Agenda packet, regular meeting — Orinda City Council, October 11, 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.

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, October 11, 2022
7:00 PM - REGULAR MEETING
City Council
Agenda Page 1 10.11.22
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 in the public review binder at Orinda City Hall, 22 Orinda Way. 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 account 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.
 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.

City Council
Agenda Page 2 10.11.22
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
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. September 20, 2022 - Closed Session Meeting

2. September 27, 2022 - Regular Meeting
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 October 12, 2022 to November 11, 2022 Pursuant to the Provisions of Assembly Bill 361.

F.3. Adoption of Amendments to the City’s Conflict of Interest Code for Designated Filers
City Council
Agenda Page 3 10.11.22
Recommendation:

Staff recommends that the City Council consider adoption of Resolution No. 48-22 amending the City’s Conflict of Interest Code for Designated Filers and the repeal of Resolution No. 55-20
F.4. Authorize Contract Amendment No. 1 with NV5, Inc. for Design Services for Community Center Solar plus Battery Backup and ReRoofing project #4141 & #4164.

Recommendation:

Staff recommends that the City Council approve Contract Amendment No. 1 (between the City of Orinda and NV5, Inc.) to increase the contract limit by an additional $16,800 to a new total contract amount of $85,500; and appropriate funding thereof from the City Capital Projects Fund (Fund #700).

F.5. Accept contract with Gruendl Inc. DBA Ray's Electric for the Camino Pablo Bicycle Route Project No. 4128
Recommendation:

Staff recommends that the City Council adopt Resolution 47-22, "Acceptance of Work for the Camino Pablo Bicycle Route Project No. 4128 by Gruendl Inc. DBA Ray's Electric of Oakland, California" and authorize the City Clerk to sign and file the Notice of Completion with the Contra Costa County Clerk-Recorder.

F.6. Increase Contingency for Construction Contract with Valentine Corporation for the Lavenida Culvert Repair Project (Project No. 4148), and Appropriate Funding.

Recommendation:

Staff recommends that the City Council approve an increase in the contingency for construction contract with Valentine Corporation by $80,000 and appropriate funding of $80,000 from the Road/Drainage Stabilization Fund (#704) for such purpose.

F.7. Approve Traffic Orders for Parking Restrictions at Various Locations in Orinda
Recommendation:

Staff recommends that the City Council Adopt Resolutions 49-22, 50-22, and 51-22 establishing various parking regulations on Meadow Park Court, Sleepy Hollow Lane, and Manzanita Drive respectively.

G. PUBLIC HEARING
G.1. Wilder Annual Review
Recommendation:

City Council
Agenda Page 4 10.11.22
Conduct a continued public hearing for staff to report on discussions with representatives of OG Property Owners, LLC (“OGLLC”) regarding its noncompliance with the terms of the Second Amendment and Restatement of the Development and Pre-Annexation Agreement for Gateway Valley (“DA”) and related approvals, including the 2009 Reimbursement Agreement, the Orinda Geologic Hazard Abatement District (“GHAD”) Plan of Control, and the 2008 Subdivision Improvement Agreement, all as amended. Staff recommends that the City Council adopt Resolution No. 54-22 finding that OGLLC still is not in good faith compliance with the DA and related approvals, directing OGLLC to immediately bring its performance into good faith compliance with the DA and to appear before the City Council at a continued public hearing on November 15, 2022.

H. POLICY MATTERS
H.1. Consider whether to proceed with a Proposal from Professor Dr.

John Radke, Center for Catastrophic Risk Management, University of California, Berkeley, to undertake “A Strategic Wildfire Planning Process for Orinda: Transitioning from Basic, through Adaptive, to Transformative Wildfire Resilience in Orinda, CA.”
Recommendation:

SSTOC Recommendation: The Commission recommends the City Council to enter into a contract with Dr. Radke along the lines of the proposal submitted at a cost of $598,196.

Staff Recommendation: Do not proceed with the proposal using Measure R or City funds. Alternatively, consider pursuing grant funds if identified and made available to possibly proceed with the proposal and consider using Measure R funds for any required local match.

H.2. Approve Measure R Fire Fuels Reduction Incentive Pilot Program Recommendation:

Adopt Resolution No. 53-22 Approving the Measure R Fire Fuels Reduction Incentive Pilot Program
H.3. City Council Meeting Scheule for 2023
Recommendation:

Review and Adopt City Council Meeting Schedules for 2023 I. COUNCILMEMBERS' REPORTS
J. CITY MANAGER'S REPORT
K. MATTERS INITIATED
L. ADJOURNMENT
City Council
Agenda Page 5 10.11.22
The next Regular Meeting of the Orinda City Council will be held on Tuesday, October 18, 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.

AGENDA TITLE: City Council Minutes
RECOMMENDATION:

Approve City Council Minutes:

1. September 20, 2022 - Closed Session Meeting

2. September 27, 2022 - Regular Meeting
ATTACHMENTS:

A. City Council Closed Session Minutes of September 20, 2022 B. City Council Minutes of September 27, 2022
Respectfully Submitted by:

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

F.1
Packet Pg. 6
SEPTEMBER 20, 2022

CITY OF ORINDA

CITY COUNCIL CLOSED SESSION MINUTES
6:00 PM - SPECIAL MEETING
A. CALL TO ORDER/ ROLL CALL
Vice Mayor Miller called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. and noted that all Councilmembers were present except Mayor Fay and Councilmember Kosla as they both had excused absences.

B. OPEN SESSION IDENTIFICATION OF CLOSED SESSION MATTERS City Attorney Wolff 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. CLOSED SESSION CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSELANTICIPATED LITIGATION - Initiation of litigation pursuant to paragraph (4) of subdivision (d) of Government Code Section 54956.9 (1 potential case) E. OPEN SESSION REPORT REGARDING CLOSED SESSION
Vice Mayor Miller announced that there was no reportable action.

F. ADJOURNMENT
The meeting adjourned at approximately 9:00 P.M.
_______________________
Sheri Marie Smith, City Clerk
F.1.a
Packet Pg. 7
Attachment: City Council Closed Session Minutes of September 20, 2022 (2922 : City Council Minutes) Orinda City Council Minutes Page 1 of 11 09.27.22
September 27, 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=2099.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
COUNCILMEMBERS ABSENT: Mayor Dennis Fay
B. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE – Led by Vice Mayor Miller.

C. ADOPTION OF AGENDA
MOTION by Councilmember Gee moved and seconded by Councilmember Kosla to adopt the agenda. Said motion carried by unanimous (4-0) roll call vote.

D. ITEMS FOR THE GOOD OF THE CITY
D.1. New Employee Introductions – Celina Palmer & Donna Baarsch Planning Director Drummond Buckley introduced two new Planning staff members Associate Planner Celina Palmer, and Planning Technician Donna Baarsch, and briefly gave an overview of their experience and background.

Donna Baarsch said she is excited to be working for the City of Orinda as the City’s new Planning Technician.

Celina Palmer said she looks forward to working with everyone and serving the Orinda community.

E. PUBLIC FORUM
There were no speakers.

F. CONSENT CALENDAR
F.1.b
Packet Pg. 8
Attachment: City Council Minutes of September 27, 2022 (2922 : City Council Minutes) Orinda City Council Minutes Page 2 of 11 09.27.22
Vice Mayor Miller asked and confirmed there were no speakers or requests for removal of items.

F.1. City Council Minutes
Recommendation:

Approve City Council Minutes:

1. September 6, 2022 - Closed Session Meeting

2. September 6, 2022 - Regular Meeting
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 September 28, 2022 to October 27, 2022 Pursuant to the Provisions of Assembly Bill 361.

F.3. Monthly Report of Receipts and Disbursements for the Period June 1, 2022 through June 30, 2022 and Summary of Revenue, Expenditures, and Preliminary Fund Balances for July 1, 2021 through June 30, 2022 Recommendation:

Staff recommends that the City Council receive and file this report of receipts, disbursements, and preliminary fund balances for the month of June 2022.

F.4. Award a Professional Services Contract for the Construction Management of the federally funded projects to seismically retrofit Miner Road Bridge over San Pablo Creek (CIP # 0044) and Bear Creek Road Bridge over San Pablo Creek (CIP # 0087) to UNICO Engineering Inc. of Folsom, CA for an amount of $ 302,274.97.

Recommendation:

Staff recommends that City Council award said contract, authorize the City Manager to administratively approve change orders not to exceed $50,000, and appropriate funding in the amount of $45,000.

F.5. Resolution Honoring Former Long-time Art and Clay Instructor Anne Parr by Naming the Community Center Clay & Kiln Room After Her Recommendation:

Staff recommends the City Council approve City Council Resolution 45-22 in order to honor former long-time art and clay Instructor Anne Parr by naming the Community Center Clay & Kiln Room after her.

F.6. Utility Trench Cut Permits- Street Moratorium Policy Update Recommendation:

Receive and file report
F.1.b
Packet Pg. 9
Attachment: City Council Minutes of September 27, 2022 (2922 : City Council Minutes) Orinda City Council Minutes Page 3 of 11 09.27.22
F.7. 4th Quarter General Fund Preliminary Report Fiscal Year 2021-2022 (July 2021 - June 2022)
Recommendation:

Receive and file the preliminary report.

F.8. Accept contract completion of Catherine Court to Martha Road Trail Maintenance Project No. 4140 by Central Pacific Engineering, LLC Recommendation:

Staff recommends that the City Council adopt Resolution 44-22 Acceptance of Work for the Catherine Court to Martha Road Trail Maintenance Project No. 4140 by Central Pacific Engineering, LLC. of San Mateo, California and authorize the City Clerk to sign and file the Certificate of Completion with the Contra Costa County Clerk-Recorder.

MOTION by Councilmember Worth moved and seconded by Councilmember Gee to approve Consent Calendar Items F.1.1, F.1.2, F.2, F.3, F.4, F.5, F.6, F.7 and F.8. Said motion carried by (4-0) roll call vote.

G. CONTNIUED PUBLIC HEARING
G.1. Wilder Annual Review
Recommendation:

Conduct a continued public hearing to consider any actions that OG Property Owners, LLC (“OGLLC”) has taken to bring its performance into good faith compliance with the terms of the Second Amendment and Restatement of the Development and Pre-Annexation Agreement for Gateway Valley (“DA”) as amended and the further actions required to bring OGLLC into good faith compliance with the DA. Staff recommends that the City Council adopt Resolution No. 46-22 finding that OGLLC still has not complied in good faith with the DA and related approvals and directing OGLLC that it shall, by October 11, 2022, bring its performance into good faith compliance with the DA and appear before the City Council at a continued public hearing on October 11, 2022.

City Attorney Osa Wolff introduced Assistant City Attorney Fran Layton and explained the Council will follow the same procedure as the last hearing regarding Development Agreement (DA) non-compliance. She displayed and reviewed the various items relating to process. She then asked Councilmembers to disclose any ex-parte communications and there were none.

Assistant City Attorney Fran Layton gave the staff report, background, and an overview of the matter regarding Orinda Gateway, LLC (OGLLC) not being in good faith compliance with the DA.

F.1.b
Packet Pg. 10
Attachment: City Council Minutes of September 27, 2022 (2922 : City Council Minutes) Orinda City Council Minutes Page 4 of 11 09.27.22
She called attention to supplemental materials distributed today at 3:00 p.m. which includes Resolution No. 46-22, an email from Derrick McDonald of EBMUD, an email exchange between Bruce Yamamoto of Brooks Street and the City regarding closure of the soil disposal area, and an email from the California Department of Fish and Wildlife which is a status report on OGLLC’s obligations under the Resource Management Plan and what they are currently researching. The Department of Fish and Wildlife has committed to providing an update once their research has been done as to what OGLLC has complied with and what is outstanding for the Resource Management Plan.

Ms. Layton said if the City Council adopts Resolution No. 46-22 finding that OGLLC still has not complied in good faith with the DA and related approvals, OGLLC will be directed to come into compliance by October 11, 2022. At that time, the City Council may proceed with all available legal remedies, extend the time for complying with a date certain, or it may terminate or modify the DA as appropriate.

She then described OGLLC’s response to Resolution No. 43-22 as outlined in the staff report, responses and activities to date, non-payment of premiums on the bonds, a $6,000 check received to cover one-half the cost of centerline striping of Wilder Road, OGLLC’s response to the redemption agreement, and next steps for the Council to adopt Resolution No. 46-22 finding that OGLLC still has not complied in good faith with the DA and to come into compliance by October 11, 2022.

Councilmember Kosla questioned what occurs if an entity does not pay their bond premium. City Attorney Osa Wolff said this came up briefly in the GHAD Board meeting and she indicated that failure to pay the premiums is in violation of the DA and Subdivision Improvement Agreement. The City’s position is the security should still be available to the City and that the City is going to take that position with the surety so the issue of nonpayment should not end their obligation to the City.

She asked to keep in mind that the bonds exist due to a Subdivision Improvement Agreement between the City and OGLLC and that was secured with these bonds. Not all of the DA non-compliance issues are subdivision improvement violations, but some of them are. The City is doing all it can to get them to pay the premium but they will not give up on the security just because they have not paid the premium.

Vice Mayor Miller stated there are many areas involved in this discussion. She asked and confirmed the bonds mentioned are the bonds where the City is the beneficiary from the Subdivision Improvement Agreement that guarantee completion of improvements within the subdivision. There is also a bond held by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife which is for the various environmental mitigation requirements and is not held by the City.

F.1.b
Packet Pg. 11
Attachment: City Council Minutes of September 27, 2022 (2922 : City Council Minutes) Orinda City Council Minutes Page 5 of 11 09.27.22
Vice Mayor Miller and Ms. Layton then spoke about the $5.8 million bond being held by Fish and Wildlife, items to be completed, confirmed the bond did not expire, and that endowments go to the three entities; EBMUD, EBRPD, and the GHAD after OGLLC meets all of its mitigation obligations in order for them to manage the preserve areas in perpetuity.

Councilmember Worth thanked staff for their due diligence, noted the City and developers have always worked in good faith, questioned if Brookside Development is part of OGLLC, and Ms. Layton stated OGLLC will discuss this later in the matter.

Vice Mayor Miller called on OGLLC representative(s) to present.

Michael Olsen, Brookside Land Company, replied that they are Brookside Lane Company. In addressing questions that have arisen between the GHAD meeting and the beginning of this meeting, the partners are reviewing all issues and associated costs with agencies as well as the City. They plan on meeting with the City Manager on October 4th to go over more details regarding resolution of the issues, after which time they will be presented to the Council on October 11th.

Vice Mayor Miler asked and confirmed with Ms. Layton that the Council made the finding that OGLLC was in default on August 16, 2022.

Ms. Wolff further clarified that the resolution tonight lists all areas of non-compliance and OGLLC representatives will be meeting with the City Manager; however, staff has not received assurance they are going to get themselves into compliance. Therefore, staff recommends the Council adopt the resolution finding them out of compliance and the issue will return to the Council on October 11th for another progress report. Hopefully, OGLLC will be in compliance with more things at that time, but at this time, they remain very much out of compliance.

Councilmember Worth and Vice Mayor Miller thanked Mr. Olsen for being here, and confirmed with him that Brookside Land Company is an entity of Brook Street and are the same partners.

Councilmember Kosla asked if Brookside Land Company, LLC has been around for 20 years and questioned the difference from it and Brook Street.

Bruce Yamamoto explained that Brookside Land Company has always been part of the entities for OGLLC or ever since 2005 when the Brook Street team started managing the Wilder development. They regarded this as a transfer to an affiliate and Brookside Land Company has always been part of this LLC.

Councilmember Kosla confirmed with the City Manager that the meeting will include himself, Mike Heed, certain Department Managers, Brookside Land Company representatives.

F.1.b
Packet Pg. 12
Attachment: City Council Minutes of September 27, 2022 (2922 : City Council Minutes) Orinda City Council Minutes Page 6 of 11 09.27.22
Vice Mayor Miller opened the Public Forum.

City Clerk Smith announced that Ms. Layton received three communications from Derrick McDonald, Bruce Yamamoto and the California Dept. of Fish and Wildlife which were provided to the Council and available on the website.

Madelyn Mallory, Wilder, said although spending 40 years in the finance industry she confessed to not having a clear understanding of the bond structure. Staff mentioned premium payments which imply to her some sort of Letter of Credit. She knows bits and pieces of this information and knows there is cash in the investments for the Wildlife Heritage Fund that handles long-term owners endowment referred to, but she wants to more clearly understand these other pieces. She said it feels like these bonds are not really bonds but insurance policies or Letters of Credit, questioned worst case scenarios, and next steps so homeowners can preserve the value of their properties.

Ms. Layton said while spelled out more in the August 16th staff report, there are two different endowments, not bonds. There are on premiums on the two endowments that need to be paid. One endowment is for the Wildlife Heritage Foundation to manage the conservation easements on all of the preserve areas which EBMUD, EBRPD and the GHAD will own in perpetuity. The Wildlife Heritage Foundation must oversee whether there are violations of those conservation easements that protect those properties and there are staff do this now and are paid out of this endowment.

The second endowment is the $5.8 million endowment that California Department of Fish and Wildlife holds. The City is not a party to that, but has known about it and has seen all of the documents. That Resource Management Plan told OGLLC they are getting permits for this project in Orinda and they need to do a whole variety of things to mitigate impacts such as impacts to species, streams, control of invasive species, fencing, etc. Until they do those things the long-term management plan will not come into effect and essentially, they will be in violation with the agreements with these various agencies.

At this point, given discussions and emails that have been sent to EBMUD, Wildlife Heritage Foundation, California Dept. of Fish and Wildlife, everyone knows that the bonds for $5.8 million have a premium that was due. She was not sure it has been paid since staff saw the emails, have not heard from OGLLC on this, and hoped they would hear something about the bonds.

Mr. Biggs stated surety bonds are very common in the public sector and they are completion bonds when someone develops a large subdivision. Those surety bonds are provided and the developer pays premiums towards those. But, under the terms of the contract between the City and the developer and conditions on which the surety bond company agrees to provide these bonds, it is the City’s opinion that they can still call on the bonds even if the premiums have not been paid. That would be a contractual dispute between the surety bond company and OGLLC. This does not mean they will try not to pay the bonds, but they are not quite there yet.

