwaiver of Rights
The failure of either Party to this Agreement to object to or to take affirmative action with respect to any conduct of the other Party that is in violation of the terms of this Agreement will not be construed as a waiver thereof, or as waiver of any future breach or subsequent wrongful conduct.
27. Agreement Execution
Unless otherwise prohibited by law or policy of any Member Entity, the Member Entities agree that an electronic copy of a signed agreement, or an electronically signed agreement, has the same force and legal effect as an agreement executed with an original ink signature. The term “electronic copy of a signed agreement” refers to a transmission by facsimile, electronic mail, or other electronic means of a copy of an original signed agreement in a portable document format. The term “electronically signed agreement” means an agreement that is executed by applying an electronic signature using technology in compliance with the Electronic Signature Act (California Civil Code §1633).
28. Equal Opportunity
a. Equal Opportunity Employer
Each of the Member Entities is an equal opportunity employer and requires their contractors to have and adhere to a policy of equal opportunity and nondiscrimination, including that such contractors will comply with all applicable federal, state, local laws and regulations, and will not discriminate against any subcontractor, employee, or applicant for employment in the recruitment, hiring, employment, utilization, promotion, classification or reclassification, transfer, recruitment advertising, evaluation, treatment, demotion, layoff, termination, rates of pay or other forms of compensation, and selection for professional Page I-3.36
development training (including apprenticeship), or against any other person, on the basis of sex (which includes pregnancy, childbirth, breastfeeding and medical conditions related to pregnancy, childbirth or breastfeeding), race, religion, color, national origin (including language use restrictions), ancestry, religious creed (including religious dress and grooming practices), political affiliation, disability (mental and physical, including HIV or AIDS), medical condition (cancer and genetic characteristics), genetic information, marital status, parental status, gender, age (40 and over), pregnancy, military and veteran status, sexual orientation, gender identity and gender expression, the exercise of family and medical care leave, the exercise of pregnancy disability leave, or the request, exercise, or need for reasonable accommodation.
b. Compliance with Applicable Equal Opportunity Laws
All equal opportunity and non-discrimination policies of Member Entity contractors must be in conformance with applicable state and federal guidelines including the Federal Equal Opportunity Clause, 41 Code of Federal Regulations, Part 60-1, §60-1.4; Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 as amended; the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990; the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (§503 and §504); the Age Discrimination Act of 1975 (42 U.S.C. §6101 et seq.); the California Fair Employment and Housing Act (Government Code §12900 et. seq.); and California Labor Code §1101 and §1102.
c. Investigation of Claims
Member Entity contractors must designate a specific position within its organization to be responsible for investigating allegations of non-compliance with the anti-discrimination and anti-harassment provisions of this Section 28.
Contractors must conduct a fair, prompt, and thorough investigation of all allegations directed to the contractor by any Member Entity. In cases where such investigation results in a finding of discrimination, harassment, or hostile work environment, the contractor must take prompt, effective action against the offender.
29. Notices
Unless otherwise specified in this Agreement, all requests for written approval or legal notices must be sent to the representatives’ addresses on file with the Authority. All notices are deemed to have been given when made in writing and when delivered or mailed to the representatives at their respective addresses.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Member Entities hereto have executed this Agreement on the dates as set for the below.
(SIGNATURES TO FOLLOW ON SEPARATE PAGES)
(REMAINDER OF PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK)
Page I-3.37
DATED: , 2023 CITY OF MENLO PARK
By:
Jen Wolosin
Mayor
ATTEST:
By:
Judi A. Herren
City Clerk
APPROVE AS TO FORM:
Nira Doherty
City Attorney
(REMAINDER OF PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK)
Page I-3.38
DATED: , 2023 CITY OF PALO ALTO
By:
Name
Mayor
ATTEST:
By:
Name
City Clerk
APPROVE AS TO FORM:
City Attorney
(REMAINDER OF PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK)
Page I-3.39
DATED: , 2023 CITY OF EAST PALO ALTO
By:
Name
Mayor
ATTEST:
By:
Name
City Clerk
APPROVE AS TO FORM:
City Attorney
(REMAINDER OF PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK)
Page I-3.40
DATED: , 2023 SANTA CLARA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT
By:
John L. Varela
Chair, Board of Directors
ATTEST:
By:
Michele L. King, CMC
Clerk, Board of Directors
APPROVE AS TO FORM:
District Counsel
J. Carlos Orellana
(REMAINDER OF PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK)
Page I-3.41
DATED: , 2023 SAN MATEO COUNTY FLOOD AND
SEA LEVEL RISE RESILIENCY DISTRICT
By:
Name
Chair, Board of Directors
ATTEST:
By:
Name
Clerk, Board of Directors
APPROVE AS TO FORM:
Brian Kulich
Lead Deputy County Counsel
General Counsel
(REMAINDER OF PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK)
Page I-3.42
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: 5/9/2023
Staff Report Number: 23-109-CC
Consent Calendar: Authorize the Mayor to sign a letter on behalf of the City Council to PG&E regarding recent extended
power outages
Recommendation
Staff recommends the City Council authorize the Mayor to sign a letter on behalf of the City Council to PG&E regarding recent extended power outages.
Policy Issues
There are no policy issues related to this item.
Background
In just a one-month time period from February to March 2023, Menlo Park residents experienced three widespread and extended PG&E power outages that lasted three days or more and left a majority of residents in the dark. The financial and personal hardship residents and businesses experienced across Menlo Park was immense. Large amounts of perishable food spoiled, elderly community members were without heat during unseasonably cold weather, residents lacked access to basic necessities like internet, and uncertain power restoration timelines created widespread anxiety. In particular, vulnerable PG&E customers like those enrolled in the Medical Baseline program faced incredible challenges maintaining the life sustaining medical equipment on which they depend.
City staff worked tirelessly to provide services during extended outages by opening or extending hours at libraries and community centers, connecting food insecure residents to local assistance programs, and launching three rounds of a hotel accommodations program.
Analysis
Now that the winter storms have passed, the City has an opportunity to work with PG&E to improve emergency response and minimize negative impacts of future storms. The letter requests a PG&E representative to attend an upcoming City Council meeting or community forum to discuss emergency preparedness with the City Council and community.
Impact on City Resources
There is no direct budget impact for authorizing the Mayor to sign this letter of support.
AGENDA ITEM I-4 Page I-4.1
Staff Report #: 23-109-CC
City of Menlo Park 701 Laurel St., Menlo Park, CA 94025 tel 650-330-6600 menlopark.gov 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. Letter to PG&E
Report prepared by:
Stephen Stolte, Assistant City Manager
Page I-4.2
City of Menlo Park 701 Laurel St., Menlo Park, CA 94025 tel 650-330-6600 menlopark.gov City Council
May 9, 2023
Aaron Johnson
Vice President, Bay Area Region
PG&E
[email protected]
Empty
RE: Extended power outages and future resilience in Menlo Park Empty
Mr. Johnson:
On behalf of the City Council of Menlo Park, I respectfully request that you attend an upcoming City Council meeting or community forum to discuss emergency preparedness with the City Council and community. I appreciated your willingness to be part of difficult conversations during the community meeting in East Palo Alto March 16, and believe we can strengthen our relationship with PG&E by learning from the recent outages and planning for future events.
Over a one-month time frame from February to March of this year, Menlo Park residents experienced three widespread and extended PG&E power outages that lasted three days or more and left a majority of our residents, and your customers, in the dark. The financial and personal hardship residents and businesses experienced across Menlo Park was immense.
Tens of thousands of residents were without power for more than nine days in the one-month period. Large amounts of perishable food spoiled, elderly community members were without heat during unseasonably cold weather, residents lacked access to basic necessities like internet, and uncertain power restoration timelines created widespread anxiety. Ultimately, our entire community was left fatigued. In particular, vulnerable PG&E customers like those enrolled in the Medical Baseline program faced incredible challenges maintaining the life sustaining medical equipment on which they depend. While PG&E was aware of these vulnerable customers, no support was provided to them.
City staff worked tirelessly to provide services during extended outages by opening or extending hours at libraries and community centers to provide residents opportunities to recharge and access internet, and connecting food insecure residents to local assistance programs. The City also launched three rounds of a hotel accommodations program. During each round, the power had been out for at least 48 Page I-4.3 ATTACHMENT A
City of Menlo Park 701 Laurel St., Menlo Park, CA 94025 tel 650-330-6600 menlopark.gov 2 hours, and the City accommodated one-night hotel stays just to get our residents into safe spaces for a night.
We understand the unprecedented nature of the storms and are grateful that your crews worked hard to prioritize and execute power restorations. Now that we have come out of the winter power outages, we have an opportunity to improve emergency response and minimize negative impacts from inevitable future storms by working together.
Sincerely,
Jen Wolosin
Mayor
Page I-4.4
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: 5/9/2023
Staff Report Number: 22-110-CC
Consent Calendar: Receive annual City Council priority and goal setting workshop final report
Recommendation
Staff recommends the City Council receive the annual City Council priority and goal setting workshop prepared by the professional facilitator.
Policy Issues
The City Council holds an annual priority and goal setting workshop to provide direction to the city manager on aligning resources and work plans for the next year.
Background
The City Council held its annual workshop March 18, with a professional facilitator and City staff. The City Council received information from the facilitator and staff on major projects and initiatives underway that will continue through the next fiscal year, an analysis of community input on City Council priorities, live public comment, an overview of norms for governing, and the context for priority setting. The City Council engaged in robust discussion of priority issues and a voting exercise to set top priorities for fiscal year 2023-24.
Analysis
The final report (Attachment A) was prepared by professional facilitator, Steve Mermell, from Baker Tilly. It provides a summary of the results of the workshop including highlights of comments by City Councilmembers regarding priorities.
Budget development
The City Council’s priorities will continue to guide fiscal year 2023-24 budget development. Budget items, including funding for programs, services and staffing that implement City Council priorities will be highlighted. The City’s budget portal will open to the public May 30, followed by a public budget workshop June 1 and a City Council budget hearing June 13. The City will also use the top priorities of the City Council as well as feedback and direction on the proposed budget to create department work plans.
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) AGENDA ITEM I-5 Page I-5.1
Staff Report #: 23-110-CC
City of Menlo Park 701 Laurel St., Menlo Park, CA 94025 tel 650-330-6600 menlopark.gov 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. City Council workshop final report
Report prepared by:
Stephen Stolte, Assistant City Manager
Page I-5.2
March 2023
City of Menlo Park
City Council Workshop
Held March 18, 2023
Page I-5.3 ATTACHMENT A
Page I-5.4
City Council Workshop
Table of Contents Baker Tilly
i
Table of Contents
Workshop Report............................................................................................................................................1 Workshop Overview......................................................................................2 Opening Comments .......................................................................................3 Good Governance and Roles and Responsibilities ....................................3 Introduction and Context for Priority Setting Discussions ......................5 Discussion of Issues of Importance to Councilmembers ..........................9 Top Priorities Through End of FY 2023-24................................................11 Wrap-up and Next Steps .............................................................................12 Page I-5.5
Page I-5.6
City Council Workshop
Workshop Report Baker Tilly
1 Workshop Report
The City of Menlo Park held a City Council priority-setting workshop on Saturday, March 18, 2023, from 10 a.m. to 2:30 p.m. in the City Council Chambers and via teleconference. The workshop provided an opportunity for Councilmembers to review what makes for effective city councils, discuss governance norms, review and create consensus on priorities for the coming fiscal year, and strengthen teamwork. This report contains a summary of the results of the workshop.
Steve Mermell with Baker Tilly facilitated the workshop.
The top five priorities for the coming fiscal year are listed in Figure 1 below.
Figure 1. Top Priorities
Housing Emergency
Preparedness Climate Action
Activating
Downtown/Economic
Development
Safe Streets
Page I-5.7
City Council Workshop
Workshop Report Baker Tilly
2 Workshop Overview
Objectives
• Discuss governance and norms
• Establish Council priorities for FY 2023-24
• Strengthen teamwork
Agenda
• Welcome from the Mayor and Call to Order
• Public Comments
• Comments from the City Manager
• Review of Agenda
• Discussion of What Makes for Effective Councils
• Introduction and Context for Priority Setting Discussion • Discussion of Issues of Importance to Councilmembers
• Establish Top Priorities Through End of FY 2023-24
• Wrap-up and Next Steps
Participants
Council
Executive Staff
• City Manager Justin Murphy
• Assistant City Manager Stephen Stolte
• City Attorney Nira Doherty
Other staff in attendance (either in person or remote):
• Deanna Chow, Assistant Community Development Director • Clay Curtin, Public Engagement Manager
• Marvin Davis, Interim Finance Director
• Judi Herren, Assistant to the City Manager / City Clerk • Brittany Mello, Administrative Services Director
• Nikki Nagaya, Deputy City Manager
• Dave Norris, Police Chief
• Sean Reinhart, Community Services & Library Director
Mayor
Jen Wolosin
Vice Mayor
Cecilia Taylor
Councilmember
Drew Combs
Councilmember
Betsy Nash
Councilmember
Maria Doerr
Page I-5.8
City Council Workshop
Workshop Report Baker Tilly
3 Workshop Preparation
In preparation for the workshop, Steve held interviews with each Councilmember to learn about their priorities for the coming year and hear feedback about some of the City’s recent accomplishments and challenges.
Steve prepared an agenda and PowerPoint presentation along with handout materials to guide discussions during the session.
Opening Comments
The workshop began with a welcome and call to order by Mayor Jen Wolosin. Then Mayor Wolosin invited public comment. There were twentyone public speakers present in the Council Chambers and via zoom who shared their comments regarding projects and priorities they would like to see the City focus on over the next fiscal year.
Following public comment, City Manager Justin Murphy offered remarks about the importance of the day’s discussions and how the day’s approach differed from previous priority setting workshops by focusing on broad areas and issues rather than a long list of projects. The City Manager expressed his hope that this would be the first step towards a strategic planning effort for the City.
Steve reviewed the workshop agenda, objectives, suggested ground rules, and explained the “bike rack” time management tool. There were no items added to the bike rack during the workshop.
Good Governance and Roles and Responsibilities
In advance of the workshop, Councilmembers received an article on high performance governance from the Institute for Local Government (ILG). Steve referred to the article and asked Councilmembers to share what resonated with them. Participants noted the importance of teamwork and indicated that the article provided a good foundation for the workshop.
Page I-5.9
City Council Workshop
Workshop Report Baker Tilly
4 Figure 2. ILG Article Highlights
The group then discussed Council norms as shown in Figure 3. Steve explained that norms are agreed upon standards of behavior and practices and that many city councils have adopted norms for governance. Topics discussed included the following:
▪ The Council likes the idea of establishing a set of norms and could explore this in the future.
▪ A time limit for Council meetings, perhaps set in meeting protocols, may be beneficial as Council meetings often run late.
▪ Meeting procedures or a Council handbook with procedures would be helpful.
Page I-5.10
City Council Workshop
Workshop Report Baker Tilly
5 Figure 3. Typical Council Norms
Introduction and Context for Priority Setting Discussions The group then moved to the priority setting portion of the workshop.
Comments were made regarding the importance of priority setting. Steve introduced the “big rocks” concept, (based on Stephen Covey’s work) summarized in the slide below, which Council found to be helpful in setting context for priorities. Steve also reviewed how management’s time is typically spent, which is in running the day-to-day operations of the City.
Figure 4. Big Rocks
Page I-5.11
City Council Workshop
Workshop Report Baker Tilly
6 The Council then reviewed some key accomplishments of the City. These are listed in the slide below. When considering the list, Councilmembers mentioned that reestablishing programs and public engagement coming out of the pandemic was an accomplishment as well.
Figure 5. Key Accomplishments Highlighted by Councilmembers Financial Outlook
City Manager Justin Murphy provided a high-level financial overview for the Councilmembers. He explained that several of the General Fund’s major revenue sources have started to recover from the economic downturn related to the COVID-19 pandemic. However, there remains much uncertainty regarding the economy. The City Manager indicated that the staff is in the process of updating its General Fund financial forecast and that the staff will present this at an upcoming Council meeting.
