Orinda City Council
May 3, 2022

IMPORTANT NOTICE REGARDING THIS MEETING: To protect our residents, officials, and staff, and in alignment with AB 361 and Orinda City Council Resolution No. 42-21, in which certain teleconference requirements of the Brown Act have been suspended, including the requirement to provide a physical location for members of the public to participate in the meeting, this meeting will be held by Teleconference.

BY

TELECONFERENCE
VIA

ZOOM WEBINAR
By PC:

MEETING URL:
https://tinyurl.com/ncusvn4h
MEETING ID: 924 9319 5201
By Telephone:
+1 669-900-9128
MEETING ID: 924 9319 5201

CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA
Tuesday, May 3, 2022
7:00 PM - REGULAR MEETING
City Council
Agenda Page 1 05.03.22
How to follow or participate in the meeting:
 Members of the public may observe and participate in the meeting at the teleconference location highlighted above. To ensure that the City Council receives your comments, we strongly encourage you to submit your comments in writing in advance of the meeting by following instructions below:

Send your e-mail to [email protected] by 3pm on the day of the meeting.

Those e-mails will be forwarded to the City Council. They will also be made a part of the public record and be available to view upon request by contacting the City Clerk at [email protected] or 925-253-4221. In addition, they will be available electronically by 5pm on the day of the meeting by selecting the date of the meeting in this Box link:
https://cityoforinda.box.com/s/aqrelwbwv0wc37m5hkju2o8a0sta7bup  Comments may also be submitted by e-mail during the meeting up until the closure of public comment period on the relevant agenda item. These will be read into the record by staff at their normal cadence and will be limited to a maximum of 3 minutes. To be read into the record, e-mail must contain in the subject line “Public Forum – Not on the Agenda” or “Public Comment – Agenda Item #” with the relevant agenda item indicated.

City Council
Agenda Page 2 05.03.22
 To comment orally in real time during the meeting, you may use the Zoom “raise your hand” function on your computer screen or the *9 function on your phone. 7:00 PM - REGULAR SESSION
A. CALL TO ORDER / ROLL CALL
Councilmembers: Darlene Gee, Nick Kosla, Amy Worth
Vice Mayor Inga Miller, Mayor Dennis Fay
B. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
C. ADOPTION OF AGENDA
The City Council may take action on any item listed on the agenda.

D. ITEMS FOR THE GOOD OF THE CITY
D.1. Orinda Association Annual Report
D.2. Proclamation - Bike to Work Day
D.3. Receive Report from Orinda Teen Advisory Committee D.4. Receive Presentation on Downtown Planning Survey Results To Date E. PUBLIC FORUM
The public forum provides an opportunity for members of the public to speak on any item within the jurisdiction of the City Council that is not on the agenda.

Additionally, a speaker has the option of addressing the Council on an item listed on the agenda, if the speaker will not be present when that agenda item is taken up. When an item is not listed on the agenda, State law prohibits Council discussion or action. Councilmembers may only “briefly respond” to statements made and questions posed. For example, State law allows Councilmembers to ask questions for clarification and provide a reference to staff or other resources for factual information. Additionally, consistent with the “Matters Initiated” rule contained in its Policies and Procedures Manual, the Council may also direct staff to report back and/or place a matter on a future agenda for discussion.

F. CONSENT CALENDAR
F.1. City Council Minutes
Recommendation:

Approve City Council Minutes:

1. April 19, 2022 - Closed Session

2. April 19, 2022 - Regular Meeting
City Council
Agenda Page 3 05.03.22
F.2. Authorization For Continued Use of Remote Teleconference for City Meetings
Recommendation:

Approve the Ratification of Orinda City Council Resolution No. 42-21 and Authorize the Continued Use of Teleconference Meetings for the Period of May 4, 2022 to June 2, 2022 Pursuant to the Provisions of Assembly Bill 361.

F.3. Ordering the Preparation and Filing of a Report for the Fiscal Year 2022/23 Assessments for the Orinda Street Lighting and
Landscaping Assessment District No. 1986-1
Recommendation:

Adopt Resolution No. 20-22, Ordering the Preparation and Filing of Report for Levy of Annual Assessments for Fiscal Year 2022/23 for Orinda Street Lighting and Landscaping Assessment District No. 1986-1.

F.4. Award a Construction Contract to Valentine Corporation for the Lavenida Culvert Repair Project (Project No. 4148), Authorize Contract Amendment #2 with Dewberry/Drake Haglan for the Design, Accept Grants of Storm Drain Easements and Approve Budget Changes for said project.

Recommendation:

Staff recommends that the City Council: (1) Award a Construction Contract for the Lavenida Culvert Project (Project No. 4148) to Valentine Corporation of San Rafael, California for an amount of $619,369 and authorize a 15% contingency; (2) Approve the Design/ Construction Plans for said project; (3) Authorize Contract Amendment No. 2 with Dewberry/Drake Haglan to increase the contract limit by an addition of $49,970 to a new total contract amount of $141,045 and authorize a 7% contingency; (4) Accept Storm Drain Easements for facilities constructed with said project and (5) Approve budget change of $243,978 in additional funding required to complete said project.

F.5. Acceptance of the Library Parcel Tax Independent Review Annual Report For The Period Ending (June 30, 2021)
Recommendation:

Receive and accept the Report for the period ending June 30, 2021.

F.6. Authorize Contract Amendment No. 3 with CSG Consultants, Inc. for On-Call Civil Engineering Services
Recommendation:

Staff recommends that the City Council authorize the City Manager and City Clerk to execute Contract Amendment No. 3 with CSG Consultants.

The amendment will increase the maximum contract amount to $515,000 and extend the term from June 30, 2022 to June 30, 2023.

F.7. Temporary Full Road Closure of portions of Overhill Road, Overhill Court and Tara Road for EBMUD's Pipeline Replacement Project City Council
Agenda Page 4 05.03.22
Recommendation:

Staff recommends the City Council Approve the Traffic Control and Detour Alternatives Requested by EBMUD; and Adopt Resolution 16-22 (Traffic Order #220) Authorizing the Temporary Full Road Closure of portions of Overhill Road, Overhill Court and Tara Rd between Moraga Way and Hillcrest Drive intersections for the purposes of EBMUD to perform their Pipeline Replacement Project which involves replacement of approximately 6,000 linear feet of the existing water main.

F.8. Request Approval for Purchase of Wes Horn’s and Doug Heine’s Artwork Pieces Using Private Donations
Recommendation:

Approve Resolution No. 15-22 authorizing the purchase by the City of Orinda of artwork by Wes Horn (Surfboard Seat) and Doug Heine (Full Circle) using Private Donations.

G. PUBLIC HEARING
H. POLICY MATTERS
H.1. Introduction of an Ordinance Banning the Sale of Flavored Tobacco and Vaping Products
Recommendation:

Staff recommends the Council waive a full reading and introduce the proposed ordinance. Alternatively, the Council could direct staff to make changes to the proposed ordinance and bring it back at a later meeting for introduction.

H.2. Discussion of Annual Update to the Capital Improvement Plan Recommendation:

Staff recommends the City Council conduct its first review and discussion of the annual update to the City's rolling five year Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) for Fiscal Years 2021/22-2026/27 and receive PowerPoint presentation from Staff on the Status of the 2021/22 CIP Projects. No action is being taken to approve projects or appropriate funds. The information obtained from this meeting will be used to develop formal updates to the CIP, including the addition of new projects. The City Council will have additional opportunities to review and provide input in the next two months along with the mid-cycle budget adjustments before the CIP is approved.

I. COUNCILMEMBERS' REPORTS
J. CITY MANAGER'S REPORT
K. MATTERS INITIATED
L. ADJOURNMENT
City Council
Agenda Page 5 05.03.22
The next Regular Meeting of the Orinda City Council will be held on Tuesday, May 17, 2022 at 7:00 PM.

Please visit the City’s website at www.cityoforinda.org to view the City Council Calendar.

I, Sheri Marie Smith, City Clerk, declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that this special meeting agenda has been posted at least 24 hours in advance at the Orinda City Hall, 22 Orinda Way and the Orinda Library, 26 Orinda Way. Additional copies are available at the Orinda Library, 26 Orinda Way, and at the City’s website at www.cityoforinda.org. At least 24 hours in advance of the meeting, this agenda was also delivered to and received by each member of the City Council as well as each local newspaper, radio station and television station requesting written notice of special meetings.

I, Sheri Marie Smith, City Clerk, declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that this regular meeting agenda has been posted at least 72 hours in advance at the Orinda City Hall, 22 Orinda Way and the Orinda Library, 26 Orinda Way.

Additional copies are available at the Orinda Library, 26 Orinda Way, and at the City’s website at www.cityoforinda.org
~ Notice ~
There is a 90-day limit for the filing of a challenge in the Superior Court to certain City administrative decisions and orders, which require a hearing by law, the receipt of evidence and the exercise of discretion. The 90-day limit begins on the date the decision is final (Code of Civil Procedure §1094.6). Further, if you challenge an action taken by the City Council in court, you may be limited by California law, including but not limited to Government Code §65009, to raising only those issues you or someone else raised in the public hearing, or in written correspondence delivered to the City Council prior to or at the public hearing. The City Council may be requested to reconsider a decision if the request is made prior to the next City Council meeting, regardless of whether it is a regular or special meeting. For information on the next regular or special City Council meeting, please call 925.253.4221 or visit the website at www.cityoforinda.org.
~ Accessible Public Meetings ~
The City of Orinda will provide special assistance for disabled citizens to participate in public meetings upon advance notice. If you need auxiliary hearing aid or sign language assistance at least two (2) working days advanced notice is necessary.

Please contact the City Clerk’s Office, 22 Orinda Way, Orinda, Ca 94563 or 925.253.4221 or [email protected] with the following information: name, mailing address, phone number and type of assistance requested.

The Orinda Association Annual Report and Program Update for 2020-21 The Orinda Association (OA) is a 501(c)3 dedicated to enhancing our community and enriching the quality of life for Orinda residents. Our main programs include The Orinda News, The Orinda Volunteer Center, an Annual 4th of July Parade, the Orinda Seniors Around Town ride program and specialized Public Forums.

The OA office is located at 26 Orinda Way, and the OA website is www.orindaassociation.org.

In 2020-2021 we welcomed several New Board Members, including Barb Brawner, Jacalyn Buettner, Latika Malkani, Marianne Moser, Grace Paik and Kelly Sopak. The current roster of board members is as follows:

Officers: President Sally Hogarty, Vice President Latika Malkani, Treasurer Cindy Powell, Secretary Marianne Moser; Board Members: Carlos Baltodano, Barb Brawner, Jacalyn Buettner, Joe Haughin - Board Member Emeritus, Chris Laszcz-Davis, Diane Lautz, Grace Paik, Kelly Sopak, Bill Waterman, Kate Wiley
The Orinda News is mailed free of charge to almost 9,000 households and businesses throughout Orinda each month. The newspaper was produced and delivered through the pandemic and continues to be the primary local news source for people in Orinda. The Orinda Association covers all costs associated with the operation of the newspaper, including all office and staff costs.

The website for The Orinda News is regularly updated, see www.theorindanews.com. The cost of developing, implementing, and maintaining the site is paid for by the OA.

The Volunteer Center is open from 9 am to 4 pm daily and offers a Volunteer Guide online with local volunteer opportunities sorted by Adult and Youth, and nonprofit group listings. There is a short summary of each group, with website and contact information. Additionally, The OA supports other nonprofits with The Orinda News (free publicity) and inclusion in a Volunteer Calendar.

The Lions Recycle for Sight collection box continues to be over-filled with eyeglasses for the monthly collection. Stay at home families cleared drawers during the pandemic and really responded to the small classified ad in The Orinda News.

One Warm Coat Program
2020 Collections - coats were not collected due to the pandemic. 2021 Collections - 600 coats - OA partnered with Orinda Teen Council to collect and count coats.

In 2020 and 2021, we were unable to present our Orinda Volunteer Awards or the OA’s William Penn Mott, Jr. Environmental Award. The Mott recipients, Barbara Leitner and the Eagle Scouts of Orinda, will have a future event as part of the Wagner Ranch Nature Area Festival.

Seniors Around Town (SAT) Established in 2005, SAT provides free, door-to- door transportation for Orinda’s seniors. The three part-time employees are also local community volunteers. Many riders are on fixed incomes; 30% live in Section 8/affordable housing. Orinda residents who are registered SAT Volunteers use their personal vehicles to provide transportation for seniors who are not able to drive themselves. The program provides rides to non-emergency medical appointments (e.g., dialysis, cancer treatment), personal care appointments and grocery shopping.

D.1
Packet Pg. 6
Communication: Orinda Association Annual Report (ITEMS FOR THE GOOD OF THE CITY) Throughout the pandemic and into 2022, SAT volunteers provided 2,323 rides to medical appointments or shopping for food. In 2020, when we were not providing rides (except for our dialysis client) many of our volunteer drivers switched to our new program of grocery shopping and delivery for seniors. Other volunteer drivers made reassurance calls to seniors to help with the isolation of shelter in place. This program was opened to all seniors living in Orinda, not just those registered with SAT. The shopping program fell under our VESP (Volunteer Emergency Support Program) program of services provided during any emergency. The intention of VESP is to provide whatever is needed when it is needed and for however long it is needed. The shopping program was so popular with both seniors and volunteers that many have continued the service into 2022. In June 2021 we resumed rides for medical appointments only, using strict CDC safety protocols.

In post Covid shutdown, early 2022, as our riders and drivers received their vaccines and booster, the requests for rides to medical appointments and personal care and errands continues to increase. The number of volunteers does not meet the increasing number of ride requests, therefore recruiting and retention have been our focus. We recently sent out Orinda Shell Gas Gift cards to 20 of our top drivers to help with the dramatic increase in fuel prices, and 37% of our driver volunteers have been active in the program for over five years.

DRIVER

STATISTICS
Total # of
Rides Given
Volunteer
Hours
Volunteer
Miles Driven
Jan.-Dec. 2020 896 620 10,665
Jan-Dec. 2021 1130 880 15,043
The Orinda Classic Car Show supplies most of the funds to the SAT program. In 2019, The Orinda Association assumed the end-to-end operations of this annual event. This includes website management, advertising, office and administrative support for car show vehicle registrations and payments, and coordination of non-staff volunteers. Additionally, coverage and advertising are provided by The Orinda News. The 2020 Car Show was re-formatted as a live stream event and the 2021 Car Show resumed the traditional program, in person but with reduced marketing efforts to keep the crowds down. The 2022 Car Show will be better than ever and is scheduled for Sept. 10, 2022.

Orinda’s 4th of July Parade (est. 1984) and Celebration is funded with sponsorships and donations and produced by volunteers. From 2019 – 2021 board members Diane Lautz and Bill Waterman took over as co-chairs of the event. In 2020, the parade was a virtual event but in 2021 the parade and a concert in the park took place. The OA partnered with Orinda Parks and Rec on activities in the park and the Library Plaza. The City of Orinda provided police and public works services prior to and on the day of the event.

Over 80 volunteers worked the day of the event, and the Parade Committee began fundraising and coordinating nine months prior, providing 800-1000 volunteer hours.

In May 2018 the OA Public Safety Forum with local police, fire and emergency evacuation preparedness services was filmed and became the basis of the Orinda Emergency Preparedness and Evacuation Video. This video, which is still used today, covers prevention, preparedness and response to crime, fire, emergencies, and natural disasters particular to the East Bay. It is still running on Contra Costa TV 26 and has been reviewed by CA State Safety officials.

D.1
Packet Pg. 7
Communication: Orinda Association Annual Report (ITEMS FOR THE GOOD OF THE CITY) The small office location at 26 Orinda Way provides support for public and nonprofit groups, schools, clubs, and businesses to coordinate within Orinda. Orinda Community Foundation, ONE Orinda, Rotary groups, Historical Society, Cal Shakes, Orinda Starlight Village Players, Film Festivals, Garden Clubs, Friends of Creeks, Friends of Wagner Ranch, Tabor Sister City, JM Adobe Friends, Orinda Woman’s Club, Orinda Jr. Women’s Club, Art in Public Places, Friends of Orinda Library, Lamorinda Adult Respite Center, Farmers Market, School age volunteers, Orinda Community and City of Orinda are part of the nonprofit and service organizations network which supports our citizens.

The Orinda Association participates in donation drives and our office location in Library Plaza, next to the Community Center, serves as a central drop-off spot and the OA websites are regularly updated.

We look forward to continuing the services provided to our homebound Orinda Seniors, planning the 4 th of
July Parade and concert, and the Orinda Classic Car Show, and reaching out to the increasing number of Orinda organizations that, like us, look for ways to make our town even better! The Orinda Association is a 501©3 organization and our annual Form 990 is available online.

The Orinda Association
P. O. Box 97
Orinda, CA 94563
Our Tax ID: 94-6098323.

D.1
Packet Pg. 8
Communication: Orinda Association Annual Report (ITEMS FOR THE GOOD OF THE CITY) AGENDA TITLE: City Council Minutes
RECOMMENDATION:

Approve City Council Minutes:

1. April 19, 2022 - Closed Session

2. April 19, 2022 - Regular Meeting
ATTACHMENTS:

A. City Council Closed Session Minutes of April 19, 2022 B. City Council Minutes of April 19, 2022
Respectfully Submitted by:

Sheri Smith
City Clerk
Prepared By: Sheri Smith, City Clerk
Approved by:

F.1
Packet Pg. 9
APRIL 19, 2022

CITY OF ORINDA

CITY COUNCIL CLOSED SESSION MINUTES
6:00 PM - SPECIAL MEETING
A. CALL TO ORDER/ ROLL CALL
Mayor Fay called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. City Manager Biggs called the roll and noted that all Councilmembers were present except Councilmember Worth.

B. OPEN SESSION IDENTIFICATION OF CLOSED SESSION MATTERS Mayor Fay identified the Closed Session Matter.

C. PUBLIC COMMENTS REGARDING CLOSED SESSION MATTERS
There were no members of the public wishing to speak.

D. CLOSED SESSION

1. CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATORS
Pursuant to Government Code Section 54957.6 Conference With Labor Negotiators - City Negotiators: David Biggs, City Manager; Douglas Alessio, Administrative Services Director; Gregory Ramirez, IEDA; Chuck Flesher, IEDA; and Ginger Staton, Human Resources Manager relative to the following employee groups:
a. Teamsters Local Union No. 856
b. Unrepresented Employee Group
E. OPEN SESSION REPORT REGARDING CLOSED SESSION
City Manager Biggs reported that Council took no reportable action taken.

F. ADJOURNMENT
The meeting adjourned at approximately 7:00 P.M.
_______________________
Sheri Marie Smith, City Clerk
F.1.a
Packet Pg. 10
Attachment: City Council Closed Session Minutes of April 19, 2022 (2760 : City Council Minutes) Orinda City Council Minutes Page 1 of 22 04.19.22
April 19, 2022

CITY OF ORINDA

CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
Note: Written communications received from the public prior to the start of this meeting can be viewed at: http://orindaca.iqm2.com/Citizens/Detail_Meeting.aspx?ID=2090. They are also kept in the City Clerk’s Office as part of the public record and available upon request. 7:00 P.M. – REGULAR MEETING– BY TELECONFERENCE
A. CALL TO ORDER / ROLL CALL:

Vice Mayor Miller called the Regular Meeting to order at approximately 7:00 p.m.

COUNCILMEMBERS PRESENT: Darlene Gee, Nick Kosla, Amy Worth Vice Mayor Inga Miller, Mayor Dennis Fay
COUNCILMEMBERS ABSENT: None
B. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE – Led by Vice Mayor Miller.

C. ADOPTION OF AGENDA
MOTION by Councilmember Gee and seconded by Vice Mayor Miller to adopt the agenda. Said motion carried by unanimous (5-0) roll call vote.

D. ITEMS FOR THE GOOD OF THE CITY
D.1. Presentation by California Consulting - Grant Writing Services City Manager Biggs introduced the item and gave a brief background regarding grant writing services by California Consulting, and introduced Steve Samulian, Owner, and Cecily Harris, Project Manager/Senior Grant Writer.

Steve Samulian, Owner, California Consulting, gave a PowerPoint presentation regarding California Consulting as a company, its services for federal, state and local grant writing services, an overview of grant writing team, affiliations and clients, and collaborative relationships. He then turned over the presentation to Cecily Harris.

Cecily Harris, Project Manager/Senior Grant Writer, provided an overview of grant writing services for the City, spoke about matching grant programs with City needs, Measure R priorities, projects applied for and grants awarded, agency requirements and recently released grant opportunities.

F.1.b
Packet Pg. 11
Attachment: City Council Minutes of April 19, 2022 (2760 : City Council Minutes) Orinda City Council Minutes Page 2 of 22 04.19.22
Councilmember Worth asked and confirmed with Ms. Harris there are many available grants at the state and local level, both for bike and pedestrians, streets, highways and bridges. Also, California Consulting partners with MOFD and will assist with training in Fire Code and assessments, and she confirmed MOFD is very competitive but sometimes cities are not able to apply for certain programs because it does not have its own fire department. However, they will make suggestions for partnerships and encourage MOFD to apply which also benefits the City.

Mr. Biggs spoke about the positive relationship with California Consulting, a grant for the Crossroads Mini-Park they did not get, funding for storm drains and a meeting held to learn more about grant opportunities for the City to maintain its drainage system, and work by California Consulting to identify and apply for grants which should prove beneficial and successful.

Mayor Fay spoke about the importance of grant writing services and funding for EV charging stations, and Mr. Biggs stated he has registered interest with three EV charging firms for proposals which requires a local match. Ms. Harris stated the BAAQMD has had some funding opportunities as well as at the state level.

Mayor Fay opened the Public Forum.

Nick Waranoff asked how California Consulting is compensated, asked if they have a contingent fee option or can consider it, asked how would the fee be apportioned if the City partnered with MOFD, and he asked how to deal with possible conflicts of interest when several clients are applying for the same grant.

Mr. Biggs and Mr. Samulian provided an explanation of the contract’s scope of service and costs, and confirmed there are no conflicts of interests in how they work with other cities and the relationship with Orinda.

Mayor Fay and Councilmembers thanked Mr. Samulian and Ms. Harris for their presentation.

E. PUBLIC FORUM
Kathleen Jenkins asked when the City is returning to in-person meetings.

Mr. Biggs explained the County’s current recommendations and said staff will provide a status update later in the summer.

Michelle Moon said she and her family are new to Orinda and many neighbors are concerned about the Housing element process. They hope for the ability to provide timely feedback, better understand ways they can contribute and participate, and hope to be able to digest the information regarding the St. Stephen’s parking lot as a site for potential development.

F.1.b
Packet Pg. 12
Attachment: City Council Minutes of April 19, 2022 (2760 : City Council Minutes) Orinda City Council Minutes Page 3 of 22 04.19.22
Mayor Fay told Ms. Moon that her comments relate to Item H.1 which may answer some of her questions.

Sheng Shu said he will not be able to stay for the rest of the meeting but wanted to voice his support for electrification and converting the City towards more sustainable energy providers like MCE.

Tom said he and CZ are concerned about the St. Stephen’s parking lot being proposed as a possible site for additional housing, and he confirmed with Mayor Fay that this item will be heard as Item H.1.

F. CONSENT CALENDAR
Mayor Fay asked if there were requests for removal of items or public comments, and there were none.

F.1. City Council Minutes
Recommendation:

Approve City Council Minutes:

1. April 5, 2022
F.2. Authorization For Continued Use of Remote Teleconference for City Meetings
Recommendation:

Approve the Ratification of Orinda City Council Resolution No. 42-21 and Authorize the Continued Use of Teleconference Meetings for the Period of April 20, 2022 to May 19, 2022 Pursuant to the Provisions of Assembly Bill 361.

F.3. Adoption of a Resolution Authorizing the Road Closure to Vehicular Traffic for the Orinda Annual Classic Car Show
Recommendation:

Staff recommends the City Council Adopt Resolution 11-22 Authorizing the Closure of a portion of Orinda Way and Avenida de Orinda for the Orinda Annual Classic Car Show (Traffic Order No. 212)
F.4. Adoption of a Resolution Authorizing the Closure to Vehicular Traffic for the Orinda Association's Fourth of July Parade and Associated Activities
Recommendation:

Staff recommends the City Council Adopt Resolution 14-22 Authorizing the Closure of a Portion of Moraga Way, Brookwood Road, Camino Pablo, Santa Maria Way, and Orinda Way for the Orinda Association's Fourth of July Parade and Associated Activities (Traffic Order No. 214) F.1.b
Packet Pg. 13
Attachment: City Council Minutes of April 19, 2022 (2760 : City Council Minutes) Orinda City Council Minutes Page 4 of 22 04.19.22
F.5. Housing Element Annual Progress Report for Calendar Year 2021 Recommendation:

Review the Housing Element Annual Progress Report for Calendar Year 2021 and direct staff to file the Report with the appropriate state agencies.

F.6. Adoption of a Resolution Authorizing the Temporary Closure of Vashell Way from Moraga Way to Davis Road for the upcoming Makers Market Event
Recommendation:

Staff recommends the City Council Adopt Resolution 12-22 Authorizing the Temporary Closure of Vashell Way from Moraga Way to Davis Road for the upcoming Makers Market event (Traffic Order No. 213)
F.7. City Council/Fire Board 2 X 2 Committee Appointments Recommendation:

Authorize Mayor to Appoint two Council Members to serve on the recently formed City Council/Fire Board 2 X 2 Committee.

F.8. Consider Revisions to the “Prerequisites for Speed Cushions” Section of the "City of Orinda Neighborhood Traffic Management Program"
Recommendation:

Consider Traffic Safety Advisory Committee’s Recommendation to Approve Revisions to the “Prerequisites for Speed Cushions” Section of the Traffic Calming Procedure and Guidebook "City of Orinda Neighborhood Traffic Management Program"
F.9. Contract Amendment No. 2 (Between the City of Orinda and Rincon Consultants, Inc.) for an Environmental Impact Report for the Downtown Precise Plan and Housing/Safety Element (Plan Orinda Project)
Recommendation:

Staff recommends the City Council authorize the City Manager to execute Contract Amendment No. 1 (Between the City of Orinda and Rincon Consultants, Inc.) to increase the base contract amount by an additional $84,000.

MOTION by Councilmember Worth and seconded by Councilmember Kosla to approve Consent Calendar Items F.1.1 (Fay abstained), F.2, F.3, F.4, F.5, F.6, F.7, F.8 and F.9.

Said motion carried by (5-0) roll call vote.

G. PUBLIC HEARING – None.

H. POLICY MATTERS
H.1. Draft City of Orinda Housing Element & Downtown Survey Results F.1.b
Packet Pg. 14
Attachment: City Council Minutes of April 19, 2022 (2760 : City Council Minutes) Orinda City Council Minutes Page 5 of 22 04.19.22
Recommendation:

Staff recommends the City Council receive the report, take public testimony, and provide feedback on the draft Housing Element and downtown survey results.

City Manager Biggs provided a brief introduction of the item.

Councilmember Worth cited there has been confusion about the process and asked if staff was still in the process of finalizing what will be presented to HCD.

Mr. Biggs said the Planning Commission conducted a meeting two weeks ago. After tonight’s meeting the Council will take comments received from the public which will influence what will be prepared as an administrative draft to be sent to HCD. This may change as a result of not having the EIR which is premature and HCD comments will be helpful to inform the City as to sites. He pointed out that the City does not have the ability to require housing be developed on private property and there will be many opportunities for public comments.

Councilmembers asked and confirmed with Mr. Buckley that tonight, there is no decision for the Council in regards to site selection or approving the administrative draft Housing Element. The Council will receive comments from the public and then staff will be considering feedback from the Council as it prepares the final administrative draft that will be presented to HCD. They asked what HCD will be doing once they receive the draft plan.

Planning Director Drummond Buckley emphasized that the City is running against a time clock given a 90-day review period with HCD which they expect will result in comments, with another 60-day review period afterwards and enough time to still be able to adopt a Housing Element before the deadline which is ultimately January 31, 2023.

Jennifer Gastelum, PlaceWorks, explained that the Housing Element is heavily regulated in terms of its format and content and those interested can visit www.hcd.ca.gov and learn more by typing in “Housing Element”. Based upon their experience, HCD goes through the Housing Element with a fine tooth comb and comments on programs and whether things are achievable. Particularly for Orinda they will look closely at the City’s land inventory and they want to see that there is assurance at all sites shown will be available for development within the next 8 years.

She and Ms. Walsh will give the PowerPoint presentation, explain the status of the sites inventory and highlight items. HCD has 90 days to review it, will go through and question everything, and they will have to provide the case that what has been included is valid and is available for development within the next 8 year period. Subsequently, they will receive a letter from HCD saying the City needs to “fix” certain things, citing Government Code, and then the City would have to submit for an additional 60 day review.

F.1.b
Packet Pg. 15
Attachment: City Council Minutes of April 19, 2022 (2760 : City Council Minutes) Orinda City Council Minutes Page 6 of 22 04.19.22
Councilmember Worth said what she is hearing is that the City is representing this as its plan and she again confirmed that the Council would provide feedback for PlaceWorks to revise the document per Council comments and then the plan will be submitted to HCD.

City Attorney Osa Wolff provided a reminder about the process the City has been following for conflicts of interest, which she explained.

Recusals:

Vice Mayor Miller announced her recusal from participating due to her providing pro bono legal services, board membership, and her proximity of her residence from St. Mark’s Church. She noted there is no proposal for St. Mark’s to build housing but this is part of the City’s discussion and she will leave the meeting at the appropriate time.

Councilmember Worth announced her membership at St. Stephen’s Congregation. She said she has no financial interests but will be recusing herself from Council deliberation on this site.

Mayor Fay said because he lives within 1,000 feet of the downtown office area and the Santa Maria Church, any he will recuse himself from any discussion that occurs regarding those two items.

Ms. Wolff reminded the Council that during questions of staff, it is appropriate to ask factual questions and she cautioned not to begin deliberations at that phase.

Mr. Buckley said given the number of speakers, he will provide a presentation at a future Council meeting of the downtown survey results, and noted people could access the survey results from the link in the staff report.