F.1.b
Packet Pg. 13
Attachment: City Council Minutes of September 27, 2022 (2922 : City Council Minutes) Orinda City Council Minutes Page 7 of 11 09.27.22
Additionally, some of the resource agencies have surety bonds that cover completion of the improvements. The endowments described are long-term operation and maintenance once those improvements are completed. In addition, the City has some small cash deposits as well that are designed to reimburse the City for expenses that could be part of the pot of resources that would allow for hopefully resolution of these matters. So, surety bonds are almost a form of an insurance policy where if the developer does not complete improvements, the City can draw on those bonds to complete improvements.

Ms. Wolff added that not everything is bonded for. It is the Subdivision Improvement Agreement that lays this out and the associated improvement plans describe what is bonded for in terms of the City. The developer is here, have time for rebuttal, and she thinks the Council can ask the developer for comment on the status of their bonds.

Rebuttal – Applicant
Bruce Yamamoto stated they have not paid their premiums on the bonds that benefit the City and have not renewed the $5.8 million mitigation bond yet. He pointed out that the endowments total $5.7 million and they did an analysis with EBMUD, EBRPD, and the GHAD on what the total amount of endowments needs to be to support annual maintenance and that total is $3.2 million. So, right now there is a surplus of funds. They thought they would have transferred these properties a lot earlier, but the endowments have been compounding and have benefitted from market appreciation.

He further explained that in looking at mitigation work, they had a Letter of Credit initially for $12.8 million, which after work was completed was reduced to $5.8 million. They then converted or replaced the Letter of Credit with a bond in about 2009 or 2010 and were paying premiums on that bond until now. They learned of a shortfall in the performance of the wetlands and riparian planting areas and offered an in-lieu payment using the County mitigation calculator, but they are looking to retire that $5.8 million bond. They also funded the endowments which are for the long-term management of conservation easement areas held by the GHAD, EBMUD and EBRPD. The funds pay for inspections, but has been growing in the account, now totaling $5.7 million of cash sitting in an account for long-term management obligations.

He then spoke of their analysis on the amount of funding needed in the endowment to cover annual operating expenses. The number they worked together with the three agencies on totaled $3.2 million. So, because that money has been allowed to accrue without any expenses charged against it, there is a surplus in the endowment, but those are separate from the bonds. He then described the shortfall in the performance of the wetlands and riparian planting of about 5 to 7 acres that did not meet the target criteria.

Mr. Biggs assured the Council staff will be meeting and discussing this with all agencies to insure the project is completed as promised and obligations satisfied.

F.1.b
Packet Pg. 14
Attachment: City Council Minutes of September 27, 2022 (2922 : City Council Minutes) Orinda City Council Minutes Page 8 of 11 09.27.22
Mr. Olsen assured the Council they are continuing to address all issues, will meet with all entities involved, they want to be sure they can resolve these issues which take time, and hopes for an amicable outcome. They hope much of this will occur next week and it is their goal to come to resolution by October 11th.

Vice Mayor Miller declared the public hearing closed and the matter now to be deliberated upon and discussed by the Council.

Vice Mayor Miller and Councilmembers thanked the Brookside Land Company representatives for answering questions, hoped for a positive outcome on outstanding issues for the City and Wilder homeowners, and voiced support of the resolution.

MOTION by Councilmember Worth moved, and seconded by Councilmember Gee, to adopt Resolution No. 46-22 finding that OGLLC still has not complied in good faith with the DA and related approvals and directing OGLLC that it shall, by October 11, 2022, bring its performance into good faith compliance with the DA and appear before the City Council at a continued public hearing on October 11, 2022. Said motion carried by (4-0) roll call vote.

H. POLICY MATTERS
H.1. Policy Discussion Regarding a Potential Building Electrification Ordinance that would Prohibit New Natural Gas Connections for Certain Development Projects
Recommendation:

Receive report and provide feedback to City Staff in the form of a motion identifying recommended local amendments to the 2023 Energy and Building Code.

Planning Director Drummond Buckley gave the staff report and a PowerPoint presentation relating to a policy regarding a potential building electrification ordinance which amends the building code to prohibit natural gas connections for certain development projects, and aims to reduce greenhouse gases (GHG). He noted the County’s electrification amendment does not apply to Orinda so the City will be asked to adopt the new CBC so it can be effective in 2023 for the next three years.

The County’s code prohibits natural gas connections for new construction, including residential (including single-family and multi-family buildings), detached ADUs, dwelling units, hotels, office buildings and retail buildings. He then displayed an extensive list of cities that have adopted building electrification ordinances.

If the Council decides to adopt such an ordinance, the Council should consider the following:
● Whether the City should adopt an electrification ordinance? ● If yes, should it be identical to the County’s ordinance? F.1.b
Packet Pg. 15
Attachment: City Council Minutes of September 27, 2022 (2922 : City Council Minutes) Orinda City Council Minutes Page 9 of 11 09.27.22
● If not identical to County, consider:
○ Requiring newly constructed buildings to be built all-electric, with no gas hook ups? ○ Applying to residential (single-family and/or multifamily) as well as commercial buildings?
○ Requiring certain electric appliances and electrical system upgrades during major remodeling of existing buildings?
○ At what threshold should the City of Orinda consider a major remodel for this purpose?
■ Projects over a certain valuation?
■ Projects where a certain percentage of the property is demolished? Mr. Buckley stated Senior Planner for Sustainability and Energy at Contra Costa County, Damien Hardman Saldana is also present to answer questions.

Councilmember Gee asked staff to comment information in regards what the State may be looking at on this topic, and Mr. Buckley said it is not included in the 2022 CBC which will be before the Council soon, but Mr. Saldana can comment.

Damien Hardman Saldana replied the new CBC that will become effective in January 2023 and all new construction will be required to include both the electrical component and switching out of gas to electrical for a new stove, and homeowners will be required to have an electrical outlet if they choose gas.

Vice Mayor Miller referred to correspondence from the Restaurant Association and she confirmed retail does not include restaurants, and Mr. Saldana described examples of retail uses.

Councilmember Worth asked and confirmed that economics were considered and Mr.

Saldana explained cost-effective studies done by the California Statewide Codes and Standards Team found over the last 15 years all low income projects have been allelectric because it is less expensive to do. Additionally, most multi-family buildings will have a heating system that might service +5 units.

Vice Mayor Miller questioned why the Board of Supervisors opted not to include restaurants and asked what Berkeley or Richmond has done. Mr. Saldana said the State focused on residential and not necessarily commercial environmental issues, and this might have been a reason. He also referred to burdens in assessing industry for not onesize-fits-all types of facilities, tracking of exemptions, said they wanted to keep it consistent with the cost-effective studies done by the State and also knew Berkeley was getting sued from the restaurant industry due to pushback.

Vice Mayor Miller opened the Public Forum.

F.1.b
Packet Pg. 16
Attachment: City Council Minutes of September 27, 2022 (2922 : City Council Minutes) Orinda City Council Minutes Page 10 of 11 09.27.22
City Clerk Smith said besides the four communications received staff received an email from Nick Waranoff asking that, “The Council should pay close attention to comments from the Restaurant Industry in the public communications for tonight. Those comments indicate that given your stated goal of revitalizing the downtown with restaurants, you should not ban new gas connections.”
David Griggs said he knows there have been concerns with the electrical system handling additional loads. He thinks having the dual services for buildings makes sense, but while PG&E starts to reinforce their electric system, it might not make sense right now given the occurrence of more rolling blackouts.

Councilmember Kosla likened this to how the CBC rolled out PV on rooftops, noted the code kicks off in 2023, and he suggested the City taking a slower approach, citing rolling blackouts, PG&E’s need to upgrade systems, and seasonal and supply chain/manufacturing impacts.

Councilmember Worth thinks electrification is important for reduction of GHG emissions, noted effective 2023 all new construction must have provisions for electric and if they choose, gas.

Vice Mayor Miller said most homes in Orinda have gas and electricity, and many with wood stoves. Mr. Saldana said right now, someone can spec their new home just to have gas hookups for ovens and stoves, and not be required to install electric. In the new code if they spec for gas they must spec for electric of 240 volts so an electric stove or dryer can be installed.

Councilmember Gee said they all understand what the basis for this is, but it is clear the State is heading this way and the City does not have a lot of development going on that will benefit the Council taking this action now, so she did not support changing an ordinance at this time.

Vice Mayor Miller suggested asking staff to track this given there are benefits as well as concerns from residents relating to gas safety shut-offs.

Councilmember Worth said the Council just approved a multi-family project with Orinda Senior Village and she is encouraged by the fact that in the construction world, electricity is viewed as the most economically feasible option. As applicants file for new projects, the City can encourage use of the electric and also solar options.

Mr. Biggs confirmed staff has direction to track any changes and will not build this into the upcoming standard option of the three-year building code.

I. COUNCILMEMBERS’ REPORTS – Councilmember Worth announced school is in session and students are back on school buses and County Connection, with adherence to school events and early release school days, etc.

F.1.b
Packet Pg. 17
Attachment: City Council Minutes of September 27, 2022 (2922 : City Council Minutes) Orinda City Council Minutes Page 11 of 11 09.27.22
Vice Mayor Miller stated Mayor Fay has traveled to Sister City, Tabor with the City Manager, and he is still traveling on the trip. She filled in for him for an Eagle Scout ceremony where 8 Eagle Scouts received their awards. She also attended the SSTOC meeting where Ms. Cronin presented Chipper Program results in various neighborhoods. Lastly, she announced that COVID booster shots are available in the community.

J. CITY MANAGER’S REPORT – Mr. Biggs reported on Monday, October 3rd, the Council’s Downtown and Housing Subcommittee will be considering Housing Element and DSP related issues and they welcome public participation. He also reported the two contra-flow signs on Miner Road have been installed to be used in the event of an emergency where Miner Road will become one way out only.

Education and outreach is being done in these specific neighborhoods and luckily they have not experienced a single Red Flag Warning day yet.

Lastly, he joined the Mayor on a visit to the City’s Sister City in Tabor on his own expense, and the Mayor will report back when he returns. Tabor officials were very welcoming and they were one of the 6 or 7 Sister Cities that participated.

Additionally, Orinda has served as a site for the Czech Heritage Festival which is coming up on Saturday, October 8th at the Community Park and Center from 10 a.m. to 4 p.m.

K. MATTERS INITIATED – None.

L. ADJOURNMENT
The Regular Meeting was adjourned at approximately 9:00 p.m. to the next Regular Meeting on Tuesday, October 11, 2022 at 7:00 p.m.
______________________________________
Sheri Marie Smith, City Clerk
F.1.b
Packet Pg. 18
Attachment: City Council Minutes of September 27, 2022 (2922 : City Council Minutes) City Council
Staff Report
Agenda Item: F.2
Date: October 11, 2022
Department: City Clerk
AGENDA TITLE: Authorization For Continued Use of Remote Teleconference for City Meetings
RECOMMENDATION:

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 19, 2021, 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 extended 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 October 4, 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. Guideline for Holding Safe Public Meetings 10.4.2022 F.2
Packet Pg. 19
Respectfully Submitted by:

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

F.2
Packet Pg. 20
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 October 4, 2022 in Covid-19 case rate, test positivity, Covid-19 hospitalizations, and COVID-19 wastewater surveillance are decreasing, but community transmission, as noted in CDC community transmission map, remains high. In addition to this, the predominant variant of COVID-19 being identified continues to be the Omicron variant and it’s subvariants 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. If unable to host outdoors, consider ways to increase ventilation and flow of the indoor space to reduce the risk of COVID-19 while indoors.

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 10-4-2022
Sefanit Mekuria, MD, MPH
Deputy Health Officer, Contra Costa County
F.2.b
Packet Pg. 21
Attachment: Guideline for Holding Safe Public Meetings 10.4.2022 (2924 : Ratify Continued Teleconference Resolution) City Council
Staff Report
Agenda Item: F.3
Date: October 11, 2022
Department: City Clerk
AGENDA TITLE: Adoption of Amendments to the City’s Conflict of Interest Code for Designated Filers
RECOMMENDATION:

The Political Reform Act requires that every local agency adopt a Conflict of Interest Code and that the Code be reviewed on a biennial basis to determine if it is accurate and up-to-date. The last review and amendments to the City’s Conflict of Interest Code were adopted by Resolution No. 55-20 on September 1, 2020.

The City’s Conflict of Interest Code (Code), required by Government Code Section 87300 incorporates by reference, Fair Political Practices Commission (FPPC) regulation, Title 2 Cal. Code of Regulations Section 18730. Appendix A of the attached Resolution designates the positions within the City that make or participate in the making of governmental decisions, which may have a material effect on any financial interest. Appendix A also identifies what types of financial interests must be disclosed (i.e., “disclosure categories”). The Code requires that any qualifying financial interest be disclosed through the filing of a Statement of Economic Interests (Form 700) upon assuming office, through annual filings, and upon leaving office.

The City Council, City Manager, City Attorney, City Treasurer/Finance Director, and Planning Commission are not subject to the provisions of the City’s Conflict of Interest Code because they are subject to the disclosure requirements of the Political Reform Act under the terms of Government Code Sections 87200 et seq.

Since 2020, when the code was last amended, there have been changes to employee positions as well as to the list of City Commissions and Committees. Those changes are shown in redline as an Appendix to the attached Resolution.

FISCAL IMPACT:

None
ATTACHMENTS:

A. Resolution 48-22 Amending Conflict of Interest Code
F.3
Packet Pg. 22
Respectfully Submitted by:

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

F.3
Packet Pg. 23
Resolution No. 48-22

Page 1 of 4 ends

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

Adopting an Amended Conflict of
Interest Code Under Government
Code Section 87300-87313
_____________
)
)
)
Resolution No. 48-22
WHEREAS, Government Code section 87300, comprising a part of the Political Reform Act of 1974 as amended, requires the City to adopt and promulgate a Conflict of Interest Code; and
WHEREAS, since November 26, 1985, the City Council has amended its Conflict of Interest Code as required by law. The latest amendment was adopted on September 1, 2020 by Resolution No. 55-20; and
WHEREAS, Section 18730 of the Regulations of the Fair Political Practices Commission (Title 2, Division 6, California Code of Regulations) authorizes the adoption of the Conflict of Interest Code by incorporating section 18730 by reference and designating the employees and disclosure categories to which the Code applies.

NOW THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Orinda does find, determine and declare as follows:

1. The City of Orinda incorporates by reference the terms of 2 Cal. Code of Regs. Section 18730(b) and any amendments to it duly adopted by the Fair Political Practices Commission and declares that those terms, along with the attached Appendix in which public officials and employees are designated and disclosure categories are set forth, constitute the Conflict of Interest Code of the City of Orinda, which is considered the “agency” for the purposes of this Code.

2. Persons designated in the Appendix shall file their statements with the City Clerk, who shall be the filing officer for the City of Orinda. Statements will be available for inspection and reproduction pursuant to Government Code section 81008.

3. Resolution No. 55-20 is repealed.

F.3.a
Packet Pg. 24
Attachment: Resolution 48-22 Amending Conflict of Interest Code (2925 : Update Conflict of Interest Code) Resolution No. 48-22

Page 2 of 4 ends

ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Orinda at a meeting of the Council held on October 11, 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. 25
Attachment: Resolution 48-22 Amending Conflict of Interest Code (2925 : Update Conflict of Interest Code) Resolution No. 48-22

Page 3 of 4 ends

APPENDIX
DESIGNATED POSITIONS and DISCLOSURE CATEGORIES
I. DESIGNATED PERSONS
Each position set forth below is a designated person within the meaning of Section 2 of this Resolution1. Disclosure categories, described in Section II, apply as shown for each position.

1. Planning Director Cat. 1

2. Planner(Technician/Assistant/Associate/Senior Cat. 1

3. Police Chief Cat. 1

4. Police Sergeant Cat. 1

5. Director of Public Works and Engineering Cat. 1

6. City Engineer Cat. 1

7. Public Works Inspector Cat. 1

8. Public Works Supervisor Cat. 4

9. Senior Civil Engineer Cat. 1

10. Engineer (Assistant/Associate) Cat. 3 and 4

11. Paving Program Manager Cat. 1

12. Parks and Recreation Director Cat. 1

13. Assistant City Manager/Department Head Cat. 1

14. Recreation Supervisor II Cat. 4

15. Facilities – Parks Supervisor Cat. 4

16. City Clerk Cat. 1

17. Senior Management Analyst Cat. 1

18. Finance Director Cat. 1

19. Administrative Services Director Cat. 1

20. Deputy City Attorney Cat. 1

21. Human Resources Manager Cat. 4

22. Senior Accountant Cat. 1

23. Education and Outreach Coordinator Cat. 1

24. Parks and Recreation Commission Cat. 3 and 4

25. Art in Public Places Committee Cat. 4

26. Finance Advisory Committee Cat. 1

27. Public Works Aesthetic Review Committee Cat. 3 and 4

28. Historic Landmarks Committee Cat. 3

29. Citizens’ Infrastructure Oversight
Commission Cat. 3 and 4

1 The members of the City Council and Planning Commission, the City Manager, the City Attorney, and the City Treasurer are not subject to the City’s conflict of interest code because they are subject to the disclosure requirements of the Political Reform Act under Government Code sections 87200 et seq.

F.3.a
Packet Pg. 26
Attachment: Resolution 48-22 Amending Conflict of Interest Code (2925 : Update Conflict of Interest Code) Resolution No. 48-22

Page 4 of 4 ends

29. Supplemental Sales Tax Oversight Commission Cat. 3 and 4

26. Traffic Safety Advisory Committee Cat. 3

27. Consultants 2 Cat. 1

28. Library Facility Steering Committee Cat. 4

29. Library Parcel Tax Review Committee Cat. 4
II. DISCLOSURE CATEGORIES
This list contains a general summary of the types of financial interests required to be disclosed by a person holding a designated position. For details, consult the statutes and regulations or the Fair Political Practices Commission at (866) 275-3772 (option 2) or the website www.fppc.ca.gov .

Category 1 – Full Disclosure.

All interests in real property located within the City of Orinda, as well as investments, business positions and sources of income, including gifts, loans and travel payments.

Category 2 – Full Disclosure (excluding interests in real property).

All investments, business positions and sources of income, including gifts, loans and travel payments.