Page I-5.12
City Council Workshop
Workshop Report Baker Tilly
7 Key Challenges
The discussion then focused on key challenges facing the City. Figure 6 is the slide shown at the workshop that contains challenges highlighted by Councilmembers in their pre-workshop planning interviews. Council’s comments included the following:
• Some of the identified challenges should be viewed as opportunities • We should focus on what will actually impact Menlo Park • Understand what priorities will have a macro impact overall • ”Meeting fatigue” is also a challenge (e.g., late meetings) • Create “enabling conditions” through ordinances
• Respect positions and embrace different ways to view an issue • City Council may try and influence challenges that are out of City Council control
• City Council will set a large umbrella for policy initiatives and goals and staff will work on objectives for those initiatives and goals Figure 6. Key Challenges Identified by Councilmembers in Interviews Prior Council Priorities and Work Plan
Before discussing issues of importance to Councilmembers, the Assistant City Manager, with the assistance of a handout, updated the Council as to the status of its prior priorities and work plan items. The Council also reviewed a list of significant Council directed projects and items that will require an allocation of staff time.
Page I-5.13
City Council Workshop
Workshop Report Baker Tilly
8 Figure 7. Former Council Priorities and Workplan
Page I-5.14
City Council Workshop
Workshop Report Baker Tilly
9 Discussion of Issues of Importance to Councilmembers
Councilmembers had the opportunity to discuss topics of importance to each of them that were identified through the interview process to understand their respective perspectives before creating consensus on top priorities. They also received a report from the Assistant City Manager regarding community input that was received in advance of the workshop.
Each Councilmember was given an opportunity to talk about what was important to him/her and why it should be a top priority for the next fiscal year.
The facilitator went through each of the eight items on the priorities list, asking the Council why the issue was important. There was robust discussion of the issues. The facilitator asked the Council to stay focused on the big picture and avoid the temptation to jump to solutions for each issue.
The priorities discussed are listed in the slide below.
Page I-5.15
City Council Workshop
Workshop Report Baker Tilly
10 Councilmembers discussed each priority. Highlights of comments follow. • Emergency Preparedness
o Leverage the San Mateo County Office of emergency
preparedness
o Determine best practices
o Include volunteer groups already in existence
o Determine the scale of resident impact from local
emergencies
o Incorporate the local hazard mitigation plan
o Determine how effective plans are
o Tally how many disasters have occurred in Menlo
Park
• Activating Downtown
o Include economic development
o Invest in downtown
o Revitalize businesses in all the districts
o Update downtown aesthetics
o Find an Economic Development Director to help all
businesses throughout the city with a focus in
downtown
o Look at vacancy rates and what City levers can
encourage people to rent vacant businesses
o Revisit downtown specific plan zoning
• Safe Streets
o Include a street maintenance piece in day-to-day
management of municipal services
o Update the transit master plan
• Advancing Equity
o Get funds (grants, etc.) to help resource needs across the community
o This is something that needs to be happening
• Organizational Effectiveness
o Important to fill key staff positions
• Community Engagement
o There’s been improvement but more work needs to be
done
Page I-5.16
City Council Workshop
Workshop Report Baker Tilly
11 Top Priorities Through End of FY 2023-24
After discussing the eight City Council priority areas, Councilmembers participated in a dot voting exercise to identify their highest priorities for the next fiscal year. Councilmembers were each provided with dots to select their highest priorities. They were instructed to not place more than one dot on a single item. The following table represents the voting results for each priority. Five priorities emerged with three or more dots.
Table 1. Dot Voting Results
Next Steps
Following the establishment of the top five priorities for FY 2023-24, the City Manager will incorporate these into a budget and work with departments to develop a work plan to further efforts in these areas as a next step.
Staying on Track with the Priorities
Following the dot exercise, the group discussed how to stay on track with these priorities. The group spent time discussing what happens when there is a need to modify the plan when there is new funding or a disaster, consistent with the slide shown below. It was determined that in this scenario, staff would reassess it based on the situation.
A comment was made that triaging issues is an important way to stay on track and that some items should be first discussed as a policy issue prior to using commissions or having staff dedicate time to an issue.
Council Priorities Votes
Housing 4
Emergency Preparedness 3
Climate Action 3
Activating Downtown/Economic Development 3
Safe Streets 3
Advancing Equity 2
Community Engagement 2
Organizational Effectiveness 0
Page I-5.17
City Council Workshop
Workshop Report Baker Tilly
12 Figure 8. Best Practice Criteria for Adding Initiatives and Projects Mid-Cycle Wrap-up and Next Steps
To wrap up, the facilitator summarized key agreements from the day. He explained that Baker Tilly would prepare this summary report. The City Manager will work with his staff to develop work plans with objectives to further the Council’s chosen priorities.
The Council expressed appreciation for the day, an opportunity to begin a conversation about strategic planning, and having a different format for discussing priorities than in prior years.
Page I-5.18
Administrative Services
City of Menlo Park 701 Laurel St., Menlo Park, CA 94025 tel 650-330-6600 menlopark.gov
STAFF REPORT
City Council
Meeting Date: 5/9/2023
Staff Report Number: 23-114-CC
Consent Calendar: Receive and file the investment portfolio as of March 31
Recommendation
At its’ April 20 meeting, the Finance and Audit Committee (FAC) recommended that the City Council receive and file the City’s investment portfolio report as of March 31.
Policy Issues
The City and the Successor Agency funds are invested in full compliance with the City’s investment policy and State law, which emphasize safety, liquidity and yield.
Background
The City’s investment policy requires a quarterly investment report to the City Council, which includes all financial investments of the City, and provides information on the investment type, value and yield for all securities.
Analysis
Investment portfolio as of March 31
The City’s investment portfolio’s fair value basis as of March 31, totaled $188,022,434. As shown below in Table 1, the City’s investments by type are measured by the amortized cost as well as the fair value as of March 31. The Local Agency Investment Fund (LAIF), managed by the California State Treasurer, is considered a safe investment, as it provides the liquidity of a money market fund. The remaining securities are prudent and range from short to longer-term investments (1-5 years), bearing higher interest rates for longer maturities.
AGENDA ITEM I-6 Page I-6.1
Staff Report #: 23-114-CC
City of Menlo Park 701 Laurel St., Menlo Park, CA 94025 tel 650-330-6600 menlopark.gov Table 1: Recap of investments held as of March 31
Security Amortized cost basis Fair value basis % of portfolio LAIF $10,058,128 $10,058,128 5%
Securities portfolio
Cash $1,296,879 $1,296,879 0.7%
Corporate bonds $49,753,626 $48,479,266 26%
Government agencies $61,074,428 $60,198,011 32%
Government bonds $69,685,031 $67,990,149 36%
Short Term Bills, Notes $0 $0 0%
Total $191,868,092 $188,022,434 100%
As shown in Table 1, the fair value of the City’s securities was $3.8 million less than the amortized cost as of March 31. The difference between amortized cost and fair value is referred to as an unrealized loss or gain, and is due to market values fluctuating from one period to another. When securities fair values are less than amortized cost, it generally signals that interest rates are rising. It is important to note that any unrealized loss or gain does not represent an actual cash transaction to the City, as the City generally holds securities to maturity to avoid market risk. The consolidated portfolio report for the quarter ending March 31, is included as Attachment A, and each component is described in detail below.
Local Agency Investment Fund (LAIF)
As previously shown in Table 1, 5% of the portfolio resides in the City’s account at the LAIF, a liquid fund managed by the California State Treasurer, yielding 2.83% for the quarter ended March 31. LAIF yields have fluctuated greatly over recent years, gradually increasing from historic lows following the Great Recession, then falling rapidly during the course of the COVID-19 public health emergency. To take advantage of fixed security rising interest rates, staff has moved a significant amount of the balance in LAIF and Union Bank to longer-term securities. Staff developed a cash flow model with the City’s consultant, Insight Investments, and established an overall liquid balance between LAIF and Union Bank.
Securities portfolio
As of March 31, the City held a number of securities in corporate bonds, government agency notes and government bonds, which reflect a diversified mix in terms of type but all at low risk. Insight Investment serves as the City’s financial adviser on security investments and makes recommended trades, purchases, and sale of securities that align market conditions to the City Council-adopted investment policy to the greatest extent possible. The Insight Investments quarterly statement for the period ended March 31, is provided in Attachment B, and includes the positions the City held as of March 31, along with maturities, purchases and transactions. The FAC recommended rating of the City’s corporate investments based on an Environmental, Social, Governance (ESG) scale. Attachment C outlines these investments relative to a scale of 1 – 5, one being the best investment. The overall score changed from 2.69 to 3.0. With a score of
3.0 being average, the City’s investments are in line with the average.
Performance comparison
As specified in the City’s investment policy, the performance of the portfolio is measured against the benchmark of a treasury bond. In the quarter ending March 31, the City’s portfolio returned a weighted average of 2.55% having a weighted average maturity of 2.06 years. The average two Year Treasury note Page I-6.2
Staff Report #: 23-114-CC
City of Menlo Park 701 Laurel St., Menlo Park, CA 94025 tel 650-330-6600 menlopark.gov saw a yield of 2.15%, or 0.40% lower than the City’s portfolio performance. Primary factors influencing the City’s portfolio are supply chain problems associated with the pandemic, Russia’s military conflict with Ukraine, and Federal Reserve fiscal management policy.
Impact on City Resources
Considering LAIF as well as Union Bank, the City has sufficient funds available to meet its expenditure requirements for the next six months.
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. City summary portfolio report for the quarter ended March 31 B. City detailed portfolio report for the quarter ended March 31 C. City ESG rating as of March 31
Report prepared by:
Adrian Patino, Management Analyst II
Reviewed by:
Marvin Davis, Interim Finance Director
Brittany Mello, Administrative Services Director
Page I-6.3
City Managed Assets % Return
LAIF $ 10,058,128 5% 2.83%
Total Internally Managed $ 10,058,128 5% Weighted Average Yield 2.83%
Days
Effective Average Duration ‐ Internal 1
Weighted Average Maturity ‐ Internal 1
Advisor Managed Assets % Return
Cash $ 1,296,879 1% 3.00%
Treasury Securities $ 67,990,149 36% 2.34%
Instrumentality Securities $ 60,198,011 32% 3.07%
Corporate Bonds $ 48,479,266 26% 2.11%
Total Externally Managed $ 177,964,306 95% Weighted Average Yield 2.53%
Years
Effective Average Duration ‐ External 2.04
Weighted Average Maturity ‐ External 2.18
Total Portfolio Assets % Return
LAIF $ 10,058,128 5% 2.83%
Cash $ 1,296,879 1% 3.00%
Treasury Securities $ 67,990,149 36% 2.34%
Instrumentality Securities $ 60,198,011 32% 3.07%
Corporate Bonds $ 48,479,266 26% 2.11%
Total Portfolio Assets $ 188,022,434
Weighted Average Yield 2.55%
Years
Effective Average Duration ‐ Total 1.93
Weighted Average Maturity ‐ Total 2.06
Portfolio Change
Beginning Balance
Ending Balance
* Note: All data for external assets was provided by the client and is believed to be accurate.
Insight Investment does not manage the external assets and this report is provided for the client's use.
Market values are presented.
$ 188,022,434
$ 178,065,744
Quarterly Consolidated Portfolio Report
March 31, 2023
City of Menlo Park
LAIF, 5%
Cash, 1%
Treasury
Securities, 36%
Instrumentality
Securities, 32%
Corporate
Bonds, 26%
LAIF
5%
Cash
1%
Treasury
Securities
36%
Instrumentality
Securities
32%
Corporate Bonds
26%
ATTACHMENT A Page I-6.4
FOR PROFESSIONAL CLIENTS ONLY
NOT TO BE REPRODUCED WITHOUT PRIOR WRITTEN APPROVALPLEASE REFER TO ALL RISK DISCLOSURES AT THE BACK OF THIS DOCUMENTCITY OF MENLO PARKMarch 2023 Page I-6.5
ATTACHMENT
B
Contents
Fixed income market review 3Activity and performance summary 4Recap of securities held 6Maturity distribution of securities held 7Securities held 8GASB 40 - Deposit and investment risk disclosure 17Securities purchased 24Securities sold and matured 25Detail of return and interest received 26Transaction report 32Additional information 34 Page I-6.6
FIXED INCOME MARKET REVIEW
As of March 31, 2023
CITY OF MENLO PARK
Chart 1: The use of the Fed’s “discount window” liquidity facility spikedSource: Federal Reserve, March 31, 2023Chart 2: Core services inflation showed no signs of flaggingSource: Bureau of Labor Statistics, Insight calculations, March 31, 2023 Economic Indicators and Monetary Policy
The market became concerned about the health of the banking sector. Silicon Valley Bankbecame the largest bank failure since Lehman Brothers in 2008, with Signature Bank failingthe same weekend, given depositor concerns. All deposits, including those uninsured by theFDIC, were protected, but other banks, principally First Republic, drew market attention. TheFederal Reserve (Fed) introduced a new liquidity facility to address interest rate risks on bankbalance sheets, and the use of its existing “discount window” facility spiked to even higherlevels than in 2008 (Chart 1). Concerns spilled over to Europe, and regulators engineering atakeover of Credit Suisse by UBS through an all-share sale, while Credit Suisse’s AT1 bondinstruments were written off.The FOMC raised the Fed Funds rate by 0.25%, taking The Fed Funds rate to a 4.75%-5% range.Market probabilities going into the meeting were finely balanced between a hike and a pause.The Fed addressed banking sector concerns stating The US banking system is sound and resilientbut tighter credit conditionsmay result. The Feds dot plotremained largely unchanged, projecting a year-end 2023 Fed Funds Rate of 5.125%. Elsewhere, the Fed slightlylowered its growth projections for both 2023 and 2024 (from 0.5% and 1.6% to 0.4% and 1.2%respectively). Chair Powell signalled the central bank would look to its liquidity facilities toaddress banking sector issues, while maintaining a tight interest policy to target inflation.CPI and Core CPI edged down to 6.0% and 5.5% year-on-year respectively, the lowest sincethe tail-end of 2021, albeit still representing a relatively slow rate of descent (Chart 2). TheFed s closely-watched supercore inflation measure (core services excluding housing) continued to run strong at 6.1% year-on-year. Meanwhile, shelter inflation was once again thelargest contributor and showed no signs of slowing yet it was up 8.1% year-on-year.
Nonfarm payrolls rose by 311,000, stronger than consensus expectations at 225,000. Techlayoffs started to show up in the data as Information sector was the largest detractor withemployment falling by 25,000. Wage growth edged up slightly from 4.4% to 4.6%. Theunemployment rate rose to 3.6% from 3.4%, partly due to an uptick in the participation rate.Interest Rate Summary Yields fell across the curve due to the banking sector developments. At the end of March, the3-month US Treasury bill yielded 4.80%, the 6-month US Treasury bill yielded 4.91%, the 2-yearUS Treasury note yielded 4.03%, the 5-year US Treasury note yielded 3.58% and the 10-yearUS Treasury note yielded 3.47%.