Jennifer Gastelum, PlaceWorks, gave a comprehensive PowerPoint presentation of the Housing Element overview, contents, public outreach, RHNA, Orinda’s 6th cycle RHNA, non-vacant site selection, additional criteria for non-vacant site suitability, projected ADUs, projected deficit with current sites inventory, possible rezones to meet the RHNA, Downtown Precise Plan sites, BART sites, SB 9 and housing development approvals, Housing Element action items, actions to address new State law, continuing and modified actions, new actions, consideration for adopting an inclusionary Housing Element and sample program, and she reviewed the following project schedule:

F.1.b
Packet Pg. 16
Attachment: City Council Minutes of April 19, 2022 (2760 : City Council Minutes) Orinda City Council Minutes Page 7 of 22 04.19.22
Milestones Estimate Date
Project Kick-Off August 5, 2021
Prepare Admin. Draft Housing Element August 2021-March 2022 City Council Meeting – Site Feedback February 15, 2022
Release Public Draft Housing Element (30-40 days) March 31, 2022 Planning Commission Meeting April 5, 2022
City Council Meeting April 19, 2022
Submit Housing Element to HCD (90-day review) May 2022
Submit Housing Element to HCD (2nd review-60
days)
September 2022
Planning Commission and City Council Adoption
Hearings
December 2022 and January
2023
Submit Final Adopted Housing Element to HCD –
Certification (60-days)
January 2023-March 2023
Councilmember Kosla asked and confirmed that the Planning Commission did not voice suggested changes and that comments were received from the pastor at St. Stephen’s Church which will be read into the record by the City Clerk.

Councilmember Kosla questioned the number of Housing Elements being certified across the state. Ms. Walsh provided an explanation of the Sacramento Area Council of Governments and the Southern California Council of Governments’ Housing Elements, stating those remaining are on the second or third letters for compliance with HCD.

Councilmember Kosla referred to the 25% contingency, confirmed HCD recommends a contingency of between 15% and 30%, and that the City wants to include a wide range for the EIR purposes.

Discussion ensued regarding school sites, clarification of undeveloped parcels owned by the school district for potential upzoning, overall assessment of sites, and school sites.

Councilmember Gee asked and confirmed that HCD does not visit the cities they review, that HCD takes fire risk into consideration, that staff and consultants hope to get HCD to provide feedback during reviews to clarify and mitigate items during the first round of reviews, and that the City’s adoption of an inclusionary housing ordinance is separate from the Housing Element adoption process and could be added given staff’s recommendation after review of pros and cons.

Councilmember Gee said understanding that HCD wants sites that are as real as possible and ready to develop, there are sites in the draft plan such as BART where the State and region are keen to develop housing sites where people resist development, and she asked to understand this in the review process.

Ms. Gastelum said the other concern with BART is putting all low-income housing in one site which becomes a fair housing issue.

F.1.b
Packet Pg. 17
Attachment: City Council Minutes of April 19, 2022 (2760 : City Council Minutes) Orinda City Council Minutes Page 8 of 22 04.19.22
Vice Mayor Miller asked how HCD is looking at fire safety issues. Ms. Walsh said HCD does not look at fire zones. Orinda is entirely in a high fire zone, with some portions very high fire severity risk. This is where the Safety Element comes into play which looks to evacuation routes and mitigations addressing safety.

Vice Mayor Miller questioned when fire maps will be updated. Mr. Biggs that the Cal Fire Board decided not to proceed with adjustment to their high first severity zone maps given there is a new State update process. Mr. Buckley added that Cal Fire has not yet finalized the schedule for update of maps, clarified that one-quarter of Orinda is in the very high fire severity zone and most of the rest of the City is also designed Wildland Urban Interface (WUI) which also follows mapping of high fire severity zones that was never applied to local jurisdictions. However, the Fire Chief adopted the WUI which follows the high fire severity zone.

Vice Mayor Miller asked and confirmed the St. Stephen’s site is not designated as a very high fire hazard severity zone, but close on three sides. Also, the high fire severity zone became the WUI when the WUI was adopted by MOFD so that site is WUI as is almost all of Orinda.

Councilmember Kosla said every other city in the Bay Area has an inclusionary ordinance which he would be open to having. He asked if this is something that hurts or helps cities if put into their Housing Element. Mr. Buckley said HCD does not look down upon cities that have an inclusionary ordinance, and Ms. Walsh said when the next Housing Element is prepared, the City would have to evaluate it to ensure it is not a constraint to development. Once developed, the City could take those units and subtract them from its RHNA.

Mayor Fay referred to the BART lot and asked if BART has land-use authority. Mr.

Buckley said no; the property is owned by CalTrans. They have an easement and use agreement which gives them some rights but to the extent the City engages with BART if a site is chosen and rezoned the City can establish the zoning. Even if BART became the owner now, AB 2923 would not apply.

Councilmember Worth referred to how HCD views a designation as credible and asked if they look at the mid-term of the Housing Element, as well. Ms. Walsh said HCD is definitely looking at something that could be available for development by mid-cycle given the time it would take to go through the process.

Councilmember Worth said given ownership constraints and site constraints for BART, this would take a fair amount of time and most likely beyond the mid-point. Mr. Buckley agreed and emphasized CalTrans owns the site and has its own process for de-certifying their right-of-way which is a very involved process.

Mayor Fay opened the Public Forum.

F.1.b
Packet Pg. 18
Attachment: City Council Minutes of April 19, 2022 (2760 : City Council Minutes) Orinda City Council Minutes Page 9 of 22 04.19.22
City Clerk Smith announced that 81 emails were received from residents and these were all forwarded to the City Council for consideration and are available on the City’s website.

Since the meeting started, an additional 2 emails were received which she read:

Reverend Dr. Steven Hasset, St. Stephen’s School Church: “The Executive Committee of St. Stephen’s met this evening after spending the last few days hearing from parishioners and neighbors regarding the Draft Housing Element. St. Stephen’s leadership respectfully requests that the City remove their site from consideration for rezoning and inclusion in the proposed Housing Element. They do think the matter of creating new housing in our community is one that aligns with their mission as a parish church. They are committed to collaborative process that allows church leadership, the congregation, neighbors, and the City leadership to work together for a mutually beneficial outcome. We believe such a process will take more time than is allocated in the current housing cycle approval process. We respectfully request that this message be included in the public comment section of tonight’s City Council meeting. Thank you.” Karen Sandy wrote: “How did you come up with a list of locations for sites for affordable housing such as St. Stephen’s parking lot? I am listening now, thank you.” Mr. Biggs replied that this question was covered in the presentation, but PlaceWorks went through each site and opted to include the St. Stephen’s site.

Nick Waranoff asked that the Council approve a final draft Housing Element before it goes to HCD, emphasized that the City should not be pre-judging HCD’s response to the situation that would exist if the City did include BART in the letter, believes the BART lots can solve 100% of the RHNA problem, said the City has two chances of submittals for review by HCD before finalizing the Housing Element, and asked to rely on the BART March 7th letter and include BART. He noted no sites are “shovel-ready”, suggested copying the City of Lafayette’s plan and to spend time tweaking it, and recommended adoption of an inclusionary housing ordinance.

Joshua Han, East Bay for Everyone, referred to the proposed current commercial and office sites listed as part of the Downtown Precise Plan and said many sites are quite small in terms of number of expected units. He understands the best construction cost efficiencies are found with projects with at least a few dozen units and it is likely these sites will need to be consolidated to allow for a truly viable project at proposed densities, requiring agreement from multiple property owners and property value and demolition cost assessments. He thinks the 60% capacity is far too high for sites when taken as a whole and hoped to see the City set higher base densities for these sites or allow modest upzoning in other neighborhoods.

F.1.b
Packet Pg. 19
Attachment: City Council Minutes of April 19, 2022 (2760 : City Council Minutes) Orinda City Council Minutes Page 10 of 22 04.19.22
Ted Fleischman said he believes the plan meets whatever pragmatic test might be applied to it. As an indirect benefit the downtown will become revitalized, a more open and pedestrian-friendly space, and he spoke of research regarding residents receipt of more direct benefits from opportunities and changes in their neighborhood environments.

He agrees with BART and Mr. Waranoff’s comments, thinks more vigorous enforcement of fire abatement, more substantial evacuation plans and fire drills should be undertaken, and supported adoption of an inclusionary housing ordinance.

David Bourne commented that upzoning could potentially put an agency of the State in control of developing the BART land and giving the City very limited power to direct it. If BART is included he would encourage the Council to consider a partial inclusion of the property to make it manageable in terms of development. He also would like to see revitalization of the downtown. He thinks Bruce Burrows has proposed reasonable elements in the Downtown Precise Plan to encourage development, and spoke of the opposition to St. Stephen’s site and the fact more development would place higher water stress conditions on the neighborhood, including the fire station to fight fires next to the church.

Matthew Conners said he is speaking on behalf of 450 Orinda residents relating to public safety concerns with the St. Stephen’s site, thanked the church for consideration given to neighbors, and echoed the Reverend’s comments. He noted the St. Stephen’s site is surrounded by a very high fire severity zone on 3 sides, is within 100 feet and 250 feet on certain sides, and the neighborhood has over 700 homes that would use a primary evacuation road over surface roads and St. Stephen’s Drive which are very close to high fire severity zones. He also recommended the Council consider other areas of the City relating to high fire risks.

Gaya Moore said she sees long-standing inequities and depth of need in unhoused neighbors and as a resident near St. Stephen’s Church, described a fire evacuation story affecting her family vacation, said her home is in a very high fire severity zone as well as many families in Orinda, and voiced opposition to including the St. Stephen’s site in the site inventory.

Charles Porges suggested the Council approve a higher buffer and include the BART lot as a backup plan which would increase the buffer significantly. He thinks an inclusionary ordinance will garner lower income housing to be built, supported a diversified community including the BART lot, envisioned mixed use, tall buildings, shopping and thinks this is the best way forward to revitalizing the downtown and incorporating lower income housing.

Scott Hines referred to the St. Stephen’s site and thinks the Council should approve the plan versus unelected staff setting such a direction, asked that high density be located in more urban locations like Orinda Village and suggested rezoning the 16th and 17th holes of the Orinda Country Club which will take care of many needs for years. He also cited the need for pedestrian walkways and access to everything along Orinda Way which is needed for this type of housing.

F.1.b
Packet Pg. 20
Attachment: City Council Minutes of April 19, 2022 (2760 : City Council Minutes) Orinda City Council Minutes Page 11 of 22 04.19.22
Carl Rittenberg agreed with the previous speaker about rezoning the golf course, said he lives along St. Stephen’s and the HCD does not look at anything other than Google Maps when making their decisions. If HCD officials would walk the hill up and down to BART they would find it is 1.8 miles each way and a steep hill. Lower income individuals may not have a vehicle which makes it unreasonable to hike 4 miles a day up and down a hill in a fire zone to get home. There is also speeding along St. Stephen’s Drive and a very dangerous road to walk and suggested first putting in a sidewalk all the way down St.

Stephen’s to the pathway along Hwy 24 on both Charles Hill and St. Stephen’s with guardrails and street lighting all the way up and down.

Robert Alvarado said he lives on El Verano and has four children, two of which will attend the St. Stephen’s preschool. He cited dangerous conditions and a recent accident in walking along the street, risks of fire danger and inadequate evacuation access, thinks not including BART is preposterous, asked that more consideration be given to living environments and strongly opposed the St. Stephen’s site.

Dan DeBusschere said he thinks the inclusionary ordinance should be adopted which would address the AFFH issue. He thinks the BART lot should be included, did not believe some sites would be accepted by HCD, and suggested letting HCD pick and choose. He noted the churches still own their land and are in control as well as other properties, and recommended including BART and moving the contingency up to 1000%. He also suggested CalTrans give the land back to the City and that the Governor come up with more land for housing.

Gary Yang said they sent in a letter regarding St. Stephen’s site, understands and agrees with the importance of affordable housing and creating more diversity; however, he wants to be sure it is done in a way that is not a rushed decision. Over 100 people share this same opinion and many were actually very surprised about the St. Stephen’s Church being considered and asked if there will be an opportunity for residents to review the draft plan before it goes to HCD as “the plan”.

Mr. Buckley confirmed there will be plenty of opportunities to comment between now and when the Council takes action on the Housing Element.

F.1.b
Packet Pg. 21
Attachment: City Council Minutes of April 19, 2022 (2760 : City Council Minutes) Orinda City Council Minutes Page 12 of 22 04.19.22
Rusty Snow, Orinda Watch, said they are aware the City is working on allocating the RHNA requirements of 1,500 housing units. Each housing unit may have approximately

2.7 people, thus this could represent an increase in population of about 4,000 people.

This would pose a major overload to schools, roads, parking and emergency services.

He referred to BART’s March 7th letter which identified the lots as sites to be developed by BART in the mid-term. They understand these lots could absorb much of if not all of the RHNA requirement and he suggested the City rezone the BART parking lots now. If BART does develop the City’s RHNA requirement would be satisfied for the cycle and no other rezoning may be necessary. If the City rezones the downtown and other areas which results in over 4,000 in population with BART proceeding, this would result in another population increase. He also cited SB 9 impacts and asked that the City hold off rezoning other areas and to include the BART lots.

Nancy Nazme thanked the church leadership for listening to their neighbors, asked if the City will remove the St. Stephen’s site from the draft report being submitted to HCD, and thinks submitting the report is a waste of taxpayer efforts and dollars. It undermines public safety concerns as well and she thanked the Council.

Mayor Fay said one of the first things to be discussed by the Council after public comments will be whether the site is included or not.

Kathleen Jenkins said she works at Lawrence Berkeley Labs and much of the money they spend comes from the Department of Energy. They are always looking for ways to lower carbon and environmentally it would make more sense to build right on the BART lot. This way, the downtown can be developed with retail space underneath, provide people the opportunity not to have to have a car, removing cars from the City, not tearing down other buildings to rebuild other areas, and the City can work with a blank slate. This is what makes sense from a traffic, neighborhood, revitalization, transportation and environmental standpoint. Those that take BART everyday are the people you want living on the BART site that do not necessarily need vehicles, and she suggested asking that the Council make other parking arrangements for those needing to drive to and from BART.

Mayor Fay asked if any Councilmembers wished to discuss the St. Mark’s site and there were none. He asked if Councilmembers wished to discuss the downtown office or Santa Maria site and there were none. Regarding the St. Stephen’s site, Councilmember Worth will be recusing herself.

Recusal: Councilmember Worth recused herself and left the meeting during discussion of the St. Stephen’s site.

St. Stephen’s Church Site:

F.1.b
Packet Pg. 22
Attachment: City Council Minutes of April 19, 2022 (2760 : City Council Minutes) Orinda City Council Minutes Page 13 of 22 04.19.22
Vice Mayor Miller thanked residents for being involved and said they have been working on this for a while, along with wildfires and evacuation drills. If the Council leaves it to the property owner to have it rezoned she would caution taking a knee-jerk reaction to remove it at this point. Cities must sometimes force housing in their communities because otherwise it will not be built. She said she hears a lot of misunderstanding of what the City would do by including that site and voiced support to leave it in for the State’s review with the option of taking it out at a later time.

This property is not in a high fire hazard severity zone and it is very near the freeway. St.

Stephen’s is a long road and improvements could be done to make it more pedestrianfriendly to get to the connector across the freeway and into downtown. As compared to other areas, it is quite accessible and it seems it may be a site that does not present evacuation concerns. All of these sites go through fire review as well and so she would like to have more information from MOFD about that area.

Councilmember Kosla said he thinks if this had come up a year ago in earlier conversations about the Housing Element he would not think it would be part of it right now. This is by far the most public input they have received. He said zoning a parcel to residential adds value to the property and the fact that the church board and the neighborhood has opposed its inclusion and the fact it will not make a large dent in the plan makes him believe it should not be included.

Councilmember Gee said she is in agreement with Councilmember Kosla and is supportive of removing it at this point. She thinks all residents should resent the entire process and not the idea of creating community and housing which she is completely supportive of. She voiced frustration with the exercise, recognized there was clear opposition, and thinks the number of units is small for development.

Mayor Fay said he agrees the site is problematic, is not on a major arterial as other church sites are, is truly in the middle of a single-family neighborhood and does not seem like the right place to him. Also, the 27 or 30 units it would provide can be more than absorbed by the fact the City has an overage of units. Also, if left in and then taken out later would look worse to HCD. Therefore, he supported its removal now.

Noted as Present:

Councilmember Worth returned to participate in the Council meeting at 10:24 p.m.

Mayor Fay suggested focusing the Council’s attention next on the BART site given the many comments received on this site, and Councilmembers concurred.

Councilmembers voiced concern with having representatives having to stay on-line for Items H.3 and H.4. Mr. Biggs suggested the Council decide whether it wishes to not take up the last couple of items, asked for a motion for continuance to a future meeting date or the next meeting.

F.1.b
Packet Pg. 23
Attachment: City Council Minutes of April 19, 2022 (2760 : City Council Minutes) Orinda City Council Minutes Page 14 of 22 04.19.22
Councilmember Gee stated she would like to participate in Item H.3 but will miss both meetings in May. Mayor Fay confirmed with the City Manager Item H.3 could be held off until June 7, 2022.

MOTION by Councilmember Kosla and seconded by Vice Mayor Miller to continue Item H.4 to May 3, 2022 and to continue Item H.3 to June 7, 2022. Said motion carried by unanimous (5-0) roll call vote.

BART Site:

Councilmember Worth referred to Mr. Bourne’s comments about the risks of upzoning the BART station, potentially losing control of BART in the Housing Element process, and asked staff what that concern would be.

Mr. Biggs said he understood Mr. Bourne’s concern that if the City included it in the Housing Element the State would maintain control of that. He clarified the City has control of the site now and that would only change if state law changed.

Councilmember Worth said she thinks some State law would kick in if the City put all of the affordable housing on the BART site. Mr. Biggs said this is a separate consideration which has to do with the Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing (AFFH) and being consistent with that goal.

Mr. Buckley said one of the issues they are dealing with in meeting the requirement of affirmatively furthering fair housing is not putting all of the affordable units in one location.

This issue is not solved by having an inclusionary housing ordinance at all.

Councilmember Worth clarified her question and said the idea is that if the City decides not to do any downtown rezoning and puts the entire RHNA on the BART lot, she asked what would happen if the State triggers that AFFH rule. Mr. Buckley said it means that HCD would provide comments and not certify the Housing Element because the City would not be in compliance.

Ms. Gastelum cited another jurisdiction with a very small RHNA for lower-income of about 100 units and they put all of the lower-income on one site. That was not acceptable because it was an over-concentration of lower-income on one site in one area of a small, similarly sized community as Orinda. Therefore, HCD looks to cities having multiple sites with dispersed affordability throughout the City.

Councilmember Worth thanked staff for working hard to bring forward the draft plan, said it builds on the work done on the Downtown Precise Plan, they have heard businesses are closing and the opportunity for redevelopment is important. The City also has a record of public outreach and support for changing densities.

F.1.b
Packet Pg. 24
Attachment: City Council Minutes of April 19, 2022 (2760 : City Council Minutes) Orinda City Council Minutes Page 15 of 22 04.19.22
She cited problems with the BART lot but if engaged with the City for development, they would want to follow through with their existing land use policies which are a minimum of 75 units to the acre. When looking at affordable housing requirements, it triggers the density bonus and other factors.

The other challenge for this station is that it is constrained by four lanes of freeway on every side. The difficulty is that given housing laws, there is no ability to do traffic analysis or off-site development requirements to make access work, so she thinks there are many issues. In the future, the BART stations will be developed but the difficulty for Orinda is many of the jobs that lower-income residents have require them to drive which defeats the purpose of living in a TOD. If BART is put in the plan and then there is an expectation, it will not fulfill the HCD requirements in terms of how soon a project can be ready to construct.

Vice Mayor Miller agreed with Councilmember Worth’s comments, said areas are needed to be rezoned for more housing and staff worked in past years to designate sites for this cycle, and communities never expected such high RHNA numbers, said their staff is pressed to get the plan and other work done and have indicated they cannot take on BART station planning. She cited challenges of residents’ acceptance of extremely tall buildings, safety concerns, densities, and other challenges, and she thinks time, special solutions and special legislation will be needed to address the BART site. Therefore, she opposed adding the BART station now but would look forward to its planning for the next housing cycle.

Councilmember Gee said she has struggled with this and respects and understands comments of Vice Mayor Worth and Councilmember Worth. She does not see adding BART as a substitute for the rest of their downtown plan. To her, BART will ultimately be developed in some way and she thinks it is appropriate it be considered for housing. The question is whether it is this cycle or next cycle.

She thinks the City should be prepared to expect HCD will come back and question why it is not included, and she was not sure they would necessarily accept its exclusion. The City would also be at constant risk of other legislative activity that would force it to be developed before the City is “ready”. She thinks they need to recognize they will need to deal with how they would want to see it look like sooner than later. Therefore, she would be willing to go along with not including it in the first draft and will be shocked if HCD does not ask about it.

Mr. Buckley pointed out there is a discussion in the Housing Element that exists now about the BART station. Staff is evaluating it in the EIR in a full level of detail that will allow the Council to ultimately choose the BART station if that is the Council’s choice or through direction by HCD.

F.1.b
Packet Pg. 25
Attachment: City Council Minutes of April 19, 2022 (2760 : City Council Minutes) Orinda City Council Minutes Page 16 of 22 04.19.22
Councilmember Kosla said he agrees with Vice Mayor Miller and Councilmember Worth’s comments. He feels the BART site has been “marinating” and at some point it will be cooked. There are many things to think about for such a small site such as opportunities, constraints, bureaucracies of BART and Caltrans, and likes that the community wants to see some development there, but feels it has not yet marinated quite enough and it can serve as a backstop without being in the Housing Element. At any time, the City can rezone it if it starts to see nothing happening in the parcels identified in the site inventory.

He also is very encouraged with the development of ADUs at 20 per year, and this helps people subsidize their mortgages through someone renting ADUs. The City might see more ADUs being built, but staff has worked very hard and he hoped for a positive review by HCD.

Mayor Fay said before he makes his comments, he asked for a motion to extend the meeting to 11:30 p.m.

EXTEND MEETING
MOTION by Councilmember Worth and seconded by Councilmember Gee to extend the meeting to 11:30 p.m. Said motion carried by unanimous (5-0) roll call vote.

Mayor Fay said he has some mixed feelings about the BART site and whether they should or should not include it. He spoke about his own experience with BART projects which takes a long time, which he described. When reading the letter from BART, it notes “BART’s limited staff resources and very limited funding sources for structured parking that is often required to open up BART’s land for development it would be challenging for BART’s TOD program to support development of all lands in these various stations.” He sees this as a red flag. On the second page it states, “The station is characterized by midterm in BART’s TOD work plan. They would like to have further discussions with you about the timing of development before it is included in the Housing Element. BART will most likely not be able to initiate development at all station areas in the mid-term category.”
The last statement summarizes it as, “Over the next several years, BART will consider availability of local funding to support development, especially affordable housing as a key factor in advancing projects.” They also say “BART parking and access solutions that maximize development in highly desirable land near station entrances by minimizing the number of structured parking stalls”. This says BART will ask Orinda for funding in order to produce this, and it feels the City is not ready for that particular site. He thinks they should return in a couple of years, review it more thoroughly and work with BART and Caltrans to see if there is a way to do something at that site that will be effective and funded by other means than the City.

F.1.b
Packet Pg. 26
Attachment: City Council Minutes of April 19, 2022 (2760 : City Council Minutes) Orinda City Council Minutes Page 17 of 22 04.19.22
Lastly, the pandemic has changed transit behavior and ridership is way down. It did not affect bus operators as much as it did for fixed rail like BART and he described BART’s deficit. So, he did not believe BART should be included in the plan as it will come eventually and the City needs to prepare for it. He confirmed there were no other comments on the BART site.

He asked and confirmed staff has received the necessary feedback, and Mr. Biggs confirmed staff will eliminate the St. Stephen’s site as a recommended site, and they will continue to include the BART site as an alternative which gives the Council room to craft a final plan. He thinks the comments from HCD will answer many of the questions heard this evening. Mr. Buckley said staff is also planning to include a program relating to inclusionary housing.

Mayor Fay suggested re-arranging the agenda to hear Councilmember Reports, and Councilmembers agreed.

RE-ARRANGE AGENDA
MOTION by Councilmember Kosla and seconded by Councilmember Worth to rearrange the agenda to hear Items I and J ahead of Item H.2. Said motion carried by unanimous (5-0) roll call vote.

I. COUNCILMEMBERS’ REPORTS – Councilmember Kosla reported he and Councilmember Worth met as the two-by-two committee with the two School District Boardmembers and Superintendent last week and reviewed progress on the Housing Element, evacuation routes, speed bumps, future meetings, and ground rules.

J. CITY MANAGER’S REPORT – City Manager Biggs had no report.

K. MATTERS INITIATED – None.

H.2. Possible Consideration of Revisiting Decision Regarding Joining a Community Choice Aggregation Entity
Recommendation:

Receive Report, Discuss, and Determine Whether to Consider Possibly Joining a Community Choice Aggregation Entity, Provide Direction to Staff Regarding Whether to Request that Marin Clean Energy of Other Community Choice Aggregation Entity Make a Presentation at a Future City Council Meeting.

Recusal: Councilmember Gee recused herself from participating in this item, stating her husband is retired from PG&E, and she left the meeting.

F.1.b
Packet Pg. 27
Attachment: City Council Minutes of April 19, 2022 (2760 : City Council Minutes) Orinda City Council Minutes Page 18 of 22 04.19.22
Mr. Biggs said the matter was in response to a Matters Initiated on March 1st where the Council agreed to request the possibility of revisiting a prior decision to not join the Community Choice Aggregation program such as MCE.

The staff report provides background, prior staff reports, and an FAQ which MCE provided. The item is not agendized for a decision if the Council wished to join MCE and suggested if the Council is interested in revisiting it, the next step would be to get a presentation from MCE on their program and process to join.

Vice Mayor Miller asked if the City Manager has spoken with communities about the level of staff time involved in the program and the ability for cities to opt-out of certain programs with 30 days’ notice.

Mr. Biggs said he spoke with the person managing the entry for the City of Fairfield and noted MCE does a lot of the legwork. Staff must prepare staff reports and review contracts and agreements. Once an agreement is made there is a level of investment from staff but MCE develops the documentation which the Council then vets. The City of Fairfield has spent time communicating by telephone and publicizing to residents, even though MCE is willing to answer calls so there is a level of staff effort that goes into it. Right now with the Housing Element and fire prevention activities, it would be difficult for staff to engage in that and handle another major initiative right now and also staff would need to hear the Council’s interest in the program.

Mayor Fay said he contacted the City of Danville and the City of Lafayette and there are some upfront activities which create some time-consuming efforts for staff. Also, if the City decides to do this they would not be in the program until 2024 so it takes a long time to get to be a member and the push would occur next year. He suggested inviting MCE and PG&E if the Council decides to move forward with next steps.

Councilmember Kosla said he had many questions relating to the practicality of how the program works, asked about the percentage of residents who might keep PG&E versus MCE, asked if there are requirements for a percentage of residents in the program, benefits for sustainability, and wanted to know more about understanding pros and cons.

Mayor Fay questioned how the program affects people with rooftop solar and others, and he suggested taking public comments.

Mayor Fay opened the Public Forum.

City Clerk Smith announced that staff received 22 emails before the meeting which the Council received and which are available on the City’s website.

F.1.b
Packet Pg. 28
Attachment: City Council Minutes of April 19, 2022 (2760 : City Council Minutes) Orinda City Council Minutes Page 19 of 22 04.19.22
Leanne Hoadley, Manager of Community and Customer Engagement, MCE, explained that MCE takes over the generation portion of customers’ electricity. PG&E continues to bill residents, owns and maintains its infrastructure and they would be substituting a low renewable rate with a very high renewable rate on electricity. If the City joined the JPA, all customers are eligible to stay with MCE and they can opt out at any time, as well as the City without leaving the JPA and without removing the choice by constituents. The customers’ bill would lay out the cost of distribution and the procuring of power which will be an additional line item in the bill.

Michael Rummer said he appreciates efforts of the City in moving forward with allowing residents to make their own decisions, understands this is an opt-in program where residents will be able to purchase their electricity from a renewable energy source or opt out to stay with PG&E, and said approximately 86% of residents of other cities have chosen to stay with MCE. With the cost of solar energy coming down, rate comparisons actually saved taxpayers money by going with MCE for their electricity. This provides an incremental benefit of reducing risks of climate change, extreme weather events and other things that contribute to wildfire risk.

Nick Waranoff said he objects to the City moving to a program with MCE, said half of Orinda adults are 55 and older and MCE is not subject to the CPUC rate regulations but set by its own Board. PG&E offers renewable energy just like MCE does, but the problem is the overall amount available is limited for PG&E; however, MCE may run out as well, also noted that PG&E rates were lower than MCE rates in January and he did not believe the City could exit a JPA.

Caitlin Roach, President, Miramonte Climate Action Club, said the club and the Environmental Solutions Club at Miramonte support Orinda joining MCE as alternate energy providers, believes climate change is the biggest threat to their generation, noted most cities in the county are all MCE members and that CCA would be the right choice, offering a cleaner, local electricity source, and there are few downsides with the program.

Residents have the choice to opt-out and they believe any concerns can be addressed and thinks the opportunity should not be ignored.

Matt Fogerty said Americans make up 4% of the world’s population yet they produce 25% of the world’s emissions and he thinks they have an enormous responsibility here. Global warming has a huge connection to forest fires. MCE rates are lower but the real cost is global warming, which he described. The cost is minimal for the City and residents to do this versus the cost of global warming impacts and asked that the City move forward with joining MCE.

EXTEND MEETING
MOTION by Vice Mayor Miller and seconded by Councilmember Kosla to extend the meeting to 12:00 midnight. Said motion carried by (4-0) roll call vote.

F.1.b
Packet Pg. 29
Attachment: City Council Minutes of April 19, 2022 (2760 : City Council Minutes) Orinda City Council Minutes Page 20 of 22 04.19.22
Latika Malkani said the City’s hesitation in 2016 was because MCE and CCAs at the time were very new with much unknown; however, it has been very successful in many communities and she voiced support for the Council to consider it. She then described MCE’s mission, PG&E versus MCE’s energy sources, and thinks the Council can learn more by agendizing the item in the future.

Linda Deschambault said she is an environmental scientist who retired from the EPA after 30 years, and is a dedicated volunteer to help ensure there are policies in local cities. She spoke about their non-profit Contra Costa Climate Leaders which help local government address and lead the way in addressing the climate crisis. She believes cities should have an energy choice other than PG&E and asked the Council to agendize the matter for future consideration.

Charles Porges thinks having a choice in renewable energy is important, voiced support to do even more to address climate change and promote solar, and asked the Council to agendize the matter.