Category 3: Interests in Real Property
All interests in real property located in the City of Orinda Category 4: Contracting Categories
All investments, business positions and income, including gifts, loans and travel payments from sources that provide leased facilities, goods, equipment, vehicles, machinery or services, including training or consulting services, of the type utilized by the person’s department or area of authority.

2 With respect to consultants, the City Manager may determine in writing that a particular consultant is required to comply with the disclosure requirements of the City’s Conflict of Interest Code. Such determination shall include a description of the consultant’s duties and, based on that description, a statement of the extent of disclosure required. The City Manager shall maintain a list of all consultants covered by the City’s Conflict of Interest Code as well as the disclosure categories applicable to those consultants.

F.3.a
Packet Pg. 27
Attachment: Resolution 48-22 Amending Conflict of Interest Code (2925 : Update Conflict of Interest Code) City Council
Staff Report
Agenda Item: F.4
Date: October 11, 2022
Department:

Public Works and
Engineering Services
AGENDA TITLE: Authorize Contract Amendment No. 1 with NV5, Inc. for Design Services for Community Center Solar plus Battery Backup and Re-Roofing project #4141 & #4164.

RECOMMENDATION:

BACKGROUND:

The City needed to retain the services of an engineering consultant to provide professional design services for the Community Center Solar PV and Battery Backup Project. In addition, the vinyl/tar flat roof on the Orinda Community Center, which was replaced in the late 1990's and had some patch work done approximately 10 years ago, is nearing the end of its useful life and has been problematic for several years.

A Request for Proposals for professional services was issued on May 18, 2020 and NV5, Inc. (NV5) was selected as the most qualified firm. The scope of the original proposal included only the design of solar power with battery backup. Having demonstrated competence and professional qualifications, NV5 also had the qualified resources to perform the additional roof replacement design. Consolidating the roof replacement design effort under one contract provided economies of scale. The City Council approved the contract award during the August 4, 2020 meeting in the amount of $68,700 (including 15% contingency). NV5 has provided design services to the City in accordance with specific agreements.

DISCUSSION:

The amount of services provided by NV5 for these projects have reached the total authorized amount including the contingency. Based on the need to perform remaining work, the City Council is requested to authorize a contract amendment. This will provide Design Services during construction for the remaining project scope of work.

The need for the additional services are described below.

Additional Work/Unforeseen Issues
 Re-roofing project – additional design effort was necessary in order to provide alternate material options due to product availability and procurement issues.

F.4
Packet Pg. 28
 PG&E Application – The project also requires an interconnection agreement between the City and PG&E. This effort was not part of the original scope of work.
 Fire District Review – As part of the building permit review, the City was asked to obtain permit from the Moraga Orinda Fire District (MOFD). This effort was not part of the original scope of the project and required additional effort to respond to comments from MOFD and obtaining approval.
 Bid period services – The project had to be re-bid due to a bid protest. This required additional bid-period services than originally scoped due to changes that needed to be made to contract documents.

The following services are ongoing and the proposed amendment will allow NV5 to continue to provide design services during construction:
o Review of contractor submittals for various materials and products used in the project.
o Site visit during critical installation work to provide oversight. o Review of product substitutions or alternate design due to issues related to product procurement and delivery.
o Commissioning and testing of the installed Photovoltaic system and coordination with PG&E, County Building department, MOFD etc. o Respond to contractor Request for Information (RFI).

NV5 has already provided services that exceeded the original contract value in the amount of $2,700 but have not yet invoiced the City. The remaining ongoing services will be provided on a time and materials basis with a not to exceed amount of $14,100 (includes $5,000 contingency), for a total of $16,800 for this Amendment, which would increase the total contract limit to $85,500. Staff believe it is beneficial to proceed with the work at this time and are presenting the recommended adjustments as described below to fund the increase and allow the project to proceed.

The project construction work is approximately 50% complete. The re-roofing work on both Community Center and the Kinder Gym buildings has been completed. Remaining work involves installation and commissioning of the Solar panels and Battery back-up, Current market conditions are causing issues with procurement of the required construction materials. Staff is working with the contractor to consider alternate options that meet the project requirements. Construction work is anticipated to be completed by the end of the year, but could potentially extend into early part of 2023 if further delays are caused due to procurement issues.

NEXT STEPS:

Upon City Council authorization, Contract Amendment No. 1 will be sent to NV5 for signature, then forwarded to the City Clerk for processing and approval by the City Manager and City Attorney.

FISCAL IMPACT:

Public Works and Finance Staff reviewed the current resources that are available in funds suitable for this project.

F.4
Packet Pg. 29
It was determined that adequate funds ($16,800) exists and are available in the City Capital Projects Fund (Fund #700) to proceed with the project. The attached Budget Change Form will affect the necessary appropriation.

ATTACHMENTS:

A. NV5, Inc Amendment #1 proposal
B. Original Approved Contract for NV5, Inc.

C. Budget Change Form
Respectfully Submitted by:

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

F.4
Packet Pg. 30
15092 Avenue of Science, Suite 200, San Diego, CA 92128 | www.NV5.com | Office 858.385.0500 June 15, 2022
Mr. Siva Natarajan, P.E.

City of Orinda| Senior Civil Engineer
[email protected]
Office: (925) 253-4254
Cell: (925) 726-1697
Subject: Project Change Order Proposal
Dear Siva,
A microgrid project like Orinda Community Center like other microgrid projects, presented some novel aspects and involved concurrent reviews with several stakeholders and vendors, which in turn led to multiple design iterations as design concepts were evolving throughout the project.

As informed before, we have completed the 100% design activities as well as providing the support for successful securing of the permits and assistance with the initial bid package submissions. While achieving this, we also incurred additional costs due to several design and scope changes from the original proposal.

We are happy to see the re-bidding phase is completed and the project has advanced toward selecting the General Contractor, during which we remained committed to advancing the project through its milestones, and ahead of an approved change order fee.

The following budget provides the breakdown of the additional efforts already incurred to date and the estimated additional future efforts to support City during the construction and commissioning phases:

Work element Description Cost Status
Engineering &
Bidding Support
The design and engineering effort
associated with the revisions and
updating of the plan set to 100% stage
required for the bidding documents.

Also included are our cost with
updating the bidding specs as needed.
$14,269.00 Cost of the completed
work to be approved.

Construction Support The estimate to support City for the Construction phase until the system is
installed, commissioned, and accepted.
$9100.00 The proposed new
budget to be approved.

Total $23,369.00
Please kindly let us know if you would have any questions or would require additional information.

Sincerely,
Alireza Moharrer, P.E., PMP
Senior Project Manager
Proposal # P-1020-0003501.00
cc: BMW, BPB, File
F.4.a
Packet Pg. 31
Attachment: NV5, Inc Amendment #1 proposal (2901 : Contract Amendment NV5) F.4.b
Packet Pg. 32
Attachment: Original Approved Contract for NV5, Inc. (2901 : Contract Amendment NV5) F.4.b
Packet Pg. 33
Attachment: Original Approved Contract for NV5, Inc. (2901 : Contract Amendment NV5) F.4.b
Packet Pg. 34
Attachment: Original Approved Contract for NV5, Inc. (2901 : Contract Amendment NV5) F.4.b
Packet Pg. 35
Attachment: Original Approved Contract for NV5, Inc. (2901 : Contract Amendment NV5) F.4.b
Packet Pg. 36
Attachment: Original Approved Contract for NV5, Inc. (2901 : Contract Amendment NV5) F.4.b
Packet Pg. 37
Attachment: Original Approved Contract for NV5, Inc. (2901 : Contract Amendment NV5) F.4.b
Packet Pg. 38
Attachment: Original Approved Contract for NV5, Inc. (2901 : Contract Amendment NV5) F.4.b
Packet Pg. 39
Attachment: Original Approved Contract for NV5, Inc. (2901 : Contract Amendment NV5) F.4.b
Packet Pg. 40
Attachment: Original Approved Contract for NV5, Inc. (2901 : Contract Amendment NV5) F.4.b
Packet Pg. 41
Attachment: Original Approved Contract for NV5, Inc. (2901 : Contract Amendment NV5) F.4.b
Packet Pg. 42
Attachment: Original Approved Contract for NV5, Inc. (2901 : Contract Amendment NV5) F.4.b
Packet Pg. 43
Attachment: Original Approved Contract for NV5, Inc. (2901 : Contract Amendment NV5) F.4.b
Packet Pg. 44
Attachment: Original Approved Contract for NV5, Inc. (2901 : Contract Amendment NV5) F.4.b
Packet Pg. 45
Attachment: Original Approved Contract for NV5, Inc. (2901 : Contract Amendment NV5) F.4.b
Packet Pg. 46
Attachment: Original Approved Contract for NV5, Inc. (2901 : Contract Amendment NV5) F.4.b
Packet Pg. 47
Attachment: Original Approved Contract for NV5, Inc. (2901 : Contract Amendment NV5) F.4.b
Packet Pg. 48
Attachment: Original Approved Contract for NV5, Inc. (2901 : Contract Amendment NV5) F.4.b
Packet Pg. 49
Attachment: Original Approved Contract for NV5, Inc. (2901 : Contract Amendment NV5) F.4.b
Packet Pg. 50
Attachment: Original Approved Contract for NV5, Inc. (2901 : Contract Amendment NV5) F.4.b
Packet Pg. 51
Attachment: Original Approved Contract for NV5, Inc. (2901 : Contract Amendment NV5) F.4.b
Packet Pg. 52
Attachment: Original Approved Contract for NV5, Inc. (2901 : Contract Amendment NV5) F.4.b
Packet Pg. 53
Attachment: Original Approved Contract for NV5, Inc. (2901 : Contract Amendment NV5) F.4.b
Packet Pg. 54
Attachment: Original Approved Contract for NV5, Inc. (2901 : Contract Amendment NV5) F.4.b
Packet Pg. 55
Attachment: Original Approved Contract for NV5, Inc. (2901 : Contract Amendment NV5) F.4.b
Packet Pg. 56
Attachment: Original Approved Contract for NV5, Inc. (2901 : Contract Amendment NV5) F.4.b
Packet Pg. 57
Attachment: Original Approved Contract for NV5, Inc. (2901 : Contract Amendment NV5) F.4.b
Packet Pg. 58
Attachment: Original Approved Contract for NV5, Inc. (2901 : Contract Amendment NV5) F.4.b
Packet Pg. 59
Attachment: Original Approved Contract for NV5, Inc. (2901 : Contract Amendment NV5) F.4.b
Packet Pg. 60
Attachment: Original Approved Contract for NV5, Inc. (2901 : Contract Amendment NV5) F.4.b
Packet Pg. 61
Attachment: Original Approved Contract for NV5, Inc. (2901 : Contract Amendment NV5) F.4.b
Packet Pg. 62
Attachment: Original Approved Contract for NV5, Inc. (2901 : Contract Amendment NV5) F.4.b
Packet Pg. 63
Attachment: Original Approved Contract for NV5, Inc. (2901 : Contract Amendment NV5) F.4.b
Packet Pg. 64
Attachment: Original Approved Contract for NV5, Inc. (2901 : Contract Amendment NV5) F.4.b
Packet Pg. 65
Attachment: Original Approved Contract for NV5, Inc. (2901 : Contract Amendment NV5) F.4.b
Packet Pg. 66
Attachment: Original Approved Contract for NV5, Inc. (2901 : Contract Amendment NV5) F.4.b
Packet Pg. 67
Attachment: Original Approved Contract for NV5, Inc. (2901 : Contract Amendment NV5) F.4.b
Packet Pg. 68
Attachment: Original Approved Contract for NV5, Inc. (2901 : Contract Amendment NV5) F.4.b
Packet Pg. 69
Attachment: Original Approved Contract for NV5, Inc. (2901 : Contract Amendment NV5) F.4.b
Packet Pg. 70
Attachment: Original Approved Contract for NV5, Inc. (2901 : Contract Amendment NV5) F.4.b
Packet Pg. 71
Attachment: Original Approved Contract for NV5, Inc. (2901 : Contract Amendment NV5) F.4.b
Packet Pg. 72
Attachment: Original Approved Contract for NV5, Inc. (2901 : Contract Amendment NV5) F.4.b
Packet Pg. 73
Attachment: Original Approved Contract for NV5, Inc. (2901 : Contract Amendment NV5) F.4.b
Packet Pg. 74
Attachment: Original Approved Contract for NV5, Inc. (2901 : Contract Amendment NV5) F.4.b
Packet Pg. 75
Attachment: Original Approved Contract for NV5, Inc. (2901 : Contract Amendment NV5) F.4.b
Packet Pg. 76
Attachment: Original Approved Contract for NV5, Inc. (2901 : Contract Amendment NV5) F.4.b
Packet Pg. 77
Attachment: Original Approved Contract for NV5, Inc. (2901 : Contract Amendment NV5) F.4.b
Packet Pg. 78
Attachment: Original Approved Contract for NV5, Inc. (2901 : Contract Amendment NV5) F.4.b
Packet Pg. 79
Attachment: Original Approved Contract for NV5, Inc. (2901 : Contract Amendment NV5) F.4.b
Packet Pg. 80
Attachment: Original Approved Contract for NV5, Inc. (2901 : Contract Amendment NV5)

CITY OF ORINDA
BUDGET CHANGE FORM FISCAL YEAR 2022-2023
Funds Appropriated Mid-Cycle Update Adopted 6/21/2022
CHANGE FORM # 004-2023
New Appropriations (City Council Approval Required): Budget Transfers:

X From Un-Appropriated Reserves From Budgeted Contingent Reserve (Approval Req’d) ____ Reduction To Adopted Budget

GENERAL FUND
New Revenue ONLY
Between Departments (City Council Approval Req’d)
Other:

BUDGET ACCOUNT
(Revenue / Expense)

INCREASE
AMOUNT

DECREASE
AMOUNT
Increase of Budgeted Expense in FY 2022‐2023
EXPENSE: 700‐35‐00‐7125‐4164

CITY CAPITAL PROJECTS FUND / PUBLIC WORKS / NO PROGRAM / DESIGN CONTRACTS / SOLAR BACK‐UP COMMUNITY CENTER
$16,800

As Presented at the City Council Meeting on: October 11, 2022 #################(Finance Use Only)###################
Posted By: Date:

REASON FOR BUDGET CHANGE ENTRY: At the City Council meeting on October 11, 2022, the City Council was presented with changes to the adopted Budget in order to proceed with a Design Contract Services Agreement with NV5, Inc. which will be utilized to through completion of the Solar Back-up project at the Community Center.

F.4.c
Packet Pg. 81
Attachment: Budget Change Form (2901 : Contract Amendment NV5) City Council
Staff Report
Agenda Item: F.5
Date: October 11, 2022
Department:

Public Works and
Engineering Services
AGENDA TITLE: Accept contract with Gruendl Inc. DBA Ray's Electric for the Camino Pablo Bicycle Route Project No. 4128
RECOMMENDATION:

BACKGROUND:

The Camino Pablo Bicycle Route Project work consisted of pavement widening, slurry seal treatment, concrete island modification, and installation of class 2 bicycle lanes, including green paint, loop detectors and striping. Due to the 2021 Paving Project award date being pushed back, the Camino Pablo Bicycle Route Project expanded the scope to include a slurry seal over the project area in order to increase the longevity of the installed striping.

The budgeted project funding included a combination of CCTA (Measure J), Transportation Development Act (TDA) grant funds, and Road Maintenance Fees.

On Septemeber 7, 2021, the City Council awarded a construction contract to Gruendl Inc. DBA Ray's Electric in the amount of $639,924.50 for construction of the Camino Pablo Bicycle Route Project. The City Council also authorized a contingency for Change Orders, provided the total contract cost did not exceed $703,924. A Notice to Proceed was issued to the Contractor on October 5, 2021. Part of the work including concrete island modification, pavement widening, and signal loop installation was completed in 2021. The slurry seal installation and final pavement striping was postponed until July of 2022 as the warmer temperatures aid the curing process.

On February 15, 2022, the City Council approved an increased contract value of $714,741.50 for additional work and change orders including base repair dig outs needed to complete the project.

DISCUSSION:

The project was substantially complete on August 16, 2022. No liquidated damages were assessed to the Contractor upon substantial completion of the project. During the course of construction, four Contract Change Orders (CCO) were incorporated into the project, to re-route an existing street light conduit in conflict with concrete, complete roadwork base repairs, add modify the cross-walk push button post and foundation at Camino Pablo and Orinda way, and to remove and install new speed limit stenciling on F.5
Packet Pg. 82
Camino Pablo. The CCOs resulted in an increased cost of $73,021.68, resulting in a total contract cost of $712,946.18, which is within the authorized contract value.

Project acceptance by the City Council is necessary for the City Clerk to sign and file the Certificate of Completion with the Contra Costa County Clerk-Recorder, which will allow the release of project retention to Gruendl Inc. DBA Ray's Electric.

NEXT STEPS:

Upon City Council approval, the City Engineer will sign the Certificate of Completion and the City Clerk will record it with the Contra Costa County Clerk-Recorder’s Office. The contract retention ($35,647.31) will be paid to Gruendl Inc. DBA Ray's Electric thirty-five (35) days after recordation of the Certificate of Completion, provided that no stop notices exist.

FISCAL IMPACT:

The construction work associated with this project was funded from a combination of the CCTA (Measure J) (Fund #331) grant funds, Transportation Development Act (TDA) (Fund #263) grant funds, and the Road Maintenance Fee (Fund #335). All project expenditures are within the current authorized budget. Any remaining unused construction funds will be available for appropriation on future projects by the City Council.

ATTACHMENTS:

A. Resolution 47-22 Acceptance of Camino Pablo Route Bicycle Project B. NOC - Camino Pablo Bicycle Route Project
Respectfully Submitted by:

Scott Christie
Public Works Director
Prepared By: Kevin McCourt, Assistant Engineer
Approved by:

F.5
Packet Pg. 83

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

Acceptance of Work for the Camino
Pablo Bicycle Route Project No. 4128, in
the City of Orinda and Authorizing the
City Clerk to sign and file the Certificate
of Completion with the Contra Costa
County Clerk-Recorder
)
) Resolution No. 47-22
)
)
)
)
WHEREAS, Gruendl Inc. DBA Ray's Electric, has completed the work in accordance with the construction contract documents for the Camino Pablo Bicycle Route Project No. 4128; and
WHEREAS, the Director of Public Works has recommended that the work be accepted as complete.

NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the work accomplished by Gruendl Inc. DBA Ray's Electric, under the terms and conditions of the above-referenced construction contract documents is hereby accepted.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Clerk is hereby authorized to sign and file the Certificate of Completion with the Contra Costa County Clerk-Recorder.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Director of Finance is hereby authorized to release all withheld project retention thirty-five (35) days after recordation of the Certificate of Completion, provided that no stop notices are outstanding.

Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orinda at a regular meeting on October 11, 2022, by the following vote:

AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS:

Dennis Fay, Mayor
ATTEST:

Sheri Smith, City Clerk
F.5.a
Packet Pg. 84
Attachment: Resolution 47-22 Acceptance of Camino Pablo Route Bicycle Project (2926 : Accept Camino Pablo Bicycle Route Project) WHEN RECORDED, RETURN TO:

City Clerk/Public Works Dept.

City of Orinda
22 Orinda Way
Orinda, CA 94563

NO FEE DOCUMENT
(Government Code section 27383)
TITLE:

Notice of Completion for
Camino Pablo Bicycle Route Project No. 4128
(Contractor: Gruendl Inc. DBA Ray's Electric
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN by the undersigned, those certain improvements, to wit:

Camino Pablo Bicycle Route Project No. 4128
Project location: Camino Pablo from Miner Road to Moraga Way and Theatre Square, in the City of Orinda, Contra Costa County, California:

Property Owner: Interest in Property or Right of Way is owned by City of Orinda (a municipal corporation, 22 Orinda Way, Orinda CA 94563)
The contract which has heretofore been let to Gruendl Inc. DBA Ray's Electric, and which contract was filed for record in the City Clerk’s office in the City of Orinda, Contra Costa County, California, was actually completed in accordance with the plans and specifications, and the work was completed and accepted by the City of Orinda, on 10/11/2022 Information pertaining to the estimate of cost, names of bidders with prices bid, changes in adopted and approved plans and specifications, and the total cost of work is on file at the City Clerks’ office of the City of Orinda.

CITY OF ORINDA,
a municipal corporation
Date: ________________ By: ____________________________________ Sivakumar Natarajan, City Engineer,
R.C.E. #74789
City of Orinda
22 Orinda Way
Orinda, CA 94563
I hereby certify, under penalty of perjury, that the above Notice of Completion was duly accepted by the City Council of the City of Orinda at a regular meeting thereof held on 10/11/2022. ______________________________
Sheri Smith, City Clerk
F.5.b
Packet Pg. 85
Attachment: NOC - Camino Pablo Bicycle Route Project (2926 : Accept Camino Pablo Bicycle Route Project) City Council
Staff Report
Agenda Item: F.6
Date: October 11, 2022
Department:

Public Works and
Engineering Services
AGENDA TITLE: Increase Contingency for Construction Contract with Valentine Corporation for the Lavenida Culvert Repair Project (Project No. 4148), and Appropriate Funding.

RECOMMENDATION:

BACKGROUND:

At its May 3, 2022 meeting, City Council awarded a construction contract to Valentine Corporation for the Lavenida Culvert Repair Project (Project No. 4148). The authorization included the base contract value of $619,369 in addition to a 15% contingency (approximately $93,000). Funding sources are Fund #105 (Orinda Add on Sales Tax, Measure L) and Fund #210 (Drainage Impact Fees). At its August 16, 2022 meeting, additional contingency was requested to allow necessary extra work to resolve unsatisfactory subgrade conditions which were encountered. At that meeting, funding of $31,000 from Fund #514, (Stormwater Utility Assessment), was approved for such purpose.

DISCUSSION:

The project is currently approximately 90% complete, and the unsatisfactory subgrade conditions have been resolved. However, our project geotechnical engineer has recommended slope and creek stabilization work beyond the contract scope of work, which we agree is necessary. This work is within the easement areas, accepted by the City, adjacent to the culvert. The contractor has provided cost proposals for this work (received 9-28-22) and as of this writing we are reviewing the estimates, negotiating pricing, and projecting our estimates of the final contract value. We believe a conservative estimate is that $80,000 in additional funding will be needed to perform the additional work and close out the contract. Since time is of the essence and the contractor needs to be out of the creek by October 15 (per State Water Board and Dept. of Fish & Wildlife permit requirements), Staff intends to authorize proceeding with the additional work, and the subject authorization will be a confirming action.

It is proposed that the Road/Drainage Stabilization Fund (Fund #704), which has adequate fund balance available, be utilized for the additional contingency. The attached Budget Adjustment Form will accomplish this.

FISCAL IMPACT:

F.6
Packet Pg. 86
Upon approval of the additional contingency by Council, the Finance department would process an appropriation of $80,000 from Fund #704 for Project #4148. Such funds would only be used to the extent that negotiated contract change orders are issued to the contractor, approved by the City.

The updated estimated total Project cost including design, permit acquisition, construction and construction management, including the increased contingency, is $1,050,000.

ATTACHMENTS:

A. Budget Adjustment Form
Respectfully Submitted by:

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

F.6
Packet Pg. 87

CITY OF ORINDA
BUDGET CHANGE FORM FISCAL YEAR 2022-2023
Funds Appropriated Mid-Cycle Update Adopted 6/21/2022
CHANGE FORM # 005-2023
New Appropriations (City Council Approval Required): Budget Transfers:

X From Un-Appropriated Reserves From Budgeted Contingent Reserve (Approval Req’d) ____ Reduction To Adopted Budget

GENERAL FUND
New Revenue ONLY
Between Departments (City Council Approval Req’d)
Other:

BUDGET ACCOUNT
(Revenue / Expense)

INCREASE
AMOUNT

DECREASE
AMOUNT
Increase of Budgeted Expense in FY 2022‐2023
EXPENSE: 704‐35‐00‐7127‐4148

ROAD DRAINAGE STABILIZATION / PUBLIC WORKS / NO PROGRAM /

CONSTRUCTION COSTS / LAVENIDA CULVERT REPAIR
$80,000

As Presented at the City Council Meeting on: October 11, 2022 #################(Finance Use Only)###################
Posted By: Date:

REASON FOR BUDGET CHANGE ENTRY: At the City Council meeting on October 11, 2022, the City Council was presented with changes to the adopted Budget in order to complete construction of the Lavenida Culvert repair project by increasing the contingency on the Valentine Corporation Construction Contract value.

F.6.a
Packet Pg. 88
Attachment: Budget Adjustment Form (2928 : Lavenida culvert contract) City Council
Staff Report
Agenda Item: F.7
Date: October 11, 2022
Department:

Public Works and
Engineering Services
AGENDA TITLE: Approve Traffic Orders for Parking Restrictions at Various Locations in Orinda
RECOMMENDATION:

Staff recommends that the City Council Adopt Resolutions 49-22, 50-22, and 51-22 establishing various parking regulations on Meadow Park Court, Sleepy Hollow Lane, and Manzanita Drive respectively.

BACKGROUND: The Public Works Department has received several requests from Republic Services, the Orinda Unified School District, and residents for new parking restrictions on various streets throughout Orinda. Engineering staff performed a field review at each location and determined that the locations warranted implementing parking restrictions as described below.

SUMMARY:

Meadow Park Court (Resolution 49-22, Traffic Order #217):

Parking restrictions on Meadow Park Court were requested by Republic Services due to trash service trucks experiencing difficulty turning around at the end of the court. It is recommended to prohibit parking on both sides of the cul-de-sac in front of 38 Meadow Park Court from 6 AM to 5 PM on Tuesdays for trash pick-up.

Sleepy Hollow Lane (Resolution 50-22, Traffic Order #218):

The Orinda Unified School District requested parking restrictions along Sleepy Hollow due to parked vehicles blocking school bus movement. It is recommended to prohibit parking at all times on both sides of Sleepy Hollow Lane between Ichabod Lane and Washington Lane.

Manzanita Drive (Resolution 51-22, Traffic Order #219):

Per a request from residents, it is recommended to prohibit parking at all times on the westbound direction of Manzanita Drive from the intersection at Kittiwake Road extending westerly 200 feet in order to eliminate the need for through traffic to cross over into opposing traffic lane around parked vehicles at the blind curve to avoid a potential head on collision.

NEXT STEPS: In accordance with Section 10.44.030(A), the City Manager will establish these parking restrictions and install the appropriate signs and striping for enforcement.

Upon approval of the Resolutions/Traffic Orders, these parking restrictions will be permanently installed and included in the Public Works Department’s Traffic Order log.

F.7
Packet Pg. 89
FISCAL IMPACT: The cost for purchasing and installing signage and striping is not considered material and already included in the Public Works Annual Operating Budget for Sign Maintenance.

ATTACHMENTS:

A. Resolution 49-22 Meadow Park Ct Tuesdays No Parking TO# 217 B. Resolution 50-22 Sleepy Hollow Lane No Parking TO# 218 C. Resolution 51-22 Manzanita Road No Parking TO# 219
Respectfully Submitted by:

Scott Christie
Public Works Director
Prepared By: Kevin McCourt, Assistant Engineer
Approved by:

F.7
Packet Pg. 90

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

Establishing Parking Regulations ) Resolution No. 49-22 On Meadow Park Court Cul-de-sac )
Traffic Order No. 217
WHEREAS, California Vehicle Code Section 22507 authorizes a local agency to establish parking regulations on streets and roads under their jurisdiction; and WHEREAS, Orinda Municipal Code Section 10.04.020(P) authorizes traffic orders to establish parking regulations on street or highways; and WHEREAS, Orinda Municipal Code Section 10.04.040 requires the adoption of a resolution for a traffic order to become effective; and WHEREAS, the cardinal directions in this resolution are based on a convention which considers Highway 24 an east-west roadway, and Camino Pablo/Moraga Way as north-south roadways. Meadow Park Court is an north-south roadway; and NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Orinda does hereby adopt and approve the following parameters and traffic orders for Meadow Park Court:

Parking shall be prohibited Tuesdays between 6:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. along both sides of Meadow Park Court beginning at the northern property line of 38 Meadow Park Court extending southerly to the end of the public portion of Meadow Park Court.

Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orinda at a regular meeting on October 11, 2022 by the following vote:

AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:

Dennis Fay, Mayor
ATTEST:

Sheri Marie Smith, City Clerk
F.7.a
Packet Pg. 91
Attachment: Resolution 49-22 Meadow Park Ct Tuesdays No Parking TO# 217 (2929 : Traffic Orders for Parking Restrictions at Various

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

Establishing Parking Regulations On
Sleepy Hollow Lane between
Ichabod Lane and Washington Lane
)
) Resolution No. 50-22
)
Traffic Order No. 218
WHEREAS, California Vehicle Code Section 22507 authorizes a local agency to establish parking regulations on streets and roads under their jurisdiction; and WHEREAS, Orinda Municipal Code Section 10.04.020(P) authorizes traffic orders to establish parking regulations on street or highways; and WHEREAS, Orinda Municipal Code Section 10.04.040 requires the adoption of a resolution for a traffic order to become effective; and WHEREAS, the cardinal directions in this resolution are based on a convention which considers Highway 24 an east-west roadway, and Camino Pablo/Moraga Way as northsouth roadways. The portion of Sleepy Hollow Lane between Ichabod Lane and Washington Lane is an north-south roadway; and
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Orinda does hereby adopt and approve the following parameters and traffic orders for Sleepy Hollow Lane:

Parking shall be prohibited at all times along both sides of the segment of Sleepy Hollow Lane between Ichabod Lane and Washington Lane.

Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orinda at a regular meeting on October 11, 2022 by the following vote:

AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS:

Dennis Fay, Mayor
ATTEST:

Sheri M. Smith, City Clerk
F.7.b
Packet Pg. 92
Attachment: Resolution 50-22 Sleepy Hollow Lane No Parking TO# 218 (2929 : Traffic Orders for Parking Restrictions at Various Locations in

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

Establishing Parking Regulations on
Manzanita Drive
)
) Resolution No. 51-22
Traffic Order No. 219
WHEREAS, California Vehicle Code Section 22507 authorizes a local agency to establish parking regulations on streets and roads under their jurisdiction; and WHEREAS, Orinda Municipal Code Section 10.04.020(P) authorizes traffic orders to establish parking regulations on street or highways; and WHEREAS, Orinda Municipal Code Section 10.04.040 requires the adoption of a resolution for a traffic order to become effective; and WHEREAS, the cardinal directions in this resolution are based on a convention which considers Highway 24 an east-west roadway, and Camino Pablo/Moraga Way as northsouth roadways. Manzanita Drive is an east-west roadway; and NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Orinda does hereby adopt and approve the following parameters and traffic orders for Manzanita Drive:

Parking shall be prohibited at all times along the north side of Manzanita Drive beginning at the intersection of Kittiwake Road and extending easterly a distance of 200 feet.

Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orinda at a regular meeting on October 11, 2022 by the following vote:

AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS:

Dennis Fay, Mayor
ATTEST:

Sheri M. Smith, City Clerk
F.7.c
Packet Pg. 93
Attachment: Resolution 51-22 Manzanita Road No Parking TO# 219 (2929 : Traffic Orders for Parking Restrictions at Various Locations in City Council
Staff Report
Agenda Item: G.1
Date: October 11, 2022
Department: Planning Department
AGENDA TITLE: Wilder Annual Review
RECOMMENDATION:

Conduct a continued public hearing for staff to report on discussions with representatives of OG Property Owners, LLC (“OGLLC”) regarding its noncompliance with the terms of the Second Amendment and Restatement of the Development and Pre-Annexation Agreement for Gateway Valley (“DA”) and related approvals, including the 2009 Reimbursement Agreement, the Orinda Geologic Hazard Abatement District (“GHAD”) Plan of Control, and the 2008 Subdivision Improvement Agreement, all as amended. Staff recommends that the City Council adopt Resolution No. 54-22 finding that OGLLC still is not in good faith compliance with the DA and related approvals, directing OGLLC to immediately bring its performance into good faith compliance with the DA and to appear before the City Council at a continued public hearing on November 15, 2022.

BACKGROUND
Staff met with representatives of OGLLC on October 4, 2022 who provided some of the information that the City has requested regarding OGLLC’s compliance with the DA and related approvals. Brooks Street and the City are working through a list of additional information items and documentation needed which will assist in possibly identifying a path forward to close out of the Wilder development in a timely manner. OGLLC representatives requested additional time to come into compliance with the DA.

Another meeting between staff and OGLLC has been scheduled for the week of October 10, 2022. At the October 11, 2022 public hearing, Staff will provide an oral report on their October 4th meeting with OGLLC representatives. The continuation of the default hearing will allow a limited amount of time for these efforts to better frame the issues and/or possibly resolve the outstanding matters.

NEXT STEPS
If the City Council adopts Resolution No. 54-22, the agenda for the Council’s November 15, 2022 meeting will include a continued public hearing.

FISCAL IMPACT:

OGLLC is responsible for reimbursing the City for the cost of preparing the Annual Review.

G.1
Packet Pg. 94
ATTACHMENTS:

A. Resolution 54-22
B. Staff Report and Attachments from City Council Meeting of September 27, 2022 C. Staff Report and Attachments from City Council Meeting of August 16, 2022 Respectfully Submitted by:

Drummond Buckley
Director of Planning
Prepared By: Drummond Buckley, Director of Planning
Approved by:

G.1
Packet Pg. 95

BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ORINDA
IN THE MATTER OF:

Determination that OG Property
Owners, LLC (‘OGLLC”) has not
brought its actions into good faith
compliance with the terms of the
Development Agreement for Gateway
Valley and Related Approvals
RESOLUTION NO. 54-22
WHEREAS, the City Council previously held noticed public hearings and adopted Resolution No. 43-22 and Resolution No. 46-22 (collectively “Resolutions”); WHEREAS, the Resolutions detail the failure of OG Property Owners, LLC (“OGLLC”) to comply with certain requirements of the Second Amendment and Restatement of the Development and Pre-Annexation Agreement for Gateway Valley (“DA”) and related approvals, including the 2009 Reimbursement Agreement, the Orinda Geologic Hazard Abatement District (“GHAD”) Plan of Control, and the 2008 Subdivision Improvement Agreement, all as amended; WHEREAS, the City Council held public hearings on OGLLC’s noncompliance with the DA and related approvals on August 16, 2022, September 27, 2022 and October 11, 2022; and
WHEREAS, representatives of OGLLC recently met with City staff and requested additional time to resolve outstanding issues.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Orinda does hereby find, determine and direct as follows:

1. OGLLC has not brought its performance into good faith compliance with the DA and related approvals.

2. OGLLC has not cured the Events of Default detailed in the Resolutions or commenced substantial efforts to cure those Events of Default.

3. OGLLC is directed to immediately and fully comply with the DA and related approvals and to appear before the City Council at a continued public hearing on November 15, 2022.

G.1.a
Packet Pg. 96
Attachment: Resolution 54-22 (2936 : Wilder Annual Review - Continued Hearing 10-11-22) Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orinda at a regular meeting on October 11, 2022, by the following vote:

AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS:

Dennis Fay, Mayor
ATTEST:

Sheri M. Smith, City Clerk
1573716.1
G.1.a
Packet Pg. 97
Attachment: Resolution 54-22 (2936 : Wilder Annual Review - Continued Hearing 10-11-22) City Council
Staff Report
Agenda Item: H.1
Date: October 11, 2022
Department: Administration
AGENDA TITLE: Consider whether to proceed with a Proposal from Professor Dr. John Radke, Center for Catastrophic Risk Management, University of California, Berkeley, to undertake “A Strategic Wildfire Planning Process for Orinda: Transitioning from Basic, through Adaptive, to Transformative Wildfire Resilience in Orinda, CA.” RECOMMENDATION:

SSTOC Recommendation: The Commission recommends the City Council to enter into a contract with Dr. Radke along the lines of the proposal submitted at a cost of $598,196.

BACKGROUND: The City of Orinda continues to work to make Orinda a more wildfire safe and resilient community. Measure R funds are targeted to fire prevention and emergency preparedness, in addition to streets and storm drains. The City Council established the Supplemental Sales Tax Oversight Commission (SSTOC) to provide recommendations on the use of Measure R funds. A variety of recommendations have been made by the Commission, have been shared with the City Council, and many have been implemented.