Page I-6.7
3 ACTIVITY AND PERFORMANCE SUMMARY
For the period March 1, 2023 - March 31, 2023
CITY OF MENLO PARK
Amortized Cost Basis Activity Summary
Opening balance 179,434,166.11
Income received 265,112.84
Total receipts 265,112.84
Total disbursements 0.00
Interportfolio transfers 2,000,000.00
Total Interportfolio transfers 2,000,000.00
Realized gain (loss) 0.00Change in accruals from security movement 0.00 Total amortization expense (54,162.28)
Total OID/MKT accretion income 164,847.07
Return of capital 0.00
Closing balance 181,809,963.74
Ending fair value 177,964,306.19
Unrealized gain (loss) (3,845,657.55)
Comparative Rates of Return (%)
* Twelve
month trailing
* Six
month trailing
* One month
Fed Funds 2.76 2.01 0.39
Overnight Repo 2.73 2.01 0.39
Merrill Lynch 3m US Treas Bill 3.00 2.09 0.38
Merrill Lynch 6m US Treas Bill 3.32 2.19 0.39
ML 1 Year US Treasury Note 3.73 2.31 0.39
ML 2 Year US Treasury Note 3.70 2.15 0.36
ML 5 Year US Treasury Note 3.35 1.83 0.32
* rates reflected are cumulative
Summary of Amortized Cost Basis Return for the Period
Total portfolio
Interest earned 295,985.76Accretion (amortization) 110,684.79Realized gain (loss) on sales 0.00Total income on portfolio 406,670.55Average daily amortized cost 180,362,685.85Period return (%)Weighted average final maturity in days 797YTD return (%) Detail of Amortized Cost Basis Return
Interest
earned
Realized
gain (loss)
Accretion
(amortization)
Total
income
Cash and Cash Equivalents 280.89 0.00 0.00 280.89Corporate Bonds 118,557.91 (22,545.22) 0.00 96,012.69Government Agencies 117,739.99 50,534.08 0.00 168,274.07Government Bonds 59,406.97 82,695.93 0.00 142,102.90 Total 295,985.76 110,684.79 0.00 406,670.55
0.220.62
Page I-6.8 4
ACTIVITY AND PERFORMANCE SUMMARY
For the period March 1, 2023 - March 31, 2023
CITY OF MENLO PARK
Fair Value Basis Activity Summary
Opening balance 173,129,506.67
Income received 265,112.84
Total receipts 265,112.84
Total disbursements 0.00
Interportfolio transfers 2,000,000.00
Total Interportfolio transfers 2,000,000.00
Unrealized gain (loss) on security movements 0.00Change in accruals from security movement 0.00Return of capital 0.00Change in fair value for the period 2,569,686.68 Ending fair value 177,964,306.19
Comparative Rates of Return (%)
* Twelve
month trailing
* Six
month trailing
* One month
Fed Funds 2.76 2.01 0.39
Overnight Repo 2.73 2.01 0.39
ICE Bofa 3 Months US T-BILL 2.50 1.93 0.43
ICE Bofa 6m US Treas Bill 2.61 2.13 0.54
ICE Bofa 1 Yr US Treasury Note 1.02 2.01 0.87
ICE BofA US Treasury 1-3 0.20 2.30 1.60
ICE BofA US Treasury 1-5 (0.38) 2.78 1.98
* rates reflected are cumulative
Detail of Fair Value Basis Return
Interest
earned
Change in
fair value
Total
income
Cash and Cash Equivalents 280.89 0.00 280.89
Corporate Bonds 118,557.91 522,342.29 640,900.20Government Agencies 117,739.99 881,085.81 998,825.80Government Bonds 59,406.97 1,166,258.58 1,225,665.55Total 295,985.76 2,569,686.68 2,865,672.44 Summary of Fair Value Basis Return for the Period
Total portfolio
Interest earned 295,985.76Total income on portfolio 2,865,672.44Average daily total value * 176,269,282.10Period return (%) 1.65Weighted average final maturity in days 797Change in fair value 2,569,686.68YTD return (%) 1.63* Total value equals market value and accrued interest Page I-6.9 5
RECAP OF SECURITIES HELD
As of March 31, 2023
CITY OF MENLO PARK
Weighted
average
final
maturity (days)
Weighted
average
effective
duration (years)
Percent
of
portfolio
Amortized
cost
Historical
cost
Fair value Unrealized
gain (loss)
Cash and Cash Equivalents 1,296,879.45 1,296,879.45 1,296,879.45 0.00 1 0.71 0.00Corporate Bonds 50,587,305.13 49,753,625.81 48,479,266.42 (1,274,359.39) 726 27.80 1.76Government Agencies 60,872,616.54 61,074,427.83 60,198,011.07 (876,416.76) 822 33.46 2.12Government Bonds 69,195,147.03 69,685,030.65 67,990,149.25 (1,694,881.40) 843 38.03 2.22Total 181,951,948.15 181,809,963.74 177,964,306.19 (3,845,657.55) 797 100.00 2.04 Cash and Cash EquivalentsCorporate BondsGovernment AgenciesGovernment Bonds Portfolio diversification (%)
Cash and Cash Equivalents 0.71Corporate Bonds 27.80Government Agencies 33.46Government Bonds 38.03 Portfolio diversification (%)
Page I-6.10
6 MATURITY DISTRIBUTION OF SECURITIES HELD
As of March 31, 2023
CITY OF MENLO PARK
Maturity Historic cost PercentUnder 90 days 2,281,720.36 1.2590 to 179 days 9,198,208.45 5.06180 days to 1 year 30,344,659.52 16.681 to 2 years 38,653,051.66 21.242 to 3 years 41,732,941.35 22.943 to 4 years 49,259,949.22 27.074 to 5 years 10,481,417.59 5.76Over 5 years 0.00 0.00 181,951,948.15 100.00
Maturity distribution
0.00 10.0020.0030.0040.0050.00
Historical cost (mm)
Under 90 days
90 to 179 days
180 days to 1 year
1 to 2 years
2 to 3 years
3 to 4 years
4 to 5 years
Over 5 years
Page I-6.11 7
SECURITIES HELD
As of March 31, 2023
CITY OF MENLO PARK
Amortized cost Fair value Unrealized
gain
(loss)
Coupon Maturity/
Call date
Cusip Historical cost Total
accrued
interest
%
Portcost
Par value or
shares
Description
Cash and Cash Equivalents
Cash and Cash Equivalents 0.000 1,296,879.45 1,296,879.45 1,296,879.45 1,296,879.45 0.00 0.00 0.71 Total Cash and Cash Equivalents 1,296,879.45 1,296,879.45 1,296,879.45 1,296,879.45 0.00 0.00 0.71Corporate Bonds369550BD9 3.375 05/15/2023 984,840.91 943,459.79 (2,393.85) 12,023.25 04/15/2023
GENERAL DYNAMICS CORP 3.375% 15MAY2023 943,000.00 941,065.94 0.54(CALLABLE 17APR23) 459200HP9 IBM CORP 3.375% 01AUG2023 3.375 08/01/2023 1,000,000.00 1,061,840.00 1,010,030.35 993,608.32 (16,422.03) 5,625.00 0.58742718EB1 PROCTER & GAMBLE CO/THE 3.1% 15AUG2023 3.100 08/15/2023 1,000,000.00 1,041,328.13 1,003,757.10 996,615.49 (7,141.61) 3,961.11 0.5789236THA6 TOYOTA MOTOR CREDIT CORP 1.35% 25AUG2023 1.350 08/25/2023 1,000,000.00 1,021,010.00 1,003,546.51 983,563.15 (19,983.36) 1,350.00 0.5624422EUM9 JOHN DEERE CAPITAL CORP 3.65% 12OCT2023 3.650 10/12/2023 950,000.00 1,005,926.50 957,324.62 942,198.87 (15,125.75) 16,277.99 0.5514913R2S5 CATERPILLAR FINL SERVICE 0.95% 10JAN2024 0.950 01/10/2024 1,000,000.00 993,070.00 997,239.83 969,672.94 (27,566.89) 2,137.50 0.5589236THU2 TOYOTA MOTOR CREDIT CORP 0.45% 11JAN2024 0.450 01/11/2024 1,800,000.00 1,797,858.00 1,799,273.94 1,736,322.97 (62,950.97) 1,800.00 0.9902665WCT6 AMERICAN HONDA FINANCE 3.55% 12JAN2024 3.550 01/12/2024 1,000,000.00 1,090,440.00 1,023,506.06 988,127.81 (35,378.25) 7,790.28 0.6024422EVN6 JOHN DEERE CAPITAL CORP 0.45% 17JAN2024 0.450 01/17/2024 800,000.00 787,240.00 794,842.08 773,366.26 (21,475.82) 740.00 0.4317325FAS7 3.650 01/23/2024 1,618,310.00 1,533,853.63 (54,426.20) 10,341.67 12/23/2023
CITIBANK NA 3.65% 23JAN2024 (CALLABLE 23DEC23) 1,500,000.00 1,479,427.43 0.89 Page I-6.12
8 SECURITIES HELD
As of March 31, 2023
CITY OF MENLO PARK
Amortized cost Fair value Unrealized
gain
(loss)
Coupon Maturity/
Call date
Cusip Historical cost Total
accrued
interest
%
Portcost
Par value or
shares
Description
Corporate Bonds693475AV7 3.500 01/23/2024 1,047,210.00 1,007,813.86 (26,621.19) 6,611.11 12/24/2023
PNC FINANCIAL SERVICES 3.5% 23JAN2024 (CALLABLE 1,000,000.00 981,192.67 0.5823DEC23) 91159HHV5 3.375 02/05/2024 1,067,060.00 1,021,877.73 (40,956.76) 5,250.00 01/05/2024
US BANCORP 3.375% 05FEB2024 (CALLABLE 05JAN24) 1,000,000.00 980,920.97 0.59 594918BX1 2.875 02/06/2024 993,734.40 965,255.64 (19,556.25) 4,216.67 12/06/2023
MICROSOFT CORP 2.875% 06FEB2024 (CALLABLE 960,000.00 945,699.39 0.5506DEC23) 24422EUX5 JOHN DEERE CAPITAL CORP 2.6% 07MAR2024 2.600 03/07/2024 1,450,000.00 1,476,419.00 1,455,399.15 1,418,954.21 (36,444.94) 2,513.33 0.81459200JY8 IBM CORP 3% 15MAY2024 3.000 05/15/2024 2,000,000.00 2,141,300.00 2,050,331.13 1,962,984.74 (87,346.39) 22,666.67 1.18 14913R2L0 CATERPILLAR FINL SERVICE 0.45% 17MAY2024 0.450 05/17/2024 1,600,000.00 1,597,536.00 1,599,076.57 1,527,174.66 (71,901.91) 2,680.00 0.8846647PBQ8 1.514 06/01/2024 2,042,800.00 2,002,708.30 (15,376.20) 10,093.33 06/01/2023
JPMORGAN CHASE & CO 1.514% 01JUN2024 (CALLABLE 2,000,000.00 1,987,332.10 1.1201JUN23) 06051GHL6 3.864 07/23/2024 1,605,540.00 1,515,058.11 (23,560.02) 10,948.00 07/23/2023
BANK OF AMERICA CORP 3.864% 23JUL2024 (CALLABLE 1,500,000.00 1,491,498.09 0.8823JUL23) 693506BQ9 2.400 08/15/2024 2,012,600.00 2,003,540.18 (67,229.24) 6,133.33 07/15/2024
PPG INDUSTRIES INC 2.4% 15AUG2024 (CALLABLE 2,000,000.00 1,936,310.94 1.1115JUL24) 89236TGL3 TOYOTA MOTOR CREDIT CORP 2% 07OCT2024 2.000 10/07/2024 1,000,000.00 999,410.00 999,811.16 962,017.95 (37,793.21) 9,666.67 0.5569353REF1 3.300 10/30/2024 2,737,590.00 2,599,885.54 (173,797.34) 34,375.00 09/30/2024
PNC BANK NA 3.3% 30OCT2024 (CALLABLE 30SEP24) 2,500,000.00 2,426,088.20 1.50 14913Q3B3 CATERPILLAR FINL SERVICE 2.15% 08NOV2024 2.150 11/08/2024 1,000,000.00 1,048,770.00 1,021,371.54 963,492.05 (57,879.49) 8,540.28 0.58 Page I-6.13
9 SECURITIES HELD
As of March 31, 2023
CITY OF MENLO PARK
Amortized cost Fair value Unrealized
gain
(loss)
Coupon Maturity/
Call date
Cusip Historical cost Total
accrued
interest
%
Portcost
Par value or
shares
Description
Corporate Bonds931142DV2 2.650 12/15/2024 1,595,520.00 1,547,503.23 (87,384.97) 11,704.17 10/15/2024
WALMART INC 2.65% 15DEC2024 (CALLABLE 15OCT24) 1,500,000.00 1,460,118.26 0.88 90331HMS9 2.800 01/27/2025 995,210.00 996,865.51 (39,924.65) 4,977.78 12/27/2024
US BANK NA CINCINNATI 2.8% 27JAN2025 (CALLABLE 1,000,000.00 956,940.86 0.5527DEC24) 437076BM3 3.000 04/01/2026 2,948,280.00 2,958,026.04 (49,745.22) 45,000.00 01/01/2026
HOME DEPOT INC 3% 01APR2026 (CALLABLE 01JAN26) 3,000,000.00 2,908,280.82 1.62 46625HRS1 3.200 06/15/2026 1,437,795.00 1,441,253.66 (3,857.94) 14,133.33 03/15/2026
JPMORGAN CHASE & CO 3.2% 15JUN2026 (CALLABLE 1,500,000.00 1,437,395.72 0.7915MAR26) 91159HHN3 2.375 07/22/2026 1,912,040.00 1,926,370.56 (91,659.72) 9,104.17 06/22/2026
US BANCORP 2.375% 22JUL2026 (CALLABLE 22JUN26) 2,000,000.00 1,834,710.84 1.05 594918BR4 2.400 08/08/2026 1,939,660.00 1,949,381.44 (45,946.66) 7,066.67 05/08/2026
MICROSOFT CORP 2.4% 08AUG2026 (CALLABLE 2,000,000.00 1,903,434.78 1.0708MAY26) 88579YAV3 2.250 09/19/2026 1,906,760.00 1,921,366.13 (75,333.59) 1,500.00 06/19/2026
3M COMPANY 2.25% 19SEP2026 (CALLABLE 19JUN26) 2,000,000.00 1,846,032.54 1.05 713448DN5 2.375 10/06/2026 967,260.00 972,330.55 (29,226.39) 11,545.14 07/06/2026
PEPSICO INC 2.375% 06OCT2026 (CALLABLE 06JUL26) 1,000,000.00 943,104.16 0.53 437076CA8 2.500 04/15/2027 1,104,228.00 1,112,469.69 13,983.62 13,833.33 02/15/2027
HOME DEPOT INC 2.5% 15APR2027 (CALLABLE 1,200,000.00 1,126,453.31 0.6115FEB27) 037833CR9 3.200 05/11/2027 2,062,439.19 2,069,498.48 (1,662.83) 26,394.67 02/11/2027
APPLE INC 3.2% 11MAY2027 (CALLABLE 11FEB27) 2,121,000.00 2,067,835.65 1.13 037833DB3 2.900 09/12/2027 947,060.00 950,316.41 6,840.09 1,530.56 06/12/2027
APPLE INC 2.9% 12SEP2027 (CALLABLE 12JUN27) 1,000,000.00 957,156.50 0.52 02665WED9 AMERICAN HONDA FINANCE 4.7% 12JAN2028 4.700 01/12/2028 1,000,000.00 1,005,620.00 1,005,574.68 1,009,711.62 4,136.94 10,313.89 0.55 Page I-6.14
10 SECURITIES HELD
As of March 31, 2023
CITY OF MENLO PARK
Amortized cost Fair value Unrealized
gain
(loss)
Coupon Maturity/