Vice Mayor Miller said she did not support further study because it does not comport with the City’s mission, believes that the City would join into an arrangement they are being told is no risk and to study it the City will spend money and staff time. In reading MCE’s agreement and its 15 amendments, it talks about liability for those agencies that leave or withdraw the JPA. She did not think the City would want to take on such liability for energy contracts, cited a 1% voice regarding the setting of rates, and said the comments received indicated residents thought they would opt-in but instead they would have to opt-out.

She also noted this has also been couched as an alternative to PG&E, but it is a way of getting more involved with PG&E. She thinks prices over time will be generally even for either utility, and thinks the City should let the CPUC regulate the City’s utility and not join the CCA.

Councilmember Worth said she appreciates Vice Mayor Miller’s comments for her legal review, shares the community commitment to sustainability, and cited the City’s efforts in increasing biking and walking, widening roads, joining Sustainable Contra Costa program for residents to address their carbon footprints, getting people on buses, and reducing methane in food waste and restaurant composting programs. She shares similar concerns as Vice Mayor Miller, noted State law requires PG&E has to be 100% non-fossil by 2045, described the buying and selling of energy which is comparable, and said the challenge is that Orinda is 17th poorest in the County and has limited staff and finances.

Voters chose fire safety as their priority and Measure R was passed which will require significant staff time for a long time. Therefore, she voiced concern in taking on additional projects. Residents have a choice with PG&E for their 100% green option and she did not want to pursue membership with MCE.

F.1.b
Packet Pg. 30
Attachment: City Council Minutes of April 19, 2022 (2760 : City Council Minutes) Orinda City Council Minutes Page 21 of 22 04.19.22
Councilmember Kosla questioned if the City joined MCE he did not want the Council to fool itself by not knowing what this will accomplish. He would like to hear more and understand the overall plan, determine the true benefits of a CCA, and supports people thinking and acting globally and would like to hear from MCE and PG&E on what the benefits are and how much benefit it leads for the county and local jurisdictions. He also questioned how those with solar panels are affected and would like more overall information.

Mayor Fay said he is extremely disappointed and thinks the Council needs to look at this, cited the need for MCE to provide answers and information, questioned why 16 of the 20 cities in the county are members of MCE, and personally thinks the Council would make a mistake by not moving forward, given dire global warming and climate change issues.

EXTEND MEETING
MOTION by Vice Mayor Miller and seconded by Councilmember Kosla to extend the meeting to 12:20 a.m. Said motion carried by (4-0) roll call vote.

Council discussion ensued regarding the need to move towards non-fossil fuel energy in all sectors, concerns about limited City resources, existing priority projects that require staff time, membership voting percentages and the possibility of sharing adjacent city MCE voting, financial and staff burdens, liability as a non-issue, the city’s lack of involvement in rate-setting and purchase of energy, and citizens having choices and options.

MOTION by Mayor Fay to move to the next step to evaluate joining a CCA and most likely MCE. The motion died due to a lack of a second.

H.3. Non-Renewal/Termination of Agreement for Street Maintenance and Public Access of Village Gate Road, Ridge Gate Road, and Watchwood Court (Orindawoods).

Recommendation:

Direct the City Manager to Provide Notice of Non-Renewal/Termination of Agreement for Street Maintenance and Public Access of Village Gate Road, Ridge Gate Road, and Watchwood Court (Orindawoods).

This item was previously continued by the Council to June 7, 2022.

H.4. Discussion of Annual Update to the Capital Improvement Plan Recommendation:

F.1.b
Packet Pg. 31
Attachment: City Council Minutes of April 19, 2022 (2760 : City Council Minutes) Orinda City Council Minutes Page 22 of 22 04.19.22
Staff recommends the City Council conduct its first review and discussion of the annual update to the City's rolling five-year Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) for Fiscal Years 2021/22-2026/27. No action is being taken to approve projects or appropriate funds. The information obtained from this meeting will be used to develop formal updates to the CIP, including the addition of new projects. The City Council will have additional opportunities to review and provide input in the next two months along with the mid-cycle budget adjustments before the CIP is approved.

This item was previously continued by the Council to May 3, 2022.

L. ADJOURNMENT
The Regular Meeting was adjourned at approximately 12:17 a.m. to the next Regular Meeting on Tuesday, May 03, 2022 at 7:00 p.m.
______________________________________
Sheri Marie Smith, City Clerk
F.1.b
Packet Pg. 32
Attachment: City Council Minutes of April 19, 2022 (2760 : City Council Minutes) City Council
Staff Report
Agenda Item: F.2
Date: May 3, 2022
Department: City Clerk
AGENDA TITLE: Authorization For Continued Use of Remote Teleconference for City Meetings
RECOMMENDATION:

Approve the Ratification of Orinda City Council Resolution No. 42-21 and Authorize the Continued Use of Teleconference Meetings for the Period of May 4, 2022 to June 2, 2022 Pursuant to the Provisions of Assembly Bill 361.

BACKGROUND:

On October 5th, 2021 the Orinda City Council adopted Resolution No. 42-21 approving the continued use of teleconferencing for the meetings of all City legislative bodies pursuant to the provisions of Assembly Bill 361. The resolution was ratified on October 19th, and at subsequent meetings through 2021 and 2022.

DISCUSSION:

At the time of adoption, the City Council anticipated that the resolution would appear on its consent calendar for review and ratification or update at regular Council meetings.

The State law authorizes the continuation for as long as the Governor’s proclaimed state of emergency relating to the COVID-19 pandemic remains in effect. On February 25, 2022 Governor Newsom issued an Executive Order which extends the emergency proclamation to June 30, 2022. State law also provides that the City Council determine that they desire to continue remote public meetings and make the necessary findings at least every thirty days. Those findings were contained in Orinda City Council Resolution No. 42-21, which staff recommends the Council vote to ratify based on current conditions.

Approval of this item will allow all public bodies established by the City of Orinda and covered by Resolution No. 42-21 to continue to conduct teleconferencing meetings.

On April 15, 2022, Contra Costa Health Services issued the attached revised Recommendations for Safely Holding Public Meetings in which online meetings are still encouraged.

FISCAL IMPACT:

None.

ATTACHMENTS:

A. Weblink to: Staff Report, Adopted Resolution at October 5, 2021 Council Meeting B. Contra Costa Health Services Recommendations for Safely Holding Public Meetings F.2
Packet Pg. 33
Respectfully Submitted by:

Sheri Smith
City Clerk
Prepared By: Sheri Smith, City Clerk
Approved by:

F.2
Packet Pg. 34
Recommendations for safely holding public meetings
Each local government agency is authorized to determine whether to hold public meetings in person, on-line (teleconferencing only), or via a combination of methods. The following are recommendations from the Contra Costa County Health Officer to minimize the risk of COVID 19 transmission during a public meeting.

1. Online meetings (i.e. teleconferencing meetings) are encouraged, where practical, as these meetings present the lowest risk of transmission of SARS CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID 19. This is particularly important when community prevalence rates are high. Our current trends as of April 15, 2022 in Covid-19 case rate and Covid-19 hospitalizations have plateaued at this time, but wastewater surveillance data and COVID-19 test positivity has been increasing. In addition to this, the predominant variant of Covid-19 being identified continues to be the Omicron variant, the impact of which on the spread of Covid-19 has shown to dramatically increase COVID-19 transmission.

2. If a local agency determines to hold in-person meetings, offering the public the opportunity to attend via a call-in option or an internet-based service option is recommended, when possible, to give those at higher risk of and/or higher concern about COVID-19 an alternative to participating in person.

3. A written safety protocol should be developed and followed. It is recommended that the protocol require social distancing, where feasible – i.e. six feet of separation between attendees; and consider requiring or strongly encouraging face masking of all attendees and encouraging attendees to be up-to-date on their COVID-19 vaccine.

4. Seating arrangements should allow for staff and members of the public to easily maintain at least six-foot distance from one another at all practicable times.

5. Consider holding public meetings outdoors. Increasing scientific consensus is that outdoor airflow reduces the risk of COVID-19 transmission compared to indoor spaces. Hosting events outdoors also may make it easier to space staff and members of the public at least 6 feet apart.

6. Current evidence is unclear as to the added benefit of temperature checks in addition to symptom checks. We encourage focus on symptom checks as they may screen out individuals with other Covid-19 symptoms besides fever and help reinforce the message to not go out in public if you are not feeling well.

7. Consider a voluntary attendance sheet with names and contact information to assist in contact tracing of any cases linked to a public meeting.

Revised 4-15-2022
Sefanit Mekuria, MD, MPH
Deputy Health Officer, Contra Costa County
F.2.b
Packet Pg. 35
Attachment: Contra Costa Health Services Recommendations for Safely Holding Public Meetings (2761 : Ratify Continued Teleconference City Council
Staff Report
Agenda Item: F.3
Date: May 3, 2022
Department: City Council
AGENDA TITLE: Ordering the Preparation and Filing of a Report for the Fiscal Year 2022/23 Assessments for the Orinda Street Lighting and Landscaping Assessment District No. 1986-1
RECOMMENDATION:

Adopt Resolution No. 20-22, Ordering the Preparation and Filing of Report for Levy of Annual Assessments for Fiscal Year 2022/23 for Orinda Street Lighting and Landscaping Assessment District No. 1986-1.

BACKGROUND:

The Orinda Street Lighting and Landscape Assessment District No. 1986-1 (AD 86-1) consists of three distinct zones of benefit. These zones are former County Service Areas which were reinstituted upon incorporation as AD 86-1 to continue similar services. The zones are as follows:
 The L-42 Zone finances the cost of residential street lighting within four neighborhoods in South Orinda. These neighborhoods are:

1. Tahos Road from just north of Bates Blvd to the south cul-de-sac including Bates Court, Silverwood Court, and Oakridge Court; Meadow View Road from Meadow Lane to the north cul-de-sac

2. Valley Drive from Heather Lane to south of Valley Court

3. Courtney Lane

4. Martha Road and Catherine Court (cul-de-sac sections of both streets)  The M-9 Zone finances the cost of residential street lighting in the Orinda Downs area along the following streets:

1. Dalewood Drive (public portion) 6. Fallen Leaf Terrace

2. Redcoach Lane 7. Sundown Terrace

3. Coachwood Terrace 8. Silver Oak Terrace

4. Amber Valley Drive 9. Happy Valley Road

5. Singingwood Lane
 The M-11 Zone is comprised of commercial properties in the Village District and Theatre District (Crossroads) areas, and finances the cost of part or all of the following services.

1. operation of street lights and replacement of failing poles and fixtures

2. sidewalk replacement

3. street sweeping and litter pickup

4. landscape maintenance (median islands, right-of-way, and mini-parks)

5. water and electric utilities for landscaping (water, electrical irrigation) F.3
Packet Pg. 36
DISCUSSION:

The Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972 requires that an annual review and updated Engineer’s report be prepared to set assessment rates each fiscal year. The assessments cannot exceed the maximum annual assessment amount set plus any approved cost of living.

In 1999, a ballot proceeding was conducted to allow for an annual adjustment to the assessment amount. The results of that proceeding were that the L-42 Zone and the M9 Zone have approved annual adjustments, which allow for an annual adjustment based on the February to February Consumer Price Index for the San Francisco Bay Area.

The M-11 Zone property owners did not approve the adjustment and that rate is levied without any adjustment. The cost of the preparation of the engineer’s report, completed by an outside firm, is included in the adopted AD 86-1 budget and is then allocated to each zone.

The first step in the assessment levy process is the adoption of a resolution ordering the engineer to prepare the annual report. The purpose of the subject Resolution (Attachment A) is to authorize the filing of the report pursuant to State requirements regarding the services to be funded, the estimated cost of the services, the method or methods of spreading the assessment of costs among benefiting properties, and the actual assessment for each parcel in the district. The tentative schedule for district proceedings is found as Attachment B.

In an effort to maintain greater control over district expenses, City staff will continue to prepare the annual district budget. The engineering services, which are provided by NBS, include allocating the engineering and assessment collection expenses, preparing the engineer's report and providing the assessment information to the County Auditor. In addition, NBS will provide ongoing administration of the tax roll billing to the assessment district through communications with the County Auditor’s office and taxpayer inquiries.

Approval of Resolution No. 20-22 will provide sufficient time to prepare and file the appropriate reports and provide the tax information to the County Auditor by the filing deadline in early August 2022.

NEXT STEPS:

Staff will proceed to prepare the engineering report for Council to review.

FISCAL IMPACT:

The estimated cost for services by NBS, including preparing the Engineer’s report, is approximately $7,000 and is charged as an expense allocated to each Zone. The preparation of the report is an annual requirement necessary to continue to collect the assessments.

ATTACHMENTS:

A. Resolution 20-22 L and L District 1986-1 - Order Report B. Timeline_2022-2023
F.3
Packet Pg. 37
Respectfully Submitted by:

Scott Christie
Public Works Director
Prepared By: Scott Christie, Public Works Director
Approved by:

F.3
Packet Pg. 38

BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ORINDA
In the Matter of:

Ordering the Preparation and Filing of )
Report for Levy of Annual Assessments )
For Fiscal Year 2022/23 for Orinda ) Resolution No. 20-22 Street Lighting and Landscaping )
Assessment District No. 1986-1 )
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Orinda formed an Assessment District under Part 2 of Division 15 of the Streets & Highways Code (Landscape & Lighting Act of 1972, beginning with Streets & Highways Code, Section 22500); and WHEREAS, the Assessment District was designated as “Orinda Street Lighting and Landscaping Assessment District No. 1986-1”; and
WHEREAS, the improvements of the Assessment District consist of the maintenance or servicing, or both, of existing and future public lighting and landscaping facilities, and the installation or construction of public lighting and landscaping facilities and any facilities appurtenant to them or necessary or convenient for the maintenance or servicing of them, including grading, clearing, removal of debris, the installation or construction of curbs, gutters, walls, sidewalks or paving, or water, irrigation, drainage or electrical facilities; and WHEREAS, it is necessary to undertake proceedings pursuant to Streets & Highways Code, Sections 22620-22631, for the levy and collection of assessments for the Fiscal year 2022/23 within the existing Assessment District; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Orinda orders the preparation and filing of a report in accordance with Article 4 (beginning with Streets & Highways Code, Section 22565) of Chapter 1 of the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972.

ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Orinda at a regular meeting of said Council held on May 3, 2022, by the following vote:

AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS:

Dennis Fay, Mayor
ATTEST:

Sheri Marie Smith, City Clerk
F.3.a
Packet Pg. 39
Attachment: Resolution 20-22 L and L District 1986-1 - Order Report (2766 : L and L district order engr report)

CITY OF ORINDA
Orinda Street Lighting and Landscape Assessment District No. 1986-1 FY 2022/23 Timeline for Levy of Assessments
Category Action
Performed
By Due Date Notes
Timeline
NBS prepares and delivers the
proposed Fiscal Year 2022/23
Timeline
NBS March 23
Timeline Agency Staff reviews the proposed
timeline and provides comments Agency April 1
Budgets Agency Staff provides the District
Budget Agency April 8
Report NBS prepares and delivers the Annual
Report NBS April 22
Council Meeting
Council adopts one resolution:

Ordering the Preparation of Annual
Report
Council May 3 1
st & 3rd Tuesday
every month
Report Agency Staff reviews the Annual
Report and provides comments Agency May 4
Report NBS delivers the Annual Report for
Agency Staff approval NBS May 6
Council Meeting
Council adopts two resolutions:

Resolution of Intention and Approving
Engineer’s Report
Council May 17 1
st & 3rd Tuesday
every month
Notice
Clerk publishes the Resolution
Declaring Intent. Notice must be in
the local newspaper, not less than 10
days before the Public Hearing
Clerk June 10 Publish by June 10
Council Meeting
Council conducts the Public Hearing,
then adopts the Resolution Confirming
the Diagram and the Assessment and
Ordering the Levy
Council June 21 1
st & 3rd Tuesday
every month
Resolutions Clerk delivers copies of all approved
Resolutions to NBS Clerk July 1
Levy Submittal NBS submits the levy of assessments
to the County Auditor/Controller NBS August 2022
F.3.b
Packet Pg. 40
Attachment: Timeline_2022-2023 (2766 : L and L district order engr report) City Council
Staff Report
Agenda Item: F.4
Date: May 3, 2022
Department: City Council
AGENDA TITLE: Award a Construction Contract to Valentine Corporation for the Lavenida Culvert Repair Project (Project No. 4148), Authorize Contract Amendment #2 with Dewberry/Drake Haglan for the Design, Accept Grants of Storm Drain Easements and Approve Budget Changes for said project.

RECOMMENDATION:

Staff recommends that the City Council: (1) Award a Construction Contract for the Lavenida Culvert Project (Project No. 4148) to Valentine Corporation of San Rafael, California for an amount of $619,369 and authorize a 15% contingency; (2) Approve the Design/ Construction Plans for said project; (3) Authorize Contract Amendment No. 2 with Dewberry/Drake Haglan to increase the contract limit by an addition of $49,970 to a new total contract amount of $141,045 and authorize a 7% contingency; (4) Accept Storm Drain Easements for facilities constructed with said project and (5) Approve budget change of $243,978 in additional funding required to complete said project.

BACKGROUND:

The current adopted CIP includes the subject project, which will repair a failing 10 ft. diameter corrugated metal culvert which conveys Moraga Creek under Lavenida Dr.

Refer to Attachment A for a map showing the work location. At its July 2, 2019 meeting, City Council awarded a design contract for the work to Dewberry/Drake Haglan, which was amended at the March 2, 2021 City Council meeting to increase the contract by an addition of $21,112 to a new total contract amount of $91,075, plus a 10% contingency.

To date, approximately $90,116 has been expended on the work. The scope of work increased due to regulatory permit acquisition efforts and the need to modify the design to accommodate both permit requirements and to fit surveyed conditions. Necessary permits have now been acquired.

The construction work to be done generally consists of installing coffer dams and creek diversion to allow replacement of the invert of the corrugated metal storm drain pipe culvert with reinforced concrete. Work also consists of excavating embankments to form and pour new concrete headwalls with decorative architectural treatment. The plans for the project are discussed below and included as Attachment B.

With respect to CEQA guidelines, the project was determined to be Categorically Exempt under section 15301, class 1, and a Notice of Exemption was filed with the County Clerk on 11-27-2019.

The abutting property owners have been cooperating with the City in regards to allowing access to do the work and to accommodate permanent easements due to the improvements. As discussed below, Staff recommends the City accept the 3 grants of F.4
Packet Pg. 41
storm drain easement which have been signed (or in the case of the AUSD will be signed upon their Board approval scheduled at their May 4, 2022 meeting) by the respective property owners. Details of the easements are provided below.

DISCUSSION:

1. Award Construction Contract
The project bid package was finalized and advertised on March 7, 2022. Seven (7) bids were received on April 12, 2022. The Engineer’s Estimate for the project was $644,956.88. The Total bid (based on unit prices and engineering estimated quantities) for each of the bidders is as follows:

Bidders Total Bid
Valentine Corporation $ 619,369.00
Farallon Company Engineering $ 628,718.50
T.P.A Construction, Inc. $ 674,968.00
Sandstone Environmental Engineering Inc. $ 682,869.50
W.R. Forde Associates, Inc. $ 742,000.00
Kerex Engineering, Inc. $ 760,407.00
NBC Construction & Engineering Inc. $ 808,081.47
The apparent low bidder, Valentine Corporation, of San Rafael, California, submitted a total bid of $619,369 (Attachment C). Staff reviewed the bid documents and finds Valentine Corporation to be the low responsive and responsible bidder and therefore recommends that the contract (Attachment D) be awarded to them. In addition Staff is recommending that a contingency of 15% (approximately $92,900) be authorized to accommodate potential changes in quantities provided based on the unit values contained in the bid, and for unforeseen changes in conditions.

To perform on-site construction inspection and construction management services for the work, we have engaged Anchor Engineering Inc., who is an on-call construction management firm for the City. The estimated amount of such work is $58,580, to be paid on a time and materials basis as stipulated in the contract.

2. Approve Plans for the Project
City Council approval of the construction plans (Attachment B) is recommended, in accordance with design immunity defense requirements listed under California Government Code Section 830.6.

3. Approve Amendment #2 to Dewberry Design Contract
The existing Dewberry contract included scope of work for environmental and design services through the completion of the PS&E bid package. The current value of the contract, included Amendment #1, is $91,075. To date, $90,116 has been expended.

The proposed Amendment #2 (Attachment E) is to add new scope of work (beyond the contract scope) which will include bidding support, design support during construction and environmental monitoring during construction of the project. These additional F.4
Packet Pg. 42
services are required as described in the March 26, 2022 Amendment Request prepared by Dewberry (included in Attachment E).

The Amendment Request is for an amount of $49,970, to be paid on a time and materials basis as stipulated in the contract. The amended contract value would be $141,045. Staff recommends a $10,000 contingency (7% of the contract value) in the event additional work is required; such work would only be authorized if approved by a third amendment executed by the City Manager. Amendment #2 also extends the time of performance to reflect the additional scope of work as described above.

4. Accept Grants of Storm Drain Easement
The existing culvert has encroached on three of the abutting property owners since the culvert was installed (estimated to be circa 1950). The culvert extends approximately 5 ft. beyond the public road right of way for Lavenida Dr. into such private properties. In order to properly acknowledge that the City will own and maintain the culvert improvements, Staff recommends that City Council accept said Grants of Storm Drain Easement (Attachments F, G & H). The easements are limited in extent to no more than 5 ft. beyond the edge of the improvements (to allow for maintenance access).

Since the parties have agreed that granting of the easements is mutually beneficial, there is no acquisition cost borne by the City.

In order to record the grants of easements, Resolutions #17-22, #18-22 and #19-22, authorizing acceptance (Attachments I, J & K) are required. Upon adoption of the subject resolutions by City Council, the City Manager will execute certificates of acceptance, which will be provided along with the signed easements and said resolutions to a Title Company for recording with the County Recorder.

NEXT STEPS:

Upon approval of the award of construction contract, it will be routed for signatures by the parties, including review/approval to form by the city attorney. Project construction will be scheduled to occur during the June 15 - October 15, 2022 in-creek work window stipulated by the regulatory permits. As noted above, the permanent storm drain easements will be recorded.

FISCAL IMPACT:

The updated estimated total Project cost including design, construction and construction management as outlined above, including contingencies, and approximately $14,000 in misc. costs (regulatory permit fees, hydraulic analysis, etc.) is $936,000. The CIP budget for the project (including prior years) is $692,022, and therefore a budget adjustment of $243,978 is recommended in order to proceed with the project. The following is a summary of the recommended revised total project budget by funding source.

F.4
Packet Pg. 43
Funding Source
Total Project
Budget
Per Adopted
CIP 6/29/2021
Proposed
Budget
Adjustment
Total Revised
Project Budget
(all Years)
105 Orinda Add-On Sales Tax
(L) $183,522 $243,978 $427,500
210 Drainage Impact Fees $ 508,500 -- $508,500
Total $ 692,022 $243,978 $936,000
It should be noted that post construction monitoring may be required, depending on actual impacts from the project. This will be better known after construction is close to completion, when regulatory agency representatives will be requested to make their determinations. Such monitoring would require Staff time and environmental consultant costs not reflected above.

ATTACHMENTS:

A. Map aerial view of Lavenida Culver Project
B. Plans
C. Valentine Bid
D. Construction contract for Lavenida Project
E. Amd #2 Dewberry with attachments and contract
F. SD Easement 18 Lavenida
G. SD Easement 15 Lavenida
H. AUSD 750 Moraga Way M H.S. Storm Drain Easement with Exhibits 3-10-2022 I. Resolution 17-22 Authorizing Acceptance of Grant of SD Easement (18 Lavenida) J. Resolution 18-22 Authorizing Acceptance of Grant of SD Easement (15 Lavenida) K. Resolution 19-22 Authorizing Acceptance of Grant of SD Easement (750 Moraga Way)
Respectfully Submitted by:

Scott Christie
Public Works Director
Prepared By: Scott Christie, Public Works Director
Approved by:

F.4
Packet Pg. 44
F.4.a
Packet Pg. 45
Attachment: Map aerial view of Lavenida Culver Project (2765 : Lavenida contruction)

CITY OF ORINDA

CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT
for
Lavenida Culvert Repair Project No.:4148
THIS CONTRACT FOR CONSTRUCTION is made and entered into the date of the last signature affixed hereto by and between the City of Orinda, a municipal corporation (herein called the City) and, Valentine Corporation located at 111 Pelican Way, San Rafael, CA 94901 (herein called Contractor).

RECITALS
A. WHEREAS, the City has caused to be prepared in the manner prescribed by law, certain plans, specifications and other contract documents for the public work of construction titled Lavenida Culvert Repair Project No. 4148 herein described and shown, and has approved and adopted the Contract Documents, as that term is defined below, including the specifications and plans, and has caused to be published in the manner and for the time required by law a Notice Inviting Bids for the work described in the Contract Documents (the Work), and
B. WHEREAS, Contractor in response to the City’s Notice has submitted to the City a sealed bid proposal “Proposal”, dated April 12, 2022 (attached as Exhibit H) accompanied by a bid guaranty in an amount not less than ten percent (10%) of the amount bid for the construction of all of the proposed Work in accordance with the terms of the Contract Documents, and C. WHEREAS, the City, in the manner prescribed by law, has publicly opened, examined, and declared the bids submitted and as a result has determined and declared Contractor to be the lowest responsible bidder and has duly awarded to Contractor a contract for all of the Work and for the sum or sums named in the bid proposal and in this Contract.

Accordingly, the City and Contractor agree as follows:

1. CONTRACT SUM: The City agrees to pay, and Contractor agrees to accept, in full payment for the above Work, the sum of Six hundred and Nineteen thousand, Three Hundred and Sixty- Nine dollars ($619,369) to be paid in accordance with the Contract Documents.

2. COMPLIANCE WITH LAW: The City is a public agency. All provisions of law applicable to public contracts are a part of this Contract to the same extent as though set forth herein and will be complied with by Contractor. This Contract is subject to State contract nondiscrimination and compliance requirements pursuant to Government Code section 12990.

3. CONTRACT DOCUMENTS: The following Contract Documents relating to this Contract for Construction are hereby made a part of and incorporated by reference into this Contract:

F.4.d
Packet Pg. 46
Attachment: Construction contract for Lavenida Project (2765 : Lavenida contruction)

I. Notice to Bidders and Special Provisions
A. Engineering Plans/Drawings and Specifications prepared for this Project.

B. State of California Dept. of Transportation, 2010 Standard Specifications C. State of California Dept. of Transportation, Revised Standard Specifications attached to the Special Provisions
D. Special Provisions
E. State of California Dept. of Transportation, 2010 Standard Plans F. State of California Dept. of Transportation, Revised Standard Plans listed in the Standard Plan List and attached to the Special Provisions G. Any Supplemental Contract Information
II. Proposal & Sample Contract
A. List of Subcontractors
B. Non-Collusion Declaration
C. Public Contract Code Section 10162 Questionnaire
D. Public Contract Section 10232 Statement
E. Public Contract Code Section 102851.1 Statement
F. Bidder’s Bond
Including the following for federally funded projects:

G. Equal Employment Opportunity Certification
H. General Prevailing Wage Rates (State of California)
I. Debarment and Suspension Certificate
J. Nonlobbying Certification
K. Disclosure of Lobbying Activities
L. DBE Commitment/DBE Good Faith Effort Documentation
M. Davis-Bacon Act Federal Minimum Wage Rates
III. Construction Contract
A. Compliance with Insurance Requirements declaration (Exhibit A) B. Performance Bond (Exhibit B)
C. Labor and Material Bond (Exhibit C)
D. Warranty and Guaranty (Exhibit D)
E. Affidavit Concerning Conflicts of Interest and Noncompetitive Practices (Exhibit E)
F. Certificates of Insurance, Endorsements, and other evidence of insurance provided pursuant to this Contract and accepted by the City (Exhibit F) G. Contractor Safety Program: Self-Certification Worksheet (Exhibit G) Any work called for in one Contract Document not mentioned in another is to be performed and executed the same as if mentioned in all Contract Documents.

4. EFFECTIVE DATE: This Contract shall not be effective and no payments to Contractor will be made until:
a. The City has received satisfactory evidence that Contractor has met all of the insurance requirements of this Contract;
F.4.d
Packet Pg. 47
Attachment: Construction contract for Lavenida Project (2765 : Lavenida contruction)

b. All required signatures, including those of the City Manager, the City Attorney, and the City Clerk have been obtained; and
c. All bonds required by this Contract have been obtained and filed with the City.

5. INDEMNIFICATION: The City of Orinda and all officers, employees, and agents thereof connected with the Work, shall not be answerable or accountable in any manner: for any loss or damage that may happen to the Work or any part thereof; for any loss or damage to any of the materials or other things used or employed in performing the Work; for injury to or death of any person; or for damage to property from any cause except losses due to sole or active negligence of the City’s officers or employees.

To the fullest extent allowed by law, Contractor shall defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City, its elected and appointed officials, employees and agents, from all liability, penalties, costs, losses, damages, expenses, causes of action, claims or judgments, including attorneys’ fees and other defense costs, resulting from injury to or death sustained by any person (including Contractor’s employees and subcontractors), or damage to property of any kind, or any other injury or damage whatsoever, which injury, death or damage arises out of or is in any way connected with the performance of the Work, regardless of Contractor’s fault or negligence, including any of the same resulting from City’s alleged or actual negligent act or omission, or its agents, contractors or employees; except that said indemnity shall not be applicable to injury, death or damage to property arising from the sole or active negligence or willful misconduct of City, its constituent entities, its and their officers, agents, or servants who are directly responsible to City. In instances where the City’s active negligence accounts for only a percentage of the liability involved, the obligation of Contractor will be for that entire portion of percentage of liability not attributable to the active negligence of the City.

Contractor shall be obligated to immediately defend, with counsel approved by the City, any suit or action brought against the City, its elected and appointed officials, employees and agents, founded upon any claim of injury to or death sustained by any person (including Contractor’s employees and subcontractors), or damage to property of any kind, or any other injury or damage whatsoever, which injury, death or damage arises out of or is in any way connected with the performance of the Work, whether or not liability is established. If it is finally adjudicated that liability was caused by the sole active negligence or sole willful misconduct of an indemnified party, Contractor may submit a claim to the City for reimbursement of reasonable attorneys’ fees and defense costs. This indemnification and duty to defend shall extend to claims asserted after termination of this Contract for whatever reason.

In addition to any remedy authorized by law, as much of the money due Contractor under and by virtue of this Contract as shall be considered necessary by the City, may be retained by the City until disposition has been made of such suits or claims for damage.