In the Spring of 2022, an opportunity was identified to possibly undertake some additional analysis and modeling of fire risk through some outreach from Dr. John Radke, who is an Orinda resident, and who expressed an interest in assisting the City and community in this regard. That informal outreach resulted in an initial request at the March 9, 2022, SSTOC to invited Dr. Radke to make a presentation to the Commission.

At the April 13, 2022, SSTOC meeting, Dr, Radke made a presentation on how he believes additional modeling can help the City of Orinda to improve its wildfire protection and the Commission expressed interest in receiving a proposal for consideration. At the May, 11, 2022 Commission meeting, an update is provided and Dr. Radke indicates he needs to update the budget for his forthcoming proposal. At that meeting, Fire Chief Winnacker provides information on the existing modeling used to develop the Community Wildfire Protection Plan (CWPP). Commissioner Light advises the Commission of another modeling tool available through a company called Vibrant Planet, and the Commission agrees to have a presentation from Vibrant Planet at a future meeting.

H.1
Packet Pg. 98
Vibrant Planet makes a presentation to the Commission on June 8, 2022. At that same meeting, Dr. Radke advises he is working on finalizing his proposal, but due to concerns about the proprietary nature of some elements and the fact his proposal would be a public record, he needs to modify it before being able to submit it formally. The Commission asks Dr. Radke if he can provide a proposal in time for their July meeting and he confirms he can.

At the July 13, 2022, SSTOC meeting, Dr. Radke presents his proposal (copy attached – Attachment 1) to the Commission (Excerpt from Minutes – Attachment 2). The Commission is asked to forward questions for Dr. Radke in regard to his proposal to staff by July 20th for written answers to be provided for the August meeting. On August 10, 2022, the Commission reviews the response to questions provided by Dr. Radke (Attachment 3) and considers the proposal. Following questions and discussion, a motion was made by Commissioner Barber, seconded by Commissioner Decareau, to recommend to the City Council that the City enter into a contract with Dr. Radke along the lines of the proposal submitted. That motion passed 6-2, with Commissioners Hammon and Light voting No, and Commissioner Lee absent (Excerpt from Draft Minutes – Attachment 4).

Subsequent to that meeting, Mayor Fay, who is the Liaison the SSTOC, had some follow-up questions for Dr. Radke, those questions and responses are provided as Attachment 5.

DISCUSSION: This item is presented so that the City Council can review the proposal from Dr. Radke as recommended by the SSTOC and determine whether to proceed with it or not. The Chair of the SSTOC, Jud Hammon, will be present at the Council meeting to share the Commission’s recommendation and perspectives. In addition, Dr.

Radke will be present and available to make a presentation if desired or to answer questions from the Council.

While staff believes Dr. Radke’s research is of interest and could be useful as the science develops, we do not recommend funding the proposal for a number of reasons.

As an individual city with limited resources, we question the value of funding what is pure research, especially when we have many competing priorities for use of Measure R funds. In addition, the proposal relies extensively on Crowdsourcing of data and we are uncertain if sufficient numbers of residents would participate to make the effort worthwhile. The Moraga Orinda Fire District Chief, upon whom the City relies for information and advice as the Chief Fire Official for the community, has stated multiple times that the modeling needed is in place to guide our efforts already. The end results of Dr. Radke’s proposal seems too uncertain and too costly to staff that it will have practical applicability as well.

As a number of Commissioner’s mentioned during their consideration of the proposal, perhaps Orinda would be a good place for the research to be done, but perhaps it should be funded by a State grant or a foundation. To that end, staff and our grants firm have been looking for possible grants. A recent grant from USDA/Forest Service, the Community Wildfire Defense Grant (Attachment 6), seems to present a possible H.1
Packet Pg. 99
opportunity to fund this proposal if desirable to proceed using other resources. There is a 25% local match required. It seems a little unclear if the development of a model, which is a GIS and database system is an eligible project, unless as noted it supports a CWPP, wildfire risk reduction planning, or fuels mitigation initiative or project, which it seems Dr. Radke’s proposal does. Also, research and development projects are ineligible, so it will depend upon how the State categorizes what is being proposed by Dr. Radke. As the deadline for this round of grant funding is October 7, 2022, staff has developed and will submit an application as a placeholder in order to give the Council additional flexibility as they consider Dr. Radke’s proposal.

NEXT STEPS: Should the City Council approve the Commission’s recommendation, a contract and funding appropriation would be brought back to the Council for approval. If the Council were to opt for the staff recommendation, there would be no further action required, unless the Council were to express and interest in the grant option. If the submitted grant application were successful, a formal contract approval and an appropriation of the required local match would be brought back to the City Council.

FISCAL IMPACT: The cost of Dr. Radke’s proposal is $598,196 and the Commission recommends use of Measure R funds. Should the Council wish to proceed, staff believes that funds could be identified from Measure R (Fund #106). A more specific analysis would be brought back at the time a contract were considered and an appropriation made. The grant option, if successful, would require a 25% local match, or $150,000, of the same $598,196 of total costs.

ATTACHMENTS:

A. Radke Proposal
B. Excerpt from July SSTOC Meeting Minutes
C. SSTOC Quesitons and Radke Responses
D. Excerpt from August 10 2022 Draft Meeting Minutes
E. Mayor Fay Question to Dr. Radke and Responses
F. USDA/Forest Service Grant Info
Respectfully Submitted by:

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

H.1
Packet Pg. 100
H.1
Packet Pg. 101
H.1.a
Packet Pg. 102 Attachment: Radke Proposal (2930 : Radke Proposal) H.1.a
Packet Pg. 103 Attachment: Radke Proposal (2930 : Radke Proposal) H.1.a
Packet Pg. 104 Attachment: Radke Proposal (2930 : Radke Proposal) H.1.a
Packet Pg. 105 Attachment: Radke Proposal (2930 : Radke Proposal) H.1.a
Packet Pg. 106 Attachment: Radke Proposal (2930 : Radke Proposal) H.1.a
Packet Pg. 107 Attachment: Radke Proposal (2930 : Radke Proposal) H.1.a
Packet Pg. 108 Attachment: Radke Proposal (2930 : Radke Proposal) H.1.a
Packet Pg. 109 Attachment: Radke Proposal (2930 : Radke Proposal) H.1.a
Packet Pg. 110 Attachment: Radke Proposal (2930 : Radke Proposal) H.1.a
Packet Pg. 111 Attachment: Radke Proposal (2930 : Radke Proposal) H.1.a
Packet Pg. 112 Attachment: Radke Proposal (2930 : Radke Proposal) H.1.a
Packet Pg. 113 Attachment: Radke Proposal (2930 : Radke Proposal) H.1.a
Packet Pg. 114 Attachment: Radke Proposal (2930 : Radke Proposal) H.1.a
Packet Pg. 115 Attachment: Radke Proposal (2930 : Radke Proposal) H.1.a
Packet Pg. 116 Attachment: Radke Proposal (2930 : Radke Proposal) H.1.a
Packet Pg. 117 Attachment: Radke Proposal (2930 : Radke Proposal) H.1.a
Packet Pg. 118 Attachment: Radke Proposal (2930 : Radke Proposal) H.1.a
Packet Pg. 119 Attachment: Radke Proposal (2930 : Radke Proposal) H.1.a
Packet Pg. 120 Attachment: Radke Proposal (2930 : Radke Proposal) H.1.a
Packet Pg. 121 Attachment: Radke Proposal (2930 : Radke Proposal) H.1.a
Packet Pg. 122 Attachment: Radke Proposal (2930 : Radke Proposal) H.1.a
Packet Pg. 123 Attachment: Radke Proposal (2930 : Radke Proposal) H.1.a
Packet Pg. 124 Attachment: Radke Proposal (2930 : Radke Proposal) H.1.a
Packet Pg. 125 Attachment: Radke Proposal (2930 : Radke Proposal) H.1.a
Packet Pg. 126 Attachment: Radke Proposal (2930 : Radke Proposal) H.1.a
Packet Pg. 127 Attachment: Radke Proposal (2930 : Radke Proposal) H.1.a
Packet Pg. 128 Attachment: Radke Proposal (2930 : Radke Proposal) H.1.a
Packet Pg. 129 Attachment: Radke Proposal (2930 : Radke Proposal) H.1.a
Packet Pg. 130 Attachment: Radke Proposal (2930 : Radke Proposal) Excerpt from the July 2022 Meeting Minutes
G. DISCUSSION ITEMS/STAFF REPORTS
G.1. Strategic Wildfire Plan
Receive Report, Review Proposal, Discuss, and Provide Direction, if any Chair Hammon thanked Dr. Radke for his very detailed proposal and commented that he agrees the City needs a Strategic Wildfire Plan and that the City and staff are already working on implementation of an existing plan which was based on recommendations that the SSTOC submitted to the Council on September 8, 2021. It focuses on educating residents on the need to reduce wildfire fuels on their properties and harden their homes against wildfire in accordance with the existing Orinda Community Wildfire Protection Plan, the MOFD Fire Code and the MOFD Wildfire Prevention Strategic Plan.

In general, priority guidance for wildfire fuel reduction efforts have been made based on the MOFD Wildfire Risk Map and, specifically, evacuation routes have been set as very high priority areas.

Secondly, regarding providing incentives for wildfire fuel risk reduction efforts and the home hardening efforts, they are in the process of developing incentive plans and already have the Orinda Chipper Program.

Third is clearing wildfire fuels from City property in accordance with the MOFD Fire Code and item four is helping Orinda residents prepare for emergencies, in general.

Commissioner Latimer then introduced Dr. Radke and said he has provided a more detailed description of what he is proposing his research on in aiding Orinda and its citizens in becoming a wildfire resilient city.

Dr. Radke said he took feedback from Commission members and residents and put together a formal proposal. The City Manager gave him a letter he could take to the project sponsor’s office and they agreed to 17% overhead which is a huge value. He broke it down into two years and two months because the final two months would be tying up loose ends when hired graduate students would be ending a semester and could finalize the plan.

Throughout the process they will be able to deliver results of what they find and, as they go through the process, it will become more and more accurate. They will build maps where people will be able to see their properties, modeling, what they are finding, what needs to be done in reducing fires from turning into an uncontrollable firestorm. They bring science and a different way of looking at radiation and control it in Orinda.

As they end up with results, they will pass on the information to MOFD. In the end, it builds an infrastructure system that has metrics built into it. Over time, it will reveal the progress of mitigation and they can control it and monitor it on an annual basis or less.

H.1.b
Packet Pg. 131 Attachment: Excerpt from July SSTOC Meeting Minutes (2930 : Radke Proposal) Excerpt from the July 2022 Meeting Minutes
He said after the project is over, the City might have to contract out with a satellite company to get a 6-month or annual subscription and purchase some of this data but this is fairly inexpensive. The database they turn over when they are done could be maintained on a desktop and it would not take much to train someone to maintain it.

There are three professors on the team. One professor has been studying fire and has been a statistician in biomass for 40 years. He will be assessing how much fuel exists in certain areas and then come up with strategies to reduce it. The other professor is in engineering and she does networking and optimizes egress.

In this project, the only fee Orinda would pay is to buy him out of a course this fall so that the money would go to someone else to teach the course so he can spend full-time this fall getting the project rolling and participating. The other two professors would not charge any of their time to this because they are doing research for other projects in California, funded by other organizations. Berkeley Professors are only allowed 3 months of summer salary and it gets taken up by other research projects so they cannot charge their time.

The hourly rate for the graduate students is fair given the skill set they have. One is a Ph.D. and the other two are professional Masters, and all are hand-picked because of their expertise in this area.

Chair Hammon thanked Dr. Radke for his presentation and for the level of detail he put in his proposal. He suggested Commissioners ask questions, and if they have many questions to forward them to staff by July 20th for Dr. Radke for written answers within two weeks for next meeting.

Commissioner Barber said he thinks he understands the proposal well enough to make a recommendation to the City Council on this matter. It strikes him this is experimental and that may be something that would make this of greater interest to a private grant maker, particularly to the Moore Foundation, the Chairman of which is a former Orinda resident that now lives in Lafayette. It would be appealing to him and possibly others but he was not sure this is something Dr. Radke can react to.

What he likes best about this proposal is the granularity; it will allow the Commission to look at specific parcels and it may be something which will finally get homeowners to act.

Most people do not know quite what to do or they do not know there is a real problem on their parcel. He would support a demonstration project and if it shows there is real promise in this approach, the cities of Lafayette and Moraga and others might be interested in using this technology.

Commissioner Decareau noted that Task #5 does that. It is a small segment of the City and then it is built upon after lessons learned.

H.1.b
Packet Pg. 132 Attachment: Excerpt from July SSTOC Meeting Minutes (2930 : Radke Proposal) Excerpt from the July 2022 Meeting Minutes
Dr. Radke referred to Commissioner Barber’s questions and described a project on flooding where the oil industry was not reacting to climate change and they did not see how it would impact their productivity. They showed them how their infrastructure, especially marine terminals and refineries will be impacted over the next 20-60 years. It was amazing how they just “woke up.” Over the last couple of years, the industry has been very proactive in making changes because of the impact on their infrastructure from climate change. That granularity does ‘bring it home’ so people realize and see what will happen on their property.

Commissioner Decareau said he has many detailed questions so he will put them in writing. His only concern is that they are running out of time. If he understands the schedule correctly, we are buying this year for Dr. Radke’s fall semester and then the following year is Year 2.

Dr. Radke said the City is just buying one course/semester and in the springtime, the City is not. The rest of the time is when the professors are donating their time.

Chair Hammon asked when Dr. Radke would need to have a contract in place in order to start in a way that does not push them back one whole semester.

Dr. Radke said it would be to start in August because graduate students and researchers are brought on board then. However, if it did not start until September, he has other funding for the three graduate students for the fall so they could start getting paid in the spring. It is highly likely they would catch up and finish early according to his schedule because there is real incentive for these graduate students to work hard because they want to graduate. This will be part of their Master’s thesis and part of their Ph.D. dissertation.

Commissioner Light said it is an exciting proposal and her primary concern has to do with the crowd-sourcing which has been tough in getting people to mitigate their properties.

The data is from 2016 through 2020 which seems old. The granularity is contingent on the crowd-sourcing and that looks like it could be the weak link in the project.

Her other concern is a funding issue. She agrees with Commissioner Barber and should urge this project to be funded through private sources and possibly there is State funding, the Moore Foundation, and possibly others.

Dr. Radke said in the past they have done NSF, State and then local. Everyone always states they want to participate but there is not proof. Locally, people do not typically participate much. This is a complete reversal of that paradigm. He believes that their mission is to go to the State, show what the City is doing, and get them on board. The project has a better chance if they take that approach. The three professors have discussed this and believe it is much more convincing.

H.1.b
Packet Pg. 133 Attachment: Excerpt from July SSTOC Meeting Minutes (2930 : Radke Proposal) Excerpt from the July 2022 Meeting Minutes
Commissioner Malkani said she also likes the granularity of the analysis and results, questioned if the modeling could include on some of the publicly open space that is not City-owned and the impact on Orinda because of issues such as EBMUD and EBRPD where they are not doing mitigation.

In terms of timing, she is sensing there are questions and people want to spend more time digesting this and did not think the opportunity would be lost if they spent another month or two engaging.

Dr. Radke said he has three students he recruited to study fire. They could have gone other places but came here. He has lots for them to do but once this project starts, they will focus on nothing else but this project. This way, the City gets the biggest bang for their buck and incredible research.

Commissioner Reinman said she likes the idea and likes the fact it is science-based. She will submit her questions in writing, thinks the students will come up with the technology and modeling, and this is more a question of buy-in and engagement before, during and after the project.

Commissioner Weinstein said he thinks this is a good idea and is excited about Orinda being able to capitalize on technology and grants and said the time is now.

Chair Hammon said there are Commissioners who will submit questions to Ms. Cronin and asked that they be submitted no later by the end of business day one week from today; July 20th. The sooner Dr. Radke can respond and submit his answers the sooner the item can be agendized for recommendation to the Council.

Chair Hammon opened the Public Forum.

Richard Nelson writes: “I cannot wait for the comment period. Maybe you can present my points. 1) The City should adopt the Radke proposal; 2) Understanding the science makes this seem like a difficult decision but the matter is really simpler; 3) We need an expert in fire risk in Orinda. MOFD does not have such an expert but relies on general analysis presented to them by Cal Fire; 4) Radke offers new technology. This is always risky but offers considerable potential rewards; 5) Having two different approaches is better than one. At minimum, Radke’s model would be a good way to test the Cal Fire model; and 6) The opportunity cost of the expenditure is not large. We have $3 million in revenues to spend this year. We can do more than one thing at a time.” H.1.b
Packet Pg. 134 Attachment: Excerpt from July SSTOC Meeting Minutes (2930 : Radke Proposal) Excerpt from the July 2022 Meeting Minutes
Blair Swedeen said the reason he voted for Measure R was to have a plan. To date, he does not feel sufficient progress has been made and this is the first concrete plan outside of “more tactical mitigation measures.” He has worked in the areas of geospatial analysis and data science for 20 years, has run similar projects, and this is proven technology that has been used in other fields. There are dozens of companies leveraging satellite imagery, machine learning, feature extraction, prediction for insurance pricing, for risk planning, so it is proven. He thinks Dr. Radke’s proposal is extremely thorough, well put together and thought through very personally. He would like to see more action and less waiting and agrees activation is important and a challenge, but he would separate that out from the actual analysis and strategy, which is what Dr. Radke’s proposal relates to.

Steven Cohn said he thinks it is time for a plan. $300,000 a year out of $3.4 million is not much and he asked to work with MOFD directors on board for more. There is a lot of money available and they need a way to direct the action, and he asked the City to move forward on this and now.

Chair Hammon concluded the matter and asked Commissioners to submit their questions to Ms. Cronin by July 20th and they will continue this discussion in next month’s meeting.