Call date
Cusip Historical cost Total
accrued
interest
%
Portcost
Par value or
shares
Description
Corporate Bonds194162AR4 4.600 03/01/2028 1,593,600.00 1,593,706.61 46,749.60 6,133.33 02/01/2028
COLGATE-PALMOLIVE CO 4.6% 01MAR2028 (CALLABLE 1,600,000.00 1,640,456.21 0.8801FEB28) Total Corporate Bonds 49,924,000.00 50,587,305.13 49,753,625.81 48,479,266.42 (1,274,359.39) 348,978.23 27.80 Government Agencies3135G0U43 FANNIE MAE 2.875% 12SEP2023 2.875 09/12/2023 2,000,000.00 2,081,960.00 2,008,752.49 1,981,937.36 (26,815.13) 3,034.72 1.143133EKVB9 FEDERAL FARM CREDIT BANK 1.86% 17OCT2023 1.860 10/17/2023 2,000,000.00 1,993,956.00 1,999,218.21 1,969,493.00 (29,725.21) 16,946.67 1.10 3133EKKU9 FEDERAL FARM CREDIT BANK 2.3% 08NOV2023 2.300 11/08/2023 1,500,000.00 1,524,645.00 1,503,404.70 1,478,580.21 (24,824.49) 13,704.17 0.84 3130AB3H7 FEDERAL HOME LOAN BANK 2.375% 08MAR2024 2.375 03/08/2024 2,000,000.00 2,045,380.00 2,009,059.92 1,959,752.10 (49,307.82) 3,034.72 1.123133EMTD4 FEDERAL FARM CREDIT BANK 0.37% 15MAR2024 0.370 03/15/2024 2,000,000.00 1,998,000.00 1,999,364.64 1,917,250.68 (82,113.96) 328.89 1.10 (CALLABLE 12APR23)
3133EMBE1 FEDERAL FARM CREDIT BANK 0.3% 28MAR2024 0.300 03/28/2024 2,000,000.00 1,998,500.00 1,999,574.15 1,913,258.38 (86,315.77) 50.00 1.10 (CALLABLE 12APR23)
3133EKNX0 FEDERAL FARM CREDIT BANK 2.16% 03JUN2024 2.160 06/03/2024 1,000,000.00 1,012,070.00 1,002,871.55 974,013.37 (28,858.18) 7,080.00 0.563135G0V75 FANNIE MAE 1.75% 02JUL2024 1.750 07/02/2024 2,000,000.00 1,982,440.00 1,995,575.74 1,929,607.70 (65,968.04) 8,652.78 1.093130AKX84 0.270 08/23/2024 999,500.00 999,801.50 (57,368.52) 285.00 05/23/2023
FEDERAL HOME LOAN BANK 0.27% 23AUG2024 1,000,000.00 942,432.98 0.55(CALLABLE 23MAY23) 3130ATT31 FEDERAL HOME LOAN BANK 4.5% 03OCT2024 4.500 10/03/2024 3,000,000.00 2,989,410.00 2,991,442.90 3,006,397.20 14,954.30 57,375.00 1.64 Page I-6.15
11 SECURITIES HELD
As of March 31, 2023
CITY OF MENLO PARK
Amortized cost Fair value Unrealized
gain
(loss)
Coupon Maturity/
Call date
Cusip Historical cost Total
accrued
interest
%
Portcost
Par value or
shares
Description
Government Agencies3137EAEP0 FREDDIE MAC 1.5% 12FEB2025 1.500 02/12/2025 3,000,000.00 2,881,764.00 2,915,112.62 2,855,691.60 (59,421.02) 6,125.00 1.58 3130AJHU6 FEDERAL HOME LOAN BANK 0.5% 14APR2025 0.500 04/14/2025 1,405,000.00 1,297,447.25 1,320,927.88 1,306,877.99 (14,049.89) 3,258.82 0.713135G03U5 FANNIE MAE 0.625% 22APR2025 0.625 04/22/2025 5,300,000.00 4,905,758.00 4,995,796.63 4,927,716.45 (68,080.18) 14,630.21 2.70 3134GVB31 0.750 05/28/2025 1,556,894.00 1,575,183.33 969.17 4,356.25 05/28/2023
FREDDIE MAC 0.75% 28MAY2025 (CALLABLE 28MAY23) 1,700,000.00 1,576,152.50 0.86#0002 3130ASG86 FEDERAL HOME LOAN BANK 3.375% 13JUN2025 3.375 06/13/2025 2,000,000.00 2,008,540.00 2,006,474.40 1,961,261.36 (45,213.04) 20,250.00 1.10 3133ENB74 FEDERAL FARM CREDIT BANK 3.15% 21JUL2025 3.150 07/21/2025 3,000,000.00 2,993,700.00 2,995,170.39 2,941,050.45 (54,119.94) 18,375.00 1.65 3135G05X7 FANNIE MAE 0.375% 25AUG2025 0.375 08/25/2025 2,000,000.00 1,838,268.89 1,879,086.08 1,831,069.78 (48,016.30) 750.00 1.013130AL7C2 0.500 08/25/2025 2,000,000.00 2,000,000.00 (162,343.02) 1,000.00 05/25/2023
FEDERAL HOME LOAN BANK 0.5% 25AUG2025 2,000,000.00 1,837,656.98 1.10(CALLABLE 25MAY23) 3137EAEX3 FREDDIE MAC 0.375% 23SEP2025 0.375 09/23/2025 4,000,000.00 3,584,696.00 3,634,614.31 3,654,419.48 19,805.17 333.33 1.97 3133ENP95 FEDERAL FARM CREDIT BANK 4.25% 30SEP2025 4.250 09/30/2025 3,000,000.00 3,005,673.00 3,004,736.27 3,013,641.99 8,905.72 0.00 1.65 3135G0K36 FANNIE MAE 2.125% 24APR2026 2.125 04/24/2026 3,000,000.00 2,891,100.00 2,911,858.06 2,849,640.99 (62,217.07) 27,802.08 1.59 3133ENV72 FEDERAL FARM CREDIT BANK 4.5% 27JUL2026 4.500 07/27/2026 2,000,000.00 1,997,520.00 1,997,796.17 2,031,679.46 33,883.29 16,000.00 1.10 Page I-6.16
12 SECURITIES HELD
As of March 31, 2023
CITY OF MENLO PARK
Amortized cost Fair value Unrealized
gain
(loss)
Coupon Maturity/
Call date
Cusip Historical cost Total
accrued
interest
%
Portcost
Par value or
shares
Description
Government Agencies3133ENH45 FEDERAL FARM CREDIT BANK 3.125% 24AUG2026 3.125 08/24/2026 4,000,000.00 3,944,044.00 3,952,162.30 3,898,725.12 (53,437.18) 12,847.22 2.17 3130AQF65 FEDERAL HOME LOAN BANK 1.25% 21DEC2026 1.250 12/21/2026 4,000,000.00 3,572,880.00 3,608,497.66 3,642,733.88 34,236.22 13,888.89 1.96 3130ATUS4 FEDERAL HOME LOAN BANK 4.25% 10DEC2027 4.250 12/10/2027 2,100,000.00 2,110,781.40 2,110,495.72 2,133,312.30 22,816.58 36,443.75 1.16 3133EN5N6 FEDERAL FARM CREDIT BANK 4% 06JAN2028 4.000 01/06/2028 1,650,000.00 1,657,689.00 1,657,450.21 1,663,657.76 6,207.55 15,583.33 0.91 Total Government Agencies 62,655,000.00 60,872,616.54 61,074,427.83 60,198,011.07 (876,416.76) 302,135.83 33.46 Government Bonds912828S35 USA TREASURY 1.375% 30JUN2023 1.375 06/30/2023 1,000,000.00 984,492.19 999,036.72 992,063.32 (6,973.40) 3,418.51 0.54 912828Y61 USA TREASURY 2.75% 31JUL2023 2.750 07/31/2023 1,000,000.00 1,040,468.75 1,003,643.68 993,398.44 (10,245.24) 4,482.04 0.579128282D1 USA TREASURY 1.375% 31AUG2023 1.375 08/31/2023 2,000,000.00 1,967,109.38 1,996,704.48 1,972,578.12 (24,126.36) 2,316.58 1.089128285D8 USA TREASURY 2.875% 30SEP2023 2.875 09/30/2023 1,000,000.00 1,041,679.69 1,011,435.36 991,289.06 (20,146.30) 0.00 0.5791282CAP6 USA TREASURY 0.125% 15OCT2023 0.125 10/15/2023 1,500,000.00 1,493,203.13 1,498,403.58 1,463,496.09 (34,907.49) 860.23 0.8291282CDD0 USA TREASURY 0.375% 31OCT2023 0.375 10/31/2023 2,000,000.00 1,981,803.58 1,993,962.74 1,951,093.76 (42,868.98) 3,128.45 1.099128285P1 USA TREASURY 2.875% 30NOV2023 2.875 11/30/2023 1,800,000.00 1,881,216.97 1,826,888.66 1,778,414.06 (48,474.60) 17,202.61 1.03 Page I-6.17
13 SECURITIES HELD
As of March 31, 2023
CITY OF MENLO PARK
Amortized cost Fair value Unrealized
gain
(loss)
Coupon Maturity/
Call date
Cusip Historical cost Total
accrued
interest
%
Portcost
Par value or
shares
Description
Government Bonds912828V23 USA TREASURY 2.25% 31DEC2023 2.250 12/31/2023 1,000,000.00 1,019,261.16 1,003,221.91 981,914.06 (21,307.85) 5,593.92 0.56 91282CBM2 USA TREASURY 0.125% 15FEB2024 0.125 02/15/2024 1,500,000.00 1,489,746.09 1,496,592.64 1,441,523.43 (55,069.21) 227.90 0.829128286R6 USA TREASURY 2.25% 30APR2024 2.250 04/30/2024 1,000,000.00 1,023,050.23 1,005,766.20 975,312.50 (30,453.70) 9,385.36 0.5691282CCC3 USA TREASURY 0.25% 15MAY2024 0.250 05/15/2024 2,000,000.00 1,997,116.08 1,998,900.47 1,907,187.50 (91,712.97) 1,878.45 1.10912828XT2 USA TREASURY 2% 31MAY2024 2.000 05/31/2024 2,000,000.00 2,101,803.58 2,037,185.74 1,943,906.24 (93,279.50) 13,296.70 1.16 912828Y87 USA TREASURY 1.75% 31JUL2024 1.750 07/31/2024 2,000,000.00 2,087,272.33 2,034,625.12 1,931,562.50 (103,062.62) 5,704.42 1.15 9128282U3 USA TREASURY 1.875% 31AUG2024 1.875 08/31/2024 1,000,000.00 1,012,382.81 1,003,693.49 966,054.69 (37,638.80) 1,579.48 0.5691282CCX7 USA TREASURY 0.375% 15SEP2024 0.375 09/15/2024 1,700,000.00 1,696,685.38 1,698,387.97 1,606,167.97 (92,220.00) 277.17 0.93912828YY0 USA TREASURY 1.75% 31DEC2024 1.750 12/31/2024 2,000,000.00 2,093,281.25 2,045,959.48 1,918,750.00 (127,209.48) 8,701.66 1.15 912828ZF0 USA TREASURY 0.5% 31MAR2025 0.500 03/31/2025 3,000,000.00 2,798,906.25 2,852,705.88 2,798,085.93 (54,619.95) 0.00 1.54 91282CAM3 USA TREASURY 0.25% 30SEP2025 0.250 09/30/2025 3,000,000.00 2,740,205.36 2,798,939.63 2,745,351.57 (53,588.06) 0.00 1.51 91282CAT8 USA TREASURY 0.25% 31OCT2025 0.250 10/31/2025 3,000,000.00 2,733,408.49 2,792,137.81 2,735,273.43 (56,864.38) 3,128.45 1.50 Page I-6.18
14 SECURITIES HELD
As of March 31, 2023
CITY OF MENLO PARK
Amortized cost Fair value Unrealized
gain
(loss)
Coupon Maturity/
Call date
Cusip Historical cost Total
accrued
interest
%
Portcost
Par value or
shares
Description
Government Bonds91282CAZ4 USA TREASURY 0.375% 30NOV2025 0.375 11/30/2025 3,000,000.00 2,739,853.80 2,795,778.95 2,736,562.50 (59,216.45) 3,739.70 1.51 91282CBC4 USA TREASURY 0.375% 31DEC2025 0.375 12/31/2025 2,300,000.00 2,071,445.21 2,110,291.98 2,096,414.07 (13,877.91) 2,144.34 1.1491282CBH3 USA TREASURY 0.375% 31JAN2026 0.375 01/31/2026 3,000,000.00 2,725,205.36 2,780,798.43 2,723,320.32 (57,478.11) 1,833.56 1.5091282CBQ3 USA TREASURY 0.5% 28FEB2026 0.500 02/28/2026 3,000,000.00 2,732,939.74 2,785,828.93 2,726,601.57 (59,227.36) 1,263.59 1.5091282CBT7 USA TREASURY 0.75% 31MAR2026 0.750 03/31/2026 3,000,000.00 2,748,642.86 2,796,237.11 2,744,648.43 (51,588.68) 0.00 1.51 91282CCF6 USA TREASURY 0.75% 31MAY2026 0.750 05/31/2026 3,000,000.00 2,721,328.12 2,764,826.14 2,728,828.14 (35,998.00) 7,479.40 1.5091282CCJ8 USA TREASURY 0.875% 30JUN2026 0.875 06/30/2026 3,000,000.00 2,747,470.99 2,792,271.70 2,735,507.82 (56,763.88) 6,526.24 1.5191282CCP4 USA TREASURY 0.625% 31JUL2026 0.625 07/31/2026 2,000,000.00 1,816,334.83 1,845,933.76 1,804,062.50 (41,871.26) 2,037.29 1.009128282A7 USA TREASURY 1.5% 15AUG2026 1.500 08/15/2026 2,000,000.00 1,896,334.83 1,913,284.16 1,856,328.12 (56,956.04) 3,646.41 1.0491282CCW9 USA TREASURY 0.75% 31AUG2026 0.750 08/31/2026 2,000,000.00 1,823,053.58 1,850,973.65 1,807,500.00 (43,473.65) 1,263.59 1.0091282CCZ2 USA TREASURY 0.875% 30SEP2026 0.875 09/30/2026 5,000,000.00 4,557,790.19 4,629,332.40 4,528,125.00 (101,207.40) 0.00 2.50 91282CDG3 USA TREASURY 1.125% 31OCT2026 1.125 10/31/2026 2,000,000.00 1,846,647.33 1,869,888.60 1,824,140.62 (45,747.98) 9,385.36 1.01 Page I-6.19
15 SECURITIES HELD
As of March 31, 2023
CITY OF MENLO PARK
Amortized cost Fair value Unrealized
gain
(loss)
Coupon Maturity/
Call date
Cusip Historical cost Total
accrued
interest
%
Portcost
Par value or
shares
Description
Government Bonds91282CDK4 USA TREASURY 1.25% 30NOV2026 1.250 11/30/2026 2,000,000.00 1,855,397.33 1,876,894.80 1,829,531.24 (47,363.56) 8,310.44 1.02 91282CDQ1 USA TREASURY 1.25% 31DEC2026 1.250 12/31/2026 2,700,000.00 2,473,980.47 2,504,496.67 2,466,281.25 (38,215.42) 8,390.88 1.36912828Z78 USA TREASURY 1.5% 31JAN2027 1.500 01/31/2027 1,400,000.00 1,255,629.69 1,270,001.81 1,288,875.00 18,873.19 3,422.65 0.69 Total Government Bonds 72,900,000.00 69,195,147.03 69,685,030.65 67,990,149.25 (1,694,881.40) 140,625.38 38.03Grand total 186,775,879.45 181,951,948.15 181,809,963.74 (3,845,657.55) 177,964,306.19 791,739.44 100.00 Page I-6.20
16 GASB 40 - DEPOSIT AND INVESTMENT RISK DISCLOSURE
As of March 31, 2023
CITY OF MENLO PARK
Cusip S&P
rating
Moody
rating
Historical
cost
% Portfolio
hist cost
Market
value
% Portfolio
mkt value
Effective
dur (yrs)
Description Coupon Maturity
date
Call date Par value or
shares