The City and Contractor shall timely notify each other of the receipt of any third-party claim relating to the contract. The City shall be entitled to recover its reasonable costs incurred in providing such notification.

F.4.d
Packet Pg. 48
Attachment: Construction contract for Lavenida Project (2765 : Lavenida contruction)

6. INSURANCE TYPES AND LIMITS: Contractor shall promptly obtain, at its own expense, all the insurance described in this section, and submit coverage verification for review and approval by the City. This insurance shall be in addition to any other form of insurance or bonds required under the terms of this Contract.

To the extent that Contractor’s insurance documentation is not in compliance with the requirements of this Contract and the City Attorney is required to intervene to explain and obtain the proper documentation from Contractor’s insurer, the cost of the City Attorney’s services will be deducted from the contract price to which Contractor would otherwise be entitled under the terms of this Contract.

Contractor shall include all costs for all insurance in its bid.

Nothing contained in these insurance requirements is to be construed as limiting the extent of Contractor’s responsibility for payment of damages resulting from its operations under this Contract. Contractor’s failure to provide or maintain the insurance required by this Contract shall not affect Contractor’s obligations under this Contract.

Contractor, at Contractor’s own expense, shall procure, pay for, and maintain throughout the duration of this Contract the following insurance coverage against claims for injuries to persons or damages to property that may arise from or in connection with the performance of the Work hereunder by Contractor, its agents, representatives, employees or subcontractors.

Companies writing the insurance under this article shall be authorized to do business in the State of California. Insurance is to be placed with insurers possessing an A.M. Best rating of no less than A:VII.
a. Workers’ Compensation Coverage. Contractor shall maintain workers’ compensation insurance and employer’s liability insurance for Contractor’s employees in accordance with Sections 3700 et seq. of the California Labor Code. In addition, Contractor shall require each subcontractor involved with the Work to be performed under this Contract to similarly maintain workers’ compensation insurance and employer’s liability insurance for all of subcontractor’s employees in accordance with Sections 3700 et seq. of the California Labor Code. The workers’ compensation policy shall include employers’ liability in an amount not less than $1,000,000 for each accident, bodily injury by disease, and $1,000,000 for each employee bodily injury by disease. The workers’ compensation policy shall be endorsed with a waiver of subrogation in favor of the City for all Work performed by Contractor, its employees, agents and subcontractors.
b. General Liability Coverage. Contractor shall maintain commercial general liability insurance and umbrella or excess liability insurance covering all operations by or on behalf of Contractor providing insurance for bodily injury liability and property damage liability for the following limits per occurrence and including coverage for:
(1) premises, operations and mobile equipment; (2) products and completed operations; (3) broad form property damage (including completed operations); (4) F.4.d
Packet Pg. 49
Attachment: Construction contract for Lavenida Project (2765 : Lavenida contruction)

explosion, collapse, and underground hazards; (5) personal and advertising injury; and (6) contractual liability.

Liability Limits
Total bid For each
occurrencea
Aggregate for
products/
completed
operation
General
aggregateb
Umbrella or
excess
liabilityc
≤ $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $2,000,000 $2,000,000 $5,000,000 > $1,000,000
≤ $2,000,000 $2,000,000 $4,000,000 $4,000,000 $5,000,000 > $2,000,000
≤ $5,000,000 $5,000,000 $5,000,000 $5,000,000 $10,000,000 > $5,000,000 $5,000,000 $5,000,000 $5,000,000 $15,000,000 a Combined single limit for bodily injury and property damage. b This limit must apply separately to your work under this Contract. c The umbrella or excess policy must contain a clause stating that it takes effect (drops down) in the event the primary limits are impaired or exhausted.

If Contractor maintains higher limits than the minimums shown above, the City requires and shall be entitled to coverage for the higher limits maintained by Contractor. Any available insurance proceeds in excess of the specified minimum limits of insurance and coverage shall be available to the City. c. Automobile Liability Coverage. Contractor shall maintain automobile liability insurance in amounts not less than $2,000,000 per occurrence for bodily injury and property damage for all activities arising out of or in connection with the Work to be performed under this Contract. A combination of an automobile liability policy and a “follow-form” excess liability or umbrella policy may be utilized to achieve these limits. All automobiles and trucks owned, non-owned or hired shall be covered.

7. ADDITIONAL INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS:
a. The general liability and automobile liability policies are to contain, or be endorsed to contain, the following provisions:
i. Additional Insureds. The City and its officers, officials, employees, agents, volunteers, and those individuals identified in section 7-1.06D(2) of the special provisions shall be covered as additional insureds with respect to liability arising out of work or operations performed by or on behalf of Contractor, including materials, parts or equipment furnished in connection with such work or operations and automobiles owned, leased, hired, or borrowed by or on behalf of Contractor. General liability coverage can be provided in the form of an endorsement to Contractor’s insurance (at least as broad as ISO Form CG 20 10, CG 11 85, or both CG 20 10 F.4.d
Packet Pg. 50
Attachment: Construction contract for Lavenida Project (2765 : Lavenida contruction)

and CG 20 37 forms if later revisions used), or as a separate owner’s policy. Forms covering additional insureds only for liability caused in whole or part by Contractor’s acts or omissions are NOT acceptable.
ii. Contractor’s Policy Primary. For any claims related to the Work, Contractor’s policy shall be considered primary insurance as to the City, its officers, officials, employees, agents and volunteers. Any insurance or self-insurance maintained by the City, its officers, officials, employees, or volunteers, shall be excess of Contractor’s insurance only and shall not contribute with it. b. Period of Effect. All insurance required by this Contract shall remain in full force and effect at all times during the prosecution of the Work and until the final completion and acceptance thereof. In addition, the general liability coverage shall be maintained for a minimum of five (5) years after final completion and acceptance of the Work. In the event Contractor fails to obtain or maintain completed operations coverage as required by this Contract, the City at its sole discretion may purchase the coverage as required and the cost will be paid by Contractor. The Notice to Proceed does not relieve Contractor of the duty to obtain such insurance as required herein.
c. Notice. Contractor shall not cancel, assign, or change any policy of insurance required by this Contract or engage in any act or omission that will cause its insurer to cancel any insurance policy required by this Contract except after providing 30 days prior written notice to the City. If an insurance policy required by this Contract is unilaterally cancelled or changed by the insurer, the Contractor shall immediately provide written notice to the City and obtain substitute insurance meeting the requirements of this Contract. Each insurance policy required by this Contract shall provide that coverage shall not be canceled, except with notice to the City. Nothing in this subsection relieves Contractor of its obligation to maintain all insurance required by this Contract at all times during the prosecution of the Work. Insurance policies shall have provisions requiring that City be given minimum 10 day notice of cancellation for nonpayment of premium. d. Deductibles and Self-Insured Retentions. Any deductibles or self-insured retentions must be declared to and approved by the City. At the option of the City, either (1) the insurer shall reduce or eliminate such deductibles or self-insured retentions as respects the City, its officers, officials, employees, agents and volunteers; or (2) Contractor shall provide a financial guarantee satisfactory to the City guaranteeing payment of loses and related investigations, claim administration and defense expenses. e. No insurance policy required herein shall be written as claims-made coverage. Insurance must be written on an occurrence basis.
f. Failure of the City to enforce in a timely manner any of the provisions of this Contract, including the Contract’s insurance provisions, shall not act as a waiver to enforcement of any of these provisions at a later date. The City reserves the right to require complete, certified copies of all required insurance policies, including endorsements, required by these provisions, at any time.

F.4.d
Packet Pg. 51
Attachment: Construction contract for Lavenida Project (2765 : Lavenida contruction)

g. Subcontractors. Contractor shall require and verify that all subcontractors maintain insurance meeting all the requirements stated herein.
h. Contractor hereby agrees to waive rights of subrogation that any insurer of Contractor may acquire from Contractor by virtue of the payment of any loss. Contractor agrees to obtain any endorsement that may be necessary to effect this waiver of subrogation. i. City reserves the right to modify these requirements, including limits, based on the nature of the risk, prior experience, insurer, coverage, or other special circumstances.

8. EVIDENCE OF INSURANCE: Contractor shall provide (1) certificates of insurance and (2) original written endorsements as evidence of the insurance coverage required by this Contract. The endorsements are to be signed by a person authorized by that Insurer to bind coverage on its behalf. Certificates and endorsements shall be filed with the City and are considered an integral part of this Contract, which shall not become effective until satisfactory evidence of insurance has been received and approved by the City. However, failure of Contractor to provide satisfactory evidence of insurance or failure of the City to approve satisfactory evidence of insurance shall not operate as a waiver of these insurance requirements. As noted above, the endorsements of insurance coverage shall specifically:
a. Endorse the City, its officers, officials, employees, agents and volunteers, and those individuals identified in section 7-1.06D(2) of the special provisions, as additional insureds for general liability coverage and automobile liability coverage; b. Provide that Contractor’s insurance is primary as to the City’s coverage, which shall be non-contributory for general liability coverage and automobile liability coverage; c. Provide that the City is named as a loss payee for the builder’s risk (course of construction) coverage; and
d. Provide that Contractor waives rights of subrogation in favor of the City for all work performed by Contractor, its employees, agents and subcontractors for the workers’ compensation coverage.
e. Provide that coverage shall not be canceled, except with notice to the City.

9. WORKERS COMPENSATION CERTIFICATION : By signing this Agreement, Contractor certifies the following “I am aware of the provisions of Section 3700 of the Labor Code which require every employer to be insured against liability for worker’s compensation or to undertake self-insurance in accordance with the provisions before commencing the performance of the work of this contract.”

10. PROHIBITED INTEREST: Contractor represents that to the best of its knowledge no officer or employee of the City has any financial interest in this transaction or in the business of Contractor; has used his or her position considering or approving the Contract for private gain or advantage; or has received any money or other consideration for approval of this Contract. Contractor further represents that to the best of its knowledge no officer or employee of the City is engaged in any employment, activity, or enterprise for compensation F.4.d
Packet Pg. 52
Attachment: Construction contract for Lavenida Project (2765 : Lavenida contruction)

which is inconsistent, incompatible, in conflict with, or inimical to his or her duties in approving this Contract. If any such interest, employment, activity, or enterprise comes to the knowledge of Contractor at any time, a full and complete disclosure of all such information shall be made in writing to the City, even if such interest would not be considered a conflict of interest under Article IV Division 4 Section 1090 or section 1126 of the Government Code of the State of California. No officer, or employee of the City or of any of its member jurisdictions during his/her tenure of office, or for one year thereafter, shall have any interest, financial or otherwise, in this Contract or the proceeds therefrom.

11. NOTICES: Any notices to be given hereunder by either party to the other may be effected either by personal delivery, fax or mail. Mail shall be sent registered or certified, postage prepaid, return receipt requested. Mailed notices shall be addressed to the parties at the addresses set forth below, but each party may change its address by written notice in accordance with this paragraph. Notices delivered personally shall be effective immediately.

Notices sent by mail shall be effective one (1) day after mailing. Notices sent by facsimile shall be effective upon transmission to the number set forth below.

CITY OF ORINDA CONTRACTOR
Director of Public Works Valentine Corporation
City of Orinda 111 Pelican Way
22 Orinda Way Sand Rafael, CA 94901
Orinda, California 94563 Fax: 415-457-5820
Fax: (925) 253-7699 Attn: Bob Valentine

12. BONDS:
a. Performance Bond: A performance bond as shown in Exhibit B shall be provided in the amount of 100% of the contract price.
b. Labor and Materials: A labor and materials bond as shown in Exhibit C shall be provided in the amount of 100% of the contract price.
c. Proof of Admitted Surety Insurer Status. A certificate of admitted surety insurer status shall be attached to each bond. Proof of that status shall be in either of the following forms: (a) a printout of information from the website of the Department of Insurance confirming the surety is an admitted surety insurer or (b) the Contra Costa County Clerk’s certificate under Code of Civil Procedure section 995.640(a).

13. CONTRACTOR’S BOOKS AND RECORDS: Contractor and its subcontractors shall establish and maintain records pertaining to this Contract. Contractor’s and subcontractors’ accounting systems shall conform to generally accepted accounting principles and all records shall provide a breakdown of total costs charged under this contract, including properly executed payrolls, time records, invoices and vouchers.

Contractor shall maintain any and all ledgers, books of account, invoices, vouchers, canceled checks and other records or documents evidencing or relating to charges for services or expenditures and disbursements charged to the City for a minimum period of three (3) years, F.4.d
Packet Pg. 53
Attachment: Construction contract for Lavenida Project (2765 : Lavenida contruction)

or for any longer period required by law, from the date of final payment to Contractor under this Contract.

Contractor shall maintain all documents and records that demonstrate performance under this Contract for a minimum period of three (3) years, or for any longer period required by law, from the date of termination or completion of this Contract.

Any records, data or documents required to be maintained pursuant to this Contract shall be made available for inspection, copying or audit, at any time during regular business hours, upon written request by the City or a designated representative for the purpose of auditing and verifying statements, performance, invoices, or bills submitted by Contractor pursuant to this Contract and shall provide such assistance as may be reasonably required in the course of such inspection. Copies of such documents shall be provided to the City for inspection at City’s facility when it is practical to do so. Otherwise, unless an alternative is mutually agreed upon, the records shall be available at Contractor’s address indicated for receipt of notices in the Contract.

Where the City has reason to believe that such records or documents may be lost or discarded due to dissolution, disbandment or termination of Contractor’s business, the City may, by written request, require that custody of the records be given to the City and that the records and documents be maintained at the City’s facility. Access to such records and documents shall be granted to any party authorized by Contractor, Contractor’s representatives, or Contractor’s successor-in-interest.

Pursuant to California Government Code section 8546.7, the parties to this Contract may be subject to the examination and audit of representative of the Auditor General of the State of California for a period of three (3) years after final payment under the Contract. Any such examination and audit shall be confined to those matters connected with the performance of this Contract including, but not limited to, the cost of administering the Contract.

Contractor and all subcontractors shall furnish the records specified in California Labor Code section 1776 directly to the Labor Commissioner in accordance with law. Contractor shall post all job site notices that are required by regulations of the Department of Industrial Relations. The work performed pursuant to this Contract is subject to compliance monitoring and enforcement by the Department of Industrial Relations.

14. WARRANTY AND GUARANTY: Contractor shall provide the City with a completed warranty and guaranty as shown in Exhibit D.

15. CONFLICTS OF INTEREST AND NONCOMPETITIVE PRACTICES AFFIDAVIT:

Contractor shall provide the City with a completed affidavit concerning conflicts of interest and noncompetitive practices as shown in Exhibit E.

16. FAITHFUL PERFORMANCE: Contractor agrees to do all things necessary to faithfully perform and complete the Work.

17. WARRANTIES:

F.4.d
Packet Pg. 54
Attachment: Construction contract for Lavenida Project (2765 : Lavenida contruction)

a. Warranty of Title: Contractor warrants to the City and its successors and assigns that the title to the materials, supplies or equipment covered by this Contract, when delivered to the City or its successors or assigns, shall be free from all liens and encumbrances. b. Warranty of Fitness: Contractor warrants that all materials, supplies and products furnished meet the requirements and conditions of the Contract Documents and are fit for the purpose intended.
c. Warranty of Merchantability: Contractor warrants that the goods are merchantable in accordance with California Commercial Code section 2314. In accepting this and other warranties and the materials or supplies to be manufactured or assembled pursuant to the Contract Documents, the City does not waive any warranty, either express or implied, in California Commercial Code sections 2312 through 2315, inclusive, or any liability of the manufacture as determined by any decision of a court of the State of California or the United States.
d. Registration: Contractor represents and warrants that it and all subcontractors working under this Contract are registered and qualified to perform public work pursuant to section 1725.5 of the California Labor Code.

18. WAIVER: No waiver of any breach of the terms, conditions or covenants of this Contract shall be construed to be a waiver of any succeeding breach of the same or any other covenants, conditions or terms of this Contract.

19. TIME OF THE ESSENCE: Time is of the essence in this Contract.

20. CONTROLLING LAW: This Contract and all matters relating to it shall be governed by the laws of the State of California.

21. ENTIRE AGREEMENT: It is expressly agreed between the City and Contractor that this Contract, including the Contract Documents listed in paragraph 3 and incorporated herein, expresses the complete and integrated agreement between the parties and supersedes all prior oral or written negotiations, agreements and understandings between them regarding the subject matter hereof. There are no other terms and provisions, implied or otherwise, written or oral, respecting the subject of this Contract.

22. AMENDMENT: This Contract may be amended only by a written agreement signed by the parties.

23. SPECIAL NOTICE:

CONTRACTORS ARE REQUIRED BY LAW TO BE LICENSED AND REGULATED BY THE CONTRACTORS’ STATE LICENSE BOARD WHICH HAS JURISDICTION

TO INVESTIGATE COMPLAINTS AGAINST CONTRACTORS IF A COMPLAINT REGARDING A PATENT ACT OR OMISSION IS FILED WITHIN FOUR (4) YEARS OF THE DATE OF THE ALLEGED VIOLATION. A COMPLAINT REGARDING A

LATENT ACT OR OMISSION PERTAINING TO STRUCTURAL DEFECTS MUST BE FILED WITHIN TEN (10) YEARS OF THE DATE OF THE ALLEGED VIOLATION.

F.4.d
Packet Pg. 55
Attachment: Construction contract for Lavenida Project (2765 : Lavenida contruction)

ANY QUESTIONS CONCERNING A CONTRACTOR MAY BE REFERRED TO THE REGISTRAR, CONTRACTORS’ STATE LICENSE BOARD, P.O. BOX 26000, SACRAMENTO, CALIFORNIA 95826.

This Contract is executed by the City upon approval by the Council at its regular meeting of May 3, 2022.

CITY OF ORINDA CONTRACTOR
By: By:

David Biggs Print Name:

City Manager Title:

Authorized representative of Contractor
Signature must be notarized. Attach acknowledgement
Date: Date:

Attest: If Contractor is a corporation, affix corporate Sheri M. Smith seal here
City Clerk
Approved as to Form:

Osa L. Wolff
City Attorney
Exhibits
A. Compliance with Insurance Requirements declaration
B. Performance Bond
C. Labor and Material Bond
D. Warranty and Guaranty
E. Affidavit Concerning Conflicts of Interest and Noncompetitive Practices F. Insurance Documents To Be Provided by Contractor
i. Workers’ Compensation Certificate of Insurance
ii. Workers’ Compensation Insurance Endorsements
iii. Automobile Liability Certificate of Insurance
iv. Automobile Liability Insurance Endorsements
v. General Liability Certificate of Insurance
vi. General Liability Insurance Endorsements
F.4.d
Packet Pg. 56
Attachment: Construction contract for Lavenida Project (2765 : Lavenida contruction)

G. Contractor Safety Program – Self Certification Worksheet H. Proposal submitted by Contractor
F.4.d
Packet Pg. 57
Attachment: Construction contract for Lavenida Project (2765 : Lavenida contruction)

EXHIBIT A

COMPLIANCE WITH INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS
To comply with this Contract, I, the undersigned, declare that I have provided certificates of insurance and original signed written endorsements (or other policy language) as evidence of the insurance coverage required by this Contract, which include the following.

A. Additional Insureds.

With respect to my general liability and automobile insurance coverage, I have attached to this Contract endorsements that add the City of Orinda, its officials, employees, agents, volunteers, and those individuals identified in section 7-1.06D of the special provisions as additional insureds. Acceptable additional insured endorsements for general liability insurance coverage include CG 10 10 11 85 or both CG 20 10 10 01 and CG 20 37 10 01.

B. Primary Insurance.

With respect to my general liability and automobile insurance coverage, I have attached to this Contract endorsements that demonstrate my insurance is primary as to the City’s insurance for any claim arising out of the subject of this Contract. The endorsements expressly state that the City’s insurance is excess insurance only and shall not be required to contribute to a loss that is covered by my insurance.

C. Waiver of Subrogation.

With respect to my workers compensation insurance coverage, I have attached to this Contract an endorsement with a waiver of subrogation in favor of the City for all Work performed by the Contractor, its employees, agents and subcontractors.

D. Notice of Cancellation.

With respect to all insurance policies, I have attached to this Contract endorsements providing that coverage shall not be canceled, except with notice to the City.

Alternatively, I have attached pages from my insurance contracts that provide satisfactory evidence that my policies cover these requirements without the need for an endorsement.

I, the undersigned, further declare that I am aware of the provisions of Section 3700 of the Labor Code which require every employer to be insured against liability for workers’ compensation or to undertake self-insurance in accordance with the provisions of that code, and I will comply with such provisions before commencing the performance of the work of this contract.

CONTRACTOR NAME
Date:

CONTRACTOR SIGNATURE
[Signature must be notarized. Attach acknowledgement form.] SIGNATORY’S TITLE/OFFICIAL CAPACITY
F.4.d
Packet Pg. 58
Attachment: Construction contract for Lavenida Project (2765 : Lavenida contruction)

EXHIBIT B

PERFORMANCE BOND
Bond No:

Premium:

Contract No:

WHEREAS, the City of Orinda, State of California, and Valentine Corporation , (Principal), have entered into a Contract in which Principal agrees to install and complete certain designated public improvements described as Lavenida Culvert Repair Project No. 4148, and; WHEREAS, the Principal is required under the terms of the Contract for furnish a bond for faithful performance of the Contract.

NOW, THEREFORE, we, the Principal and ,
as corporate surety, are held and firmly bound unto the City of Orinda, (City), in the sum of dollars ($ )
lawful money of the United States, for the payment of which we bind ourselves, our heirs, successors, executors and administrators, jointly and severally.

The condition of this obligation is such that if the above Principal, his/her or its heirs, executors, administrators, successors or assigns, shall in all things stand to and abide by, and well and truly keep and perform the covenants, conditions and provisions in the Contract and any alteration thereof made as therein provided, on this or their part, to be kept and performed at the time and in the manner therein specified, and in all respects according to their true intent and meaning, it shall become null and void; otherwise it shall be and remain in full force and effect.

As part of the obligation secured hereby and in addition to the face amount specified therefore, there shall be included costs and reasonable expenses and fees, including reasonable attorneys’ fees, incurred by City in successfully enforcing such obligation, all to be taxed as costs and included in any judgment rendered.

The surety hereby stipulates and agrees that no change, extension of time, alteration or addition to the terms of the Contract or to the Work to be performed thereunder or the specifications accompanying the same shall in any way affect its obligations on this bond, and it does hereby waive notice of any such change, extension of time, alteration or addition of the terms of the Contract or to the Work or to the specifications.

The surety is an "admitted surety insurer" as described in California Code of Civil Procedure §995.120. A certificate of admitted surety insurer status is attached to this bond. Proof of that status shall be in either of the following forms: (a) a printout of information from the website of the Department of Insurance confirming the surety is an admitted surety insurer or (b) the Contra Costa County Clerk’s certificate under CCP§995.640(a).

F.4.d
Packet Pg. 59
Attachment: Construction contract for Lavenida Project (2765 : Lavenida contruction) IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this instrument has been duly executed by the Principal and Surety above named, on , 20 .

Date:

Surety
[Signature must be notarized. Attach acknowledgement form.] Date:

Contractor
[Signature must be notarized. Attach acknowledgement form.] Title (Designated Official Capacity)
Note: Power of Attorney must be attached for signatory for surety. In addition, a certificate of admitted surety insurer status shall be attached.

NAME AND ADDRESS OF CONTRACTOR:

NAME AND ADDRESS OF SURETY:

F.4.d
Packet Pg. 60
Attachment: Construction contract for Lavenida Project (2765 : Lavenida contruction)

EXHIBIT C

LABOR AND MATERIAL BOND
Bond No:

Premium:

Contract No:

WHEREAS, the City of Orinda, State of California, and Valentine Corporation , (Principal), have entered into a Contract in which Principal agrees to install and complete certain designated public improvements described as Lavenida Culvert Repair Project No. 4148, and; WHEREAS, under the terms of the Contract, Principal is required to file a good and sufficient payment with the City of Orinda to secure the claims to which reference is made in Title 15 (commencing with Section 3082) of Part 4 of Division 3 of the Civil Code of the State of California.

NOW, THEREFORE, the Principal and ,
as corporate surety are held firmly bound unto the City of Orinda and all contractors, subcontractors, laborers, materialmen and other persons employed in the performance of the Contract and referred to in the above-mentioned Civil Code in the sum of
dollars ($ ), for materials furnished or labor on the project of any kind, or for amounts due under the Unemployment Insurance Act with respect to such work or labor, that the surety will pay the same in an amount not exceeding the amount set forth above, and also in case suit is brought upon this bond, will pay, in addition to the amount set forth above, costs and reasonable expenses and fees, including reasonable attorneys’ fees, incurred by City in successfully enforcing such obligation, to be awarded and fixed by the court, and to be taxed as costs and to be included in the judgment rendered.

THE CONDITION OF THIS OBLIGATION IS SUCH that:

1. If the Principal, its heirs, executors, administrators, successors, or assigns fail to pay for any materials, provisions, or other supplies or teams used in, on, for, or about the performance of the work contracted to be done, or for any work or labor on the project of any kind, as required by California Civil Code section 3247 et seq., and

2. If the Principal fails to pay (1) any of the persons named in Civil Code section 3181, (2) amounts due under the Unemployment Insurance Code with respect to work or labor performed under the contract or (3) for any amounts required to be deducted, withheld, and paid over to the Employment Development Department from the wages of employees of contractor and subcontractors pursuant to section 13020 of the Unemployment Insurance Code with respect to the work and labor, and

3. If those entitled to be paid (the persons, companies, or corporations furnishing the materials, provisions or other supplies, teams, appliances or power to be used in, on, for, or about the performance of the work contracted to be executed or performed, or any person contributing to said work to be done or any person who performs work or labor on the project, or supplies both work and materials for the project) have complied with California Civil Code section 3247 et seq., then the Surety will pay the same in or to any amount not exceeding one hundred percent (100%) of the Contract amount and also, in case suit is brought on this bond, the Surety will pay such reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs and expenses of litigation as shall be fixed by the court, awarded and taxed as provided in California Civil Code section 3247 et seq.

This bond shall inure to the benefit of any of the persons and entities identified in Section 3181 so as to give a right of action to those persons or their assigns in any suit brought on the bond.

F.4.d
Packet Pg. 61
Attachment: Construction contract for Lavenida Project (2765 : Lavenida contruction) Should the conditions of this bond be fully performed, then this obligation shall become null and void, otherwise it shall be and remain in full force and effect.

The surety stipulates and agrees that no change, extension of time, alteration or addition to the terms of the Contract shall in any manner affect its obligations on this bond, and it waives notice of any such change, extension, alternation or addition.

The surety is an "admitted surety insurer" as described in California Code of Civil Procedure §995.120. A certificate of admitted surety insurer status is attached to this bond. Proof of that status shall be in either of the following forms: (a) a printout of information from the website of the Department of Insurance confirming the surety is an admitted surety insurer or (b) the Contra Costa County Clerk’s certificate under CCP §995.640(a).

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this instrument has been duly executed by the Principal and Surety above named, on , 20 .

Date:

Surety
[Signature must be notarized. Attach acknowledgement form.] Date:

Contractor
[Signature must be notarized. Attach acknowledgement form.] Title (Designated Official Capacity)
Note: Power of Attorney must be attached for signatory for surety. In addition, a certificate of admitted surety insurer status shall be attached.

NAME AND ADDRESS OF CONTRACTOR:

NAME AND ADDRESS OF SURETY:

F.4.d
Packet Pg. 62
Attachment: Construction contract for Lavenida Project (2765 : Lavenida contruction)

EXHIBIT D

WARRANTY AND GUARANTY
To the CITY OF ORINDA,
Contractor hereby warrants and guarantees for one (1) year from and after the date of completion of the services provided for in this Contract that said materials and labor necessary for the Lavenida Culvert Repair Project No. 4148 in Orinda , CAshall operate as provided for in the Contract Documents. During the term of this warranty, Contractor shall provide all materials, parts and labor, at its own expense, which are necessary to repair and/or correct any and all defects, installation or operational failures in the equipment from any cause. Notwithstanding the foregoing, Contractor shall not be required to bear the expense of correction of any failure in the equipment that is caused by the sole or active negligence or willful misconduct of the City. The warranties of each part or component supplied are in addition to the warranties required of Contractor in other Contract Documents.

Should any of the work prove defective, due to faulty workmanship, materials furnished or methods of installation, or should the work or any part thereof fail to operate properly as originally intended and in accordance with the plans and specifications, due to any of the above causes, or if any work performed under this Contract fails to fulfill any of the requirements of the Contract Documents, all within one year after date on which the Work is accepted by the City, or after relief from maintenance, whichever is latest, the undersigned agrees to without delay and without any cost to the City to repair, replace or reconstruct any defective or otherwise unsatisfactory part or parts of the Work so that said Work will function successfully as originally contemplated. Should Contractor fail to act promptly or in accordance with this requirement, or should the situation require that repairs or replacements be made before Contractor can be notified, the City may, at its option, make the necessary repairs or replacements or perform the necessary work and Contractor shall pay to the City the actual cost of such repairs. Contractor shall also pay to the City any attorneys’ fees incurred to enforce this guaranty.

CONTRACTOR NAME
Date:

CONTRACTOR SIGNATURE
[Signature must be notarized. Attach acknowledgement form.] SIGNATORY’S TITLE/OFFICIAL CAPACITY
F.4.d
Packet Pg. 63
Attachment: Construction contract for Lavenida Project (2765 : Lavenida contruction)

EXHIBIT E

AFFIDAVIT CONCERNING CONFLICTS OF INTEREST AND

NONCOMPETITIVE PRACTICES
A. Conflict of Interest. That Contractor, by entering into this Contract with the City to perform or provide work, services or materials to the City, has thereby covenanted, and by this affidavit does again covenant and assure that it has no direct or indirect pecuniary or proprietary interest, and that it shall not acquire any such interest, that conflicts in any manner or degree with the services required to be performed under this Contract and that it shall not employ any person or agent having any such interest.

In the event that Contractor or its agents, employees or representative hereafter acquires such a conflict of interest, it shall immediately disclose such interest to the City and take action immediately to eliminate the conflict or to withdraw from this Contract, as the City may require.