H.1.b
Packet Pg. 135 Attachment: Excerpt from July SSTOC Meeting Minutes (2930 : Radke Proposal) To: Supplemental Sales Tax Oversight Commission (SSTOC), City of Orinda, CA From: John Radke, Center for Catastrophic Risk Management, University of California, Berkeley Answers to the Questions submitted by the Supplemental Sales Tax Oversight Commission (SSTOC) members (7/20/2022) regarding the UC Berkeley proposal, “A Strategic Wildfire Planning Process for Orinda: Transitioning from Basic, through Adaptive, to Transformative Wildfire Resilience in Orinda, CA.” I think it is important to point out that this proposal responds to the needs of the citizens of Orinda, the funders of Measure R, and those who we address here as the clients of this research. We see their needs as being significantly different than those of other entities. However, we do recognize that many other entities and organizations (such as MOFD, Calfire) will benefit from the findings of this research.

Paula Reinman’s Questions:
• What is the final output? I understand it to be a program or application that people can use to get granular detail about the specific fire risk and vegetation management needs for their home, as long as they uploaded information about their vegetation. Is that correct? Do they get customized recommendations about vegetation management for their homes? The final output will be a report with a series of maps that detail the current vegetation conditions, identifying the fuel models, and showing the wildfire intensity results of various wildfire scenarios based on common weather and extreme conditions. The geographic extent will be Orinda-wide, where users can zoom to their individual properties to assess their conditions and risk. The maps will be in digital format where one can zoom to individual neighborhoods and properties to see their classification. We will decide on the actual delivery platform after interacting with the TAC and other citizen groups like the Firewise community. It could be something like thematic shading on top of a Google Earth platform where the shading illustrates fire intensity of the current vegetation. It is our intent to delineate and work with fireshed neighborhoods and virtually mitigate by altering vegetation fuels and reburning in a fire model the fireshed to realize the impact. The more cooperation and crowdsourcing in a fireshed neighborhood, the more accurate and granular detailed the predictions and the more opportunity for custom mitigation scenarios and outcomes.

Our results will provide a very high spatial resolution map of where to begin the mitigation efforts to get the greatest result for the money spent to improve conditions and reduce the overall risk of a firestorm in Orinda. In a sense, recommendations about vegetation management on their individual properties. • Who is the receiving organization for this work? I assume it's the City of Orinda. What is required from the City, from MOFD and from any other entities during the project? What is required from them after the project to maintain and promote the work?
The City of Orinda, and its citizens, are the receiving organization for this work. The City will examine the results, and once approved for public access, they will be made available to the citizens of Orinda. MOFD or any other entity, have no requirements, but may wish to participate in the discussions as the research is undertaken, and will receive the results at the same time as the community at large. The results of this research, at an enhanced spatial resolution and sophistication of vegetation classification, along with various burn scenarios, will likely benefit efforts to further strategize to keep Orinda safe. We recommend the City keep the interactive website active so that citizens can update any changes in vegetation growth and mitigation on their part. The database itself will track all updates which are then H.1.c
Packet Pg. 136 Attachment: SSTOC Quesitons and Radke Responses (2930 : Radke Proposal) used to simulate any fire scenario. We would have to examine the current City computer operations to best answer the final question here. An outside contractor may be required to maintain the fire-safeOrinda website if the system exceeds internal technical capacity. • How is MOFD involved? Are they a receiving organization for the project? What if they do not want it or do not want to participate?
MOFD is a stakeholder, but not directly involved in the data acquisition and modeling process. Their mission is to protect Orinda and Moraga from a wildfire disaster. This research is to inform the individual citizen and their fireshed neighborhoods of their vegetation fuels risk, and to show them strategies on how they can reduce that risk on their own property and in their fireshed neighborhood. We assume the City will provide MOFD with a link to the report and database. We believe outputs from this research will be beneficial to MOFD in their efforts to reduce fuels in the City of Orinda, especially with high spatial accuracy of up-to-date vegetation inventory and modeled fuel burns under various weather conditions. • What areas do the advisory committee influence? How?
The TAC is made up of a cross-section of the community to be informed, and inform the research effort so that we do not move forward without being aware of all known concerns and interests. We also hope the TAC can help strategize the engagement of citizens in the crowdsourcing effort to improve the accuracy of vegetation identification of each plant/bush/tree within each property. • Has this or something like it been done anywhere else? To answer this question it is necessary to first look at higher-resolution data itself. High resolution remotely-sensed images are filled with fine-grained detail that can be difficult to interpret by visual inspection, and require automated techniques, such as machine learning, to resolve. Machine learning techniques, such as support vector machines or random forest classifiers, are efficient algorithms that can be used to classify the high level of detail in the images into meaningful clusters of pixels. Both of these machine learning algorithms have been applied in many studies using mid-to-high resolution remotelysensed images (Braun et al. 2010, - Zhao et al. 2020). One issue is that the high degree of detail in high resolution images inevitably leads to a greater amount of superfluous pixels. To address this problem, the pixels in high resolution images can be clustered into similar classes and segmented into meaningful regions called “objects.” For vegetation classification, this object-based image analysis approach with machine learning algorithms can be used on high resolution images to help segment “objects” and delineate them into vegetation classes. Examples of vegetation objects are trees, groups of trees, shrubs, and grass.

Alternatively, more complex deep learning models, such as deep neural networks and convolutional neural networks, have also been widely used for vegetation classification and identification to a high level of accuracy (Li et al. 2012, Radke et al. 2020, Ayhan et al. 2020). The integration of deeper and wider networks, in addition to convolution operations have the capacity to interpret and learn the complex patterns in the input data features. While deep learning models pose a powerful option for automated vegetation classification, many high-quality training samples are required to effectively train the model.

An important component of our proposal is to rely on crowdsourcing to generate these training samples via vegetation identification and labeling. Post-processing and filtering techniques will also improve the fidelity of the training samples.

H.1.c
Packet Pg. 137 Attachment: SSTOC Quesitons and Radke Responses (2930 : Radke Proposal) This proposed research is part of a 30-year effort in modeling and identifying vegetation and wildfire risks in the wildland-urban regions of California. Radke (1995) introduced a vector polygon delineation method that mapped vegetation fuels to better define areas of fire intensity, spread and flame length from a BEHAVE fire model. This approach is advanced in our machine learning, support vector machine classification. Radke’s PhD student, Wei Luo (2004), developed a cellular automata modeling approach to studying wildland urban interface fires in her dissertation. Radke’s PhD student, Jianchun Xu (2006), developed a spatial data gathering technology for large scale fire modeling in the wildland urban interface, which included a form of crowdsourcing where ordinary citizens identified vegetation through crowdsourcing. Radke (2006) argued that the current scale of the data and models used in fuel identification and wildland urban interface modeling must move to a backyard scale to engage the individual homeowner in a fuels management strategy. Li and Radke (2012) propose a very high spatial resolution support vector machine approach to classify vegetation from a 3m2 multispectral satellite imagery. Radke et. al. (2018) show that higher spatial resolution data sets have produced significantly better modeling results than more conventional data sets in similar circumstances. In 2018 they identified and modeled vegetation fuels at 5 m2 resolution and calculated 91.25% accuracy of mapped fuel cover where for the same landscape the standard LandFire dataset at 30 m2 resolution results in an accuracy of only 48.75%. We propose to better this 2018 advancement by modeling ground data at 1 m2 resolution and 3 m2 resolution for this proposed 2022 Orinda research.

To the best of our knowledge a community action plan using our proposed state-of-the-art research has not been done anywhere else.

Braun, A. C., Weidner, U., & Hinz, S. (2010). Support vector machines for vegetation classification A revision. PhotogrammetrieFernerkundung-Geoinformation, 273-281.

Zhao, F., Wu, X., & Wang, S. (2020). Object-oriented vegetation classification method based on UAV and satellite image fusion. Procedia Computer Science, 174, 609-615.

Li, W., Radke, J., Liu, D., & Gong, P. (2012). Measuring detailed urban vegetation with multisource high-resolution remote sensing imagery for environmental design and planning. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design, 39(3), 566-585.

Ayhan, B., Kwan, C., Budavari, B., Kwan, L., Lu, Y., Perez, D., ... & Vlachos, M. (2020). Vegetation detection using deep learning and conventional methods. Remote Sensing, 12(15), 2502.

Weimin Li & John D. Radke (2012): Geospatial data integration and modeling for the investigation of urban neighborhood crime, Annals of GIS, 18:3, 185-205
• What is the minimum percentage of citizens / parcels that need to participate by providing crowdsourced data? Is the purpose of the crowdsourced data to validate the model, to provide individual property level insights or something else?
Crowdsourcing is an important effort used to validate, or ground truth, our modeling process for vegetation identification through remote sensing and image processing. Based on the crowdsourced validation data we propose combining a rule-based classifier and Support Vector Machine classifier to produce vector objects or polygons of like vegetation. These polygons might delineate individual plants or like clusters of plants. We randomly chose the training data sites and use them to train the classifier.

We can calculate the initial classification accuracy of our process using this technique. We initially use our own technical staff to identify on the ground vegetation and classify these polygons in the training sites. We then train Orinda citizens to undertake the same validation process and through this crowdsourcing technology we add to and improve the accuracy of the dataset. The more citizens that H.1.c
Packet Pg. 138 Attachment: SSTOC Quesitons and Radke Responses (2930 : Radke Proposal) participate, the more we reduce uncertainty and improve the accuracy predictions. It isn’t possible to estimate the absolute minimum required percentage of citizens / parcels that need to participate to capture meaningful results. However, if even one citizen on one parcel participates, it is an improvement over the status quo. The more citizen participation, the higher the accuracy of our results, the better the model, the better the prediction, and the more accurate and better the strategy for mitigating a wildfire disaster.

Jud Hammon’s Questions:

To be more specific, here are my questions about your proposal. Please be as complete as you can in responding to each question.

1. Do you have any data showing how higher-resolution data sets have actually produced significantly better modeling results than more-conventional data sets in similar circumstances? Yes, Radke, et al (2018) show that higher-resolution data sets produced significantly better modeling results than more-conventional data sets in similar circumstances. Documented in their Appendix D, the accuracy of their mapped fuel cover at 5 m2 resolution is 91.25%; the accuracy of mapped fuel cover from the standard LandFire dataset at 30 m2 resolution is 48.75%. For the proposed 2022 Orinda research they propose an improvement in their efforts by modeling ground data at 1 m2 resolution when public domain at that resolution data is available; and 3 m2 resolution at other times using cost effective Planetscope satellite data which widely available for all sites.

2. You propose a crowdsourcing effort to help validate your initial identification of vegetation conditions.

Approximately what fraction of Orinda households would need to be actively participating, in order to give high confidence that your sensors and Al system are correctly identifying the location, type, and size, of vegetation throughout Orinda?
This question is very similar to one proposed by Paula Reinman above. I include the same answer here.

The crowdsourcing is an important effort used to validate or ground truth our modeling process for vegetation identification through remote sensing and image processing. Based on the crowdsources validation data we propose combining a rule-based classifier and Support Vector Machine classifier to produce vector objects or polygons of like vegetation. These polygons might delineate individual plants or like clusters of plants. We randomly chose the training data sites and use them to train the classifier.

We can calculate the initial classification accuracy of our process using this technique. We initially use our own technical staff to identify on the ground vegetation and classify these polygons in the training sites. We then train Orinda citizens to undertake the same validation process and through this crowdsourcing technology we add to and improve the accuracy of the dataset. The more citizens that participate, the more we reduce uncertainty and improve the accuracy predictions. It isn’t possible to estimate the absolute minimum required percentage of citizens / parcels that need to participate to capture meaningful results. However, if even one citizen on one parcel participates, it is an improvement over the status quo. The more citizen participation, the higher the accuracy of our results, the better the model, the better the prediction, and the more accurate and better the strategy for mitigating a wildfire disaster.

3. What data do you have that demonstrates that your remote-sensing system will give reasonably accurate measures of fuel moisture content in Orinda's vegetation? H.1.c
Packet Pg. 139 Attachment: SSTOC Quesitons and Radke Responses (2930 : Radke Proposal) We use standard Normalized Difference Vegetation Index (NDVI) to quantify vegetation greenness, useful in understanding vegetation density and assessing changes in plant health. We use Soil Adjusted Vegetation Index (SAVI) to correct the Normalized Difference Vegetation Index (NDVI) for the influence of soil brightness in areas where vegetative cover is low. The Normalized Difference Water Index (NDWI) is also known to be strongly related to the plant water content. It is therefore a very good proxy for plant water stress. Both NDVI and NDWI are positively correlated with live fuel moisture. Chuvieco et al. (2004) present an empirical method for deriving fuel moisture content (FMC) from NDVI and surface temperature. Their model shows high accuracy (r2 > 0.8) for both grasslands and shrubs. It is used to derive a spatial estimator of FMC in Mediterranean conditions such as those found in Orinda. In addition, we plan on sampling some vegetation to validate our modeled estimates of FMC with actual ground truth measurements. We follow the fuel moisture sampling and lab processing procedures from Pollet and Brown (2007)
E. Chuvieco et al.. / Remote Sensing of Environment 92 (2004) 322–331 J. Pollet and A. Brown. 2007. Fuel moisture sampling guide. Salt Lake City, UT: U.S. Department of Interior, Bureau of Land Management, Utah State Office. 30 p. http://www.wfas.net/nfmd/references/fmg.pdf (May 14, 2015).

4. What data do you have showing that your proposed more-sophisticated set of sensors and resulting higher-resolution data set will give more accurate predictions on fire-weather patterns in the event of an actual wildfire?
The proposed analysis does not predict fire-weather patterns. Rather, it is designed to model the fire impact of various weather patterns.

5. Why do you believe that your remote sensor system will result in a landscape model that is significantly more accurate than existing landscape data?
Our evidence is in our peer reviewed Radke et al (2018) research report to the California Energy Commission that showed that our 5m2 spatial resolution remotely sensed approach improved contemporary landscape data from 48.75% accuracy to 91.25% accuracy of mapped fuels. We plan to improve this using new remote sensors with of 3m2 spatial resolution, and at times we can take advantage of even higher spatial resolution sensors of 1m2.

6. How could your model be used in real time, to more accurately guide first responders (including both fire fighters and evacuation teams) in the event of an actual fire? The proposed analysis is designed for strategic planning in advance of a fire event to mitigate and reduce the risk of future catastrophic wildfires. It is not intended for operational real-time emergency fire response, which is the domain of first responders.

7. What staffing would Orinda need to have, to maintain and use the model in the future? Please include the number of full-time-equivalent persons and qualifications of each, as well as a brief description of the tasks each person would perform.

I could only answer this after assessing the current Orinda staff, their computer equipment and skill set.

A quick guess is that once built, this system could easily be maintained with a qualified and skilled part time contract position of ~ 25% time. As far as, “a brief description of the tasks each person would H.1.c
Packet Pg. 140 Attachment: SSTOC Quesitons and Radke Responses (2930 : Radke Proposal) perform”, it is too premature to address this request. During the research project, interaction with the community will help determine the needs, dependency and future use of this system.

Chris Decareau’s Questions:
• Objective 1.B: If MOFD (CalFire) uses Hauling Scale for fire response, will the BIP be able to correlate to the Hauling scale so residents can gauge whether their property MAY be protected under vegetation mitigation strategies (understanding that some Plan scenarios may change the BIP based on underlying dynamics).

Although the Hauling Chart is used as a nomograph to show when an incident commander is likely to deploy firefighters and types of apparatus to a location to engage the fire, the Burn Intensity Potential (BIP) is a good metric to use to gauge what type of fire response engagement might likely occur. If a fireshed can collectively reduce the BIP to where the incident commander is likely to deploy firefighters, then a neighborhood has a fighting chance of being saved. If the BTUs and Rate of Spread can be shown to drop into the green zone on Figure 2 in the proposal, an incident commander will be quite confident that it is a safe neighborhood for their fire fighters to defend. • Objective 2: One risk of crowdsource data is obsolescence or industry capture, such as happened to WeatherUnderground. This is a risk to the Plan that should be addressed during design.

Significant vegetation change happens on an approximate 5-10 year scale, rather than annually. So, we would envision that the citizenry could be asked perhaps once or twice a decade to update their vegetation classes. While this would be ideal, one of the advantages of the rapid return of the remotely sensed data is the ability to detect change at a very high spatial resolution (3m2) on an almost daily basis.

These sensors function independent of crowdsourcing. We will always have accurate remotely sensed change data. If crowdsourced data is no longer available to validate, we at least continue to have accurate data from the satellite sensors.
• Objective 3.A: Is the classification map based on the BIP or Hauling Scale or some other metric. Won't the metric vary by scenario: weather and intensity.

The BIP metric comes from the burn scenarios in the wildfire modeling. The Hauling Chart is used as a nomograph to show when the incident commander is likely to deploy firefighters and appropriate apparatus to a location to engage the fire. The metric varies, based on weather conditions and fuel moisture. A good gauge for this is time of year, whether drought conditions are present, temperature, wind speed and direction, relative humidity, and trends in the Vapor Pressure Deficit (VPD). So yes, it will vary by scenario. Therefore, we will run the wildfire models on various scenarios to try to encompass a range of all possible events.
• Objective 3.B: How does suppression difficulty index vary from Hauling Scale or BIP? Is there a relationship?
A suppression difficulty index is a combination of where first ignition occurs, and what the accessibility is for deploying apparatus and egressing residents. It has more to do with the movement of resources in, and residents out, of the fire region. It does look for bottle necks or choke points that are identified from BIP predictions. The Hauling Chart is again a nomograph to show when the incident commander is likely to deploy firefighters and types of apparatus to a location to engage the fire.

H.1.c
Packet Pg. 141 Attachment: SSTOC Quesitons and Radke Responses (2930 : Radke Proposal) • Objective 3.C.1: Define relationships between different spatial unit/metric and BIP, SDI and/or Hauling Scale.

The BIP spatial unit at the very smallest resolution is 3m2, but more likely defined by a larger polygon that is the result of the SVM classifier of fuels. The SDI is generated using a networked based locationallocation algorithm, and delivers apparatus to the fire and moves residents from the fire along transportation corridors. Choke points are identified using the BIP, and weights can be added to represent evacuation delays. These weights can be calculated from historic data where normal and congested traffic occurs. The Hauling Chart is again a nomograph to show when the incident commander is likely to deploy firefighters and types of apparatus to a location to engage the fire. Incident commanders can show unique interpretations of the Hauling Chart, but for the most part, from Radke (1995) they are consistent in their interpretation of fire risk. • Objective 3.C.2: Is "collective" a unit/metric for a neighborhood/fireshed? In this context, “collective” refers to the neighbors in the fireshed. For example, your neighbor’s property, although it is not your responsibility, might actually endanger your property, and therefore it is of concern to you, and vice versa. They collectively share the risk. • Objective 3.C3: Does "proprietary" mean to UC or Orinda? Is this a licensing issue for future budgets? In this context, “proprietary” refers to the collective homeowners that together own the risk of wildfire, or manage their neighborhood and collectively own a much safer and fire-resistant neighborhood. I believe the citizens of Orinda would own the database since it is paid for using Orinda tax revenues. The University of California will not impose any ownership requirements on the data, which will remain in the public domain.
• Task 1: Clarify monthly method of "briefing" the TAC. Meetings with CC, SSTOC, MOFD, & OFC are problematic to schedule and require Brown Act provisions.