United States Treasury Note/Bond912828S35 USA TREASURY 1.375% 1.375 06/30/2023 AA+ Aaa 1,000,000.00 984,492.19 0.54 992,063.32 0.56 0.25 912828Y61 USA TREASURY 2.75% 2.750 07/31/2023 AA+ Aaa 1,000,000.00 1,040,468.75 0.57 993,398.44 0.56 0.33 9128282D1 USA TREASURY 1.375% 1.375 08/31/2023 AA+ Aaa 2,000,000.00 1,967,109.38 1.08 1,972,578.12 1.11 0.41 9128285D8 USA TREASURY 2.875% 2.875 09/30/2023 AA+ Aaa 1,000,000.00 1,041,679.69 0.57 991,289.06 0.56 0.49 91282CAP6 USA TREASURY 0.125% 0.125 10/15/2023 AA+ Aaa 1,500,000.00 1,493,203.13 0.82 1,463,496.09 0.82 0.53 91282CDD0 USA TREASURY 0.375% 0.375 10/31/2023 AA+ Aaa 2,000,000.00 1,981,803.58 1.09 1,951,093.76 1.10 0.57 9128285P1 USA TREASURY 2.875% 2.875 11/30/2023 AA+ Aaa 1,800,000.00 1,881,216.97 1.03 1,778,414.06 1.00 0.65 912828V23 USA TREASURY 2.25% 2.250 12/31/2023 AA+ Aaa 1,000,000.00 1,019,261.16 0.56 981,914.06 0.55 0.74 91282CBM2 USA TREASURY 0.125% 0.125 02/15/2024 AA+ Aaa 1,500,000.00 1,489,746.09 0.82 1,441,523.43 0.81 0.86 9128286R6 USA TREASURY 2.25% 2.250 04/30/2024 AA+ Aaa 1,000,000.00 1,023,050.23 0.56 975,312.50 0.55 1.04 91282CCC3 USA TREASURY 0.25% 0.250 05/15/2024 AA+ Aaa 2,000,000.00 1,997,116.08 1.10 1,907,187.50 1.07 1.09 912828XT2 USA TREASURY 2% 2.000 05/31/2024 AA+ Aaa 2,000,000.00 2,101,803.58 1.16 1,943,906.24 1.09 1.12912828Y87 USA TREASURY 1.75% 1.750 07/31/2024 AA+ Aaa 2,000,000.00 2,087,272.33 1.15 1,931,562.50 1.09 1.29 9128282U3 USA TREASURY 1.875% 1.875 08/31/2024 AA+ Aaa 1,000,000.00 1,012,382.81 0.56 966,054.69 0.54 1.37 91282CCX7 USA TREASURY 0.375% 0.375 09/15/2024 AA+ Aaa 1,700,000.00 1,696,685.38 0.93 1,606,167.97 0.90 1.42 912828YY0 USA TREASURY 1.75% 1.750 12/31/2024 AA+ Aaa 2,000,000.00 2,093,281.25 1.15 1,918,750.00 1.08 1.69 912828ZF0 USA TREASURY 0.5% 0.500 03/31/2025 AA+ Aaa 3,000,000.00 2,798,906.25 1.54 2,798,085.93 1.57 1.94 91282CAM3 USA TREASURY 0.25% 0.250 09/30/2025 AA+ Aaa 3,000,000.00 2,740,205.36 1.51 2,745,351.57 1.54 2.43 91282CAT8 USA TREASURY 0.25% 0.250 10/31/2025 AA+ Aaa 3,000,000.00 2,733,408.49 1.50 2,735,273.43 1.54 2.51 91282CAZ4 USA TREASURY 0.375% 0.375 11/30/2025 AA+ Aaa 3,000,000.00 2,739,853.80 1.51 2,736,562.50 1.54 2.59 91282CBC4 USA TREASURY 0.375% 0.375 12/31/2025 AA+ Aaa 2,300,000.00 2,071,445.21 1.14 2,096,414.07 1.18 2.67 91282CBH3 USA TREASURY 0.375% 0.375 01/31/2026 AA+ Aaa 3,000,000.00 2,725,205.36 1.50 2,723,320.32 1.53 2.75 91282CBQ3 USA TREASURY 0.5% 0.500 02/28/2026 AA+ Aaa 3,000,000.00 2,732,939.74 1.50 2,726,601.57 1.53 2.82 91282CBT7 USA TREASURY 0.75% 0.750 03/31/2026 AA+ Aaa 3,000,000.00 2,748,642.86 1.51 2,744,648.43 1.54 2.90 91282CCF6 USA TREASURY 0.75% 0.750 05/31/2026 AA+ Aaa 3,000,000.00 2,721,328.12 1.50 2,728,828.14 1.53 3.05 Page I-6.21
17 GASB 40 - DEPOSIT AND INVESTMENT RISK DISCLOSURE
As of March 31, 2023
CITY OF MENLO PARK
Cusip S&P
rating
Moody
rating
Historical
cost
% Portfolio
hist cost
Market
value
% Portfolio
mkt value
Effective
dur (yrs)
Description Coupon Maturity
date
Call date Par value or
shares
United States Treasury Note/Bond91282CCJ8 USA TREASURY 0.875% 0.875 06/30/2026 AA+ Aaa 3,000,000.00 2,747,470.99 1.51 2,735,507.82 1.54 3.12 91282CCP4 USA TREASURY 0.625% 0.625 07/31/2026 AA+ Aaa 2,000,000.00 1,816,334.83 1.00 1,804,062.50 1.01 3.22 9128282A7 USA TREASURY 1.5% 1.500 08/15/2026 AA+ Aaa 2,000,000.00 1,896,334.83 1.04 1,856,328.12 1.04 3.21 91282CCW9 USA TREASURY 0.75% 0.750 08/31/2026 AA+ Aaa 2,000,000.00 1,823,053.58 1.00 1,807,500.00 1.02 3.30 91282CCZ2 USA TREASURY 0.875% 0.875 09/30/2026 AA+ Aaa 5,000,000.00 4,557,790.19 2.50 4,528,125.00 2.54 3.37 91282CDG3 USA TREASURY 1.125% 1.125 10/31/2026 AA+ Aaa 2,000,000.00 1,846,647.33 1.01 1,824,140.62 1.03 3.42 91282CDK4 USA TREASURY 1.25% 1.250 11/30/2026 AA+ Aaa 2,000,000.00 1,855,397.33 1.02 1,829,531.24 1.03 3.49 91282CDQ1 USA TREASURY 1.25% 1.250 12/31/2026 AA+ Aaa 2,700,000.00 2,473,980.47 1.36 2,466,281.25 1.39 3.57 912828Z78 USA TREASURY 1.5% 1.500 01/31/2027 AA+ Aaa 1,400,000.00 1,255,629.69 0.69 1,288,875.00 0.72 3.64 Issuer total 72,900,000.00 69,195,147.03 38.03 67,990,149.25 38.20 2.22Federal Farm Credit Banks Funding Corp3133EKVB9 FEDERAL FARM CREDIT 1.860 10/17/2023 AA+ Aaa 2,000,000.00 1,993,956.00 1.10 1,969,493.00 1.11 0.53 3133EKKU9 FEDERAL FARM CREDIT 2.300 11/08/2023 AA+ Aaa 1,500,000.00 1,524,645.00 0.84 1,478,580.21 0.83 0.59 3133EMTD4 FEDERAL FARM CREDIT 0.370 03/15/2024 AA+ Aaa 2,000,000.00 1,998,000.00 1.10 1,917,250.68 1.08 0.94 3133EMBE1 FEDERAL FARM CREDIT 0.300 03/28/2024 AA+ Aaa 2,000,000.00 1,998,500.00 1.10 1,913,258.38 1.08 0.97 3133EKNX0 FEDERAL FARM CREDIT 2.160 06/03/2024 AA+ Aaa 1,000,000.00 1,012,070.00 0.56 974,013.37 0.55 1.13 3133ENB74 FEDERAL FARM CREDIT 3.150 07/21/2025 AA+ Aaa 3,000,000.00 2,993,700.00 1.65 2,941,050.45 1.65 2.18 3133ENP95 FEDERAL FARM CREDIT 4.250 09/30/2025 AA+ Aaa 3,000,000.00 3,005,673.00 1.65 3,013,641.99 1.69 2.34 3133ENV72 FEDERAL FARM CREDIT 4.500 07/27/2026 AA+ Aaa 2,000,000.00 1,997,520.00 1.10 2,031,679.46 1.14 3.03 3133ENH45 FEDERAL FARM CREDIT 3.125 08/24/2026 AA+ Aaa 4,000,000.00 3,944,044.00 2.17 3,898,725.12 2.19 3.17 3133EN5N6 FEDERAL FARM CREDIT 4.000 01/06/2028 AA+ Aaa 1,650,000.00 1,657,689.00 0.91 1,663,657.76 0.93 4.24 Issuer total 22,150,000.00 22,125,797.00 12.16 21,801,350.42 12.25 2.08Federal Home Loan Banks3130AB3H7 FEDERAL HOME LOAN 2.375 03/08/2024 AA+ Aaa 2,000,000.00 2,045,380.00 1.12 1,959,752.10 1.10 0.91 Page I-6.22
18 GASB 40 - DEPOSIT AND INVESTMENT RISK DISCLOSURE
As of March 31, 2023
CITY OF MENLO PARK
Cusip S&P
rating
Moody
rating
Historical
cost
% Portfolio
hist cost
Market
value
% Portfolio
mkt value
Effective
dur (yrs)
Description Coupon Maturity
date
Call date Par value or
shares
Federal Home Loan Banks3130AKX84 FEDERAL HOME LOAN 0.270 08/23/2024 05/23/2023 AA+ Aaa 1,000,000.00 999,500.00 0.55 942,432.98 0.53 1.363130ATT31 FEDERAL HOME LOAN 4.500 10/03/2024 AA+ Aaa 3,000,000.00 2,989,410.00 1.64 3,006,397.20 1.69 1.41 3130AJHU6 FEDERAL HOME LOAN 0.500 04/14/2025 AA+ Aaa 1,405,000.00 1,297,447.25 0.71 1,306,877.99 0.73 1.97 3130ASG86 FEDERAL HOME LOAN 3.375 06/13/2025 AA+ Aaa 2,000,000.00 2,008,540.00 1.10 1,961,261.36 1.10 2.07 3130AL7C2 FEDERAL HOME LOAN 0.500 08/25/2025 05/25/2023 AA+ Aaa 2,000,000.00 2,000,000.00 1.10 1,837,656.98 1.03 2.283130AQF65 FEDERAL HOME LOAN 1.250 12/21/2026 AA+ Aaa 4,000,000.00 3,572,880.00 1.96 3,642,733.88 2.05 3.54 3130ATUS4 FEDERAL HOME LOAN 4.250 12/10/2027 AA+ Aaa 2,100,000.00 2,110,781.40 1.16 2,133,312.30 1.20 4.13 Issuer total 17,505,000.00 17,023,938.65 9.36 16,790,424.79 9.43 2.35Federal National Mortgage Association3135G0U43 FANNIE MAE 2.875% 2.875 09/12/2023 AA+ Aaa 2,000,000.00 2,081,960.00 1.14 1,981,937.36 1.11 0.44 3135G0V75 FANNIE MAE 1.75% 1.750 07/02/2024 AA+ Aaa 2,000,000.00 1,982,440.00 1.09 1,929,607.70 1.08 1.213135G03U5 FANNIE MAE 0.625% 0.625 04/22/2025 AA+ Aaa 5,300,000.00 4,905,758.00 2.70 4,927,716.45 2.77 1.99 3135G05X7 FANNIE MAE 0.375% 0.375 08/25/2025 AA+ Aaa 2,000,000.00 1,838,268.89 1.01 1,831,069.78 1.03 2.33 3135G0K36 FANNIE MAE 2.125% 2.125 04/24/2026 AA+ Aaa 3,000,000.00 2,891,100.00 1.59 2,849,640.99 1.60 2.88 Issuer total 14,300,000.00 13,699,526.89 7.53 13,519,972.28 7.60 1.88Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corp3137EAEP0 FREDDIE MAC 1.5% 1.500 02/12/2025 AA+ Aaa 3,000,000.00 2,881,764.00 1.58 2,855,691.60 1.60 1.803134GVB31 FREDDIE MAC 0.75% 0.750 05/28/2025 05/28/2023 AA+ Aaa 1,700,000.00 1,556,894.00 0.86 1,576,152.50 0.89 2.013137EAEX3 FREDDIE MAC 0.375% 0.375 09/23/2025 AA+ Aaa 4,000,000.00 3,584,696.00 1.97 3,654,419.48 2.05 2.41 Issuer total 8,700,000.00 8,023,354.00 4.41 8,086,263.58 4.54 2.11 Home Depot Inc/The437076BM3 HOME DEPOT INC 3% 3.000 04/01/2026 01/01/2026 A A2 3,000,000.00 2,948,280.00 1.62 2,908,280.82 1.63 2.72 Page I-6.23
19 GASB 40 - DEPOSIT AND INVESTMENT RISK DISCLOSURE
As of March 31, 2023
CITY OF MENLO PARK
Cusip S&P
rating
Moody
rating
Historical
cost
% Portfolio
hist cost
Market
value
% Portfolio
mkt value
Effective
dur (yrs)
Description Coupon Maturity
date
Call date Par value or
shares
Home Depot Inc/The437076CA8 HOME DEPOT INC 2.5% 2.500 04/15/2027 02/15/2027 A A2 1,200,000.00 1,104,228.00 0.61 1,126,453.31 0.63 3.67 Issuer total 4,200,000.00 4,052,508.00 2.23 4,034,734.13 2.27 2.98 Toyota Motor Credit Corp89236THA6 TOYOTA MOTOR CREDIT 1.350 08/25/2023 A+ A1 1,000,000.00 1,021,010.00 0.56 983,563.15 0.55 0.39 89236THU2 TOYOTA MOTOR CREDIT 0.450 01/11/2024 A+ A1 1,800,000.00 1,797,858.00 0.99 1,736,322.97 0.98 0.76 89236TGL3 TOYOTA MOTOR CREDIT 2.000 10/07/2024 A+ A1 1,000,000.00 999,410.00 0.55 962,017.95 0.54 1.45 Issuer total 3,800,000.00 3,818,278.00 2.10 3,681,904.07 2.07 0.84 Caterpillar Financial Services Corp14913R2S5 CATERPILLAR FINL 0.950 01/10/2024 A A2 1,000,000.00 993,070.00 0.55 969,672.94 0.54 0.7614913R2L0 CATERPILLAR FINL 0.450 05/17/2024 A A2 1,600,000.00 1,597,536.00 0.88 1,527,174.66 0.86 1.1014913Q3B3 CATERPILLAR FINL 2.150 11/08/2024 A A2 1,000,000.00 1,048,770.00 0.58 963,492.05 0.54 1.53 Issuer total 3,600,000.00 3,639,376.00 2.00 3,460,339.65 1.94 1.13 JPMorgan Chase & Co46647PBQ8 JPMORGAN CHASE & CO 1.514 06/01/2024 06/01/2023 A- A1 2,000,000.00 2,042,800.00 1.12 1,987,332.10 1.12 0.1746625HRS1 JPMORGAN CHASE & CO 3.200 06/15/2026 03/15/2026 A- A1 1,500,000.00 1,437,795.00 0.79 1,437,395.72 0.81 2.88 Issuer total 3,500,000.00 3,480,595.00 1.91 3,424,727.82 1.92 1.29 John Deere Capital Corp24422EUM9 JOHN DEERE CAPITAL 3.650 10/12/2023 A A2 950,000.00 1,005,926.50 0.55 942,198.87 0.53 0.51 24422EVN6 JOHN DEERE CAPITAL 0.450 01/17/2024 A A2 800,000.00 787,240.00 0.43 773,366.26 0.43 0.78 24422EUX5 JOHN DEERE CAPITAL 2.600 03/07/2024 A A2 1,450,000.00 1,476,419.00 0.81 1,418,954.21 0.80 0.91 Issuer total 3,200,000.00 3,269,585.50 1.80 3,134,519.34 1.76 0.76 Page I-6.24
20 GASB 40 - DEPOSIT AND INVESTMENT RISK DISCLOSURE
As of March 31, 2023
CITY OF MENLO PARK
Cusip S&P
rating
Moody
rating
Historical
cost
% Portfolio
hist cost
Market
value
% Portfolio
mkt value
Effective
dur (yrs)
Description Coupon Maturity
date
Call date Par value or
shares
Apple Inc037833CR9 APPLE INC 3.2% 3.200 05/11/2027 02/11/2027 AA+ Aaa 2,121,000.00 2,062,439.19 1.13 2,067,835.65 1.16 3.65037833DB3 APPLE INC 2.9% 2.900 09/12/2027 06/12/2027 AA+ Aaa 1,000,000.00 947,060.00 0.52 957,156.50 0.54 4.01 Issuer total 3,121,000.00 3,009,499.19 1.65 3,024,992.15 1.70 3.76 International Business Machines Corp459200HP9 IBM CORP 3.375% 3.375 08/01/2023 A- A3 1,000,000.00 1,061,840.00 0.58 993,608.32 0.56 0.33459200JY8 IBM CORP 3% 3.000 05/15/2024 A- A3 2,000,000.00 2,141,300.00 1.18 1,962,984.74 1.10 1.07Issuer total 3,000,000.00 3,203,140.00 1.76 2,956,593.06 1.66 0.82Microsoft Corp594918BX1 MICROSOFT CORP 2.875% 2.875 02/06/2024 12/06/2023 AAA Aaa 960,000.00 993,734.40 0.55 945,699.39 0.53 0.80594918BR4 MICROSOFT CORP 2.4% 2.400 08/08/2026 05/08/2026 AAA Aaa 2,000,000.00 1,939,660.00 1.07 1,903,434.78 1.07 3.08 Issuer total 2,960,000.00 2,933,394.40 1.61 2,849,134.17 1.60 2.31 US Bancorp91159HHV5 US BANCORP 3.375% 3.375 02/05/2024 01/05/2024 A+ A2 1,000,000.00 1,067,060.00 0.59 980,920.97 0.55 0.8291159HHN3 US BANCORP 2.375% 2.375 07/22/2026 06/22/2026 A+ A2 2,000,000.00 1,912,040.00 1.05 1,834,710.84 1.03 3.07 Issuer total 3,000,000.00 2,979,100.00 1.64 2,815,631.81 1.58 2.26 PNC Bank NA69353REF1 PNC BANK NA 3.3% 3.300 10/30/2024 09/30/2024 A A2 2,500,000.00 2,737,590.00 1.50 2,426,088.20 1.36 1.47 Issuer total 2,500,000.00 2,737,590.00 1.50 2,426,088.20 1.36 1.47 American Honda Finance Corp02665WCT6 AMERICAN HONDA 3.550 01/12/2024 A- A3 1,000,000.00 1,090,440.00 0.60 988,127.81 0.56 0.7602665WED9 AMERICAN HONDA 4.700 01/12/2028 A- A3 1,000,000.00 1,005,620.00 0.55 1,009,711.62 0.57 4.18 Issuer total 2,000,000.00 2,096,060.00 1.15 1,997,839.43 1.12 2.40 Page I-6.25