B. Contingent Fees and Gratuities. That Contractor, by entering into this Contract with the City to perform or provide services or material for the City, has thereby covenanted, and by this affidavit does again covenant and assure:

1. That no person or selling agency except bona fide employees or designated agents or representative of Contractor has been employed or retained to solicit or secure this Contract with an agreement or understanding that a commission, percentage, brokerage or contingent fee would be paid;

2. That no gratuities, in the form of entertainment, gifts or other, were offered or given by Contractor or any of its agents, employees or representatives, to any official or employee of the City or other governmental agency with a view toward securing this Contract or securing favorable treatment with respect to the awarding or amending, or the making of any determination with respect to the performance of this Contract; and

3. That no contracts of communication or lobbying efforts were made by Contractor, its agents or officer with any member of the City Council, any board or commission, or the staff of the City of Orinda with regard to this process.

CONTRACTOR NAME
Date:

CONTRACTOR SIGNATURE
[Signature must be notarized. Attach acknowledgement form.] SIGNATORY’S TITLE/OFFICIAL CAPACITY
F.4.d
Packet Pg. 64
Attachment: Construction contract for Lavenida Project (2765 : Lavenida contruction)

EXHIBIT F

INSURANCE DOCUMENTS TO BE PROVIDED BY CONTRACTOR
Insurance documents to be provided by Contractor pursuant to this Contract and accepted by the City.

F.4.d
Packet Pg. 65
Attachment: Construction contract for Lavenida Project (2765 : Lavenida contruction)

EXHIBIT G
CONTRACTOR SAFETY PROGRAM: SELF-CERTIFICATION WORKSHEET The following worksheet must be completed during the preconstruction meeting or as requested by the City of Orinda. Incomplete or missing responses will be deemed NON-RESPONSIVE.

Part A: Safety Programs
Part A is used to:
• Verify whether a prospective contractor has safety documents and programs relevant to the work they may be performing.
• Inform the prospective contractor of the safety programs that will be mandatory to the project. • Confirm that the contractor’s employees have been trained in project-related safety programs and that there is documentation of the training.
• Give prospective contractors an opportunity to provide more information about their safety programs that may be important and relevant to the project. • Inform contractors of the types of safety information that may be requested at a later time.

Part B: Safety Equipment
Part B is used to:
• Verify whether a prospective contractor has safety equipment relevant to the work they may be performing.

Part C: Specialized Training and Certification
Part C is used to:
• Verify whether a prospective contractor’s employees hold specialized safety certifications relevant to the work they may be performing.
• Inform contractors of the types of specialized safety certifications their employees may be required to possess before being issued a Notice to Proceed.

Part D: Jobsite Safety Practices
Part D is used to:
• Address how safety aspects of the project will be managed and provide a basis for discussing the contractor’s safety program practices.

Part E: Certification and Signature
Part E is used to have the bidder certify the following:
► The submitted information is accurate and complete.
► Allow the bidder the opportunity to certify that all bidder safety programs, safety equipment and employee safety training described herein meets or exceeds all local, State and Federal requirements.

F.4.d
Packet Pg. 66
Attachment: Construction contract for Lavenida Project (2765 : Lavenida contruction) Bidder Safety Program Self-Certification Worksheet
PART A - Safety Programs
Please indicate below whether your firm has the following written safety programs. If any of the programs listed do not apply to your operations or this project, please make note of this in the “Comments” column.

Those programs that have been checked are, without exception, mandatory and must be made available for review, upon request, before commencing work on this project. Other safety programs may be requested if it is later determined that they are applicable to the project and must be made available for review upon request. Mandatory
Program
Do you
have a
written
program/
policy?
Sub will
provide
Have
project
employees
been
trained?
Is the training
documented?
Comments
Yes No Yes No Yes No
X Injury and Illness
Prevention
Hazard
Communication
Confined Space
Operations
Respiratory
Protection
Emergency
Response
X Site-Specific
Project Safety
Plan
Lockout/Tagout
Program
X New Employee
Orientation
Excavation Safety
Program
Code of Safe
Program
Electrical Safety
Program
Drugs/Alcohol
Traffic Control
Safety (1)
Fall Prevention
Plan (2)
Forklift Program
Hotwork Program
Bloodborne
Pathogens Control
Program
(1) Reflecting M.U.T.C.D and California Supplement requirements (2) If conventional fall protection measures cannot be used.

F.4.d
Packet Pg. 67
Attachment: Construction contract for Lavenida Project (2765 : Lavenida contruction) PART B - Safety Equipment - Identify what safety equipment will be available and used for this project.

Type Description/Comments
[ ] Gas detectors
[ ] Ventilation equipment
[ ] Approved harnesses and
lanyards
[ ] Mechanical hoists
[ ] Fire extinguishers
[ ] First aid kits
[ ] Respirators
[ ] Hard hats
[ ] Hearing protectors
[ ] Safety goggles
[ ] Steeled toed footwear
[ ] Hand protection
[ ] Fall protection
[ ]
[ ]
PART C - Specialized Training and Certification - Identify the areas of specialized training or certification that will have been completed by employees who will be assigned to this Project. Be prepared to provide documentation as requested.
[ ] CPR/first aid [ ] Confined space operations and
rescue
[ ] Scaffolding
[ ] Fork lift operation [ ] Respirators [ ] Air-Supplying [ ] Air-Purifying
[ ] Flagging
[ ] Cranes/hoists operation [ ] Trenching and shoring
competent person
[ ]
[ ] Heavy equipment
operation
[ ] Welding [ ]
[ ] Powder-actuated tools
use
[ ] Asbestos abatement [ ]
F.4.d
Packet Pg. 68
Attachment: Construction contract for Lavenida Project (2765 : Lavenida contruction) PART D - Jobsite Safety Practices

1. Name of person who will have responsibility for jobsite safety?

2. Does the person who is responsible for jobsite safety have authority to take immediate action to correct unsafe conditions of work practices?

3. Who will be responsible for conducting and documenting accident investigations? Does your company perform near-miss investigations?

4. How often are jobsite safety audits or inspections performed, and by whom?

5. How often are jobsite tailgate or toolbox safety meetings held?

6. Briefly describe how you will ensure that workers comply with City safety requirements and Cal/OSHA requirements?

7. Has CAL OSHA cited and assessed penalties against your firm for any “serious,” “willful” or “repeat” violations of its safety or health regulations in the past five years? If "YES", please describe.

8. Have there been any on-the-job fatalities in the last five years? If yes, please explain.

9. Has the EPA or any Air Quality Management District or any Regional Water Quality Control Board cited and assessed penalties against either your firm or the owner of a project on which your firm was the contractor, in the past five years? If "YES", please describe.

PART E - Certification and Signature
I certify that the above information is complete and accurate. I further certify that, to the best of my knowledge, all safety programs and safety training meets or exceeds all applicable local, State and Federal regulatory requirements. I understand that any false statements may result in my firm not being considered for this project or in my firm being terminated from this project.

Name (Print) Title
Signature Date
(CEO or equivalent signature required)
573296.1
F.4.d
Packet Pg. 69
Attachment: Construction contract for Lavenida Project (2765 : Lavenida contruction) F.4.f
Packet Pg. 70
Attachment: SD Easement 18 Lavenida (2765 : Lavenida contruction) F.4.f
Packet Pg. 71
Attachment: SD Easement 18 Lavenida (2765 : Lavenida contruction) F.4.f
Packet Pg. 72
Attachment: SD Easement 18 Lavenida (2765 : Lavenida contruction) F.4.f
Packet Pg. 73
Attachment: SD Easement 18 Lavenida (2765 : Lavenida contruction) F.4.f
Packet Pg. 74
Attachment: SD Easement 18 Lavenida (2765 : Lavenida contruction) F.4.g
Packet Pg. 75
Attachment: SD Easement 15 Lavenida (2765 : Lavenida contruction) F.4.g
Packet Pg. 76
Attachment: SD Easement 15 Lavenida (2765 : Lavenida contruction) F.4.g
Packet Pg. 77
Attachment: SD Easement 15 Lavenida (2765 : Lavenida contruction) F.4.g
Packet Pg. 78
Attachment: SD Easement 15 Lavenida (2765 : Lavenida contruction) F.4.g
Packet Pg. 79
Attachment: SD Easement 15 Lavenida (2765 : Lavenida contruction) Recording Requested by and
When Recorded Return to:

City of Orinda
City Clerk
22 Orinda Way
Orinda, CA 94563
No Fee Document
APN: 271-120-006 THIS SPACE FOR RECORDER’S USE ONLY

GRANT OF STORM DRAIN EASEMENT
This Grant of Storm Drain Easement is made by Acalanes Union High School District (collectively, “Grantor”) in favor of the City of Orinda (“Grantee”).

RECITALS
Grantor is the sole owner in fee simple of that certain real property located at 750 Moraga Way in the City of Orinda, more particularly described as: see Legal Description (EXHIBIT C) attached hereto and made a part hereof.

Lavenida Drive is a public street owned and operated by the City. The City plans to make repairs and improvements to an existing 10 foot diameter storm drain pipe that runs beneath Lavenida Drive. Those repairs and improvements may include installation of a new concrete headwall and/or replacement of the existing corrugated metal pipe (or portions of it) with concrete. A portion of those repairs and improvements will be located within the City’s existing public road right of way for Lavenida Drive.

A portion of that 10 foot diameter storm drain pipe is located on Grantor’s property, outside the public road right of way for Lavenida Drive. A portion of future repairs, improvements, and appurtenant structures associated with the storm drain pipe will likewise also be located on Grantor’s property, outside the existing public road right of way for Lavenida Drive. Grantor and Grantee have agreed that it is in their mutual interest for Grantee to hold an easement over that area so that Grantee may access, repair, improve, operate and maintain the existing storm drain pipe and its appurtenant structures.

COVENANTS, TERMS, CONDITIONS, AND RESTRICTIONS
Grantor hereby grants to Grantee, and its successors and assigns, a perpetual, non- exclusive easement and right of way for the purpose of laying down, constructing, reconstructing, removing, replacing, repairing, maintaining, operating, and using, as the Grantee may see fit, for the transmission of drainage water, a culvert, pipe or pipelines, and all necessary accessory structures for use in connection therewith or appurtenant thereto, in, under, along, and across portions of Grantor’s property, which area is described and depicted as “Storm Drain Easement” in Exhibits A and B, which are attached hereto and incorporated by reference.

F.4.h
Packet Pg. 80
Attachment: AUSD 750 Moraga Way M H.S. Storm Drain Easement with Exhibits 3-10-2022 (2765 : Lavenida contruction) Grantee agrees upon the completion of any work to restore as near as possible the surface of the ground to the condition in which it was prior to the commencement of work.

The undersigned is authorized to sign this document by the attached Acalanes Union High School District Resolution No. ________.

GRANTOR
Acalanes Union High School District
Dated:

Superintendent
[Signatures Must Be Notarized]
F.4.h
Packet Pg. 81
Attachment: AUSD 750 Moraga Way M H.S. Storm Drain Easement with Exhibits 3-10-2022 (2765 : Lavenida contruction)

PORTION OF
APN 271-120-006
750 MORAGA WAY

CITY OF ORINDA

CALIFORNIA

EXHIBIT A

LEGAL DESCRIPTION

STORM DRAIN EASEMENT TO CITY OF ORINDA
ACROSS 750 MORAGA WAY
LCC ENGINEERING & SURVEYING, INC.
930 ESTUDILLO STREET
MARTINEZ, CA 94553 EXHIBIT A
WWW.LCC-INC.COM Page 1 of 1
A portion of the parcel of land described in the deed granted to Acalanes Union High School District dated October 31, 1951 and recorded in Book 1855 of Official Records at Page 552, in the office of the County Recorder, County of Contra Costa, State of California, more particularly described as follows:

BEGINNING at the most westerly corner of Lot 16 as shown on the map of Lincoln Estates, recorded June 25, 1952, in Book 47 of Maps at Page 18, in the office of the County Recorder, County of Contra Costa, State of California, said point also being on the southeasterly line of Lavenida Drive, thence from said point of beginning, along the southwesterly line of said Lot 16 (47 M 18), South 35°11’48” East, 25.80 feet; thence South 68°57’32” East, 8.91 feet; thence, leaving said southwesterly line of Lot 16 (47 M 18), South 48°26’45” West, 18.43 feet; thence North 59°14’04” West, 26.34 feet to a point on the southeasterly line of Lavenida Drive as shown on the map of Hardin Estates, recorded November 13, 1953, in Book 52 of Maps at Page 29, in the office of the County Recorder, County of Contra Costa, State of California; thence, along said southeasterly line of Lavenida Dr. (52 M 29), northeasterly along a non-tangent curve to the left, the center of which bears North 59°14’04” West, having a radius of 875.00 feet, through a central angle of 1°44’23”, an arc length of 26.57 feet to the point of beginning.

Containing an area of 593 square feet, more or less.

As shown on Exhibit B and by this reference
made a part hereof.

Prepared by me or under my direction in
conformance with the Professional Land
Surveyors Act:
9/13/2021
Date
F.4.h
Packet Pg. 82
Attachment: AUSD 750 Moraga Way M H.S. Storm Drain Easement with Exhibits 3-10-2022 (2765 : Lavenida contruction) F.4.h
Packet Pg. 83
Attachment: AUSD 750 Moraga Way M H.S. Storm Drain Easement with Exhibits 3-10-2022 (2765 : Lavenida contruction)

EXHIBIT C

LEGAL DISCRIPTION

THE LAND REFERRED TO HEREIN BELOW IS SITUATED IN THE CITY OF ORINDA, COUNTY OF CONTRA COSTA, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AND IS DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:

PORTIONS OF LOTS 231, 239, 240, 265 AND 266, AS SHOWN ON THE MAP OF SECTIONIZATION OF PART OF RANCHO DE LOS PALOS COLORADOS, FILED IN BOOK 15 OF MAPS, PAGE 308, IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:

PARCEL 1:

BEGINNING AT THE MOST EASTERN CORNER OF THAT CERTAIN 18.3 ACRE TRACT OF LAND DESCRIBED IN THAT CERTAIN DEED FROM THE MORAGA COMPANY, A CORPORATION, TO KERMIT L.

LINCOLN, ET AL, DATED AUGUST 3, 1951 AND RECORDED IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ON AUGUST 22, 1951, IN BOOK 1810 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS, PAGE 266; THENCE FROM SAID POINT OF BEGINNING, RUNNING ALONG THE GENERAL SOUTHERN BOUNDARY LINE OF SAID 18.3 ACRE TRACT OF LAND, THE FOLLOWING COURSES AND DISTANCES: SOUTH 33° 05' 32" WEST 99.70 FEET; SOUTH 75° WEST, 46 FEET; SOUTH 62° WEST, 35 FEET; SOUTH 59° WEST, 80 FEET; NORTH 80° WEST, 54 FEET; SOUTH 19° WEST, 58 FEET; NORTH 89° WEST, 40 FEET; NORTH 17° WEST, 70 FEET; NORTH 36° WEST, 41 FEET; SOUTH 75° WEST, 56 FEET; SOUTH 74° WEST, 44 FEET; SOUTH 63° WEST, 50 FEET; NORTH 79° WEST, 128 FEET; NORTH 60° WEST, 57 FEET; SOUTH 77° WEST, 40 FEET; NORTH 85° WEST, 28 FEET; NORTH 37° WEST, 52 FEET; NORTH 74° WEST, 45 FEET; NORTH 87° WEST, 46 FEET; NORTH 68° WEST, 77 FEET; NORTH 62° WEST, 90 FEET; NORTH 24° WEST, 38 FEET; NORTH 44° WEST, 32 FEET; WEST 65 FEET; NORTH 54° WEST, 49 FEET; NORTH 70° WEST, 54 FEET; AND NORTH 36° 14' 16" WEST, 53.66 FEET TO A POINT HEREIN DESIGNATED AS POINT "A", FROM WHICH SAID POINT THE CENTER OF A CIRCLE, HAVING A RADIUS OF 850 FEET BEARS NORTH 62° 49' 55" WEST; THENCE LEAVING SAID GENERAL SOUTHERN BOUNDARY LINE OF SAID 18.3 ACRE TRACT OF LAND, SOUTHWESTERLY ALONG THE CIRCUMFERENCE OF SAID MENTIONED CIRCLE, 60.52 FEET; THENCE TANGENT TO SAID MENTIONED CIRCLE, SOUTH 31° 14' 50” WEST 323.37 FEET TO A POINT HEREIN DESCRIBED AS POINT "B"; THENCE SOUTH 66° 05' 28" EAST, 147.62 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 13° 45' EAST, 71 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 13° 22' WEST, 136 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 48° 03' WEST, 150 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 5° 23' EAST, 233 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 37° 37' EAST, 194 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 27° 24' EAST, 203 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 45° 38' 21" EAST, 509 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 81° 10' 16" EAST 759.95 FEET TO A POINT HEREIN DESIGNATED AS POINT "C"; THENCE NORTH 34° EAST, 1313 FEET TO A POINT HEREIN DESIGNATED AS POINT "D'; THENCE NORTH 56° WEST, 350.12 FEET; THENCE NORTHWESTERLY AND TANGENT TO

SAID LAST MENTIONED COURSE, ALONG THE ARC OF A CIRCLE TO THE RIGHT WITH A RADIUS OF 2850 FEET, A DISTANCE OF 149.23 FEET; THENCE TANGENT TO SAID LAST MENTIONED CIRCLE, NORTH 53° WEST, 192.89 FEET; THENCE NORTHWESTERLY AND TANGENT TO SAID LAST MENTIONED COURSE, ALONG THE ARC OF A CIRCLE TO THE LEFT, WITH A RADIUS OF 1925 FEET, A DISTANCE OF 115.98 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING, SAID POINT BEING HEREIN DESIGNATED AS POINT "E", FROM WHICH SAID POINT THE CENTER OF SAID LAST MENTIONED CIRCLE BEARS SOUTH 33° 32' 53" WEST.

EXCEPTING THEREFROM: THE INTEREST CONVEYED TO THE COUNTY OF CONTRA COSTA, BY DEED FROM THE MORAGA COMPANY, A CORPORATION, DATED APRIL 28, 1922, RECORDED MAY 18, 1922, IN BOOK 419 OF DEEDS, PAGE 41.

F.4.h
Packet Pg. 84
Attachment: AUSD 750 Moraga Way M H.S. Storm Drain Easement with Exhibits 3-10-2022 (2765 : Lavenida contruction) 1 BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ORINDA
In the Matter of:

Authorizing Acceptance of Grant of )
Storm Drain Easement, 18 Lavenida Dr.) Resolution No. 17-22 WHEREAS, Kimberly K. Hett and Jonathon E. Hett, wife and husband, as joint tenants, is Grantor and owner of certain real property located in the City of Orinda, California, at 18 Lavenida Dr. (APN 271-180-001); and
WHEREAS, the Lavenida Culvert which conveys Moraga Creek encroaches on a portion of Grantor’s Property; and
WHEREAS, the City and the property owner have agreed that a permanent storm drain easement is mutually beneficial and the property owner has or will execute a grant of storm drain easement in coordination with the Lavenida Culvert Repair Project (City CIP #4148); and
WHEREAS, before the easement can be recorded, State law (Government Code §27281) requires an approved City Council resolution authorizing acceptance; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Orinda does hereby authorize Staff to accept and record easement over portion of 18 Lavenida Dr. (APN 271-180-001) to accommodate public use.

The above and foregoing Resolution was passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Orinda held on the 3rd day of May, 2022 by the following vote:

AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:
______________________
Dennis Fay, Mayor
ATTEST:
____________________________
Sheri Marie Smith, City Clerk
F.4.i
Packet Pg. 85
Attachment: Resolution 17-22 Authorizing Acceptance of Grant of SD Easement (18 Lavenida) (2765 : Lavenida contruction) 1 BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ORINDA
In the Matter of:

Authorizing Acceptance of Grant of )
Storm Drain Easement, 15 Lavenida Dr.) Resolution No. 18-22 WHEREAS, Kirk M. Hardiman and Heather D. Hardiman, husband and wife, as community property with right of survivorship, is Grantor and owner of certain real property located in the City of Orinda, California, at 15 Lavenida Dr. (APN 271-172-001); and WHEREAS, the Lavenida Culvert which conveys Moraga Creek encroaches on a portion of Grantor’s Property; and
WHEREAS, the City and the property owner have agreed that a permanent storm drain easement is mutually beneficial and the property owner has or will execute a grant of storm drain easement in coordination with the Lavenida Culvert Repair Project (City CIP #4148); and
WHEREAS, before the easement can be recorded, State law (Government Code §27281) requires an approved City Council resolution authorizing acceptance; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Orinda does hereby authorize Staff to accept and record easement over portion of 15 Lavenida Dr. (APN 271-172-001) to accommodate public use.

The above and foregoing Resolution was passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Orinda held on the 3rd day of May, 2022 by the following vote:

AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:
______________________
Dennis Fay, Mayor
ATTEST:
____________________________
Sheri Marie Smith, City Clerk
F.4.j
Packet Pg. 86
Attachment: Resolution 18-22 Authorizing Acceptance of Grant of SD Easement (15 Lavenida) (2765 : Lavenida contruction) 1 BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ORINDA
In the Matter of:

Authorizing Acceptance of Grant of )
Storm Drain Easement, 750 Moraga Way) Resolution No. 19-22 WHEREAS, Acalanes Union High School District, is Grantor and owner of certain real property located in the City of Orinda, California, at 750 Moraga Way (APN 271-120- 006); and
WHEREAS, the Lavenida Culvert which conveys Moraga Creek encroaches on a portion of Grantor’s Property; and
WHEREAS, the City and the property owner have agreed that a permanent storm drain easement is mutually beneficial and the property owner has or will execute a grant of storm drain easement in coordination with the Lavenida Culvert Repair Project (City CIP #4148); and
WHEREAS, before the easement can be recorded, State law (Government Code §27281) requires an approved City Council resolution authorizing acceptance; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Orinda does hereby authorize Staff to accept and record easement over portion of 750 Moraga Way (APN 271-120-006) to accommodate public use.

The above and foregoing Resolution was passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Orinda held on the 3rd day of May, 2022 by the following vote:

AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:
______________________
Dennis Fay, Mayor
ATTEST:
____________________________
Sheri Marie Smith, City Clerk
F.4.k
Packet Pg. 87
Attachment: Resolution 19-22 Authorizing Acceptance of Grant of SD Easement (750 Moraga Way) (2765 : Lavenida contruction) City Council
Staff Report
Agenda Item: F.5
Date: May 3, 2022
Department: Finance
AGENDA TITLE: Acceptance of the Library Parcel Tax Independent Review Annual Report For The Period Ending (June 30, 2021)
RECOMMENDATION:

Receive and accept the Report for the period ending June 30, 2021.

BACKGROUND:

The Library Parcel Tax measure approved by Orinda voters on June 5, 2018, provided for an annual review of parcel tax revenue and expenditures by an Independent Library Parcel Tax Review Committee. The Committee reviewed a Draft of the report for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2021, at their meeting conducted on March 23, 2022. Their feedback was incorporated into the report being presented this evening (Attachment A).

DISCUSSION:

The Library Parcel Tax Review Committee consists of eight members. The Friends of the Orinda Library selects three members and all five members of the Finance Advisory Committee serve on this separate Committee. Ms. Linda Landau of the Friends of the Orinda Library serves as the Chair of the Committee.

Attachment 1 is the Annual Report prepared outlining the revenue and expenditures in Fiscal Year 2020-2021 for the voter approved Library Parcel Tax. The report includes excerpts from the Annual City Audited Financial Statements and additional detail and discussion of line item expenses. The report also provides an overview of the General Fund contributions towards the joint operation of the facility, given that utilities and services are provided to the entire facility including the Auditorium and areas not used exclusively for Library Services.

The report is presented for City Council acceptance.

FISCAL IMPACT:

In Fiscal Year 2020-2021 the Library Parcel Tax collected was $522,468 and Expenditures for the year totaled $309,213. This allowed a contribution of $134,533 to reserves. The reserves as of June 30, 2021 were $302,123 and they will be used in the future to fund both annual operating costs as well as facility improvements.

ATTACHMENTS:

A. 2021 Library Parcel Tax Independant Review Financial Report Respectfully Submitted by:

F.5
Packet Pg. 88
Doug Alessio
Administrative Services Director
Prepared By: Doug Alessio, Administrative Services Director Approved by:

F.5
Packet Pg. 89
2021
Parcel Tax Review Committee
March 23, 2022
Linda Landau, Chair
Fran Strykowski, Vice Chair
Jon Conner, Member
James Keefe, Member
Jeff Lyon, Member
Nancy Ross-Madnick, Member
Alex McCafferty, Member
Abe Mintz, Member

Library Parcel Tax Independent
Review Financial Report
F.5.a
Packet Pg. 90
Attachment: 2021 Library Parcel Tax Independant Review Financial Report (2757 : Library Parcel Tax Independent Review (June 30, 2021)) Library Parcel Tax Independent Review Committee
Annual Financial Report
For The Fiscal Year Ending June 30, 2021
(Including Audited Results)
Purpose
On June 5, 2018 the voters in Orinda approved Measure J which authorized an increase of $30 to an existing parcel tax to create a total tax of $69 per residential equivalent parcel. This is a special tax and the passage required two-thirds voter approval. The tax is levied to support the provision of library services and the operation of the facility. The collection of the tax at the higher rate began July 1, 2018. Chapter 3.32 Special Library Services Parcel Tax was added to the Orinda Municipal Code establishing the requirements for administering the funds.

Section 3.32.050 establishes an independent review committee to review the collection and expenditure of the tax revenues. All revenue is to be used for the library purposes identified in the measure. The fiscal year ending June 30, 2019 was the first full year of the increased tax.

Background
On September 4, 2018 the City Council adopted Resolution 62-18 establishing the bylaws for the Library Parcel Tax Review Committee. The Committee is comprised of 8 members (the 5 members of the Finance Advisory Committee and 3 Members selected by the Friends of the Orinda Library).

The Library operates as a partnership between the Friends of the Orinda Library, City of Orinda, and the Contra Costa County Library System. The Orinda Library building is owned by the Friends of the Orinda Library and leased to the City of Orinda under the terms of a 50 year lease which terminates October 6, 2051. The lease does not require the payment of rent by the City, but rather requires the City to perform specific items and conditions to allow for the operation of the library. The lease provides the option for the City to purchase the building for $1.00 in 2051. The land on which the facility was constructed is owned by the City of Orinda.

The Contra Costa County Library system is comprised of 26 libraries countywide staffed and managed by the County. The Orinda Branch in Fiscal Year 2020-2021 was scheduled to operate 60 hours per week and of that amount, the County funds base service of 35 hours per week (with the City parcel tax funding the remaining 25 hours). This includes the professional library staff, materials (including books and other media); information technology support services for the circulation and loaning of materials; etc. In May of 2020, the County Library announced that Sunday hours would be eliminated system-wide beginning in the 2020-2021 fiscal year.

Due to the COVID-19 pandemic Library operating hours were significantly reduced when the Library was required to close to the public between mid-March through May, and the Library developed a curbside reservation and pick-up service that was launched in June 2020. This service was available during all of the Library's regular hours, but had to be closed on days in the fall when there was too much wildfire smoke. The Library fully reopened on April 26, 2021.

In addition to funding the additional 25 hours of Library operations the City parcel tax pays for the base operating costs for facility utilities, janitorial service, and most maintenance activities.

F.5.a
Packet Pg. 91
Attachment: 2021 Library Parcel Tax Independant Review Financial Report (2757 : Library Parcel Tax Independent Review (June 30, 2021)) Library Parcel Tax Independent Review Committee
Annual Financial Report
For The Fiscal Year Ending June 30, 2021
(Including Audited Results)
With the building reaching 20 years in age this is expected to include the need to address major building components in the coming years.

The partnership and particularly the funding from the Parcel Tax allows the City to make available to the entire community enhanced library services, which are widely used by Orinda residents.

Annual Audit
The City obtains an independent annual audit of its financial statements and completes a Annual Comprehensive Financial Report (Annual Report). The City Council has selected Maze & Associates as its independent auditors. The complete June 30, 2021 Annual Report is available on the City website at https://www.cityoforinda.org/436/Most-Recent-AuditedFinancial-Statements. Excerpts relevant to the Library Parcel Tax are attached to this report.

For the fiscal year ending June 30, 2021, Maze and Associates has issued a “clean” opinion.

This states that based on their independent review and testing, the financial statements are fairly presented in all material respects. The auditors’ opinion covers the respective financial position of the governmental activities, each major fund, and the aggregate remaining fund information presented in the Annual Report. This is the highest opinion an agency can receive.

The auditors opinion is included on page one of the Annual Report.

Parcel Tax Reporting - Governmental Special Revenue Fund The Annual Financial Report is comprised of financial statements and schedules for the various funds used to account for the City’s revenue and expenditures. A fund is a grouping of related accounts that is used to maintain control over resources that have been segregated for specific activities or objectives. The City of Orinda, like other state and local governments, uses fund accounting to ensure and demonstrate compliance with finance-related legal requirements.

The Library Parcel Tax Revenue and Expenditures are reported in a separate fund as required by the measure.

Annual Report Schedules / Excerpts Related To Library Parcel Tax (Attachments A-B) Information related to the Library Parcel Tax Fund (#520) is shown on the attached Excerpts from the City Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (Annual Report). • Attachment A – Statement of Changes In Fund Balance (Page 102 of Annual Report) • Attachment B – Schedule of Budget To Actual (Page 110 of Annual Report) The report provided with the Audit provides a high level summary of the activity within the fund.

For Fiscal Year 2020-2021 the fund had total revenue of approximately $524,746 and expenditures of $390,213. Additional discussion of the detail is provided later in this report. As noted the balance remaining in the fund as of June 30, 2021 is $302,123.

F.5.a
Packet Pg. 92
Attachment: 2021 Library Parcel Tax Independant Review Financial Report (2757 : Library Parcel Tax Independent Review (June 30, 2021)) Library Parcel Tax Independent Review Committee
Annual Financial Report
For The Fiscal Year Ending June 30, 2021
(Including Audited Results)
Detailed Analysis and Schedule of Revenue and Expenditures (Attachment C) The Audit schedules that are produced provide summary financial information. In order to fully understand the uses of the parcel tax revenue, City Finance Staff have prepare a separate schedule that includes line item detail. It also compares the budget to actual and includes the prior fiscal year data for historical comparison. The format of the report is very similar to reports discussed in the past with the City Council / Friends of the Orinda Library Facility Steering Committee. This schedule is attached as Attachment C.

The following narrative explains key components of the detailed report which relates to revenue and expenses paid from the Library Parcel Tax Fund:

Revenue – The total taxes collected were $522,468 and the City also allocated $2,278 in interest to the fund. The tax revenue was $1,540 more than the adopted Budget. For budget purposes the City estimated a small addition of units assumed to be completed in the Wilder development. The tax rate does not change as there is no inflation adjustment and the only opportunity for growth is from additional units constructed. The increase in tax revenue over the previous year was less than 0.5% ($2,415).