In past projects we have kept the TAC informed through an email thread that was updated monthly. We had online meetings once a quarter to report progress and we met in person once a year. These updates helped the research team as much as it helped the TAC be engaged with the progress. On several occasions members of the TAC were able to help the research group more effectively accomplish tasks. It would be helpful if at least one representative from CC, SSTOC, MOFD, and OFC would be on the TAC.

These briefings are not intended to be formal enough to require Brown Act provisions, they are more to keep everyone informed and to communicate where problems might be surfacing. • Task 2: Notify/list proprietary or licensed data that the Orinda Wildfire Plan will depend on for future updates. (see Obj. 3.C.3 above)
The only proprietary or licensed data that will be used in this research is remotely sensed imagery from private satellite companies. This is the only data that would need to be licensed if Orinda wished to use it for future updates. However, we believe Orinda would not need the original data used in this research but would rather license future data for future updates. All public domain data used in this research is accessible to Orinda with no licensing necessary. Until the final report is submitted to Orinda, the UC group will keep the crowdsourced data on a secure server, only accessible to those that contribute data H.1.c
Packet Pg. 142 Attachment: SSTOC Quesitons and Radke Responses (2930 : Radke Proposal) from their own individual property. Orinda will have to determine the access and security protocols for this crowdsourced data after the project is complete. All public domain remotely sensed data and their resultant classified products will be accessible to Orinda with no licensing necessary. All the classified products from the machine learning efforts will be available to Orinda with no licensing necessary. • Task 11: relates to Obj 3.C.2 that individual lots with one metric have a different risk metric when aggregated with neighbors. There could be significant social "dependence" developed if residents get two metrics: lot vs neighborhood.

A good observation and true. This is why we promote a Wildfire Plan for Transformative Resilience, a fundamentally new system where a profound shift in the human relationship with wildfire that embraces the dynamic and rapidly changing role of fire in social–ecological systems. You cannot survive wildfire without engaging and working with your neighbors. The landscape is not a blank canvas and each property has its own unique landscape. The fireshed is where we engage together in a common cause to reduce the fuel loads and give ourselves a fighting chance to suppress fire should it occur. If one property is perfect amongst others that are not, that perfect property is still not going to see fire fighters risk their lives to save their structure(s).
• Task 14: Orinda Police and MOFD are working with ZoneHaven already to design evacuation options and procedures. How can the UC/Radke fire modeling provide supplemental or complementary information for Orinda?
The results of our research will help inform any organization with more information. Professor González came to UC Berkeley from the MIT’s engineering group and is one of the world leaders in mobility. She employs mobile phone records to understand the appearance of traffic jams and uses AI to better understand access and egress in transportation networks. Knowledge gained from modeling the Orinda project will likely be of great value to the Orinda Police and MOFD. • Budget: "Year 1/Year 2" - Clarify calendar or fiscal year for budgeting purposes.

The Year 1 was expected to begin by the Fall semester 2022 (August 1st 2022). UC Berkeley requires Graduate Student Researchers (GSRs) to be hired for entire semesters. I attempted to align the budget with the GSRs expert in the areas needed for this research and their graduate programs. Year 2 would begin August 1st 2023. I include two months at the end to tie up loose ends and transfer everything to the City of Orinda, including the live database.
• Budget: I did not catch, but heard from the proposal presentation, that faculty will provide guidance and supervision, though the University is foregoing charges for that time after Year 1.

Yes, the professors will be providing guidance and supervision, as it is expected that this project will generate problems and solutions that will become part of each student’s thesis.

There may be overlap in the emergency egress (network) modeling, but there are indications that the Radke proposal offers a more dynamic/situational model than may be currently implemented (Task 14).

However, I am not an expert on the differences between the proposed modeling and Zonehaven or the methodology that the Police and Fire have adopted.

H.1.c
Packet Pg. 143 Attachment: SSTOC Quesitons and Radke Responses (2930 : Radke Proposal) Again, we see our clients as the property owners/citizens of Orinda, and our efforts/models will be geared to their needs. They may appear similar in some way to the efforts of the Police and Fire, or they may not. We seek to push the envelope in every way, as this is the purpose of faculty and students at a top research university. This is how we all collectively advance theory and technology. We are never in competition with the world of consulting, rather we hope to advance solutions that are then adopted by the consulting world. We see the Orinda project as a prototype for the rest of the Californians who live in threatened wildland urban regions where both interface and intermix exist and have created ecologies that are extremely dangerous for both the residents and the fire fighters. We seek to change the paradigm and guide Californians to a state of Transformative Resilience.

To support this modeling effort, there will need to be Orinda staff, and SSTOC time, to review reports, as well as facilitate arrangement, notification and hosting of periodic meetings and a workshop or two.

In past projects our research team has taken on the facilitation, notification, and hosting of workshops.

The final report will come at the end. We will release some preliminary findings if members of the TAC feel it can help other entities in Orinda.

Alex Weinstein’s Questions:
- How will we measure success?
- Key metrics?
- Deliverables?
- Next steps?
We will be quantifying what can be mitigated, and how much it will reduce wildfire risk using metrics that are common in wildfire and fuels modeling. All of this will be mapped at very high spatial resolution so that the individual property owner can see what on their property is causing the greatest risk. This will help them better see what needs to be immediately addressed. How many members of the community engage in the crowdsourcing will be another way of measuring success. High risk neighborhoods will be identified, and neighborhood groups can be targeted to make changes ad Orinda a safer community.

The deliverables will be digital maps available online indicating individual risk under various weather scenarios. These maps will illustrate what can be done by mitigating fuels on individual properties, what the results of such mitigation efforts would be, and how to access and egress from each property during an event. Routes that are in danger of failure during various event scenarios will be mapped for everyone to evaluate.

The results will provide a very high spatial resolution map of where to begin the mitigation efforts to get the greatest result for the money spent to improve conditions and reduce the overall risk of a firestorm in Orinda. In a sense, a road map to an Orinda safer from wildfire. - What are the biggest risks to both timing and budget? Delaying will cause staffing issues on the UC side (the three graduate students recruited for this type of research) where the GSRs will be allocated to other funded projects. These are the only three wildfire oriented environmental modeling and remote sensing planning students in the program. Losing them to another project would significantly change the timing of this project or even cause it to be cancelled.

H.1.c
Packet Pg. 144 Attachment: SSTOC Quesitons and Radke Responses (2930 : Radke Proposal) - What does an ideal scenario look like in 26 months?
- ie what are we doing with this treasure trove of data then. - How are we making it actionable?
As stated in other answers to questions above, the dataset will be a part of Orinda’s infrastructure that will live on for the rest of time. It will be updated each year and its use will be seen in almost every other Orinda project. Over twenty years ago, through a joint Oakland/UC Berkeley initiative, my research lab designed the digital infrastructure (GIS) for the City of Oakland. Over the years it has integrated itself into every department and organization and now serves as the base for most projects in the City of Oakland.

This Orinda initiative will take Orinda’s digital infrastructure to a new spatial resolution which will likely impact many other Orinda community functions.
- Why wouldn't we want to pursue this option for the City of Orinda? This is a difficult question to answer. We believe our proposed solution to a wildfire plan for Orinda is a critical and necessary step in building a resilient landscape to protect against catastrophic wildfires.

Rachelle Latimer’s Questions:

MOFD used ELMFIRE and FLAMMAP for modeling to build their risk maps as part of the current Community Wildfire Protection Plan. (approx. 1:17 in on the video from May 2022 SSTOC meeting begins discussion of the maps; 1:25 more detailed description of modeling) Recognizing MOFD decided to focus on 5 acre x 5 acre units rather going to the parcel level, how else will your modeling be different? MOFD’s mission is to protect all of Orinda from a wildfire. It has a very different focus on the problem. I have been trying to explain this throughout our engagement (with SSTOC and the UC). Measure R is about the citizens, the property owners, the homeowners and vegetation managers on those individual properties searching for a solution that will keep them from following the path of those less fortunate, in cities around California, that lost everything in a wildfire. These citizens are the clients of the Transformative Resilience wildfire plan that I am proposing here. My strategy is geared to the individual and builds outwards. MOFD does not have the luxury to take this approach. MOFD has to plan to defend Orinda today against an aggressive, fast-moving wildfire. My approach looks at a collective approach to removing fuel from the fireplace so to speak. MOFD has to work with consultants and stay within normative boundaries. At the university we invent solutions to important problems facing our communities, and although it may appear risky to an outsider because we do things that have no precedent, we are very comfortable in this environment. It is what we have been doing all our professional lives. In your position you likely already know this as it is literally the definition of what constitutes a PhD. It is not only how one earns a PhD, but also how we guide others to successfully complete their PhD. After mentioning risk and no precedent, I want to assure you that the solution I have scripted for Orinda is not high risk. After all, I live here with the rest of you so I am invested in this endeavor being successful.

One of my answers above focuses on what we have been doing at UC Berkeley over the past 25+ years with regards to wildfire. You can see that from our list of accomplishments, our discoveries have been headed in the direction of what I am proposing here, one small exploration and invention after another.

We are confident that when we complete this project, the citizens of Orinda will know more about their risk, and how to reduce it, than anyone else in California. In addition, we feel that if Orinda citizens follow our recommendations and mitigate the fuels we individually point to, and reduce the fire intensity and H.1.c
Packet Pg. 145 Attachment: SSTOC Quesitons and Radke Responses (2930 : Radke Proposal) BTUs so that their neighborhood moves into the green zone on the Hauling Chart, any incident commander will deploy their fire fighters and apparatus to defend and save that neighborhood.

ELMFIRE is based on a cellular automata modeling approach. As noted earlier, my PhD student, Wei Luo (2004), developed such a modeling approach in her dissertation, but our approach to assessing risk in the fireshed is more dependent on the actual physiographic landscape plus fuels and FLAMMAP (which I see they also use) and FARSITE are more useful for predicting fire intensity. Their 5-acre spatial units, although they may serve their more generalized purposes, do not make sense for our parcel leveland our plant level approach to modeling and mitigation.

How does your model account for structures (homes) as pad of the flammable area of a lot? Adding information about structures (homes) is not the focus of this proposal. I am addressing how to best use Measure R funding to get the best outcome for money spent in the short term. This is to reduce the rate of spread and vegetation fuels have been shown to be the greatest catalyst to this. The effort of this research is to keep the fire cool and easy to control and extinguish so that fire fighters will be able to go onsite and defend the structures (homes). If one was to address the structures (homes) issue, the modeling effort would quickly move to a Deep Learning model, like Radke, et al. (2020) where data gathering, and assembling would take on a very different protocol. The cost of data gathering alone would likely push such a study well over the million-dollar mark. We are more than willing to include building if the funding levels are sufficient for us to do so.

If ember cast is a major concern for fire spreading into Orinda, roofs and decking material may be as significant as vegetation in protecting the city
In Radke 1995, we looked at roofs and decking materials, and covered over 550 miles of travel on streets with human observers. The effort was funded by FEMA and NASA, and in today’s dollars it would easily exceed the million-dollar mark. Still, through our proposed crowdsourcing online app we might be able to add in some observations that would allow us to add a map on high risk to roof or deck ignitions from ember casts.

H.1.c
Packet Pg. 146 Attachment: SSTOC Quesitons and Radke Responses (2930 : Radke Proposal) Excerpt from the August 10, 2022 Draft Minutes
G.1. Strategic Wildfire Plan
Receive Report, Discuss, and Provide Direction, if any.

Commissioner Latimer introduced Dr. John Radke, Center for Catastrophic Risk Management, University of California, Berkeley, who has put together a proposal, “A Strategic Wildfire Planning Process for Orinda: Transitioning from Basic, through Adaptive, to Transformative Wildfire Resilience in Orinda, CA.” Dr. Radke was open to further questions from the extensive question and answer document in the staff report. He spoke of the loss of fire insurance for properties, based on the identification of Orinda as an extreme fire zone, which he believes is flawed. He commended the Chief and the mission of the MOFD to defend the community against fire and evacuate in the case of fire. He stated his proposal takes a different approach by looking at individual parcels and identifying the dangers, and mitigation measures. It is a method that allows for more detailed information for each parcel which helps educate the homeowner much like the blueprint for a home. This approach looks at what could ignite and propagate the ignition, what the intensity could be, and allowing the property owner to remove what it dangerous and leaving what is not, and gives better understanding behind the reasons for citations.

Public Comment:

Juana Rudati noted she has a PhD in Physics and clarified what physics defines as fuel. She voiced disappointment in Dr. Radke’s proposal due to it lacking data to support the premise that removal of fuel saves lives, and questioned the data about moisture content in vegetation.

Steve Cohn asked about the cost and benefit of the proposal. He noted current cost to Orinda tax payers to MOFD for its service, the increase this year in Orinda property assessed value and subsequent increased property taxes which increases revenue to MOFD, and Measure R taxes. He noted the value of Dr. Radke’s research and other research at the University of California, and stated the resources are available to invest in our collective safety.

Richard Nelson expressed thanks and support for Dr. Radke’s proposal. He asked if it would allow for monitoring, over time, the fuel density in the community. Dr. Radke affirmed it would and briefly explained the technology to do so.

Chair Hammond posed the question to the Commission for discussion as to whether the Commission should recommend to the City Council to authorize the funds to support Dr. Radke’s proposal.

Commissioner Decareau commented the questions/answers in the report were substantial and he was leaning towards supporting the proposal, particularly because it provided leverage in compelling neighbors to perform all the work H.1.d
Packet Pg. 147 Attachment: Excerpt from August 10 2022 Draft Meeting Minutes (2930 : Radke Proposal) Excerpt from the August 10, 2022 Draft Minutes
and home hardening. He felt it also gave a different strategy toward education of residents.

Commissioner Reinman supported the innovative approach and suggested involvement of students in the data and citizen science.

Commissioner Light expressed doubt in being able to compel residents to act on this information, regardless of education efforts, thus making the launch of this proposal premature, as well as a potential distraction from the MOFD community building efforts. These factors, and its cost, give cause for caution.

She supports the proposal but suggests revisiting this in one year.

While Commissioner Latimer understood the caution of Commissioner Light, she felt waiting would not be of greater benefit than proceeding.

Commissioner Malkani noted this would take a couple of years to get off the ground and believed engagement would be increased by then.

Chair Hammon commended the proposal as a means of defining the wildfire risk in greater detail, but lacked substantive solution to getting property owners to act, and has the potential to be distracting to that effort.

Commissioner Barber stated this proposal presents a dramatically different approach to compel action by residents - in addition to every outreach option currently in play.

A motion was made by Commissioner Barber to recommend to the City Council to enter into a contract with Dr. Radke along the lines of the proposal submitted, seconded by Commissioner Decareau. Said motion carried by majority (6-2-1) roll call vote. (Hammon, Light – Nays, Lee – Absent) City Manager Biggs stated the item would be agendized to bring before Council, but staff would not be recommending the proposal and requested that noted for the record for the Commission.

H.1.d
Packet Pg. 148 Attachment: Excerpt from August 10 2022 Draft Meeting Minutes (2930 : Radke Proposal) Radke answer’s to the Mayor’s questions
Dear Micki,
Please find below our answers to Mayor Fay's questions.

The City of Orinda needs a strategic wildfire planning process that is focused on defending each individual property at very high spatial resolution from fast spreading and very intense wildfire. Our proposed research analyzes all the properties of Orinda at a very high spatial resolution (1 meter square resolution of both landscape surface and objects on that surface, and

2.5 meter square resolution imagery over several years to analyze vegetation change), so that each citizen has available to them information on where and what vegetation on their property is dangerous. The very high spatial resolution analysis and characterization we propose, for the entire community in a Wildland Urban Intermix region, has not been solved to date. We categorize this as a research project at the university, and not a contract. Contracts can have cost overruns, but a research project cannot. The budget we attached to the proposal is fixed and cannot increase.

I met with my two colleagues (Professors Gonzalez & Biging) to discuss responses to your questions. The role of a professor at a major research university is to discover, to invent, to solve problems that have to date not been solved. Orinda’s wildfire planning problem is a very good example of a problem that has not been solved. If it had, as professors, we would not be interested in undertaking such a project. There are some very interesting and complex vegetation identification, management, and modeling problems to solve, as well as some very dynamic and complex egress strategies. All three professors on this proposal see value in advancing society’s knowledge in these areas, and collectively built a proposal that will produce at least two publishable papers and advance the knowledge base in this area. We spent time thinking about your questions and had a meeting on Friday to collectively respond.

Question 1. Can this proposal be scaled down to do a test on a small geographic area, say a few neighborhoods, rather than the entire City? In essence, be a "proof of concept" pilot program that hopefully would be considerably less costly and provide useful information to then model the entire City.

We feel the operative words in this question are “considerably less costly.” Since we have already undertaken "proof of concept" in several of our earlier published research papers found in the references of our proposal, we posit that it is possible to scale back. However, scaling down the project to a portion of the city while of publishable value would be of considerably less value to the citizenry of Orinda. We say this because in a reduced scenario we would not be able to produce an effective wildfire mitigation strategic plan for the entire city. However, we looked long and hard in the proposal at how we could reduce tasks, shorten the project, therefore lowering the cost, yet produce a significant advancement with important and valued information to the citizenry of Orinda and of publication quality. We discuss this in this next section.