21 GASB 40 - DEPOSIT AND INVESTMENT RISK DISCLOSURE
As of March 31, 2023
CITY OF MENLO PARK
Cusip S&P
rating
Moody
rating
Historical
cost
% Portfolio
hist cost
Market
value
% Portfolio
mkt value
Effective
dur (yrs)
Description Coupon Maturity
date
Call date Par value or
shares
PPG Industries Inc693506BQ9 PPG INDUSTRIES INC 2.4% 2.400 08/15/2024 07/15/2024 BBB+ A3 2,000,000.00 2,012,600.00 1.11 1,936,310.94 1.09 1.31 Issuer total 2,000,000.00 2,012,600.00 1.11 1,936,310.94 1.09 1.31 3M Co88579YAV3 3M COMPANY 2.25% 2.250 09/19/2026 06/19/2026 A A1 2,000,000.00 1,906,760.00 1.05 1,846,032.54 1.04 3.22 Issuer total 2,000,000.00 1,906,760.00 1.05 1,846,032.54 1.04 3.22 Colgate-Palmolive Co194162AR4 COLGATE-PALMOLIVE CO 4.600 03/01/2028 02/01/2028 AA- Aa3 1,600,000.00 1,593,600.00 0.88 1,640,456.21 0.92 4.30 Issuer total 1,600,000.00 1,593,600.00 0.88 1,640,456.21 0.92 4.30 Bank of America Corp06051GHL6 BANK OF AMERICA CORP 3.864 07/23/2024 07/23/2023 A- A2 1,500,000.00 1,605,540.00 0.88 1,491,498.09 0.84 0.31Issuer total 1,500,000.00 1,605,540.00 0.88 1,491,498.09 0.84 0.31Citibank NA17325FAS7 CITIBANK NA 3.65% 3.650 01/23/2024 12/23/2023 A+ Aa3 1,500,000.00 1,618,310.00 0.89 1,479,427.43 0.83 0.78 Issuer total 1,500,000.00 1,618,310.00 0.89 1,479,427.43 0.83 0.78 Walmart Inc931142DV2 WALMART INC 2.65% 2.650 12/15/2024 10/15/2024 AA Aa2 1,500,000.00 1,595,520.00 0.88 1,460,118.26 0.82 1.58 Issuer total 1,500,000.00 1,595,520.00 0.88 1,460,118.26 0.82 1.58 Cash and Cash Equivalents
INVESTED CASH 0.000 1,296,879.45 1,296,879.45 0.00 1,296,879.45 0.73 0.00 Issuer total 1,296,879.45 1,296,879.45 0.00 1,296,879.45 0.73 0.00 Page I-6.26
22 GASB 40 - DEPOSIT AND INVESTMENT RISK DISCLOSURE
As of March 31, 2023
CITY OF MENLO PARK
Cusip S&P
rating
Moody
rating
Historical
cost
% Portfolio
hist cost
Market
value
% Portfolio
mkt value
Effective
dur (yrs)
Description Coupon Maturity
date
Call date Par value or
shares
Procter & Gamble Co/The742718EB1 PROCTER & GAMBLE 3.100 08/15/2023 AA- Aa3 1,000,000.00 1,041,328.13 0.57 996,615.49 0.56 0.37 Issuer total 1,000,000.00 1,041,328.13 0.57 996,615.49 0.56 0.37 PNC Financial Services Group Inc/The693475AV7 PNC FINANCIAL 3.500 01/23/2024 12/24/2023 A- A3 1,000,000.00 1,047,210.00 0.58 981,192.67 0.55 0.78 Issuer total 1,000,000.00 1,047,210.00 0.58 981,192.67 0.55 0.78 US Bank NA/Cincinnati OH90331HMS9 US BANK NA CINCINNATI 2.800 01/27/2025 12/27/2024 AA- A1 1,000,000.00 995,210.00 0.55 956,940.86 0.54 1.72 Issuer total 1,000,000.00 995,210.00 0.55 956,940.86 0.54 1.72 PepsiCo Inc713448DN5 PEPSICO INC 2.375% 2.375 10/06/2026 07/06/2026 A+ A1 1,000,000.00 967,260.00 0.53 943,104.16 0.53 3.20 Issuer total 1,000,000.00 967,260.00 0.53 943,104.16 0.53 3.20 General Dynamics Corp369550BD9 GENERAL DYNAMICS 3.375 05/15/2023 04/15/2023 A- A3 943,000.00 984,840.91 0.54 941,065.94 0.53 0.12 Issuer total 943,000.00 984,840.91 0.54 941,065.94 0.53 0.12 Grand total 186,775,879.45 181,951,948.15 100.00 177,964,306.19 100.00 2.04 Page I-6.27
23 SECURITIES PURCHASED
For the period March 1, 2023 - March 31, 2023
CITY OF MENLO PARK
Par value or
shares
Unit cost Accrued
interest
Trade date
Settle date
Coupon Maturity/
Call date
Principal
cost
Cusip Description / Broker
Corporate Bonds194162AR4 03/01/2023 4.600 03/01/2028 1,600,000.00 99.60 (1,593,600.00) (1,022.22) 03/06/2023 02/01/2028
COLGATE-PALMOLIVE CO 4.6%J.P. MORGAN SECURITIES LLC
02665WED9 03/17/2023 4.700 01/12/2028 1,000,000.00 100.56 (1,005,620.00) (9,008.33) 03/21/2023
AMERICAN HONDA FINANCE 4.7%BARCLAYS CAPITAL
Total Corporate Bonds 2,600,000.00 (2,599,220.00) (10,030.55) Grand total Grand total 2,600,000.00 (2,599,220.00) (10,030.55) Page I-6.28
24 SECURITIES SOLD AND MATURED
For the period March 1, 2023 - March 31, 2023
CITY OF MENLO PARK
Historical cost Amortized cost
at sale or
maturity
Fair value at
sale or
maturity
Realized
gain
(loss)
Trade date Coupon Price
Settle date
Maturity/
Call date
Par value or
shares
Cusip Accrued
interest
sold
Description / Broker
Corporate Bonds06051GHF9 03/06/2023 3.550 (1,500,000.00) 1,606,050.00 1,500,000.00 0.00 1,500,000.00 0.00 0.00 03/06/2023
BANK OF AMERICA CORP 3.55%05MAR2024 (CALLABLE 05MAR23)
Total (Corporate Bonds) (1,500,000.00) 1,606,050.00 1,500,000.00 1,500,000.00 0.00 0.00 Grand total (1,500,000.00) 1,606,050.00 1,500,000.00 1,500,000.00 0.00 0.00 Page I-6.29
25 DETAIL OF RETURN AND INTEREST RECEIVED
For the period March 1, 2023 - March 31, 2023
CITY OF MENLO PARK
Description Accretion Interest earned
(amortization)
Realized gain
(loss)
Change in fair
value
Cusip Interest received
Cash
Cash and Cash Equivalents 0.00 0.00 0.00 280.89 280.89
Total Cash 0.00 0.00 0.00 280.89 280.89
Corporate Bonds
88579YAV3 3M COMPANY 2.25% 19SEP2026 (CALLABLE 19JUN26) 1,888.72 0.00 32,601.78 4,125.00 22,500.00 02665WCT6 AMERICAN HONDA FINANCE 3.55% 12JAN2024 (2,500.65) 0.00 3,467.69 3,254.17 0.00 02665WED9 AMERICAN HONDA FINANCE 4.7% 12JAN2028 (45.32) 0.00 4,091.62 1,305.56 0.00 037833DB3 APPLE INC 2.9% 12SEP2027 (CALLABLE 12JUN27) 930.40 0.00 27,439.82 2,658.34 14,500.00 037833CR9 APPLE INC 3.2% 11MAY2027 (CALLABLE 11FEB27) 1,043.24 0.00 63,744.49 6,221.60 0.00 06051GHF9 BANK OF AMERICA CORP 3.55% 05MAR2024 (CALLABLE 05MAR23) (558.16) 0.00 195.46 1,035.42 26,625.00 06051GHL6 BANK OF AMERICA CORP 3.864% 23JUL2024 (CALLABLE 23JUL23) (3,997.72) 0.00 2,584.81 5,313.00 0.00 14913R2L0 CATERPILLAR FINL SERVICE 0.45% 17MAY2024 68.07 0.00 15,918.98 660.00 0.00 14913R2S5 CATERPILLAR FINL SERVICE 0.95% 10JAN2024 295.73 0.00 5,930.31 870.83 0.00 14913Q3B3 CATERPILLAR FINL SERVICE 2.15% 08NOV2024 (1,109.25) 0.00 10,075.64 1,970.84 0.00 17325FAS7 CITIBANK NA 3.65% 23JAN2024 (CALLABLE 23DEC23) (3,861.63) 0.00 1,260.02 5,018.75 0.00 194162AR4 COLGATE-PALMOLIVE CO 4.6% 01MAR2028 (CALLABLE 01FEB28) 106.61 0.00 46,856.21 5,111.11 0.00369550BD9 GENERAL DYNAMICS CORP 3.375% 15MAY2023 (CALLABLE 17APR23) (919.58) 0.00 1,831.58 2,917.41 0.00 437076CA8 HOME DEPOT INC 2.5% 15APR2027 (CALLABLE 15FEB27) 1,804.75 0.00 29,603.56 2,750.00 0.00 437076BM3 HOME DEPOT INC 3% 01APR2026 (CALLABLE 01JAN26) 1,164.87 0.00 77,173.68 8,250.00 0.00 459200JY8 IBM CORP 3% 15MAY2024 (3,728.24) 0.00 18,614.20 5,500.00 0.00 459200HP9 IBM CORP 3.375% 01AUG2023 (2,486.86) 0.00 1,048.28 3,093.75 0.00 Page I-6.30
26 DETAIL OF RETURN AND INTEREST RECEIVED
For the period March 1, 2023 - March 31, 2023
CITY OF MENLO PARK
Description Accretion Interest earned
(amortization)
Realized gain
(loss)
Change in fair
value
Cusip Interest received
Corporate Bonds
24422EVN6 JOHN DEERE CAPITAL CORP 0.45% 17JAN2024 539.15 0.00 6,161.45 330.00 0.00 24422EUX5 JOHN DEERE CAPITAL CORP 2.6% 07MAR2024 (480.64) 0.00 5,460.87 3,455.83 18,850.00 24422EUM9 JOHN DEERE CAPITAL CORP 3.65% 12OCT2023 (1,144.47) 0.00 671.65 3,178.55 0.00 46647PBQ8 JPMORGAN CHASE & CO 1.514% 01JUN2024 (CALLABLE 01JUN23) (1,331.95) 0.00 6,892.70 2,775.66 0.00 46625HRS1 JPMORGAN CHASE & CO 3.2% 15JUN2026 (CALLABLE 15MAR26) 1,525.88 0.00 25,182.06 4,400.00 0.00 594918BR4 MICROSOFT CORP 2.4% 08AUG2026 (CALLABLE 08MAY26) 1,257.08 0.00 48,479.92 4,400.00 0.00 594918BX1 MICROSOFT CORP 2.875% 06FEB2024 (CALLABLE 06DEC23) (640.94) 0.00 6,532.24 2,530.00 0.00 713448DN5 PEPSICO INC 2.375% 06OCT2026 (CALLABLE 06JUL26) 655.68 0.00 20,318.98 2,177.08 0.00 69353REF1 PNC BANK NA 3.3% 30OCT2024 (CALLABLE 30SEP24) (5,549.20) 0.00 3,476.65 7,333.33 0.00693475AV7 PNC FINANCIAL SERVICES 3.5% 23JAN2024 (CALLABLE 23DEC23) (891.32) 0.00 (3,109.08) 3,208.33 0.00 693506BQ9 PPG INDUSTRIES INC 2.4% 15AUG2024 (CALLABLE 15JUL24) (228.40) 0.00 19,233.18 4,400.00 0.00 742718EB1 PROCTER & GAMBLE CO/THE 3.1% 15AUG2023 (834.91) 0.00 5,452.78 2,841.67 0.00 89236THU2 TOYOTA MOTOR CREDIT CORP 0.45% 11JAN2024 77.51 0.00 9,112.68 742.50 0.00 89236THA6 TOYOTA MOTOR CREDIT CORP 1.35% 25AUG2023 (733.76) 0.00 2,147.02 1,237.50 0.00 89236TGL3 TOYOTA MOTOR CREDIT CORP 2% 07OCT2024 10.36 0.00 11,269.98 1,833.34 0.00 91159HHN3 US BANCORP 2.375% 22JUL2026 (CALLABLE 22JUN26) 1,853.09 0.00 354.70 4,354.17 0.00 91159HHV5 US BANCORP 3.375% 05FEB2024 (CALLABLE 05JAN24) (2,298.75) 0.00 (457.47) 3,093.75 0.00 90331HMS9 US BANK NA CINCINNATI 2.8% 27JAN2025 (CALLABLE 27DEC24) 143.13 0.00 (1,702.37) 2,566.67 0.00 931142DV2 WALMART INC 2.65% 15DEC2024 (CALLABLE 15OCT24) (2,567.74) 0.00 14,426.22 3,643.75 0.00 Total Corporate Bonds (22,545.22) 522,342.29 0.00 118,557.91 82,475.00 Page I-6.31
27 DETAIL OF RETURN AND INTEREST RECEIVED
For the period March 1, 2023 - March 31, 2023
CITY OF MENLO PARK
Description Accretion Interest earned
(amortization)
Realized gain
(loss)
Change in fair
value
Cusip Interest received
Government Agencies
3135G05X7 FANNIE MAE 0.375% 25AUG2025 4,193.55 0.00 32,696.66 687.50 0.00 3135G03U5 FANNIE MAE 0.625% 22APR2025 12,299.33 0.00 74,421.70 3,036.46 0.00 3135G0V75 FANNIE MAE 1.75% 02JUL2024 293.64 0.00 16,462.18 3,208.34 0.00 3135G0K36 FANNIE MAE 2.125% 24APR2026 2,395.16 0.00 56,411.91 5,843.75 0.00 3135G0U43 FANNIE MAE 2.875% 12SEP2023 (1,620.83) 0.00 6,441.16 5,270.83 28,750.00 3133EMBE1 FEDERAL FARM CREDIT BANK 0.3% 28MAR2024 (CALLABLE 12APR23) 35.69 0.00 17,158.24 550.00 3,000.00 3133EMTD4 FEDERAL FARM CREDIT BANK 0.37% 15MAR2024 (CALLABLE 12APR23) 55.25 0.00 16,711.54 678.33 3,700.00 3133EKVB9 FEDERAL FARM CREDIT BANK 1.86% 17OCT2023 119.06 0.00 10,497.30 3,410.00 0.00 3133EKNX0 FEDERAL FARM CREDIT BANK 2.16% 03JUN2024 (203.65) 0.00 8,860.31 1,980.00 0.00 3133EKKU9 FEDERAL FARM CREDIT BANK 2.3% 08NOV2023 (468.53) 0.00 7,795.00 3,162.50 0.00 3133ENH45 FEDERAL FARM CREDIT BANK 3.125% 24AUG2026 1,172.49 0.00 75,259.60 11,458.33 0.00 3133ENB74 FEDERAL FARM CREDIT BANK 3.15% 21JUL2025 174.36 0.00 45,117.57 8,662.50 0.00 3133EN5N6 FEDERAL FARM CREDIT BANK 4% 06JAN2028 (130.25) 0.00 35,034.83 6,050.00 0.00 3133ENP95 FEDERAL FARM CREDIT BANK 4.25% 30SEP2025 (157.88) 0.00 45,613.95 11,333.33 63,750.00 3133ENV72 FEDERAL FARM CREDIT BANK 4.5% 27JUL2026 55.23 0.00 36,167.58 8,250.00 0.003130AKX84 FEDERAL HOME LOAN BANK 0.27% 23AUG2024 (CALLABLE 23MAY23) 11.84 0.00 12,884.94 247.50 0.00 3130AJHU6 FEDERAL HOME LOAN BANK 0.5% 14APR2025 3,436.19 0.00 21,229.97 643.96 0.00 3130AL7C2 FEDERAL HOME LOAN BANK 0.5% 25AUG2025 (CALLABLE 25MAY23) 0.00 0.00 43,559.06 916.67 0.00 3130AQF65 FEDERAL HOME LOAN BANK 1.25% 21DEC2026 8,758.44 0.00 80,416.32 4,583.33 0.00 3130AB3H7 FEDERAL HOME LOAN BANK 2.375% 08MAR2024 (804.13) 0.00 18,908.48 4,354.16 23,750.00 Page I-6.32
28 DETAIL OF RETURN AND INTEREST RECEIVED
For the period March 1, 2023 - March 31, 2023
CITY OF MENLO PARK
Description Accretion Interest earned
(amortization)
Realized gain
(loss)
Change in fair
value
Cusip Interest received
Government Agencies