Library Services Expense – The largest component of the annual expenses was for Contra Costa County Library Services representing the additional 25 hours per week that the Library is open due to the availability of this funding. The cost in Fiscal Year 2020-2021 was $195,402 and this represented 50% of the parcel tax operating expenditures. This is an increase of $40,862 or 26% over Library Services Expense in the prior fiscal year, which is representative of the increased services levels as the Library adjusts back towards pre-COVID operating models.

Facilities Expense – The total of these expenditures was $61,393 which was 16% of the operating expenditures. The largest component was for Building Maintenance which includes regular preventative maintenance for the heating & ventilation system, fire sprinklers, elevator, etc. as well as special repairs. Of the $35,124 in Building Maintenance costs, approximately $29,622 was for regular preventative maintenance and $5,502 was related to repairs. Repairs costs were significantly lower than prior year’s repairs of $23,807 because of amount of work performed on the HVAC system and Boiler in Fiscal year 2019-20.

Utilities – The total cost for utilities was $103,996 which accounted for 27% of the total operating expense. Among the higher costs was electric utilities, which accounted for 71% of total Utilities costs and the natural gas accounted for 18%. Telephone, sewer and water charges have been fairly consistent year over year and make up the remaining 11% of costs captured in the Utilities category.

F.5.a
Packet Pg. 93
Attachment: 2021 Library Parcel Tax Independant Review Financial Report (2757 : Library Parcel Tax Independent Review (June 30, 2021)) Library Parcel Tax Independent Review Committee
Annual Financial Report
For The Fiscal Year Ending June 30, 2021
(Including Audited Results)
Other Services – The total cost represents approximately 4% of the operating expenses. In order to collect the special tax the City engages a firm to prepare and submit the tax roll and respond to taxpayer inquiries. The cost of this work was $5,500.

The second component is the cost incurred from the County Tax Collector to collect and remit the tax. The cost charged by the County Tax Collector was $6,222.

Earthquake Insurance Expense – The cost of earthquake insurance was $13,873 and accounted for 3.6% of the total operating expenditures. The provision of this coverage is a specific requirement of the lease with the Friends of the Orinda Library. The coverage renews each May 1st. In 2020, the Friends reviewed the lease terms and indicated that at that time they wished to have the coverage continue without an amendment to the lease.

Capital Expense – There were no Capital Expenses incurred during Fiscal Year 2020-

21. Looking forward, there are two Projects occurring in Fiscal Year 2021-22 and three more are currently planned for Fiscal Year 2022-23 with $148,750 and $284,250 of funding from Library Parcel Taxes respectively. There is a total of $76,500 of other funding sources committed to these projects as well. See table with details below.

The current Orinda Library was completed and open to the community on October 7, 2001.

The City Council obtained a building assessment report in 2018 which estimated that there will be $2.7 million worth of required maintenance expenses over the next 20 years. The Annual Capital Improvement Plan is used to identify and schedule improvements over a multi-year period. The CIP is updated annually and funded projects are included in the Budget Appropriations authorized by the City Council. Projects planned in the next 4 years include:

FUTURE PROJECTS 2021 - 2023
Project
Estimated
Timing
Estimated
Parcel Tax
Contribution
Contribution
from Other
Funds
Accent Tile Replacement (Project 4179) FY 2021-22 $ 85,000 $ 15,000 Boiler Replacement (Project 4161) FY 2021-22 63,750 11,250 Flat Vinyl Roof Replacement (Project 4173) FY 2022-23 72,250 12,750 HVAC Air Handlers (Project 4174) FY 2022-23 161,500 28,500 Facility Painting (Project 4175) FY 2022-23 51,000 9,000 F.5.a
Packet Pg. 94
Attachment: 2021 Library Parcel Tax Independant Review Financial Report (2757 : Library Parcel Tax Independent Review (June 30, 2021)) Library Parcel Tax Independent Review Committee
Annual Financial Report
For The Fiscal Year Ending June 30, 2021
(Including Audited Results)
Shared Cost of Facility Operations
A portion of the Library facility operating costs are paid for by the City General Fund, in order to acknowledge the shared use of the facility. Prior to FY 2017-18 the Library costs shown in the City Financial Statements were only identified in the Library Fund. The City now accounts for General Fund Library expenses in a separate Department in order to more closely track the allocation of costs. This includes shared expenses for utilities, maintenance, and repairs.

In Fiscal Year 2020-21 the following non-parcel tax expenditures were made by the City, which contributed towards the operation of the facility.

General Fund Maintenance expenses $ 11,710
General Fund Utilities 19,668
General Fund – Property Insurance 2,448
Total Non-Parcel Tax Contributions $ 33,826
Annually as part of the Budget process the City examines the shared costs for the facility.

F.5.a
Packet Pg. 95
Attachment: 2021 Library Parcel Tax Independant Review Financial Report (2757 : Library Parcel Tax Independent Review (June 30, 2021)) Library Parcel Tax Independent Review Committee
Annual Financial Report
For The Fiscal Year Ending June 30, 2021
(Including Audited Results)
ATTACHMENT A – EXCERPT CITY JUNE 30, 2021 ANNUAL COMPREHENSIVE FINANCIAL REPORT BUDGET TO ACTUAL (Page 102)
F.5.a
Packet Pg. 96
Attachment: 2021 Library Parcel Tax Independant Review Financial Report (2757 : Library Parcel Tax Independent Review (June 30, 2021)) Library Parcel Tax Independent Review Committee
Annual Financial Report
For The Fiscal Year Ending June 30, 2021
(Including Audited Results)
ATTACHMENT B – EXCERPT CITY JUNE 30, 2021 ANNUAL COMPREHENSIVE FINANCIAL REPORT BUDGET TO ACTUAL (Page 110)
F.5.a
Packet Pg. 97
Attachment: 2021 Library Parcel Tax Independant Review Financial Report (2757 : Library Parcel Tax Independent Review (June 30, 2021)) Library Parcel Tax Independent Review Committee
Annual Financial Report
For The Fiscal Year Ending June 30, 2021
(Including Audited Results)
ATTACHMENT C – Detailed Analysis and Schedule of Revenue and Expenditures F.5.a
Packet Pg. 98
Attachment: 2021 Library Parcel Tax Independant Review Financial Report (2757 : Library Parcel Tax Independent Review (June 30, 2021)) City Council
Staff Report
Agenda Item: F.6
Date: May 3, 2022
Department: City Council
AGENDA TITLE: Authorize Contract Amendment No. 3 with CSG Consultants, Inc. for On-Call Civil Engineering Services
RECOMMENDATION:

Staff recommends that the City Council authorize the City Manager and City Clerk to execute Contract Amendment No. 3 with CSG Consultants. The amendment will increase the maximum contract amount to $515,000 and extend the term from June 30, 2022 to June 30, 2023.

BACKGROUND:

In August 2019 the City entered into an on-call civil engineering services contract with CSG Consultants, Inc. (Attachment A). Beginning in January 2020, CSG was assigned the ongoing task of providing civil engineering plan review for new development, replacing Gossett Civil Engineering, who was no longer available for such work.

Development plan review work by CSG is performed in conjunction with Planning Department review of applications including subdivisions, commercial building and single family home additions or new construction. CSG’s work reviews projects from a civil engineering/public works perspective, focusing on grading, drainage, erosion control, “C.3” stormwater treatment and geotechnical issues and the completeness of the application relevant to these areas.

On June 16, 2020, the City Council approved Amendment No. 1 to the subject contract, which increased the maximum cost under the agreement to $85,000, and on March 2, 2021, Amendment No. 2 was approved, increasing the value to $290,000. The work is paid on a time and materials basis in accordance with the contract documents. To date, approximately $285,000 has been expended.

DISCUSSION:

The actual development plan review services provided has exceeded the previous estimate (when Amendment No. 2 was presented), primarily due to the additional scope/task order assigned to CSG in November 2021 to help the City prepare for implementing procedures (including application forms for SB9 lot splits, etc.) to comply with new SB9 regulations that went into effect January 1, 2022. Their services on SB9 related matters are continuing as the interpretation of SB9 continues. Furthermore, in order for new SB9 procedures to be consistent with Orinda’s subdivision ordinance, CSG work also includes updating that ordinance.

The additional SB9 work, and also the variable work scope for ongoing plan review, has resulting in depleting the contract value approximately 3 months early. At an F.6
Packet Pg. 99
average estimated billing rate of $15,000 per month, this amounts to $45,000 in order to reach the end of the current contract term. It is also recommended that the contract term be extended by one year, to end June 30, 2023. In a normal situation Staff would solicit proposals for the next on-call period, however due to Staff shortages at the current time, this is not feasible. Furthermore, CSG is now very familiar with the city plan review process and understands the necessary coordination with Planning Dept., and to “retrain” a new consultant would require significant Staff time, of which we are very short in both Public Works/Engineering and Planning Departments. The cost of a one year extension at the same usage rate is estimated to be 12 x $15,000= $180,000.

Therefore, the recommended additional contract amount is $225,000.

NEXT STEPS:

Upon City Council authorization, Contract Amendment No. 3 (Attachment B) will be executed by the parties, subject to approval as to form by the City Attorney.

FISCAL IMPACT:

The City Master Fee Schedule allows for the collection of fees and charges to offset the majority of CSG’s costs for development review time. This includes a mix of flat fees as well as direct billable costs for more complex projects. Some of the consulting costs, such as the initial CSG review of City procedures and the ongoing coordination activities (between Planning, Public Works, and CSG) and the above mentioned SB9 work are not recovered from fees.

ATTACHMENTS:

A. Contract, CSG on-call August 2019
B. Amendment No 3 CSG
Respectfully Submitted by:

Scott Christie
Public Works Director
Prepared By: Scott Christie, Public Works Director
Approved by:

F.6
Packet Pg. 100
1 CITY OF ORINDA
AMENDMENT No. 3 TO SERVICES CONTRACT
CSG Consultants, Inc. (“Provider”) and the City of Orinda (“City”), a municipal corporation, previously entered into a contract with an effective date of August 27, 2019 relating to a professional services contract for on-call civil engineering. Section 18 of that agreement provides that “No waiver, modification or termination of this agreement is valid unless made in writing.”
City and Provider mutually agree to amend the agreement as follows:

1. Replace Section 3.c “Time of Performance” as follows:
 The services of Provider shall begin no sooner than the effective date and shall continue until all work is approved by City. All work shall be completed no later than June 30, 2023.

2. Replace Section 4.a “Compensation” as follows:
 City agrees to pay Provider at the rates described in Exhibit A, not to exceed a maximum contract price of $515,000 for all services performed under this agreement.

In all other respects, the agreement shall remain unchanged and in full force and effect.

City of Orinda
__________________________________
City Manager Date
Attest
___________________________________
City Clerk
Approved as to form
___________________________________
City Attorney
CSG Consultants, Inc.
__________________________________
Date
__________________________________
Printed Title
__________________________________
Printed Name
F.6.b
Packet Pg. 101 Attachment: Amendment No 3 CSG (2768 : CSG Amd 3) City Council
Staff Report
Agenda Item: F.7
Date: May 3, 2022
Department:

Public Works and
Engineering Services
AGENDA TITLE: Temporary Full Road Closure of portions of Overhill Road, Overhill Court and Tara Road for EBMUD's Pipeline Replacement Project RECOMMENDATION:

Staff recommends the City Council Approve the Traffic Control and Detour Alternatives Requested by EBMUD; and Adopt Resolution 16-22 (Traffic Order #220) Authorizing the Temporary Full Road Closure of portions of Overhill Road, Overhill Court and Tara Rd between Moraga Way and Hillcrest Drive intersections for the purposes of EBMUD to perform their Pipeline Replacement Project which involves replacement of approximately 6,000 linear feet of the existing water main.

BACKGROUND:

For the past year, EBMUD has been coordinating with the City about its Pipeline Replacement Project in the Overhill Road neighborhood. As planned, EBMUD has recently started construction of its project which will last approximately 8 months.

Despite the long duration of inconvenience and other temporary impacts, City Staff feels the improvements are very important and should be completed as quickly as possible since the new water mainlines will have improved water pressure flows for the neighborhood and fire hydrants. The project will be constructed in two phases:

Phase 1 – 4,000 feet of pipeline along Overhill Hill Road and Overhill Court between Moraga Way and Catherine Court.

Phase 2 – 2,000 feet of pipeline Overhill Hill Road between Catherine Court and Hillcrest Drive, and Tara Road between Monterey Terrace and Overhill Road.

The main impact to vehicular traffic from the Pipeline Replacement Project is the trenching work along Overhill Road in order to install new water mainlines. Due to the narrowness of the road, it requires a full road closure to safely perform the work; there is insufficient room to maintain one-lane traffic control. Therefore when there is a proposed full road closure of a public road, Overhill Road in this case, then a traffic order/resolution needs to be approved by the City Council before City Staff issues a road closure permit.

Road Closure will be limited to Monday through Friday, between the hours of 9:00 a.m. and 2:00 p.m.

DISCUSSION:

EBMUD is proposing to close Overhill Road in six segments, between Moraga Way and Hillcrest Drive. Closure also includes cross streets along Overhill Road, such as Overhill F.7
Packet Pg. 102
Court, Westwood Court (private) and a segment of Tara Road, between Monterey Terrace and Overhill Road. Traffic control plans for the stationary closures are included as Attachment B. EBMUD sent out resident notification letters (Attachment C) to all residents, informing about the upcoming project and the proposed road closure.

Working hours for the project are Monday through Friday, between the hours of 7:00 a.m. to 5:30 p.m., but the road closure is limited to the hours of 9:00 a.m. and 2:00 p.m.

Contractor will have necessary trench plates and equipment on site to provide access to emergency vehicles, school bus, residents within the closure limits, mail delivery and trash pickup.

City Staff and EBMUD are currently working on an agreement, which will allow EBMUD to pay the City an in-lieu restoration fee. Any trench excavation in the City requires the contractor to install a final paving that extends at least a foot on each side of the trench (T-Cut). EBMUD will instead install temporary paving along the trench and maintain it for a period of 6 months. This will allow the City to install the final paving as part of the Annual Paving project. Both the City and EBMUD benefit from this approach due to cost savings from not paving the trench area twice.

NEXT STEPS:

Upon the City Council approval of Resolution 16-22 (Attachment A), Staff will amend the encroachment permit with the updated road closure hours.

FISCAL IMPACT:

Staff will coordinate with EBMUD staff, and their construction team, to ensure adherence to traffic control plans and provide inspection oversight during the project. As part of the issuance of the encroachment permit, the City collected a $21,028 fee for inspection services.

ATTACHMENTS:

A. Resolution 16-22 Overhill Rd Temporary Rd Closure
B. Traffic Control Plans Overhill Rd Closure
C. Overhill Resident Notification
Respectfully Submitted by:

Scott Christie
Public Works Director
Prepared By: Sivakumar Natarajan, Acting City Engineer
Approved by:

F.7
Packet Pg. 103
F.7
Packet Pg. 104

BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ORINDA
In the Matter of:

Authorizing the full closure of a
portion of Overhill Road between
Moraga Way and Hillcrest Drive
intersections
)
) Resolution No. 16-22
)
)
Traffic Order No. 220
WHEREAS, East Bay Municipal Utility District (EBMUD) needs to construct their Pipeline Replacement Project in the Overhill Road neighborhood which will upgrade 6,000 linear feet of existing pipeline that will improve residential service in the area, fire flows, and service reliability and redundancy during outages; and
WHEREAS, the section of Overhill Road, between Moraga Way and Hillcrest Drive intersection has very narrow pavement width and limited workspace; and WHEREAS, for the safety of all concerned, including public vehicular traffic, it is necessary to fully close portions of Overhill Road, Overhill Court, and Tara Road to through traffic during construction; and
WHEREAS, residents located in the vicinity of the proposed road closure will need to detour using Tara Road to Moraga Way; and
WHEREAS, EBMUD has begun informing local Overhill Road residents via mailed letters of the proposed work and associated road closure and further notification will be provided in advance of start of road closure activities; and
WHEREAS, under Section 21101, paragraph (e) of the Vehicle Code, a local authority may adopt by resolution, a temporary closure of a street for the purpose when the closure is necessary for the safety and protection of the users of the street; and NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council hereby authorizes the temporary full road closure of a portion of Overhill Road between Moraga Way and Hillcrest Drive intersection for an EBMUD Pipeline Replacement project for the following times:

Beginning Wednesday May 4, 2022 until Friday December 30, 2022 between 9:00 a.m. to 2:00 p.m.

Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orinda at a regular meeting on May 3, 2022 by the following vote:

AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS:

F.7.a
Packet Pg. 105 Attachment: Resolution 16-22 Overhill Rd Temporary Rd Closure (2764 : Overhill Road temporary closure traffic order) Dennis Fay, Mayor
ATTEST:

Sheri M. Smith, City Clerk
F.7.a
Packet Pg. 106 Attachment: Resolution 16-22 Overhill Rd Temporary Rd Closure (2764 : Overhill Road temporary closure traffic order) F.7.b
Attachment: Traffic Control Plans Overhill Rd Closure (2764 : Overhill Road temporary closure traffic F.7.b
Attachment: Traffic Control Plans Overhill Rd Closure (2764 : Overhill Road temporary closure traffic F.7.b
Attachment: Traffic Control Plans Overhill Rd Closure (2764 : Overhill Road temporary closure traffic F.7.b
Attachment: Traffic Control Plans Overhill Rd Closure (2764 : Overhill Road temporary closure traffic F.7.b
Attachment: Traffic Control Plans Overhill Rd Closure (2764 : Overhill Road temporary closure traffic F.7.b
Attachment: Traffic Control Plans Overhill Rd Closure (2764 : Overhill Road temporary closure traffic F.7.b
Attachment: Traffic Control Plans Overhill Rd Closure (2764 : Overhill Road temporary closure traffic F.7.b
Attachment: Traffic Control Plans Overhill Rd Closure (2764 : Overhill Road temporary closure traffic F.7.b
Attachment: Traffic Control Plans Overhill Rd Closure (2764 : Overhill Road temporary closure traffic F.7.b
Attachment: Traffic Control Plans Overhill Rd Closure (2764 : Overhill Road temporary closure traffic F.7.b
Attachment: Traffic Control Plans Overhill Rd Closure (2764 : Overhill Road temporary closure traffic F.7.b
Attachment: Traffic Control Plans Overhill Rd Closure (2764 : Overhill Road temporary closure traffic F.7.b
Attachment: Traffic Control Plans Overhill Rd Closure (2764 : Overhill Road temporary closure traffic Construction Coming Soon
Overhill Road Pipeline Replacement Project
April 2022—December 2022
Construction Coming Soon
Overhill Road Pipeline Replacement Project
April 2022—December 2022
F.7.c
Packet Pg. 120 Attachment: Overhill Resident Notification (2764 : Overhill Road temporary closure traffic order) Overhill Road Pipeline Replacement
Project information:

To improve water reliability, EBMUD will be replacing the drinking water main on: Overhill Rd. between Moraga Way & Catherine Court, Overhill Court, and Westwood Court Project Schedule:

The project is anticipated to begin in late-April 2022 and last though December 2022. Work hours are Monday-Friday from 7:00a.m.-5:30p.m. Road closure hours are 9:00a.m.-2:00p.m.

Traffic Impacts:

Portions of the road will be closed to through traffic between 9:00a.m.-2:00p.m. Access will be maintained for residents within the work area, waste removal, school buses, and emergency vehicles. Residents may experience delays up to 10 minutes when entering and leaving the work area. Traffic will be detoured using Tara Road (see traffic plan on front).

The detour request will be submitted for Orinda City Council consideration on Tuesday, May 3, 2022 at 7:00p.m., with an opportunity for public comment.

For meeting information and virtual link visit: www.cityoforinda.org Questions:

Community Affairs, 510-287-2053 or [email protected] Thank you for your patience while we work to improve your water system.

Follow @ebmud
Overhill Road Pipeline Replacement
Project information:

To improve water reliability, EBMUD will be replacing the drinking water main on: Overhill Rd. between Moraga Way & Catherine Court, Overhill Court, and Westwood Court Project Schedule:

The project is anticipated to begin in late-April 2022 and last though December 2022. Work hours are Monday-Friday from 7:00a.m.-5:30p.m. Road closure hours are 9:00a.m.-2:00p.m.

Traffic Impacts:

Portions of the road will be closed to through traffic between 9:00a.m.-2:00p.m. Access will be maintained for residents within the work area, waste removal, school buses, and emergency vehicles. Residents may experience delays up to 10 minutes when entering and leaving the work area. Traffic will be detoured using Tara Road (see traffic plan on front).

The detour request will be submitted for Orinda City Council consideration on Tuesday, May 3, 2022 at 7:00p.m., with an opportunity for public comment.

For meeting information and virtual link visit: www.cityoforinda.org Questions:

Community Affairs, 510-287-2053 or [email protected] Thank you for your patience while we work to improve your water system.

Follow @ebmud
F.7.c
Packet Pg. 121 Attachment: Overhill Resident Notification (2764 : Overhill Road temporary closure traffic order) City Council
Staff Report
Agenda Item: F.8
Date: May 3, 2022
Department: Parks and Recreation
AGENDA TITLE: Request Approval for Purchase of Wes Horn’s and Doug Heine’s Artwork Pieces Using Private Donations
RECOMMENDATION:

Approve Resolution No. 15-22 authorizing the purchase by the City of Orinda of artwork by Wes Horn (Surfboard Seat) and Doug Heine (Full Circle) using Private Donations.

BACKGROUND: The City Council appointed members to a subcommittee to explore options for an Art in Public Places Program. At the July 17, 2007 meeting, the City Council adopted an Art in Public Places Policy (“APP Policy) and established an Art in Public Places Committee (“APPC”). At the October 1, 2013 meeting the City Council amended the APP Policy to expand sites for placement of loaned and purchased art (Attachment A). And, in August of 2018, the City Council adopted a revised APPC Policy in which, amongst the changes, the City Manager would have approval authority for the loan of an art piece, but approval for purchases would remain with the City Council.

DISCUSSION: While the APPC maintains their commitment to rotating the majority of loaned artwork, the Committee recognizes the long-term value of these pieces.

Wes Horn’s Surfboard Seat is both artistic and functional. The piece, which is approximately 2 feet high and 6 feet long, is located adjacent to the sidewalk near the Nation’s restaurant on Moraga Way in the Theater District where it has been since July 2015 and the functional attribute is unique to the current collection of pieces loaned to the City of Orinda. Wes’ unique design, using precast concrete coupled with bright color in the way of mosiac tiles, can be moved relatively easily, which allows members of the APPC to relocate the bench when new art becomes available. This flexibility is key to keeping the collection fresh and interesting while providing functional seating in appropriate locations so it can be enjoyed.

The Artwork Loan Agreement with Wes Horn is up for renewal and the APPC members have determined that they would like to acquire the piece. Wes began his connection with ArtSpace Orinda in November 2012 with the loan of Sardine Seat, which, three years later, was replaced by Surfboard Seat at the same location.

F.8
Packet Pg. 122
Surfboard Seat
Doug Heine has supported the Orinda Art in Public Places program since its very beginning with loans of five different pieces over the years. Full Circle itself was formerly placed in front of Mechanics Bank in 2017 before moving to a local art gallery. At approximately 6 ½ feet tall and 3 feet wide and consisting of metal on aluminum, this whimsical piece, as the artist contests, is inspired by the times that his life went full circle and he hopes the composition shows the harmony of form. The APPC looks forward to more of Doug’s artistry to be on loan in Orinda in the future.

Full Circle
The APPC considered the terms of the artwork Policy as used for loan, lease or donations purposes and used this criterion for consideration of reviewing the artwork for purchase. The APPC unanimously recommended purchase.

F.8
Packet Pg. 123
The APPC has followed the terms of the policy by:
 Reviewing the artworks and recommending the Council approve their acceptance for purchase, subject to execution of a purchase agreement approved by the City Manager and City Attorney.
 APPC followed the site selection acceptance criteria and determined that:

A. The artwork:

1. is thought-provoking, memorable or enduring and shall reflect the diverse social, cultural, or historic values of the City;

2. is appropriate in terms of scale, form, content, and the environment;

3. is durable relative to theft, vandalism and the environment;

4. acknowledges and is sensitive to the importance of the contributions by local and regional artists to the City of Orinda’s art program;

5. is not religious iconography intended to be perceived as government endorsement of religion in violation of the Establishment Clause of the Federal and State Constitutions;

6. would not, when displayed, create a hostile work environment for public employees; and

7. does not depict graphic violence or overt sexual activity.

B. The City does not already have sufficient examples or better examples of this type of object or the objects by a particular artist in a particular style.

C. The City has the facilities and resources necessary to accept the object, knowing that the City has limited facilities and resources.

D. The person wishing to sell the artwork to the City is prepared to execute a contract or other document which, in the estimation of the City Attorney and City Manager, protects and serves the fiscal and other interests of the City.

E. The artist who created the artwork that will be sold to the City is prepared to execute a waiver of their rights under California Art Preservation Act (Civil Code 987 and 989), the Visual Artist Rights Act (17 U.S.C. 106A, 113), and other applicable state and federal laws.

F. The artwork is appropriate to be displayed in the community, as set forth above, particularly because such artwork will be viewed by children and City employees.

When recommending sites for works of art in a permanent collection, the APPC considered the following criteria were satisfactorily met:

A the artwork can be properly installed, placed to be seen, and displayed with patron safety in mind;
B the artwork displays compatibility of design and location within unified design character or historical character of site, preservation and integration of natural features;
C the site design including landscaping, drainage, grading, lighting and seating considerations are acceptable;
F.8
Packet Pg. 124
D the artwork has no adverse environmental impacts such as noise, sound and light;
E the artwork has public accessibility, particularly handicapped areas; F the artwork has no adverse impact on adjacent property owner’s views; and
G the artwork has no adverse impact on operational functions of the City.

The APPC is not asking the City to participate towards the purchase of the two pieces.

The necessary funding will be contributed by private donations from the Art in Public Places Fund held by the Orinda Parks and Recreation Foundation and the Orinda Community Foundation. The cost for Surfboard Seat is $2,200 and the cost for Full Circle is $6,500.

NEXT STEPS: The City’s acceptance of the pieces is contingent on the execution of agreements that are acceptable to the City Attorney and City Manager. The Art Purchase Agreements would transfer legal ownership of the art pieces to the City, commits the City to credit the artists when displaying the artwork and is intended to ensure that the City can reproduce and publicly display/remove the pieces without restriction from the artists.

FISCAL IMPACT: There will be no fiscal impact to the City in the process of obtaining the two pieces. The necessary funding will be contributed by private donations from the Art in Public Places Fund held by the Orinda Parks and Recreation Foundation and the Orinda Community Foundation. The City would be responsible for maintenance of the artwork and, to date, the pieces have required no maintenance.

ATTACHMENTS:

A. APPCPolicyandApplication
B. Resolution 15-22 Purchase of Art - Horn and Heine
Respectfully Submitted by:

Todd Trimble
Director of Parks and Recreation
Prepared By: Todd Trimble, Director of Parks and Recreation Approved by:

F.8
Packet Pg. 125
1 City of Orinda - Art in Public Places Committee and Policy

I PURPOSE
Since public art is a cultural reflection of a community and its people, it is important that procedures be in place for the acquisition and acceptance of art by the City of Orinda to further the education and appreciation of art. The purpose of this Art in Public Places Committee is to advise the City on its Public Art Program, including advice regarding:

A. selection and acceptance of loaned artwork;
B. art placement or site selection;
C. possible funding for program costs.

D. possible sale of art currently owned by the City
E. possible acquisition of art to be owned by the City
The Art in Public Places Committee will annually present a report in February to the City Council regarding the status of the Public Art Program and the goals and objectives for the calendar year.

This policy shall apply to artwork that is loaned to the City for display for an extended period of time as well as art owned by the City and displayed outdoors. Artwork displayed in the Art Gallery of the Orinda Library for short periods of time (less than 2 months) pursuant to the City’s arrangements with the Lamorinda Arts Council is not covered by this policy. Artwork that is owned by the City and displayed indoors is not covered by this policy.

II DEFINITIONS
Art as described in this policy is art intended to enrich the public environment for both residents and visitors.

Art shall include, but not be limited to, sculptures, murals, paintings, graphic arts, mosaics, photography, crafts, mixed media, and environmental works.

III COMMITTEE
The Art in Public Places Committee (“Committee” or “APPC”) is appointed by the City Council, consistent with Resolutions 41-07 and 15-10.

IV SELECTION / ACCEPTANCE PROCESS
When making a recommendation regarding works of art for possible loan to the City or possible City ownership/sale, the APPC shall consider whether:

A. the artwork:

1. is thought-provoking, memorable or enduring and reflects the diverse social, cultural, or historic values of the City

2. is appropriate in terms of scale, form, content, compatibility with immediate surroundings and reasonably protected from theft and vandalism and

3. is sensitive to the importance of the contributions by local and regional artists to the City of Orinda’s Public Art Program

4. is not religious iconography intended to be perceived as government endorsement of religion in violation of the Establishment Clause of the Federal and State Constitutions

5. would not, when displayed, create a hostile work environment for public employees

6. does not depict graphic violence or overt sexual activity F.8.a
Packet Pg. 126 Attachment: APPCPolicyandApplication (2759 : Artwork purchase) 2 B. the City already has on loan or owns sufficient examples or better examples of this type of object or the objects by a particular artist in a particular style; C. the City has the facilities and resources necessary to accept the object, knowing that the City has limited facilities and resources;
D. the person wishing to loan, purchase, donate or sell the artwork is prepared to execute a contract or other document which, in the estimation of the City Attorney and City Manager, protects and serves the fiscal and other interests of the City,
E. the artist who created the artwork that will be to loaned, sold or donated to the City is prepared to execute a waiver of their rights under California Art Preservation Act (Civil Code 987 and 989), the Visual Artist Rights Act (17 U.S.C. 106A, 113), and other applicable state and federal laws.

F. the person wishing to loan art to the City is willing to agree in writing that the City’s maximum liability for any claim related to the art (including for loss or damage) will be limited to $5,000.

The City’s intention with this policy is to create a limited public forum for the display of artwork that meets the City’s standards for artwork that is appropriate to be displayed in the community, as set forth above, particularly because such artwork will be viewed by children and City employees.