3130ASG86 FEDERAL HOME LOAN BANK 3.375% 13JUN2025 (244.93) 0.00 27,927.14 6,187.50 0.00 3130ATUS4 FEDERAL HOME LOAN BANK 4.25% 10DEC2027 (186.31) 0.00 33,525.32 8,181.25 0.00 3130ATT31 FEDERAL HOME LOAN BANK 4.5% 03OCT2024 472.77 0.00 30,915.75 12,375.00 0.00 3137EAEX3 FREDDIE MAC 0.375% 23SEP2025 12,274.99 0.00 59,591.16 1,375.00 7,500.00 3134GVB31 FREDDIE MAC 0.75% 28MAY2025 (CALLABLE 28MAY23) #0002 4,812.98 0.00 27,981.01 1,168.75 0.00 3137EAEP0 FREDDIE MAC 1.5% 12FEB2025 3,789.62 0.00 39,497.13 4,125.00 0.00 Total Government Agencies 50,534.08 0.00 881,085.81 117,739.99 130,450.00 Government Bonds
91282CBM2 USA TREASURY 0.125% 15FEB2024 329.05 0.00 11,953.11 160.57 0.00 91282CAP6 USA TREASURY 0.125% 15OCT2023 249.94 0.00 8,613.27 159.68 0.00 91282CCC3 USA TREASURY 0.25% 15MAY2024 82.93 0.00 20,781.26 428.17 0.00 91282CAM3 USA TREASURY 0.25% 30SEP2025 6,819.34 0.00 55,898.43 638.74 3,750.00 91282CAT8 USA TREASURY 0.25% 31OCT2025 6,818.76 0.00 56,132.79 642.26 0.00 91282CCX7 USA TREASURY 0.375% 15SEP2024 93.58 0.00 21,847.67 541.33 3,187.50 91282CAZ4 USA TREASURY 0.375% 30NOV2025 6,493.18 0.00 56,718.75 958.11 0.00 91282CBC4 USA TREASURY 0.375% 31DEC2025 5,845.87 0.00 44,472.66 738.61 0.00 91282CBH3 USA TREASURY 0.375% 31JAN2026 6,552.80 0.00 58,359.39 963.39 0.00 91282CDD0 USA TREASURY 0.375% 31OCT2023 874.56 0.00 12,500.00 642.26 0.00 91282CBQ3 USA TREASURY 0.5% 28FEB2026 6,234.08 0.00 59,531.25 1,263.59 0.00 912828ZF0 USA TREASURY 0.5% 31MAR2025 6,246.40 0.00 48,867.18 1,277.47 7,500.00 Page I-6.33
29 DETAIL OF RETURN AND INTEREST RECEIVED
For the period March 1, 2023 - March 31, 2023
CITY OF MENLO PARK
Description Accretion Interest earned
(amortization)
Realized gain
(loss)
Change in fair
value
Cusip Interest received
Government Bonds
91282CCP4 USA TREASURY 0.625% 31JUL2026 3,921.22 0.00 42,109.38 1,070.44 0.00 91282CCW9 USA TREASURY 0.75% 31AUG2026 3,698.81 0.00 42,343.76 1,263.59 0.00 91282CBT7 USA TREASURY 0.75% 31MAR2026 5,763.37 0.00 60,234.36 1,916.21 11,250.00 91282CCF6 USA TREASURY 0.75% 31MAY2026 6,301.12 0.00 61,523.46 1,916.21 0.00 91282CCJ8 USA TREASURY 0.875% 30JUN2026 5,425.08 0.00 61,757.82 2,247.92 0.00 91282CCZ2 USA TREASURY 0.875% 30SEP2026 8,984.12 0.00 105,078.10 3,725.96 21,875.00 91282CDG3 USA TREASURY 1.125% 31OCT2026 3,078.97 0.00 42,578.12 1,926.80 0.00 91282CDK4 USA TREASURY 1.25% 30NOV2026 2,847.95 0.00 43,046.86 2,129.12 0.00 91282CDQ1 USA TREASURY 1.25% 31DEC2026 4,420.57 0.00 58,746.09 2,890.19 0.00 912828S35 USA TREASURY 1.375% 30JUN2023 328.16 0.00 3,938.32 1,177.49 0.00 9128282D1 USA TREASURY 1.375% 31AUG2023 667.72 0.00 8,671.88 2,316.58 0.00 9128282A7 USA TREASURY 1.5% 15AUG2026 2,180.21 0.00 41,171.88 2,569.06 0.00 912828Z78 USA TREASURY 1.5% 31JAN2027 2,874.42 0.00 30,734.37 1,798.34 0.00 912828YY0 USA TREASURY 1.75% 31DEC2024 (2,222.69) 0.00 27,500.00 2,997.24 0.00 912828Y87 USA TREASURY 1.75% 31JUL2024 (2,199.55) 0.00 22,421.88 2,997.24 0.00 9128282U3 USA TREASURY 1.875% 31AUG2024 (220.62) 0.00 11,875.00 1,579.48 0.00 912828XT2 USA TREASURY 2% 31MAY2024 (2,699.67) 0.00 19,218.74 3,406.59 0.00 9128286R6 USA TREASURY 2.25% 30APR2024 (451.39) 0.00 7,773.44 1,926.80 0.00 912828V23 USA TREASURY 2.25% 31DEC2023 (363.20) 0.00 5,429.68 1,926.79 0.00 912828Y61 USA TREASURY 2.75% 31JUL2023 (925.85) 0.00 2,617.19 2,354.97 0.00 Page I-6.34
30 DETAIL OF RETURN AND INTEREST RECEIVED
For the period March 1, 2023 - March 31, 2023
CITY OF MENLO PARK
Description Accretion Interest earned
(amortization)
Realized gain
(loss)
Change in fair
value
Cusip Interest received
Government Bonds
9128285P1 USA TREASURY 2.875% 30NOV2023 (3,416.18) 0.00 7,945.31 4,407.28 0.00 9128285D8 USA TREASURY 2.875% 30SEP2023 (1,937.13) 0.00 3,867.18 2,448.49 14,375.00 Total Government Bonds 82,695.93 1,166,258.58 0.00 59,406.97 61,937.50Grand total 110,684.79 0.00 2,569,686.68 295,985.76 275,143.39 Page I-6.35
31 TRANSACTION REPORT
For the period March 1, 2023 - March 31, 2023
CITY OF MENLO PARK
Maturity Par value or
shares
Trade date Cusip Transaction Sec type Description Principal Interest Transaction totalSettle date Realized
gain(loss)
03/01/2023 (1,022.22)03/06/2023
194162AR4 Bought Corporate Bonds COLGATE-PALMOLIVE CO 4.6% 03/01/2028 1,600,000.00 0.00 (1,593,600.00) (1,594,622.22) 03/05/2023 26,625.0003/05/2023
06051GHF9 Income Corporate Bonds BANK OF AMERICA CORP 3.55% 03/05/2024 1,500,000.00 0.00 0.00 26,625.00 03/06/2023 0.0003/06/2023
06051GHF9 Capital Change Corporate Bonds BANK OF AMERICA CORP 3.55% 03/05/2024 (1,500,000.00) 0.00 1,500,000.00 1,500,000.00 03/07/2023 18,850.0003/07/2023
24422EUX5 Income Corporate Bonds JOHN DEERE CAPITAL CORP 03/07/2024 1,450,000.00 0.00 0.00 18,850.00 03/08/2023 23,750.0003/08/2023
3130AB3H7 Income Government Agencies FEDERAL HOME LOAN BANK 03/08/2024 2,000,000.00 0.00 0.00 23,750.00 03/12/2023 14,500.0003/12/2023
037833DB3 Income Corporate Bonds APPLE INC 2.9% 12SEP2027 09/12/2027 1,000,000.00 0.00 0.00 14,500.00 03/12/2023 28,750.0003/12/2023
3135G0U43 Income Government Agencies FANNIE MAE 2.875% 09/12/2023 2,000,000.00 0.00 0.00 28,750.00 03/15/2023 3,700.0003/15/2023
3133EMTD4 Income Government Agencies FEDERAL FARM CREDIT BANK 03/15/2024 2,000,000.00 0.00 0.00 3,700.00 03/15/2023 3,187.5003/15/2023
91282CCX7 Income Government Bonds USA TREASURY 0.375% 09/15/2024 1,700,000.00 0.00 0.00 3,187.50 03/17/2023 (9,008.33)03/21/2023
02665WED9 Bought Corporate Bonds AMERICAN HONDA FINANCE 01/12/2028 1,000,000.00 0.00 (1,005,620.00) (1,014,628.33) 03/19/2023 22,500.0003/19/2023
88579YAV3 Income Corporate Bonds 3M COMPANY 2.25% 09/19/2026 2,000,000.00 0.00 0.00 22,500.00 03/23/2023 7,500.0003/23/2023
3137EAEX3 Income Government Agencies FREDDIE MAC 0.375% 09/23/2025 4,000,000.00 0.00 0.00 7,500.00 03/28/2023 3,000.0003/28/2023
3133EMBE1 Income Government Agencies FEDERAL FARM CREDIT BANK 03/28/2024 2,000,000.00 0.00 0.00 3,000.00 03/30/2023 63,750.0003/30/2023
3133ENP95 Income Government Agencies FEDERAL FARM CREDIT BANK 09/30/2025 3,000,000.00 0.00 0.00 63,750.00 03/31/2023 14,375.0003/31/2023
9128285D8 Income Government Bonds USA TREASURY 2.875% 09/30/2023 1,000,000.00 0.00 0.00 14,375.00 03/31/2023 7,500.0003/31/2023
912828ZF0 Income Government Bonds USA TREASURY 0.5% 03/31/2025 3,000,000.00 0.00 0.00 7,500.00 03/31/2023 3,750.0003/31/2023
91282CAM3 Income Government Bonds USA TREASURY 0.25% 09/30/2025 3,000,000.00 0.00 0.00 3,750.00 Page I-6.36
32 TRANSACTION REPORT
For the period March 1, 2023 - March 31, 2023
CITY OF MENLO PARK
Maturity Par value or
shares
Trade date Cusip Transaction Sec type Description Principal Interest Transaction totalSettle date Realized
gain(loss)
03/31/2023 11,250.0003/31/2023
91282CBT7 Income Government Bonds USA TREASURY 0.75% 03/31/2026 3,000,000.00 0.00 0.00 11,250.00 03/31/2023 21,875.0003/31/2023
91282CCZ2 Income Government Bonds USA TREASURY 0.875% 09/30/2026 5,000,000.00 0.00 0.00 21,875.00 03/31/2023 Income Cash and Cash Equivalents Cash 0.00 0.00 0.00 280.89 280.89 Page I-6.37
33 ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
As of March 31, 2023
CITY OF MENLO PARK
Past performance is not a guide to future performance. The value of investments and any income from them will fluctuate and is not guaranteed (this may partly be due to exchange rate changes) and investors may not get back the amount invested. Transactions in foreign securities may be executed and settled in local markets. Performance comparisons will be affected by changes in interest rates. Investment returns fluctuate due to changesin market conditions. Investment involves risk, including the possible loss of principal. No assurance can be given that the performance objectives of a given strategy will be achieved. The information contained herein is for your reference only and is being provided in response to your specific request and has been obtained from sources believed to be reliable; however, no representation is made regarding its accuracy or completeness. Thisdocument must not be used for the purpose of an offer or solicitation in any jurisdiction or in any circumstances in which such offer or solicitation is unlawful or otherwise not permitted. This document should not be duplicated, amended, or forwarded to a third party without consent from Insight. This is a marketing document intended for professional clients only and should not be made available to or relied upon by retail clients Investment advisory services in North America are provided through two different SEC-registered investment advisers using the brand Insight Investment: Insight North America LLC (INA) and Insight Investment InternationalLimited (IIIL). The North American investment advisers are associated with a broader group of global investment managers that also (individually and collectively) use the corporate brand Insight Investment and may be referred to as Insight, Insight Group or Insight Investment.INA is an investment adviser registered with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), under the Investment Advisers Act of 1940, as amended. Registration with the SEC does not imply a certain level of skill or training.You may request, without charge, additional information about Insight. Moreover, specific information relating to Insights strategies, including investment advisory fees, may be obtained from INA's Form ADV Part 2A, which isavailable without charge upon request.Where indicated, performance numbers used in the analysis are gross returns. The performance reflects the reinvestment of all dividends and income. INA charges management fees on all portfolios managed and these feeswill reduce the returns on the portfolios. For example, assume that $30 million is invested in an account with INA, and this account achieves a 5.0% annual return compounded monthly, gross of fees, for a period of five years.
At the end of five years that account would have grown to $38,500,760 before the deduction of management fees. Assuming management fees of 0.25% per year are deducted monthly from the account, the value at the end of the five year period would be $38,022,447. Actual fees for new accounts are dependent on size and subject to negotiation. INA's investment advisory fees are discussed in Part 2A of its Form ADV.
Unless otherwise stated, the source of information is Insight. Any forecasts or opinions are Insight’s own at the date of this document (or as otherwise specified) and may change. Material in this publication is for general information only and is not advice, investment advice, or the recommendation of any purchase or sale of any security. Insight makes no implied or expressed recommendations concerning the manner in which an account should or would be handled, as appropriate investment strategies depend upon specific investment guidelines and objectives and should not be construed to be an assurance that any particular security in a strategy willremain in any fund, account, or strategy, or that a previously held security will not be repurchased. It should not be assumed that any of the security transactions or holdings referenced herein have been or will prove to be profitable or that future investment decisions will be profitable or will equal or exceed the past investment performance of the securities listed.Please compare the information provided in this statement to the information provided in the statement received from your Custodian.