V SITE SELECTION
Artwork loaned to or owned by the City pursuant to this policy may be displayed in the following locations:

A. City-controlled areas of the Orinda Community Center and Library.

B. City Hall (lower and upper mezzanine, interior lobbies, and landscape circle in lower parking lot).

C. City-controlled parks including, but not limited to, Orinda Wilder Park, Orinda Oaks Park, Orinda Crossroads Park, and Pine Grove Park.

D. City-controlled areas located within the Downtown as designated in the Orinda General Plan. Such City-controlled areas shall not, however, be eligible for art display if the Director of Public Works and Engineering Services determines that such display would interfere with use by pedestrians and/or vehicles, would create a safety hazard, or would otherwise be inappropriate.

When recommending sites for display of works of art, the APPC shall consider:

A. whether the artwork can be properly installed, placed to be seen, and displayed with patron safety in mind;
B. compatibility of design and location within unified design character or historical character of site, preservation and integration of natural features;
C. site design including landscaping, drainage, grading, lighting and seating considerations; D. environmental impacts such as noise, sound and light; E. public accessibility to the artwork, particularly handicapped areas; F. impact on adjacent property owner’s views; and
G. impact on operational functions of the City.

VI CITY MANAGER AUTHORITY & APPC RECOMMENDATION TO CITY MANAGER The City Manager may take all actions appropriate to administer the Public Art Program consistent with this policy. The City Manager has the authority to approve and execute agreements:

A. accepting the loan of art as recommended by the APPC B. extending the loan term for art as recommended by the APPC C. selling City-owned art as recommended by the APPC
D. acquiring City-owned art as recommended by the APPC and approved by the City Council E. determining where art should be displayed as recommended by the APPC F.8.a
Packet Pg. 127 Attachment: APPCPolicyandApplication (2759 : Artwork purchase) 3 If the City Manager determines (including after receiving advice from the APPC) that it would be appropriate to obtain City Council input on any proposed action under this policy (e.g., loan, extension, sale, purchase), he or she should place an item on an upcoming Council agenda for discussion.

Applications to loan artwork to the City will be made to the Park and Recreation office and will be routed to the APPC. The documentation of the proposed public art will be available for review through the City Clerk’s office.

The APPC will consider the application and then make a recommendation to the City Manager for action.

The City Manager (or his/her designee) will notify applicants of the City decision. The notification, if the application is approved, will include a description of the location where the art will be placed. That location may be change at the discretion of the City Manager with input from the APPC.

The offer to loan artwork may be withdrawn at any time up until execution of an agreement between the City and the artist/donor.

VII MAINTENANCE AND INSURANCE OF ART IN PUBLIC PLACES:

Upon receipt of a loaned work of art pursuant to this policy, the City may, at its sole discretion, insure the art pieces through coverage obtained through the Municipal Pool Authority.

There will be a limit of $5,000 per claim. In the case of a catastrophic event, there will be a limit of $5,000 for all claims. The Orinda Park and Recreation Foundation will fund claims, up to a total of $5,000 annually.

Maintenance of loaned art shall be the responsibility of the person loaning the art to the City. Prior to undertaking any such maintenance on City property, the person loaning the art to the City shall obtain the approval of the City.

Any maintenance and/or insurance of City-owned artwork will be at the City’s sole discretion. City Staff may consider the condition of City-owned artwork each year in time for budget preparation and make recommendations to the Council regarding the estimated cost of appropriate maintenance activities and/or insurance.

VIII REMOVING (DEACCESSIONING) ARTWORK
Loaned art shall be removed at the end of the prescribed term, unless the City Manager or his or her designee determines, after considering the APPC’s recommendation, that early removal is appropriate under the criteria described below.

Any loaned artwork may be removed from public display if:

A. the artwork’s physical or structural condition poses a threat to public safety; B. the artwork requires excessive maintenance, has faulty design or workmanship, and repair or remedy is impractical or unfeasible;
C. the artwork has been damaged and repair or remedy is impractical or unfeasible; D. the condition or security of the artwork cannot be reasonably protected; significant changes in the use, character or design of the site have occurred and affect the integrity of the artwork; E. the artwork violates the selection criteria in section IV of this policy; or G. removal is requested by the artist or donor.

F.8.a
Packet Pg. 128 Attachment: APPCPolicyandApplication (2759 : Artwork purchase) 4 Removal of loaned art should be a seldom-employed action that operates with a strong presumption against removing works from public display. Where removal of the artwork may cause damage to it, the City should consider sections 987 and 989 of the Civil Code.

Any City-owned artwork may be removed from public display by the City Manager at his/her discretion after considering the APPC’s recommendation.

IX PROGRAM MAINTENANCE/LIMITS ON LOANED AND CITY-OWNED ARTWORK In order to minimize the staff time necessary to support the program, control the City's potential liability, and ensure that the City has the resources necessary to properly carry out this policy, the Council has determined that it is appropriate to place caps on the maximum number and value of art in the program. Recommended caps of art value and number of pieces are subject to review and change annually at the time of the yearly report. Current caps are set forth in the annual report.

The number of artworks displayed shall be determined in part by the number of appropriate locations as identified by the APPC and approved by the City. In considering the number of artworks the APPC should consider recommending a balance between city-owned art and loaned art.

The decision to recommend the acquisition of an artwork should be based on several factors including the interest expressed by the community for any particular piece of art after observing it over a period of time as loaned art, responding to an offer for a commissioned artwork or a dedication of an artwork by the artist or a third party and that the artwork would not constitute a risk to patrons or require any significant maintenance.

The total value of the artwork under loan or ownership may be subject to limitation for insurance liability claims and shall be reviewed on an annual basis upon submittal of an annual report.

Loaned artwork should be promptly removed from display at the end of the loan term and any extension(s).

Artwork loans should be for an initial term of no more than two years. The loan period may be extended by up to two additional one-year terms. Any such extensions shall be approved in writing by the City Manager (or his/her designee) after consideration of the recommendation of the APPC and Artist/Donor. Any extensions beyond the two additional one-year terms will be addressed and considered at the time of the annual report to the City Council.

The APPC should make recommendations to the City Manager regarding any proposed sale of owned art.

Any revenue realized from selling such art would go to support City’s art program.

In implementing the policy, the APPC and City staff should prioritize and prefer art loans over the acquisition of owned art. The Council has established this prioritization and preference because loaned art is displayed for a relatively short time and then removed, making room for new art.

X FUNDING AND SUPPORT FOR ART IN PUBLIC PLACES
City staff time related to the Public Art Program should be limited to .25 FTE (full-time employee), with a small amount of City Attorney assistance. In order to accomplish this, the City Staff and City Attorney have developed uniformly applicable documents (e.g., application forms, agreements, extensions). To further ensure efficiency, the APPC and City Manager should limit non-uniform and nonconforming requests, which tend to increase staff and attorney time (e.g., short-term extensions, last minute loan requests, having a variety of termination dates, negotiations regarding departures from the City’s standard agreement, displaying items in County-controlled portion of the Library, artwork remaining after expiration of the set loan term, etc.).

F.8.a
Packet Pg. 129 Attachment: APPCPolicyandApplication (2759 : Artwork purchase) 5 A well designed and maintained web presence describing the ArtSpace Orinda Program is a vital tool to attract artists and communicate with residents and visitors and will be maintained by the City. The APPC will provide guidance for content and recommend reimbursement of expenses incurred from the account with OPRF.

The City has entered into a funding agreement with the Orinda Parks and Recreation Foundation to provide certain funding for the program as follows: supplements to the artist (when necessary) for installation, maintenance and removal expense, signage to identify the art, ArtSpace website expense, and events to publicize the Program and recognize the artists and up to $5,000 annually for insurance claim deductible payments.

XI PUBLIC ART PROPOSAL
Any person wishing to loan artwork to the City of Orinda must complete the attached Public Art Application.

F.8.a
Packet Pg. 130 Attachment: APPCPolicyandApplication (2759 : Artwork purchase) 6 City of Orinda
Public Art Application
(Please complete this application as fully as possible) Date:____________________ Project Name _________________________________________________________________________ Year created: ___
Proposed Location/Address ______________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ Proposed by__________________________________________________________________________ Phone __________________________ Email _______________________________________

Address__________________________________ City__________________ Zip__________

Reason for application
( ) Showcase my art
( ) Support ArtSpace Orinda
( ) Other ______________________________________________________ Artist Name __________________________________________________________________________ Phone __________________________ Email _______________________________________

Address__________________________________ City__________________ Zip__________

Description of Artwork (Include material, finish, and color) _______________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________

Approximate Weight ______________ Approximate Dimensions ___________________________ System for Mounting or Displaying Artwork
_______________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________

F.8.a
Packet Pg. 131 Attachment: APPCPolicyandApplication (2759 : Artwork purchase) 7 Maintenance, Mounting or Display Requirements
_______________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________ Value: $___________ Approximate Annual Maintenance Costs: $___________ Basis for value:
( ) Published in gallery catalog or other media e.g. price list, website ( ) Comparable to similar works sold
( ) Other _________________________________________________________ Term of Loan _____ years/months
Please attach
• Photo, plans, model or other representation of proposed artwork • Artist biography
• Artist’s information for artwork signage
F.8.a
Packet Pg. 132 Attachment: APPCPolicyandApplication (2759 : Artwork purchase)

BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ORINDA
IN THE MATTER OF: Resolution No. 15-22
Authorizing the purchase of artworks by)
Wes Horn and Doug Heine )
WHEREAS, in July 2007, the Council adopted Resolution No. 41-07 approving Art in Public Place Policy; and
WHEREAS, since 2015 “Surfboard Seat” by Wes Horn has been on exhibit in Orinda; and
WHEREAS, up until 2017 “Full Circle” by Doug Heine was on exhibit in front of Mechanics Bank; and
WHEREAS, the Art in Public Place Committee (APPC) has recommended purchasing these artworks which have been adored by the Orinda community; and WHEREAS, the Artists have offered to sell the Artworks permanently to the City at significant discounts to their original values; and
WHEREAS, the City Council finds the acceptance of the Artworks by the City will benefit the public welfare and quality of life in the City; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds the acceptance of the Artworks will be consistent with the City’s fiscal and other interests, provided the Artist executes a Public Artwork Purchase Agreement acceptable to the City Manager and City Attorney; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, the City of Orinda hereby authorizes the purchase of the Artworks, contingent upon the Artist’s execution of a Public Art Purchase Agreement acceptable to the City Manager and City Attorney.

Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orinda at a regular meeting on May 3, 2022 by the following vote:

AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS:

Dennis Fay, Mayor
ATTEST:

Sheri M. Smith, City Clerk
F.8.b
Packet Pg. 133 Attachment: Resolution 15-22 Purchase of Art - Horn and Heine (2759 : Artwork purchase) City Council
Staff Report
Agenda Item: H.1
Date: May 3, 2022
Department: Administration
AGENDA TITLE: Introduction of an Ordinance Banning the Sale of Flavored Tobacco and Vaping Products
RECOMMENDATION:

Staff recommends the Council waive a full reading and introduce the proposed ordinance. Alternatively, the Council could direct staff to make changes to the proposed ordinance and bring it back at a later meeting for introduction.

BACKGROUND:

On January 11, 2022, the Orinda City Council directed Staff to prepare an ordinance for City Council consideration restricting the sale of flavored tobacco and vaping products in Orinda. Prior to that, the City Council raised the subject as a matter initiated on October 22, 2020. City Councilmembers discussed the matter in response to Contra Costa County considering a ban of sales of flavored tobacco for the County unincorporated areas. Currently, Contra Costa County and nearby cities, including the City of Walnut Creek, and most recently, the City of Antioch, have adopted bans. The State Legislature also passed Senate Bill (SB) 793 in August 2020 to implement a statewide ban that was set to take effect on January 1, 2021, but the law was suspended by a veto referendum that will be voted on during the November 2022 general election. If SB 793 goes into effect, it would allow for more stringent local standards to remain in effect.

DISCUSSION:

Staff has prepared an ordinance that would ban the sale of flavored tobacco and vaping products in Orinda. The ordinance was modeled after City of Walnut Creek’s November 2021 ordinance, with the inclusion of adjustments to be unique to Orinda. Specifically, the ordinance includes:
 New or revised definitions for the following terms: “characterizing flavor,” “flavored tobacco product,” “menthol cigarettes,” “tobacco product,” and “vaping product”;
 Prohibition of the sale or offer for sale of flavored tobacco and vaping products; and
 A separate violation for each day that flavored tobacco and/or vaping products provisions are violated.

Staff also reviewed the County of Los Angeles’s 2019 ordinance, which was recently upheld by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. The court affirmed that the County of Los Angeles’ ordinance banning the sale of flavored tobacco was not expressly or impliedly preempted by the Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act (TCA), and H.1
Packet Pg. 134
would be saved under the TCA’s savings clause (R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. v. City. of Los Angeles, 29 F.4th 542 (9th Cir. 2022)). Specifically, the TCA includes a preservation clause which preserves state, local, and tribal power to enact any tobacco product regulation that is in addition to, or more stringent, than the TCA. This holding affirms that local ordinances, such as Orinda’s proposed ban of sales of flavored tobacco and vaping products, are not preempted by the TCA.

At Staff’s request, the Orinda Chamber has shared information about the consideration of a ban with their membership.

NEXT STEPS:

If the ordinance is introduced as proposed, it would then return to the City Council Agenda on the consent calendar for the meeting of May 17, 2022 for a second reading/adoption. If approved by a majority of the City Council on that date, the ordinance would take effect 30 days later. As noted in the ordinance, there would be a 120 day grace period prior to any enforcement by City Staff.

Following adoption and prior to the effective date, staff will work with the Chamber and will identify impacted business to share information regarding the ban and the effective date.

FISCAL IMPACT:

It is expected that Staff and City Attorney time required to finalize the ordinance and administer the implementation can be accomplished within the existing budget.

ATTACHMENTS:

A. Ordinance 22-01 On Restricting the Sale of Flavored Tobacco and Vaping Products B. Ordinance 22-01 Attachment A On Restricting the Sale of Flavored Tobacco and Vaping Products
Respectfully Submitted by:

David Biggs
City Manager
Prepared By: Sheri Smith, City Clerk
Approved by:

H.1
Packet Pg. 135
1 BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ORINDA
In the Matter of: Ordinance 22-01
An Ordinance Banning the Sale of
Flavored Tobacco and Vaping Products
WHEREAS, the U.S. Center for Disease Control and Prevention (“CDC”) estimates that approximately 480,000 people die each year in the United States (“U.S.”) due to smoking, and that cigarette smoking is the leading cause of preventable death in the U.S.;
1 and
WHEREAS, flavored tobacco products can appeal to youths and young adults and influence tobacco initiation and continued use; and
WHEREAS, conventional tobacco products including cigars and hookah are also sold in flavors (such as menthol and wintergreen) that appeal to young people, with data from the National Youth Tobacco Survey (“NYTS”) indicating that nearly two thirds of U.S. middle school and high school smokers reported using flavored tobacco products in 2018, including menthol cigarettes, flavored cigars, flavored bidis, flavored smokeless tobacco, flavored tobacco in pipes, and flavored hookah; 2 and
WHEREAS, the use of vaping products is difficult to monitor due to their varied design, appearance, and names, including, but not limited to: “e-cigarettes,” “c-cigs,” “cigalikes,” “e-hookahs,” “mods,” “vape pens,” “vapes,” and “tank systems”; and WHEREAS, the use of vaping products among U.S. youth has increased considerably due to youth-appealing flavors and product innovations, growing 900 percent among high school students from 2011 to 2015;3 and

1 U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. The Health Consequences of Smoking—50 Years of Progress. A Report of the Surgeon General, Atlanta, GA: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, Office on Smoking and Health, p. iii, 11 (2014), https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/ books/NBK179276/pdf/Bookshelf_NBK179276.pdf.
2 Cullen, et al. “Flavored Tobacco Product Use Among Middle and High School Students – United States, 2014-2018.” MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep (2019); 68:839–844, http://dx.doi.org/10.15585/mmwr. mm6839a2.
3 U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. E-Cigarette Use Among Youth and Young Adults. A Report of the Surgeon General, Atlanta, GA: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, Office on Smoking and Health, p. vii (2016), https://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/data_statistics/sgr/ecigarettes/pdfs/2016_sgr_entire_report_508.pdf.

H.1.a
Packet Pg. 136 Attachment: Ordinance 22-01 On Restricting the Sale of Flavored Tobacco and Vaping Products (2763 : Introduction of an Ordinance Banning 2 WHEREAS, in the 2020 NYTS, approximately one in five high school students and one in 20 middle school students reported using vaping products, with more than eight in ten youths using flavored vaping products;
4 and
WHEREAS, in the 2019-2020 California Student Tobacco Survey, 28.6 percent of California high school students reported ever using any tobacco product, and that vapes were the most commonly used tobacco product across gender, race/ethnicity, and grade;5 and
WHEREAS, vaping products are marketed in a variety of flavors that appeal to youth, including: candy, chocolate, cocktails, desserts, fruit, menthol, mint, and other sweets; and
WHEREAS, the smoking of tobacco and the use of vaping products are forms of air pollution and area danger to public health as well as a material public nuisance; and WHEREAS, a local prohibition against the sale of flavored tobacco and vaping products is an effective means to reduce the availability of these products to youth, thereby protecting the public health by discouraging tobacco initiation and continued use; and WHEREAS, the federal Family Smoking Prevention Tobacco Control Act (“Tobacco Control Act”), enacted in 2009, prohibited candy and fruit-flavored conventional cigarettes, largely because these flavored products were marketed to youth and young adults, and younger smokers were more likely to have tried these products; and WHEREAS, the California Legislature has recognized the danger of tobacco use and has made reducing youth access to tobacco products a high priority, with various tobacco control laws including: the prohibition against the sale or furnishing of tobacco products and smoking paraphernalia to minors (Cal. Pen. Code, § 308); the sale or furnishing of vaping products to minors (Cal. Health & Safety Code, § 119405); and the sale of loose or single cigarettes; and
WHEREAS, State law requires tobacco retailers check the identification of tobacco purchasers who appear to be under 21 years of age (Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code, § 22956); and
WHEREAS, in August 2020, the California Legislature passed and Governor Newsom signed into law Senate Bill 793 (“SB 793”), a broad legislation prohibiting the sale of most flavored tobacco products (codified at Cal. Health & Safety Code, §104559.5); and

4 Wang, et. al. E-cigarette Use Among Middle and High School Students — United States (2020), MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep 2020;69:1310–1312. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.15585/mmwr.mm6937e1. 5 Zhu, et al., Results of the Statewide 2019 -20 California Student Tobacco Survey, San Diego, California:

Center for Research and Intervention in Tobacco Control (CRITC), University of California San Diego (2021), https://www.cdph.ca.gov/Programs/CCDPHP/DCDIC/CTCB/CDPH%20Document%20Library/ ResearchandEvaluation/FactsandFigures/2019-20CSTSBiennialReport_7-27-2021.pdf.

H.1.a
Packet Pg. 137 Attachment: Ordinance 22-01 On Restricting the Sale of Flavored Tobacco and Vaping Products (2763 : Introduction of an Ordinance Banning 3 WHEREAS, Section 104559.5(g) also specifically allows adoption of a local ordinance that imposes greater restrictions on the access to tobacco products than the restrictions imposed by state law, and provides that a stricter local ordinance shall govern in the case of any inconsistency between the local ordinance and state law; and WHEREAS, while SB 793 has been placed on the November 8, 2022 ballot through a qualifying referendum, municipalities continue to retain the authority to adopt local ordinances restricting the sale of flavored tobacco and/or vaping products; and WHEREAS, the FDA and federal law, including the Tobacco Control Act, also expressly grants state and local governments the right to enact measures that are more restrictive than those in the federal law; and
WHEREAS, despite local, state, and federal efforts to limit youth access to tobacco, flavored tobacco and vaping products, minors are still able to access these products; and
WHEREAS, the failure of retailers to comply with tobacco control laws and other smoking laws, particularly laws prohibiting sale to minors, presents an imminent threat to the public health, safety, and welfare of the residents of Orinda; and WHEREAS, flavored tobacco and vaping products are commonly sold to young people by California retailers. For example, in 2019, California retailers violated the federal prohibition against underage tobacco sales at an average rate of 17.9 percent; in particular, tobacco stores and smoke shops had a violation rate of 30.6 percent while vape shops had a rate of 13.4 percent;
6 and
WHEREAS, the accessibility of these products in retailers such as gas stations, deli markets, and discount stores, and low cost in comparison to conventional cigarettes, coupons, discounts, and other promotional materials make these products more easily available to youth; and
WHEREAS, the California Constitution, Article XI, Section 7, provides cities and counties with the authority to enact ordinances to protect the health, safety, welfare, and morals of their citizens; and
WHEREAS, the City of Orinda (“City”) has a substantial interest in promoting compliance with federal, state, and local laws prohibiting the sale or furnishing tobacco products and vaping products by minors; in promoting compliance with laws prohibiting sales of cigarettes and tobacco products to minors; and in protecting children from being lured into illegal activity through adult misconduct; and

6 California Tobacco Control Branch, California Department of Public Health, “Young Adult Tobacco Purchase Survey Results - Tobacco Sales to Young Adults Under 21 Years, 2019” (Aug. 28, 2019), https://www.cdph.ca.gov/Programs/CCDPHP/DCDIC/CTCB/CDPH%20Document%20Library/Researchan dEvaluation/FactsandFigures/YATPSforCDPHCTCPWebsite_9-26-2019.pdf.

H.1.a
Packet Pg. 138 Attachment: Ordinance 22-01 On Restricting the Sale of Flavored Tobacco and Vaping Products (2763 : Introduction of an Ordinance Banning 4 WHEREAS, the City seeks to ensure compliance with state laws relating to tobacco retailing and discourage violations of tobacco-related laws, particularly those that prohibit the sale or distribution of smoking and tobacco products to minors; and WHEREAS, based upon the recitals above, the City Council finds that the proposed amendments are necessary for the protection of the public health, safety, and welfare.

NOW THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Orinda DOES ORDAIN as follows:

SECTION 1. The City Council of the City of Orinda hereby amends Chapter 9.28 (Restrictions on the Advertising, Access and Promotion of Tobacco Products to Minors) to Title 9 of the Orinda Municipal Code (Public Peace, Morals and Welfare). The full text of Chapter 9.28 is contained in Attachment A to this ordinance, with additions in underline and deletions in strikethrough.

SECTION 2. Purpose and intent. The purpose of this ordinance is to the ban the sale of flavored tobacco and vaping products in Orinda.

SECTION 3. If any section, subsection, subdivision, paragraph, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid, such a decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this ordinance. The City Council hereby declares that it would have passed each section, subsection, subdivision, paragraph, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance irrespective of the invalidity of any section, subsection, subdivision, paragraph, sentence, clause or phrase.

SECTION 4. This ordinance is consistent with the Orinda General Plan.

SECTION 5. This ordinance is exempt from California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) review under CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3), the common sense exemption. This exemption applies to projects that will have no significant effect on the environment. Adopting and implementing an ordinance banning the sale of flavored tobacco and vaping products would not adversely affect the environment.

SECTION 6. This ordinance becomes effective 150 days after adoption.

SECTION 7. The City Clerk shall either (a) have this ordinance published once within fifteen (15) days after adoption in a newspaper of general circulation, or (b) have a summary of this ordinance published twice in a newspaper of general circulation, once five (5) days before its adoption and again within fifteen (15) days after adoption.

The foregoing ordinance was introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Orinda held on May 3, 2022 and was adopted and ordered published at a regular meeting held on May 17, 2022 by the following vote:

AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS:

H.1.a
Packet Pg. 139 Attachment: Ordinance 22-01 On Restricting the Sale of Flavored Tobacco and Vaping Products (2763 : Introduction of an Ordinance Banning 5 ______________________________
Dennis Fay, Mayor
ATTEST:
____________________________
Sheri Marie Smith, City Clerk
1492545.2
H.1.a
Packet Pg. 140 Attachment: Ordinance 22-01 On Restricting the Sale of Flavored Tobacco and Vaping Products (2763 : Introduction of an Ordinance Banning 1 Attachment A
Chapter 9.28 – RESTRICTIONS ON THE ADVERTISING, ACCESS AND

PROMOTION OF TOBACCO PRODUCTS TO PROTECT MINORS

9.28.010 Purpose.

The purpose of this chapter is to promote the welfare of minors by discouraging the commercial exploitation of potential underage tobacco users, the unlawful sale of tobacco products to minors and the unlawful purchase or possession of tobacco products by minors.

9.28.020 Definitions.

In this chapter:
"Adult" means any person or persons over the minimum age at which it is legal to purchase or possess (whichever minimum age is older) tobacco products. A driver's license or other government-issued identification shall be deemed to be sufficient proof of adulthood.
"Adult-only facility" means a facility or restricted area (whether open-air or enclosed) where the operator ensures or has a reasonable basis to believe (such as by checking identification as required under state law, or by checking the identification of any person appearing to be under the age of twenty-seven (27)) that no underage person is present. A facility or restricted area need not be permanently restricted to adults in order to constitute an adult-only facility, provided that the operator ensures or has a reasonable basis to believe that no underage person is present during the event or time period in question.
"Characterizing flavor” means a distinguishable taste or aroma imparted by a tobacco product or any byproduct produced by the tobacco product that is perceivable by an ordinary consumer by either the sense of taste or smell, other than the taste or aroma of tobacco. A "characterizing flavor" includes, but is not limited to, a taste or aroma relating to a fruit, chocolate, vanilla, honey, candy, cocoa, dessert, alcoholic beverage, menthol, mint, wintergreen, herb, or spice.
"Cigarette" means any product that contains nicotine, is intended to be burned or heated under ordinary conditions of use, and consists of or contains: (1) any roll of tobacco wrapped in paper or in any substance not containing tobacco; or (2) tobacco, in any form, which, because of its appearance, the type of tobacco used in the filler, or its packaging and labeling, is likely to be offered to, or purchased by, consumers as a cigarette; or (3) any roll of tobacco wrapped in any substance containing tobacco which, because of its appearance, the type of tobacco used in the filler, or its packaging and labeling, is likely to be offered to, or purchased by, consumers as a cigarette described in clause (1) of this definition. The term "cigarette" includes "roll-your-own" (i.e., any tobacco which, because of its appearance, type, packaging, or labeling is suitable for H.1.b
Packet Pg. 141 Attachment: Ordinance 22-01 Attachment A On Restricting the Sale of Flavored Tobacco and Vaping Products (2763 : Introduction of an 2 use and likely to be offered to, or purchased by, consumers as tobacco for making cigarettes).
"City Manager" means the City Manager or his/her designee. "Flavored tobacco product" means any tobacco product that contains a constituent that imparts a characterizing flavor. Menthol cigarettes are included in the definition of a flavored tobacco product for the purposes of this chapter. A tobacco product whose labeling or packaging contains text or an image indicating that the product imparts a characterizing flavor is presumed to be a flavored tobacco product. "Menthol cigarettes" means cigarettes as defined by federal law that have a characterizing flavor of menthol, mint, or wintergreen, including cigarettes advertised, labeled, or described by the manufacturer as possessing a menthol characterizing flavor.
"Nonsale distribution" means to give tobacco products to the general public at no cost, or at nominal cost, or to give coupons, coupon offers, or rebate offers for tobacco products or cigarettes to the general public at no cost or at nominal cost. Distribution to an adult of tobacco products, coupons, coupon offers, gift certificates, gift cards, or other similar offers, or rebate offers in connection with the sale of another item, including tobacco products, cigarette lighters, magazines, or newspapers shall not constitute nonsale distribution.
"Offering for sale" refers to tobacco products that are sold or displayed in a retail establishment.
"Smokeless tobacco product" means any finely cut, ground, powdered, or leaf tobacco that is intended to be placed in the oral cavity as defined in the Comprehensive Smokeless Tobacco Health Education Act, 15 U.S.C. § 4401 et seq. "Tobacco product" means cigarettes; and smokeless tobacco products; any vaping device that contains nicotine or can be used to deliver nicotine in aerosolized or vaporized form; any product containing, made from, or derived from tobacco or nicotine that is intended for human consumption, whether smoked, heated, chewed, absorbed, dissolved, inhaled, snorted, sniffed, or ingested by any other means, including but not limited to cigarettes, cigars, little cigars, chewing tobacco, pipe tobacco, and snuff; or any component, part, or accessory of a tobacco product, whether or not it is sold separately.
"Underage" means younger than the minimum age at which it is legal to purchase or possess (whichever minimum age is older) tobacco products. “Vaping product” means any device or delivery system that can be used to deliver nicotine to a person in aerosolized or vaporized form, including but not limited to, an electronic cigarette, electronic cigar, electronic pipe, electronic hookah, or vape pen.

This definition of “vaping product” includes any component, part, or accessory, including but not limited to a cartridge, that is used during the operation of the device or delivery system.

H.1.b
Packet Pg. 142 Attachment: Ordinance 22-01 Attachment A On Restricting the Sale of Flavored Tobacco and Vaping Products (2763 : Introduction of an 3 9.28.030 Administration.

This chapter shall be administered by the City Manager. The City Manager may issue guidelines to ensure implementation of this chapter.

9.28.040 Restrictions on the advertising of tobacco products.

No person shall place or maintain any advertising or promotion of tobacco products in violation of the provisions of Chapter 17.18 ("Signs") of the Orinda Municipal Code.

9.28.050 Nonsale distribution of tobacco products prohibited.

No person in the business of selling or distributing tobacco products for commercial purpose shall, in the course of business, distribute, authorize or permit an agent or employee to engage in Nonsale distribution within the City of Orinda.

9.28.060 Self-service displays prohibited.

A. It is unlawful for a person to sell, offer for sale, or display for sale any tobacco product by means of a self-service display, rack, counter top or shelf that allows a self-service customer access to a tobacco product.

B. Every tobacco product shall be offered for sale exclusively by means of seller assistance. Every tobacco product shall be located exclusively in a locked case, located behind a counter out of reach from customers, or in a similar location that is inaccessible to customers and requires seller assistance for the customer to obtain access to the tobacco product.

C. Exceptions. Subsections A and B of this section do not apply to vending machines located in an adult-only facility.

9.28.065 Sale or offer for sale of flavored tobacco and vaping products prohibited.

It is unlawful for a person or retailer to sell, or offer to sell, any flavored tobacco or vaping product.

9.28.070 License requirement generally.

A. License Required. It is unlawful for a person or retailer who, within the last twelve (12) months, has been found to be in violation of this chapter or applicable state or federal law governing the sale and distribution of tobacco, to sell or offer for sale any tobacco product within the city without first obtaining and maintaining a tobacco retailer's license from the city.

B. It is unlawful for a person or retailer who is required to have a tobacco retailer's license to sell or offer a tobacco product for sale if the license has been suspended pursuant to Section 9.28.080.

H.1.b
Packet Pg. 143 Attachment: Ordinance 22-01 Attachment A On Restricting the Sale of Flavored Tobacco and Vaping Products (2763 : Introduction of an 4 9.28.080 License application and suspension procedure.

A. The City Manager shall issue each tobacco retailer's license.

B. An application for a tobacco retailer's license shall be submitted in the name of the person or retailer, who, following a finding of a violation of this chapter or applicable state or federal law governing the sale and distribution of tobacco, proposes to conduct retail tobacco sales. The application shall be signed by the person or retailer or its authorized agent. The application shall be submitted on a form provided by the city and shall contain the following information:

1. The name, address, and telephone number of the applicant;

2. The business name, address and telephone number where tobacco is to be sold; and

3. Such other information as the City Manager determines is reasonably necessary for implementation of this chapter.

C. Failure to Pay Fine. Any outstanding fines must be paid before the city issues a tobacco retailer's license under this section.

D. Upon receipt of a completed application for a tobacco retailer's license, including payment of the license fee and any outstanding fines, the City Manager shall issue a license.

E. The fee for a tobacco retailer's license shall be established from time to time by the City Council and shall reflect the actual cost of processing the license, including the cost of any inspection of the tobacco retailer's business premises and implementation costs for the licensing program.

F. The license must be prominently displayed at the location where tobacco retail sales are conducted.

G. The Tobacco Retailer's License is Nontransferable. If there is a change in location, a new tobacco retail license will be issued for the new address upon receipt of an application. The new license shall retain the same expiration date as the previous license.

H. Suspension of License. To discourage violations of law, a tobacco retailer's license may be suspended if the City Manager finds that the licensee or an employee or other agent has violated the provisions of this chapter or any state or federal law governing the sale or distribution of tobacco. The City Manager may suspend the license only after giving the licensee notice and a reasonable opportunity to be heard on the matter. The City Manager shall put the findings regarding the violation in writing.

1. The first time that the City Manager finds a violation has occurred, the license may be suspended for up to sixty (60) days.

H.1.b
Packet Pg. 144 Attachment: Ordinance 22-01 Attachment A On Restricting the Sale of Flavored Tobacco and Vaping Products (2763 : Introduction of an 5 2. After the second time within a twelve-month period that the City Manager finds a violation has occurred, the license may be suspended for up to one hundred twenty (120) days.

3. After the third and each subsequent time within a twelve-month period that the City Manager finds a violation has occurred, the license may be suspended for up to one (1) year.

4. Appeal of suspension. A decision of the City Manager to suspend a tobacco retailer's license may be appealed to the City Council.

I. A License is Valid for Three (3) Years. If there is no further violation of a law regulating the sale or distribution of tobacco during that three-year period, a tobacco retailer's license is no longer required.

9.28.090 Violations.

A. City Manager review. A private citizen or a city officer or employee may submit a written complaint to the City Manager reporting violations of this chapter.

B. If the City Manager finds a violation of this chapter, the City Manager shall serve written notice requiring correction of the violation upon the person responsible. The notice shall specify a date by which the violation must be corrected. The notice shall be served by: (1) personal service; or (2) certified first class mail. The person responsible shall correct the violation within the time specified in the notice.

C. Imposition of fine. The City Manager may impose an administrative fine, as permitted under Government Code Section 53069.4, upon finding a violation of this chapter. A fine may be imposed only after the City Manager gives notice and an opportunity to be heard.

D. Fine amount. The fine amounts are as set from time to time City Council resolution.

E. Fine procedures.

1. Notice. Notice of the fine shall be served by certified first class mail. The notice shall contain notice of the right to request a hearing before the City Council contesting the imposition of the fine. The hearing must be requested within ten (10) days of the date of the notice of the fine.

2. Judicial review. A person contesting the decision of the City Council may seek judicial review under Government Code section 53069.4(b).

F. Separate violations.

1. Each day that an advertisement or promotion of tobacco products is placed or maintained in violation of the provisions of Chapter 17.18 ("Signs") of the Orinda Municipal Code is a separate violation.

2. Each instance of nonsale distribution in violation of this chapter is a separate violation.

3. Each day that the self-service provisions of this chapter are violated is a separate violation.

H.1.b
Packet Pg. 145 Attachment: Ordinance 22-01 Attachment A On Restricting the Sale of Flavored Tobacco and Vaping Products (2763 : Introduction of an 6 4. Each day that the flavored tobacco and/or vaping products provisions of this chapter are violated is a separate violation.

5. Each day that a tobacco product is offered for sale without a license by a person or retailer required to have a license is a separate violation. Each day that a tobacco product is offered for sale by a person or retailer with a suspended license is a separate violation.

65. For the purposes of determining liability, each location at which a violation of this chapter occurs is considered a separate entity.

9.28.100 Additional remedies—Disclaimers.

A. Intent as to additional legal restrictions and remedies. This chapter is not intended to alter the obligations or restrictions that apply to a person under any other law governing matters covered by this chapter. The remedies set forth in this chapter are not exclusive. If an action prohibited by this chapter is also unlawful under another law, the penalties and remedies under other laws may be pursued in addition to those provided in this chapter.

B. Disclaimers. In regulating tobacco products, the city is promoting the general welfare. It is not assuming, nor is it imposing upon its officers and employees, a mandatory duty or obligation. Nothing in this chapter shall render the city liable to any person who claims that the city's action or inaction caused injury. 1498054.3
H.1.b
Packet Pg. 146 Attachment: Ordinance 22-01 Attachment A On Restricting the Sale of Flavored Tobacco and Vaping Products (2763 : Introduction of an City Council
Staff Report
Agenda Item: H.2
Date: May 3, 2022
Department:

Public Works and
Engineering Services
AGENDA TITLE: Discussion of Annual Update to the Capital Improvement Plan RECOMMENDATION:

Staff recommends the City Council conduct its first review and discussion of the annual update to the City's rolling five year Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) for Fiscal Years 2021/22-2026/27 and receive PowerPoint presentation from Staff on the Status of the 2021/22 CIP Projects. No action is being taken to approve projects or appropriate funds. The information obtained from this meeting will be used to develop formal updates to the CIP, including the addition of new projects. The City Council will have additional opportunities to review and provide input in the next two months along with the mid-cycle budget adjustments before the CIP is approved.

CIP PLANNING PROCESS IN UNCERTAIN TIMES:

The CIP is a financial planning document which relies on estimates of available resources. The plan then presents a road map, balancing the various funding needs over numerous proposed projects, to ensure sufficient funding exists. For capital projects it is important to look beyond one year. In some cases the City may have accumulated funds over multiple years, or it may still be in a saving mode to address critical deficiencies. The COVID-19 pandemic will continue to have an impact on City resources, along with more recent changes to the economy, such as significant increases in inflation, changes in the labor market, and supply chain interruptions.

These developments have resulted in increased prices for construction materials and supplies, such as asphalt, fuel, lumber and metals. This leads to higher bid prices for projects. In light of this environment, Staff recommends a fiscally conservative approach to only fund the most essential projects.

BACKGROUND:

The Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) identifies projects and funding sources for longterm capital investments that are designed to protect, preserve, and enhance the City's infrastructure, extend the useful service life of public facilities and improve or enhance delivery of City services. The City Council annually discusses priorities, overall funding of future projects, and potentially new projects to be added to the CIP. To set the stage for consideration of the annual update of the Five Year CIP, staff will make a presentation at the City Council meeting updating the Council and Community on the projects completed to date in the 21/22 fiscal, both prior and current fiscal year projects, and the status of the balance of the programmed 21/22 capital projects.

The City Council last approved the CIP on June 29, 2021, for the five-year period FY 2021-2025, which included expected expenditures for fiscal year which was underway (July 1, 2021 through June 30, 2022) and forecasted expenditures for a four-year period H.2
Packet Pg. 147
(to June 30, 2025). Attachment A is a listing of the current approved CIP projects by category. Programming for future years enables the CIP to be used as a planning tool to prioritize potential projects and schedule them in light of projected fund balances.

This year, in order to forecast a conventional five year period, the CIP will encompass an additional year. It should also be noted that in order to be consistent with the twoyear overall city budget cycle, the CIP will be updated annually, and then comprehensively adopted during the two-year cycle with the overall budget.

The CIP update and adoption process encompasses three City Council meetings:
 City Staff meets with the City Council to present proposed changes to the CIP which includes consideration of new project. (This is the subject meeting.)  Based on input received at the first meeting, Staff prepares a proposed updated CIP, including new projects proposed at the above meeting, fiscal changes to current projects, and removal of completed or discontinued projects. This will be presented to the City Council, tentatively in May 2022.  (Planning Commission reviews new projects in the CIP update to determine conformance with the General Plan, prior to adoption by City Council)  Staff prepares the final updated CIP that will be recommended for adoption by the City Council, tentatively in June 2022.

DISCUSSION:

The purpose of the subject item is to receive input from the City Council (concurrence and/or direction) on allocating funding for capital projects as described in the various Tables below. This will allow Staff to be better informed before proceeding with further analyses which includes balancing the various fund sources to ensure minimum levels are maintained. Depending on the priority and needs for proposed project(s), it may be warranted to reschedule or even cancel future year projects already in the approved CIP to allow funding of such new projects.

It should be noted that Staff is not including maintenance related projects under $60,000 such as building painting and carpet installation, as these typically are not classified as capital improvements. Costs for such work would be incorporated into the operating budget.

Staff have separated the potential projects into the categories as described below:

Table 1 - Proposed New Projects with proposed funding identifiedthese include projects (highlighted) from the Unfunded Project List (Attachment B) in last year’s approved CIP
No. Project Name Expenditure
Year(s)
Potential Fund
Source (Fund #)
Estimated
Cost

1.1 San Pablo Creek Box
Culvert Repair
21/22 to
25/26
Road/Drainage
Stabilization (#700),
Measure R (#106) $5,000,000

1.2 2025 Annual Pavement
Project
25/26 Various (*)
$2,000,000
H.2
Packet Pg. 148
Table 1 - Proposed New Projects with proposed funding identifiedthese include projects (highlighted) from the Unfunded Project List (Attachment B) in last year’s approved CIP
No. Project Name Expenditure
Year(s)
Potential Fund
Source (Fund #)
Estimated
Cost

1.3 2026 Annual Pavement
Project
26/27 Various (*)
$2,000,000

1.4 RRFB Crosswalk Moraga
Way at Valley View
23/24 TDA (#263) $100,000

1.5 Library elevator
modernization
24/25 Library parcel tax
(#520) $350,000

1.6 Emergency Generators –
various city buildings **
23/24 State Grants (#260) TBD

1.7 Lighting retrofit (LED) –
tennis courts
22/23 Park Dedication fees
(#240) $65,000
* Gas Tax (Fund #200), Garbage Co. Road Maint. Fees (#335), CCTA Return To Source (#330) ** Replace community center and City Hall generators, obtain generators for library and maintenance yard, add battery back-up system to AGC solar - primarily grant funded by California Governor’s Office of Emergency Services (Cal OES - 404 Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (HGMP) Table 2 - Selected Projects from the CIP Unfunded Project List - Staff selected for discussion on priorities, should funding sources become available in the future.

No. Project Name Estimated Cost

2.1 Lighting retrofit (LED) – Wilder fields #1 & #2 $250,000 Table 3 - Changes to the Unfunded CIP Projects list - Staff recommends the addition of new projects as shown, which may include requests from the public.

No. Project Name Estimated Cost

3.1 Camino Pablo medians – landscaping upgrade for
remaining areas following 2019 project – Santa
Maria to Brookwood
$120,000
NEXT STEPS:

Staff will follow the direction given by the City Council and address/incorporate any comments into the draft of the CIP Update to be reviewed by City Council in May or June 2022. Staff will further analyze the selected projects, and determine impact to the funding sources and the fund balances.

H.2
Packet Pg. 149
FISCAL IMPACT:

Project budgets, cost estimates, and potential project funding sources are preliminary.

No funding is being appropriated by the City Council with this item – it is for preliminary review only, and no new projects are approved to move forward.

ATTACHMENTS:

A. Projects by Category CIP final 6-29-21
B. Master Unfunded CIP Project List post June 29, 2021 CC mtg C. PowerPoint Presentation 2021/22 CIP Project Status
Respectfully Submitted by:

Scott Christie
Public Works Director
Prepared By: Sheri Smith, City Clerk
Approved by:

H.2
Packet Pg. 150
Capital Improvement Plan
City of Orinda, California

PROJECTS BY CATEGORY
'20/'21 thru '24/'25
Category Project # '20/'21 '21/'22 '22/'23 '23/'24 '24/'25 Total

CITY BUILDINGS & FACILITIES
Community Center Window Replacement 4016 120,000 120,000 Sewer Line Community Center 4017 50,000 50,000
Community Center HVAC 4050 50,000 50,000
Community Center Exterior Painting 4083 75,000 75,000
Community Center Accessibility Improvements 4086 5,800 15,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 65,800 City Hall Slide Stabilization 4108 50,000 835,000 885,000 Art and Garden Center Sound Absorption 4113 15,000 15,000 Community Center Roof Replacement 4141 5,000 295,000 300,000 City Hall Elevator 4145 20,000 20,000
Install Mini Split HVAC System at Orinda Library 4160 30,000 30,000 Library Boiler Replacement 4161 75,000 75,000
Solar Back-Up Community Center 4164 52,000 313,701 365,701 Library Roof Replacement 4173 85,000 85,000
Replace Library Air Handlers 4174 190,000 190,000
Library Painting (Ext. & Interior) 4175 60,000 60,000
Library Exterior Accent Tile Replacement 4179 100,000 100,000 Community Center Vinyl Flooring Replacement 4180 40,000 40,000 Art & Garden Ctr Audio Visual 4181 20,000 20,000
City Hall Exterior Painting 4182 65,000 65,000
Wilder Ranch House Roof Replacement 4184 35,000 35,000
CITY BUILDINGS & FACILITIES Total 162,800 2,018,701 435,000 15,000 15,000 2,646,501

LONG TERM PLANNING
Downtown Precise Plan 4163 217,860 205,131 97,000 519,991 Housing Element Update 5501 25,000 219,000 181,000 425,000 LONG TERM PLANNING Total 242,860 424,131 278,000 944,991

PARK IMPROVEMENTS
Wilder Fields 1&2 Turf Replacement 4013 30,000 1,334,680 1,364,680 Fencing & Gate Wilder Field 4 4018 33,000 0 33,000
Resurface Community Park Tennis Courts 4052 168,020 168,020 Wilder Park Field#4 Synthetic Turf 4061 256,328 256,328 Mini Park (Crossroads Park) 4103 30,000 328,000 358,000 Community Park Renovation Plan & Improvements 4112 140,000 652,000 792,000 PARK IMPROVEMENTS Total 517,348 1,802,680 652,000 2,972,028

TRANSPORTATION / DRAINAGE
Miner Road Bridge Seismic Retrofit 0044 140,000 116,000 301,000 557,000 Bear Creek Bridge Seismic Retrofit 0087 212,000 220,000 778,000 1,210,000 Camino Pablo Path-Orinda Way to Monte Vista 3066 50,000 580,000 30,000 660,000 Glorietta-Rheem SD Repair PL-492 3100 175,000 25,000 1,000,000 1,200,000 Orchard SD Repair PL-409 & PL-513 3101 50,000 200,000 1,000,000 1,250,000 Ivy Dr. SD Repairs, PL-958/959 & PL864 3102 200,000 1,100,000 1,300,000 2021-2025 CIP

H.2.a
Packet Pg. 151 Attachment: Projects by Category CIP final 6-29-21 (2762 : CIP discussion) Category Project # '20/'21 '21/'22 '22/'23 '23/'24 '24/'25 Total Canon SD Repairs PL-1765, -1766 &-1775 3103 1,600,000 1,600,000 Ranch SD Repairs PL-1074; PL-1089, PL-1809 3104 1,100,000 1,100,000 Brookside SD Repair PL-751, PL-867 3105 1,100,000 1,100,000 Canon Dr. Embankment repair 3548 53,000 20,000 73,000
Traffic Signal Operation Improvements 3608 150,000 1,100,000 1,250,000 ADA Transition Plan Compliance (Roadway) 4074 15,064 85,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 250,064 Camino Pablo Pathway Rehabilitation 4076 25,000 30,000 95,000 150,000 Storm Drain Plan & Inventory 4092 10,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 70,000 Storm Drain Liner Ivy Dr (48in) 4094 10,000 130,000 140,000 Traffic Calming Improvements Program 4107 3,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 123,000 Annual Bicycle, Trails, and Walkways Program 4109 0 40,000 40,000 40,000 40,000 160,000 Annual Drainage Facilities Improvement Program 4111 40,000 170,000 170,000 165,000 155,000 700,000 2019 Annual and Measure J & L Pavement Rehab 4119/4120 889,605 720,000 1,609,605 Camino Pablo Bicycle Route Corridor Improvements 4128 55,000 451,500 506,500 Orinda Way Pavement Rehabilitation 4138 25,000 835,000 860,000 Martha Rd-Catherine Ct Ped Path 4140 1,400 280,000 281,400 Green Infrastructure Program for Pavement Projects 4146 0 35,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 125,000 Lavenida Culvert Repair 4148 48,500 20,000 604,477 672,977 2020 Annual Pavement Project 4150 5,922,905 5,922,905
Camino Sobrante at Golf Course Slide Stabilization 4152 20,000 770,000 790,000 Loma Vista Pavement Repair 4153 55,000 245,000 300,000
2021 Annual Pavement Project 4155 300,000 3,020,000 3,320,000 Pavement Rehab - El Toyonal, Oak Flat, La Espiral 4165 497,000 403,000 900,000 2022 Annual Pavement Project 4166 530,000 1,875,000 2,405,000 Storm Drain Moraga Wy & Coral 4167 93,000 100,000 773,900 966,900 Ped Path MoragaWy ECM to Altam 4168 0 125,000 125,000 250,000 Crosswalk Orindawoods KiteHill 4169 49,000 49,000
Drainage Impvt 25 La Cuesta 4170 31,500 31,500
2023 Annual Paving Project 4171 210,000 1,790,000 2,000,000 Ped Xing Improvement Glorietta at Virginia 4172 49,000 49,000 Washington Ln. Widening Study 4176 31,141 31,141
Camino Pablo Underground Utility District 4177 200,000 100,000 1,200,000 1,500,000 2024 Annual Pavement Rehabilitation 4178 225,000 1,775,000 2,000,000 2025 Annual Pavement Rehabilitation 4183 200,000 200,000 Road Safety Plan 4185 70,000 70,000
Mitigation - Brookwood Rd. ROW- Study 4186 110,000 110,000 TRANSPORTATION / DRAINAGE Total 7,874,615 8,919,000 7,311,477 6,443,900 7,295,000 37,843,992

VEHICLES
Fleet Replacements 0020 301,000 201,000 364,770 237,580 220,200 1,324,550 VEHICLES Total 301,000 201,000 364,770 237,580 220,200 1,324,550 GRAND TOTAL 9,098,623 13,365,512 9,041,247 6,696,480 7,530,200 45,732,062 2021-2025 CIP

H.2.a
Packet Pg. 152 Attachment: Projects by Category CIP final 6-29-21 (2762 : CIP discussion)

CITY OF ORINDA - CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN

UNFUNDED CIP PROJECTS LIST
FY 2021 to FY 2025 CIP
In lieu of individual project sheets for projects that do not have funding, this list represent projects that of significance but do not have funding sources identified. These projects will not move forward unless funding sources can be identified. The order of the project listed below do not present priority.

Public Works Dept. /Transportation Projects

1. Downtown Intersection Operational Improvements
Description/Notes: Consider reconfiguration of the intersection of Camino Pablo/EB Hwy 24 Offramp/Brookwood Rd, including a traffic circle/roundabout or removal of some traffic movements. Due to the five legs to this intersection, signal operations are protracted and can be somewhat difficult to discern. Due to the high volumes of vehicles along Camino Pablo and the Hwy 24 off-ramp, multi-lanes within the circle must be considered to operate with reasonable level of service. Special consideration must be evaluated for pedestrian and bicycle traffic safety due to the lack of right of way control afforded by standard traffic signals.

Cost: TBD

2. Camino Sobrante Slope Stabilization
Description/Notes: This project contemplates a reconstruction and rehabilitation of Camino Sobrante from Orinda Way east to El Ribero. No funds have been secured for this major reconstruction project, which will include a geotechnical study for slope stabilization and repair.

Cost: TBD

3. Moraga Way at Stein Way Improvements
Description/Notes: The project is identified in the Lamorinda Fee and Financing Authority Expenditure Plan. It would address the increased traffic accessing Moraga Way at this intersection. The scope of the project is still to be determined.

Cost: $750,000

4. Rheem Blvd. & Glorietta Blvd. Intersection Improvements (#3038) Description/Notes: The need for installation of a traffic signal at this intersection was identified in the Lamorinda Transportation Improvement Program (1994) based on the proposed Rancho Palos Colorados project in Moraga, which has not yet occurred. The need for improvements to this intersection continues to be monitored and will likely not be implemented until Moraga completes their Rancho Palos Colorados project.

Cost: $TBD

5. Sign Inventory and Replacement
Description/Notes: Inventory of Existing Roadway Signage including condition and retroreflectivity; add to GIS database. Establish a protocol of sign replacement by type or age Cost: $TBD
H.2.b
Packet Pg. 153 Attachment: Master Unfunded CIP Project List post June 29, 2021 CC mtg (2762 : CIP discussion)

6. Full trash capture/Triton Drop Inlet to capture oil & grease runoff from Chevron Description/Notes: Install full trash capture device at inlet near Chevron gas station. Chevron may have a future improvement project. Depending on the future improvement project, the City may place a requirement for Chevron to construct this project.

Cost: $TBD

7. Happy Valley Road Guardrail/Embankment Stabilization Description/Notes: Repair the slide on the northerly side of Happy Valley Road south of Sundown Terrance (near the border of Lafayette), consider soldier pile retaining walls along the west side of Happy Valley Road just north of the Sundown Terrance, and provide additional pavement width to install metal beam guardrails. Ref. CCTA CTPL potential project list.

Cost: $1,250,000+

8. Ichabod Ln. Drainage (Project #4154)
Description/Notes: Per request from resident to reduce surface drainage in gutter along the frontage of the beginning of Ichabod Lane (89 Sleepy Hollow Lane) by installing new storm drain system 200’ uphill to open space ditch.

Cost: $425,000

9. Daryl Drive Neighborhood Drainage Improvements
Description/Notes: Perform drainage studies on the Daryl Drive culvert between Overhill Rd. and Marth Rd. to allow design and construction of capacity improvements to the system. This will require permitting from regulatory agencies and the associated environmental studies.

Easements to allow improvements on portions of private property will likely be required.

Cost: $800,000

10. Washington Ln. Widening
Description/Notes: Utilizing Study completed in 2020 (project #4176), acquire easement if necessary to widen street for improved fire dept. access.

Cost: $800,000

11. Hwy 24/Camino Pablo Interchange Landscape Improvements Description/Notes: Improve landscaping appearance at this location. Determine if Caltrans, who has control of this location, would entertain a design prepared by the City for their review.

Irrigation of the site would be a major consideration as new service meters are very expensive and drought surcharges may apply. Review and approval by Caltrans will be required if such project is allowed to proceed by Caltrans. Ongoing maintenance agreements would likely be required.

Cost: Initial landscaping plans and review $30,000. Irrigation and installation: $100,000 plus, depending on extent of improvements.

H.2.b
Packet Pg. 154 Attachment: Master Unfunded CIP Project List post June 29, 2021 CC mtg (2762 : CIP discussion) Public Works Dept. /Trail, Pedestrian and Bicycle Projects

12. Miner Road Pedestrian Bridge at San Pablo Creek
Description/Notes: Construct a pedestrian bridge over San Pablo Creek. Ref. CCTA CTPL potential project list.

Cost: $TBD

13. Brookwood Road Walkway
Description/Notes: Provide a pedestrian walkway along Brookwood Road. (#7 on “Top 10” list compiled from BTW Plan)
Cost: $TBD

14. Aesthetic Enhancement - Sandblast & Paint Pedestrian Overcrossing Hwy. 24 on-ramp (end of Orinda Way)
Description/Notes: Existing bridge surface meets minimum maintenance level, consider aesthetic enhancement with sandblast and paint this Caltrans-owned bridge, which is maintained by the City under a Maintenance Agreement with Caltrans. Work will need to include containment facilities. Caltrans permits will be required.

Cost: $125,000

15. Orinda Oaks/Oak Springs Fire Evacuation & Trail Access to Wilder Description/Notes: Acquire easements to connect to existing easement to provide trail connecting the Wilder development (at the east end of Fiddleneck Way) to Stein Way (west of Oak Rd.

Cost: $300,000
Parks & Recreation Dept./Parks

16. Park and Recreation Master Plan (#4059)
Description/Notes: Develop a Parks and recreation Master Plan with consideration of the recently adopted Bicycle, Trails, and Walkways Master Plan. The existing Master Plan was adopted in 1988.

Cost: $100,000

17. Parklands Acquisition (#4060)
Description/Notes: Provide funding for parkland acquisition opportunities as provided in the Orinda General Plan and Parks Master Plan.

Cost: $TBD

18. Park Monument Signage (#4113)
Description/Notes: Develop program to replace aging signs, and implement, subject to design and cost estimates.

Cost: $ TBD
H.2.b
Packet Pg. 155 Attachment: Master Unfunded CIP Project List post June 29, 2021 CC mtg (2762 : CIP discussion)

19. Community Park Tennis Court Lighting Retrofit and Pole Painting Description/Notes: Replace the outdated, inefficient existing lighting system for the 3 tennis courts and practice court in the community park with LED technology will result in a more efficient, effective, and environmentally-friendly facility. The existing poles also require repainting.

Cost: $ 75,000

20. Wilder Fields 1 & 2 Lighting Retrofit
Description/Notes: Replacing the existing lighting system for Wilder Fields 1 and 2 with LED technology will provide more efficient, effective, and environmentally-friendly lighting for these heavily used sports fields.

Cost: $ 200,000
Parks & Recreation Dept./Facilities

21. Art & Garden Center Parking Lot
Description/Notes: Construct a parking lot uphill of the Art & Garden Center with ADA pathway.

Funding has not be identified. Wilder residents have provided initial feedbacks. The scope of this parking lot needs to be further developed.

Cost: $150,000

22. Upgrades to City Hall Pedestrian Paths
Description/Notes: Upgrade City Hall pedestrian paths, including adding lighting and railing.

Cost: $50,000

23. Community Center Kitchen Renovations (#4022)
Description/Notes: Upgrade kitchen to meet current health and safety codes.

Cost: $75,000

24. Orinda Oaks Park Restroom Replacement (#TBD4012)
Description/Notes: The project replaces the existing aged restroom with a new, efficient and accessible facility.

Cost: $100,000
Planning Dept.

25. Near-Term Downtown Pedestrian Safety and Beautification Enhancements Description/Notes: The project area for this project is focused on the connections between the Theatre District and BART and the Village District and BART. This includes re-opening the second pedestrian entrance to BART, beautification of the pedestrian undercrossing, pedestrian safety and comfort improvements, and improving the landing of the walkway from the pedestrian bridge from BART to the Village District, including creating a gateway to the existing pedestrian bridge near the southern end of Orinda Way (as detailed on pages 22-27 and 36-38 of the ConnectOrinda Plan). Potential funding could come from Measure RR and CCTA Measure J. Ref.

CCTA CTPL potential project #3043.

Cost: $50,000 - 650,000
H.2.b
Packet Pg. 156 Attachment: Master Unfunded CIP Project List post June 29, 2021 CC mtg (2762 : CIP discussion)

26. Construct Living Landscape Berm on Bryant Way
Description/Notes: Enhance Bryant Way through visual screening and freeway noise attenuation by creating an earthen mound with vegetation on top of it along the freeway side of Bryant Way (as detailed on pages 42-44 of the ConnectOrindaPlan). (Note this project is an expansion of the “Visual Screening Enhancements” project which appeared in the 2019-2023 Potential Project List (F). The planting work in that project was completed) Cost: $200,000 - $400,000

27. San Pablo Creek Restoration (CIP Project #4159)
Description/Notes: Perform creek hydrology study work, determine potential creek alignments, determine trail alignments for future pedestrian creek trail, provide a pedestrian connection to the de Laveaga (EBMUD) trail, and perform property acquisition due diligence. Plan for public creek access (as detailed on pages 28-32 of the ConnectOrinda Plan). Future creek restoration phases would include CEQA compliance and project implementation. Note: The State Water Board has allowed mitigation fees (from creek/culvert project regulatory permit conditions) to be paid into this project. Note: A portion of this work (technical/ hydraulic evaluations) will be included as part of the Downtown Precise Plan CIP Project #4163.

Cost: $125,000 (study only)

28. Library Terrace Area Pedestrian Improvements
Description/Notes: This project will include replacing the existing surface material with decomposed granite, installing string lighting (if not already completed through remaining ConnectOrinda funds), permanent games (such as concrete foosball), and outdoor furnishings that transform the area into a well-used area for people of all ages that remains beautiful (as detailed on pages 33-35 of the ConnectOrinda Plan).

Cost: $100,000

29. Murals Along Camino Pablo Near State Route 24
Description/Notes: Create murals along Camino Pablo near State Route 24 and Vashell Way. This includes the pedestrian bridges between the two sides of Downtown and BART (as shown on pages 61-62 of the ConnectOrinda Plan). The Vashell Way mural would be located on the south-east wall of the Casa Orinda building (as shown on page 40 of the ConnectOrinda Plan).

This project includes funding for the community process of selecting qualified artists as well as partial funding for the murals. The intent is to use the city funding as seed money to be used as matching funds for community fundraising. Staff will outreach to the community groups for possible partnerships and potential philanthropic giving to fully fund the mural art desired by the community.

Cost: $10,000 (seed money only; private donations needed to implement project)

30. Vashell Way Pedestrian Activation
Description/Notes: Enhance Theatre District activity through transformation of Vashell Way into a part-time pedestrian alley. The project would include special paving, murals, lighting, and bollards (as detailed on pages 39-41 of the ConnectOrinda Plan). Potential funding could come from Measure RR and philanthropic community groups/community members.

Cost: $250,000
H.2.b
Packet Pg. 157 Attachment: Master Unfunded CIP Project List post June 29, 2021 CC mtg (2762 : CIP discussion)