For trading activity the Clearing broker will be reflected. In certain cases the Clearing broker will differ from the Executing broker.In calculating ratings distributions and weighted average portfolio quality, Insight assigns U.S Treasury and U.S agency securities a quality rating based on the methodology used within the respective benchmark index. WhenMoody’s, S&P and Fitch rate a security, Bank of America and Merrill Lynch indexes assign a simple weighted average statistic while Barclays indexes assign the median statistic. Insight assigns all other securities the lower of Moody’s and S&P ratings.Information about the indices shown here is provided to allow for comparison of the performance of the strategy to that of certain well-known and widely recognized indices. There is no representation that such index is anappropriate benchmark for such comparison. You cannot invest directly in an index and the indices represented do not take into account trading commissions and/or other brokerage or custodial costs. The volatility of theindices may be materially different from that of the strategy. In addition, the strategy’s holdings may differ substantially from the securities that comprise the indices shown.
The ICE BofA 3 Month US T-Bill index is an unmanaged market index of U.S. Treasury securities maturing in 90 days that assumes reinvestment of all income.The ICE BofA 6 Month US T-Bill index measures the performance of Treasury bills with time to maturity of less than 6 months.The ICE BofA 1-Year US Treasury Index is a one-security index comprised of the most recently issued 1-year US Treasury note. The index is rebalanced monthly. In order to qualify for inclusion, a 1-year note must be auctionedon or before the third business day before the last business day of the month.The ICE BofA 3-Year US Treasury Index is a one-security index comprised of the most recently issued 3-year US Treasury note. The index is rebalanced monthly. In order to qualify for inclusion, a 3-year note must be auctionedon or before the third business day before the last business day of the month.The ICE BofA 5-Year US Treasury Index is a one-security index comprised of the most recently issued 5-year US Treasury note. The index is rebalanced monthly. In order to qualify for inclusion, a 5-year note must be auctionedon or before the third business day before the last business day of the month.The ICE BofA 1-3 US Year Treasury Index is an unmanaged index that tracks the performance of the direct sovereign debt of the U.S. Government having a maturity of at least one year and less than three years.
The ICE BofA 1-5 US Year Treasury Index is an unmanaged index that tracks the performance of the direct sovereign debt of the U.S. Government having a maturity of at least one year and less than five years.
Page I-6.38
34 ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
As of March 31, 2023
CITY OF MENLO PARK
Insight does not provide tax or legal advice to its clients and all investors are strongly urged to consult their tax and legal advisors regarding any potential strategy or investment.
Insight is a group of wholly owned subsidiaries of The Bank of New York Mellon Corporation. BNY Mellon is the corporate brand of The Bank of New York Mellon Corporation and may also be used as a generic term to reference the Corporation as a whole or its various subsidiaries generally. Products and services may be provided under various brand names and in various countries by subsidiaries, affiliates and joint ventures of The Bank of New York Mellon Corporation where authorized and regulated as required within each jurisdiction. Unless you are notified to the contrary, the products and services mentioned are not insured by the FDIC (or by any governmental entity)and are not guaranteed by or obligations of The Bank of New York Mellon Corporation or any of its affiliates. The Bank of New York Corporation assumes no responsibility for the accuracy or completeness of the above data and disclaims all expressed or implied warranties in connection therewith.© 2023 Insight Investment. All rights reserved.
Page I-6.39
35 Cusip/Id Description Moody Rating S&P Rating Par Insight ESG Score Envirnmental Social Governance 369550BD9 GENERAL DYNAMICS 3.375% 15MAY2023 A3 A- $ 943,000 5 3 54 459200HP9 IBM CORP 3.2% 01AUG2023 A3 A- $ 1,000,000 2 1 23742718EB1 PROCTER & GAMBLE CORP 3.1% 15AUG2023 Aa3 AA- $ 1,000,000 3 3 4389236THA6 TOYOTA MOTOR CREDIT 1.35% 25 AUG 2023 A1 A+ $ 1,000,000 3 1 3424422EUM9 JOHN DEERE CAPITAL CORP 3.65% 12OCT2023 A2 A $ 950,000 4 4 4414913R2S5 CATERPILLAR FIN. SER. .95% 10JAN2024 A2 A $ 1,000,000 4 4 3489236THU2 TOYOTA MOTOR CREDIT .45% 11JAN2024 A1 A+ $ 1,800,000 3 1 3402665WCT6 AMERICAN HONDA FINANCE 3.55% 12JAN2024 A3 A- $ 1,000,000 2 1 3324422EVN6 JOHN DEERE CAPITAL CORP .45% 17JAN2024 A2 A $ 800,000 4 4 4417325FAS7 CITIBANK NA 3.65% 23JAN2024 (CALLABLE 23DEC23) Aa3 A+ $ 1,500,000 3 1 34693475AV7 PNC FINSERVGRUP 3.5% 23JAN2024 (CALLABLE 24DEC2023) A3 A- $ 1,000,000 3 2 4391159HHV5 US BANK NA CINCINNATI 3.375% 05FEB2024 (CALLABLE 06JAN2024) A2 A+ $ 1,000,000 3 3 43594918BX1 MICROSOFT CORP 2.875% 06FEB2024 (CALLABLE 06DEC23) Aaa AAA $ 960,000 2 1 2324422EUX5 JOHN DEERE CAPITAL CORP 2.6% 07MAR2024 A2 A $ 1,450,000 4 4 44459200JY8 IBM CORP 3.0% 15MAY2024 A3 A- $ 2,000,000 2 1 2314913R2L0 CATERPILLAR .45% 17MAY2024 A2 A $ 1,600,000 4 4 3446647PBQ8 JPMORGAN CHASE & CO 1.514% 01JUN2024 (CALLABLE 01JUN23) A1 A- $ 2,000,000 3 1 3406051GHL6 BANK OF AMERICA NA 3.864% 23JUL2024 (CALLABLE 23JUL2023) A2 AA- $ 1,500,000 3 1 44693506BQ9 PPG INDUSTRIES INC 2.4% 15AUG2024 A3 BBB+ $ 2,000,000 2 1 3389236TGL3 TOYOTA MOTOR CREDIT 2.00% 07OCT2024 A1 A+ $ 1,000,000 3 1 3469353REF1 PNC BANK NA 3.3% 30OCT2024 (CALLABLE 30SEP2024) A2 A $ 2,500,000 3 2 4314913Q3B3 CATERPILLAR 2.15% 8NOV2024 A2 A $ 1,000,000 4 4 34931142DV2 WALMART INC. 2.65% 15DEC2024 (CALLABLE 15OCT2024) Aa2 AA $ 1,500,000 4 1 5490331HMS9 US BANK NA 2.8% 27JAN2025 (CALLABLE 27DEC2024) A1 AA- $ 1,000,000 3 3 43437076BM3 HOME DEPOT INC. 3% 01APR2026 (CALLABLE 01JAN2026) A2 A $ 3,000,000 2 2 2246625HRS1 JPMORGAN CHASE & CO 3.2% 15JUN2026 (CALLABLE 15MAR26) A1 A- $ 1,500,000 3 1 34911159HHN3 US BANCORP 2.375% 22JUL2026 (CALLABLE 22Jun2026) A2 A+ $ 2,000,000 3 3 43594918BR4 MICROSOFT CORP 2.40% 08AUG2026 (CALLABLE 08MAY26) Aaa AAA $ 2,000,000 2 1 2388579YAV3 3M COMPANY 2.25% 19SEO2026 (CALLABLE 19JUN2026 A1 A+ $ 2,000,000 3 3 43713448DN5 PEPSICO INC. 2.375% 06OCT2026 (CALLABLE 06JUL2026) A1 A+ $ 1,000,000 2 2 22437076CA8 HOME DEPOT 2.5% 15APR2027 (CALLABLE 15FEB2027) A2 A $ 1,200,000 2 2 22037833CR9 APPLE INC. 3.2% 11MAY2027 (CALLABLE 11FEB2027) Aaa AA+ $ 2,121,000 4 1 45037833DB3 APPLE INC 2.9% 12SERP2027 (CALLABLE 12JUN2027) Aaa AA+ $ 1,000,000 4 1 4502665WED9 AMERICAN HONDA FINANCE 4.7% 12JAN2028 A3 A- $ 1,000,000 2 1 33194162AR4 COLGATE-PALMOLIVE CO 4.6% 01MAR2028 (CALLABLE 01FEB28) Aa3 AA- $ 1,600,000 2 2 23 Corporate 49,924,000 $ 3.00 2.03 3.26 3.46
*ESG ratings are from 1 to 5, with 1 as the highest rating and 5 as the lowest. All ratings are weighted by industry rankings, based on the importance of the category within the individual industry.
City of Menlo Park
Insight ESG Ratings as of March 31, 2023
ATTACHMENT C
Page I-6.40
Community Development
City of Menlo Park 701 Laurel St., Menlo Park, CA 94025 tel 650-330-6600 menlopark.gov
STAFF REPORT
City Council
Meeting Date: 5/9/2023
Staff Report Number: 23-117-CC
Consent Calendar: Adopt a resolution to authorize the city manager to execute a community funding agreement with
Habitat for Humanity Greater San Francisco
(Habitat) in the amount of $1.2 million for the
preservation of existing housing in Belle Haven
through their Homeownership Preservation
Program
Recommendation
Staff recommends that the City Council adopt a resolution to authorize the city manager to execute a community funding agreement (Attachment A, Exhibit A) with Habitat for the preservation of existing housing through their Homeownership Preservation Program in the amount of $1.2 million from the below market rate (BMR) housing fund.
Policy Issues
The City Council retains sole discretion to award available monies from the BMR housing fund collected in accordance with the Menlo Park Municipal Code Chapter 16.96.
Background
On Nov. 18, 2020, a notice of funding availability (NOFA) of approximately $10 million from the BMR housing fund was released to support the preservation and production of permanent affordable housing.
Qualified projects included the preservation of existing affordable housing, and the acquisition of or new construction of permanently affordable rental or ownership housing for very low, low and moderate-income households. This funding is intended to fill the financing gap between the projected total project costs and other available funding sources.
The City received three applications in response to the 2020 NOFA, including Habitat’s proposal for their Homeownership Preservation Program. On May 11, 2021, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 6623 (Attachment B) to approve a grant from the BMR housing fund of $1.2 million to Habitat for this program and to authorize the city manager to execute any and all documents necessary to dispense funds on behalf of the City. At that time, the City Council delegated its authority to the city manager to execute the contract upon its completion. The City’s process is now for the City Council to review the agreement, and therefore, the community funding grant agreement is before the City Council for review and approval. The proposed funding amount and components of the Homeownership Preservation Program remain the same and discussed in more detail in Attachment A in the May 11, 2021, staff report (Attachment C), and summarized below.
Homeownership Preservation Program
Repairs for low-income homeowners. To be eligible, homeowners must appear on the title and live in their AGENDA ITEM I-7 Page I-7.1
Staff Report #: 23-117-CC
City of Menlo Park 701 Laurel St., Menlo Park, CA 94025 tel 650-330-6600 menlopark.gov homes as their primary residence. The key features of the proposed program are the following:
• Award of $1.2 million, including administrative costs of $131,000 and marketing and outreach costs of $58,950;
• Rehabilitations generally valued at $40,000-$75,000, with the maximum loan amount of $75,000; • Goal of 20 loans over a three-year term, ending June 30, 2026; • Serves the Belle Haven neighborhood and targets very low and low-income homeowners at or below 80% of area median income (AMI). The target group expanded from the original proposal to include lowincome households to provide the program with greater reach and flexibility; • Loans are payable over a 30-year term with zero percent interest and payment deferred until the earlier of sale or transfer;
• Repayments are put into a revolving loan fund for future rehabilitation loans by Habitat; and • Annual reporting by Habitat to the City
Analysis
This proposal strongly aligns with the NOFA priorities including preserving affordable housing and improving neighborhoods, as well as with section 14.3 of the City of Menlo Park BMR guidelines regarding eligible uses of the BMR fund in support of very low, low and moderate-income housing development. Habitat can serve 20 households at a fraction of the cost of building or acquiring new homes and has the ability to complete these projects within three years. Their proposal also conforms closely with the City’s Housing Element goal H2 to maintain, protect, and enhance existing housing and neighborhoods.
Authorizing the city manager to execute this agreement with Habitat is recommended as its Homeownership Preservation Program successfully addresses the City’s affordable housing needs and priorities and was determined to meet the eligibility requirements of the 2020 NOFA. Doing so will allow Habitat to begin outreach and identify households eligible for this program.
Impact on City Resources
The $1.2 million is provided from the BMR housing fund to support the preservation of affordable housing in accordance with the requirements of the 2020 NOFA and BMR Guidelines. These funds have already been set aside from the 2020 NOFA and would have no impact on the current 2022 NOFA process. The City’s BMR housing fund is a separate special fund with no impact on the City’s general fund. All fees are collected from non-housing projects at the time of building permit issuance.
Environmental Review
This project involves the rehabilitation of existing residential structures and thus the funding of the project is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines §§15301, which exempts the repair of existing private structures involving no or negligible expansion of the existing use, §15302, which exempts the reconstruction of existing structures where the new structure will be on the same site and have substantially the same capacity and use, as well as §§15378 and 15061(b)(3) as the project 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.
Page I-7.2
Staff Report #: 23-117-CC
City of Menlo Park 701 Laurel St., Menlo Park, CA 94025 tel 650-330-6600 menlopark.gov Attachments
A. City Council resolution – Habitat for Humanity Community funding agreement B. City Council Resolution No. 6623
C. Hyperlink: City Council staff report 21-099-CC – Habitat Homeownership Preservation Program - menlopark.gov/files/sharedassets/public/agendas-and-minutes/city-council/2021- meetings/agendas/20210511-city-council-agenda-packet.pdf#page=61 Report prepared by:
Adam Patterson, Management Analyst II
Report reviewed by:
Deanna Chow, Assistant Community Development Director
Page I-7.3
RESOLUTION NO. XXXX
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MENLO PARK
APPROVING A COMMUNITY FUNDING AGREEMENT TO HABITAT FOR
HUMANITY GREATER SAN FRANCISCO (HABITAT) OF $1.2 MILLION FOR
PRESERVATION OF EXISTING OWNER-OCCUPIED HOUSING THROUGH
THEIR HOMEOWNERSHIP PRESERVATION PROGRAM
WHEREAS, the opportunity to preserve existing affordable housing remains a high priority need in Menlo Park: and
WHEREAS, the City of Menlo Park issued a Notice of Funding Availability (NOFA) on November 18, 2020 for approximately $10 million from the Below Market Rate (BMR) housing fund to support the preservation and production of permanent affordable housing; and WHEREAS, Habitat will administer a Homeownership Preservation Program to preserve existing affordable housing in the Belle Haven neighborhood of Menlo Park; and WHEREAS, the City of Menlo Park affirms the City’s commitment to producing, preserving and protecting affordable housing units; and
WHEREAS, as defined in 14.3 of the City’s Below Market Rate Housing Program Guidelines, the BMR Housing Fund may be used for the rehabilitation of uninhabitable structures for very low, low or moderate income housing; and
WHEREAS, the City of Menlo Park City Council adopted Resolution No. 6623 on May 11, 2021 to approve a $1.2 million grant to Habitat to serve Belle Haven residents in Menlo Park through their Homeownership Preservation Program; and
WHEREAS, the grant will serve to rehabilitate homes of 20 low income (at or below 80% AMI) owner-occupied households in Menlo Park during a period of three threes, and loans are payable over a 30-year term with zero interest and payment is deferred until the earlier of sale or transfer; and
WHEREAS, the repayment of the loans are put into a revolving loan fund for future rehabilitation loans by Habitat to serve Belle Haven residents.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Menlo Park hereby resolves:
(a) The approval of the community funding agreement and the projects to rehabilitate existing residential structures in the Belle Haven neighborhood are exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines §§ 15301, which exempts the repair of existing private structures involving no or negligible expansion of the existing use, 15302, which exempts the reconstruction of existing structures where the new structure will be on the same site and have substantially the same capacity and use, as well as 15378 and 15061(b)(3) as the projects will not result in any direct or indirect physical change in the environment.
Page I-7.4 ATTACHMENT A
(b) The City Manager is authorized to execute the Community Funding Agreement and any and all documents necessary to disperse funds on behalf of the City of Menlo Park.
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 ninth day of May, 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 May, 2023.
Judi A. Herren, City Clerk
Exhibits:
A. Community Funding Agreement – Habitat for Humanity of Greater San Francisco Resolution No. XXXX