Possible modified scenario:

We were going to choose three characteristically different fireshed neighborhoods to use as prototypes for our data: collection, processing, field verification, validation, and to optimize our geoprocessing and wildfire modeling workflow. These would help us build a range of possible training conditions that would better characterize all of Orinda. We could reduce this by working with the Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) to identify one fireshed neighborhood to H.1.e
Packet Pg. 149 Attachment: Mayor Fay Question to Dr. Radke and Responses (2930 : Radke Proposal) use as our training data. Having less training data for our models would add uncertainty to our machine learning modeling, but we would be able to quantify this, and it would still be a contribution to science.

We were going to compute wildfire growth and behavior (thus wildfire intensity) with detailed sequences of weather conditions from actual past weather events in Orinda. We could reduce the number of weather scenarios sampled by 75%, which would reduce the amount of modeling, but it would increase the uncertainty of outcomes. However, this could be quantified, reported, and published. We proposed integrating science to measure the fuels and assess the overall potential fire intensity of each neighborhood in Orinda, through various simulation modeling of various mitigation strategies. We could reduce the simulation modeling by 75%, and thus narrow the possible mitigation strategies. Again, the richness of the results for each property owner would be reduced, but uncertainty could be quantified, which would still be a significant contribution to science while helping Orindans develop effective fireshed management options albeit not a strategic plan for the entire city. In addition, we could reduce the number of Virtual Fire Model Scenarios in all the fireshed neighborhoods by reducing the ignition sites in each simulation.

With respect to egress scenarios, we could threshold (rank according to severity) the targeted hot spots or choke points in the city. With the critical nodes, intersections, and narrow roadways identified and classified, we could cluster or group them into classes of severity and run fewer simulations. We could therefore save time and costs with fewer simulation models. Under this reduced number of egress scenarios, we could still demonstrate the process of weighting choke point infrastructure and quantify results under varied wildfire conditions.

We cannot go back to the budgeting staff at UC Berkeley with a complete rewrite of the proposal, but we estimate that the proposed changes noted above could be accomplished in 14 months, which would likely reduce the budget to $344,560.

Question 2. If the proposal can be scaled down in geographic scope, what area would you suggest be used?
As noted in our response to question 1, we will work with the Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) to identify one fireshed neighborhood to use as our training data.

Question 3. What is the estimated cost of such a pilot program? The cost for a reduced research proposal as outlined above is $344,560 as stated above at the end of question 1
Sincerely,
John Radke, PhD
Center for Catastrophic Risk Management
University of California, Berkeley
On Thu, Aug 11, 2022 at 4:40 PM Micki Cronin <[email protected]> wrote:

Hi Professor Radke,
H.1.e
Packet Pg. 150 Attachment: Mayor Fay Question to Dr. Radke and Responses (2930 : Radke Proposal) Thank you for your time last night and congratulations on your proposal moving forward to the City Council! Mayor Fay has a few questions that he would like to know before a proposal goes to the City Council.

1. Can this proposal be scaled down to do a test on a small geographic area, say a few neighborhoods, rather than the entire City? In essence, be a "proof of concept" pilot program that hopefully would be considerably less costly and provide useful information to then model the entire City.

2. If the proposal can be scaled down in geographic scope, what area would you suggest be used?

3. What is the estimated cost of such a pilot program?
Please send me your responses at your earliest convenience.

Thank you,
Micki
Micki Cronin
City of Orinda I Sr Management Analyst
22 Orinda Way, CA 94563
[email protected] I P: 925.253.4227

H.1.e
Packet Pg. 151 Attachment: Mayor Fay Question to Dr. Radke and Responses (2930 : Radke Proposal) Community Wildfire Defense Grant
The CWDG helps communities in the wildland urban interface (WUI) implement the three goals of the National Cohesive Wildland Fire Management Strategy (Cohesive Strategy):
• Restore and Maintain Landscapes: Landscapes across all jurisdictions are resilient to fire-related disturbances, in accordance with management objectives. • Create Fire Adapted Communities: Human populations and infrastructure can withstand a wildfire without loss of life and property.
• Improve Wildfire Response: All jurisdictions participate in making and implementing safe, effective, efficient risk-based wildfire management decisions.

Project proposal directly reduces wildfire risk to a community:
a. Private lands
b. Local government
c. Homeowner associations
d. State government
e. Tribal/Alaska native corporation (includes Trust lands) Minimum and Maximum Funding Levels:
a. There is no minimum Federal funding limit for projects under CWDG. b. The maximum amount of Federal funding awarded to any one community or Tribe via this competitive process is:
•$250,000 for the creation or updating of a Community Wildfire Protection Plan, and •$10 million for a project described within a Community Wildfire Protection Plan less than 10 years old. c. For planning purposes, the Federal funding allocated through the CWDG competitive process is expected to be approximately $160 million annually for the next five years.

Proposals to develop or update a CWPP, the required match is 10%. For proposals to implement projects described within a CWPP, the required match is 25%.

Grant Timeframes: Projects must be completed within five (5) years.

Examples of Planning Projects
Eligible Projects Ineligible Projects
Creation of a CWPP or
development of a
wildfire section for a
hazard mitigation
plan.

GIS and database systems unless they support a CWPP, wildfire risk reduction planning or fuels mitigation initiative or project
Update of an existing
CWPP/hazard
mitigation plan
(Existing plan must be
over five (5) years
old.)
Creation and/or update of Forest Stewardship Plans
Contract support to
assist a community
with developing
building codes, zoning
ordinances or land use
planning.

Economic development projects
H.1.f
Packet Pg. 152 Attachment: USDA/Forest Service Grant Info (2930 : Radke Proposal) Community Wildfire Defense Grant
Direct staff funding
support to assist a
community with
developing building
codes, zoning
ordinances or land
use planning.

Small business start-up funding
Tabletop or functional
exercises to test
effectiveness of
community wildfire
planning.

Research and development projects
Plan and address public health and safety effects of smoke and mitigation from wildfire and projects that use prescribed fire (“Smoke Ready” efforts)
Direct staff support for community wildfire mitigation leadership/coordination Training in the use of proven effective mitigation practices, such as the Forest Service’s mitigation best practices Direct staff support to assist in creation of a local or regional mitigation partnership Wildfire Prevention/Education/Outreach
Eligible Ineligible
Firewise USA© or similar programs outreach to
communities and property owners
Printing of paper-based materials without an organized
outreach/education program
Fire education presentation such as Project Learning Tree Property inspections and/or assessments
Training to conduct property inspections and/or assessments Implementation of WUI Structure / Parcel / Community Fire Hazard Mitigation Methodology (HMM) for community hazard reduction
Adoption, implementation, enforcement, and training of National Fire Protection Association, International Code Council, or similar codes
Examples of Hazardous Fuels Reduction/ Restoration Projects Eligible Ineligible
Defensible space around homes,
businesses, and other structures
Capital improvements including construction/infrastructure (building remodel, bridges, road construction, water development)
Development, creation, and/or
maintenance of fuel breaks and fire
breaks, including shaded fuel breaks
Home hardening, including but not limited to:
•Roof upgrades or replacements
•Fire resistant siding
•Metal gutters and vents
H.1.f
Packet Pg. 153 Attachment: USDA/Forest Service Grant Info (2930 : Radke Proposal) Community Wildfire Defense Grant
Fuels reduction beyond defensible
space adjacent to at-risk communities.

Fire suppression training (unless course is a requirement for prescribed fire qualifications)
Removal of standing woody vegetation
by cutting, piling and burning.

Fire suppression equipment and apparatus
Removal of standing woody vegetation
by cutting and chipping.

Drones
Removal of standing woody vegetation using a mechanical mulcher or masticator type equipment mounted on mobile equipment.

Reduction of hazardous fuels through the application of prescribed fire.

Vegetation management (pruning, mowing, chemical treatment, grazing), including rights-of-ways for roads.

Please note: Several other Project Examples listed Pages 9-11 of attached Guidelines for consideration.

H.1.f
Packet Pg. 154 Attachment: USDA/Forest Service Grant Info (2930 : Radke Proposal) City Council
Staff Report
Agenda Item: H.2
Date: October 11, 2022
Department: Administration
AGENDA TITLE: Approve Measure R Fire Fuels Reduction Incentive Pilot Program RECOMMENDATION:

Adopt Resolution No. 53-22 Approving the Measure R Fire Fuels Reduction Incentive Pilot Program
BACKGROUND: On August 16, 2022, the City Council provided initial approval of a Pilot Incentive Program for Measure R funds. The staff report from that meeting is provided as Attachment 2.

DISCUSSION: Since the initial approval made by the City Council on August 16, 2022, City staff and the City Attorney have worked to refine the program and develop the application materials. Staff consulted with a working group of SSTOC members as part of this effort. Provided for the City Council’s consideration is a resolution (Attachment 1) approving the final recommended Measure R Fire Fuels Reduction Incentive Pilot Program, with the program being set forth in Exhibit A of the resolution. Also provided as background information are the Application Form (Attachment 3) and the listing of eligible evacuation routes (Attachment 4).

NEXT STEPS: After approval of the program by the City Council, staff will publicize the availability of the program and will begin to accept and process grant applications as soon as November 1, 2022 while allowing completed eligible work submittals back to Aug 16, 2022.

FISCAL IMPACT: The City Council has already appropriated $400,000 in Measure R Funding for an incentive program. As such, funds are available to provide the pilot incentive program until August 2023 or until the funds are exhausted, whichever comes first.

ATTACHMENTS:

A. Resolution 53-22 Measure R Fire Fuels Reduction Incentive Pilot Program.doc B. 8.16.22 Staff Report - Fire Fuels Reduction Incentive Program C. Measure R Fire Fuels Reduction Incentive Application Form D. Primary Evacuation Routes
Respectfully Submitted by:

David Biggs
City Manager
H.2
Packet Pg. 155
Prepared By: Micki Cronin, Senior Management Analyst
Approved by:

H.2
Packet Pg. 156

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

Orinda Measure R Fire Fuels
Reduction Incentive Pilot Program
)
)
)
) Resolution No. 53-22
)
)
)
)
)
WHEREAS, much of the City of Orinda is in a Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone or the Wildland Urban Interface and is at increasing risk of wildfire given climate change and other factors;
WHEREAS, the City of Orinda would like to incentivize homeowners and/or residents to undertake activities on their own properties related to fire fuel reduction in order to accelerate making Orinda a more fire safe community and in ways to benefit the public generally;
WHEREAS, the Moraga Orinda Fire District (MOFD) which serves Orinda has recently established a grant program to encourage home hardening; WHEREAS, it has been documented that fuel reduction on individual private properties can help reduce the spread of wildfire, protect structures, and minimize impacts from wildfire on the community in general;
WHEREAS, Orinda property owners and/or residents along public streets designated as evacuation routes can assist in ensuring evacuation routes are available in event of wildfire or other natural disaster by ensuring they are in compliance with vegetation standards for the City of Orinda and the MOFD associated with fuel reduction along street rights-of-way; and
WHEREAS, by encouraging compliance with City of Orinda and the MOFD fire fuel reduction and vegetation standards through code compliance efforts and enforcement is being pursued; and
H.2.a
Packet Pg. 157 Attachment: Resolution 53-22 Measure R Fire Fuels Reduction Incentive Pilot Program.doc (2933 : Fire Fuels Incentive Program)

WHEREAS, in order to encourage fire fuel reduction and removal of vegetation to bring eligible properties into compliance, the City of Orinda desires to establish a pilot incentive program using voter-approved Measure R funds which has fire prevention as one of its focus areas.

WHEREAS, that the Measure R Fire Fuels Reduction Incentive Pilot Program has been reviewed and recommended to the City Council by the Supplemental Sales Tax Oversight Commission (SSTOC) which is the oversight body of Measure R funds for the City of Orinda.

NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Orinda hereby approves the Fuel Reduction Incentive Pilot Program as set forth in Exhibit A.

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________, 2022 by the following vote:

AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

RECUSED: COUNCILMEMBERS:
______________________
Dennis Fay, Mayor
ATTEST:
____________________________
Sheri Marie Smith, City Clerk
Exhibit A: Measure R Fire Fuels Reduction Incentive Pilot Program H.2.a
Packet Pg. 158 Attachment: Resolution 53-22 Measure R Fire Fuels Reduction Incentive Pilot Program.doc (2933 : Fire Fuels Incentive Program)

Exhibit A: Measure R Fire Fuels Reduction Incentive Pilot Program Approved by the Orinda City Council October 11, 2022
with Resolution No. 53-22
Goal: Reduce the risk of wildfire spreading throughout the City of Orinda and facilitate evacuations in the event of a wildfire by encouraging compliance with vegetation standards for the City of Orinda and the Moraga-Orinda Fire District (MOFD).

Duration of the pilot program: November 1, 2022 – August 31, 2023, unless Measure R funds are expended prior to the end of August 2023 or sooner if authorized funding of $400,000 is depleted.

Who is eligible: Orinda property owners and/or residents along public streets designated as evacuation routes who meet one of the following criteria:
• Are in a current Firewise community;
• Have had a Fire Adapted Community Assessment completed no more than 90 days prior to the work being done;
• Received notice from MOFD that the property is not in compliance.

The property owner and/or a resident who can provide documented proof of residency (such as a Driver’s License, utility bill, etc.).

Eligible work: the removal of vegetation to bring an eligible property into compliance with the vegetation standards for the City and MOFD, excluding routine or ongoing maintenance (e.g., cutting down dry grasses). Qualifying work:
• Total removal of Eucalyptus and/or Monterey Pine trees within 6 feet of a habitable structure or a public street designated as an evacuation route measuring from back of curb or edge of pavement;
• Total removal of dead or dying trees within 6 feet of a habitable structure or a public street designated as an evacuation route; measuring from back of curb or edge of pavement; • Remove ladder fuels (shrubs and bushes), creating 6 foot gap between the lower tree canopy and the ground;
• Removal of Juniper and Bamboo within 10 feet of a public street designated as an evacuation route; and/or
• Removal of hazardous vegetation or combustible material within a 3 foot by 15 foot area adjacent to a public street designated as an evacuation route measured from back of curb or edge of pavement.

The incentive is a matching reimbursement: The City will offer 1:1 matching funds for the cost incurred after August 16, 2022, not to exceed $599 per applicant to cover the expenses to bring the eligible property into compliance with the vegetation standards for the City of Orinda and the Moraga-Orinda Fire District (MOFD). The City Council has allocated $400,000 from Measure R revenue, and the funds will be expended on a first-come, first-served basis. Incentives are limited to a one-time basis.

Reimbursements are only awarded after work has been completed. The work must be completed no more than 90 days prior to a request. For expenses under $599, the City will reimburse up to 50%.

H.2.a
Packet Pg. 159 Attachment: Resolution 53-22 Measure R Fire Fuels Reduction Incentive Pilot Program.doc (2933 : Fire Fuels Incentive Program)

How to apply: submit an application form (name, address of the property on which the work is to be performed, amount requested) and the following documentation:
o Proof of residency (copy of applicant’s driver’s license, utility bill, etc); or o Copy of property tax record (only if applicant is the property owner but not the resident) o Copy one of the following: Firewise certificate, Fire Adapted Community Assessment, or MOFD violation notice
o Copy of receipt from contractor for eligible work, work must be completed no more than 90 days prior to the request, and noted, from the contractor, type of eligible work (removal of Monterey Pine, removal of Juniper, etc.)
o Before and after photos of the project.

Measuring the efficacy of the program:
• Number of applications – by month and comprehensive total • Number of applications approved – by month and comprehensive total • Amount awarded – by month and comprehensive total; determine mean and mode • Number of reimbursements processed – by month and comprehensive total • Amount reimbursed – by month and comprehensive total; determine mean and mode • Categorize the type of work being performed (e.g. tree removal, ladder fuel removal, clearing of juniper and/or bamboo)
• Contractor, third-party vendors, or consumables
• Type of assessment (Firewise, Fire Adapted Community Assessment, MOFD violation notice) Resources:

Fire Adapted Community Assessment
Firewise USA
Fire Code
H.2.a
Packet Pg. 160 Attachment: Resolution 53-22 Measure R Fire Fuels Reduction Incentive Pilot Program.doc (2933 : Fire Fuels Incentive Program) City Council
Staff Report
Agenda Item: H.1
Date: August 16, 2022
Department: Administration
AGENDA TITLE: Fuel Reduction Incentive Program Using Measure R Funds RECOMMENDATION:

Receive Report, Discuss, and Conceptually Approve Incentive Program as Presented BACKGROUND: At the June 21st City Council Meeting the City Council set aside $400,000 for a grant/incentive program and asked Staff to work with the City Attorney to develop a possible program. As the Moraga Orinda Fire District (MOFD) at their April 2022 meeting has set aside $500,000 in their budget it is for a home hardening incentive program, specifically targeted at fire-resistant vents and home hardening retrofits are not currently required by the fire code, City Staff is recommending the City of Orinda offer a pilot incentive program to assist Orinda property owners along public streets designated as evacuation routes in reducing wildfire fuels on their property to decrease the risk of a wildfire spreading throughout the community and to facilitate evacuations in the event of a wildfire.

DISCUSSION: As part of Staff’s ongoing research into other agencies’ programs related to fire prevention, a level of familiarity with grant/incentive programs had been developed. Based on the more recent direction and interest and what Staff has learned from other agencies, the Fire Chief, and the Commission, Staff has found the City of San Rafael may have a model incentive program of interest and one the City of Orinda could emulate.

Staff and the City Attorney have outlined an incentive program which was reviewed by the SSTOC on August 10th. That review resulted in some revisions which have been incorporated into the attached outline. In addition, the Commission discussed some alternatives which could be revisited later after the launch of the program and demand and effectiveness could be evaluated. The Commission also designated two of its members to work with staff as an informal Ad Hoc to further refine the program if needed. The Commission did unanimously recommend the program as outlined with the clarifications which staff have made (attachment 1).

It is recommended that the City of Orinda offer a pilot incentive program to assist Orinda property owners along public streets designated as evacuation routes in reducing wildfire fuels on their property to decrease the risk of a wildfire spreading throughout the community and to facilitate evacuations in the event of a wildfire. The attached program outline is based on this premise.

H.2.b
Packet Pg. 161 Attachment: 8.16.22 Staff Report - Fire Fuels Reduction Incentive Program (2933 : Fire Fuels Incentive Program) NEXT STEPS: If the City Council conceptually approves the incentive program as outlined or with modifications, Staff will bring back a resolution to more formally approve the program and will develop an implementation plan including the required applications and forms, together with outreach materials.

FISCAL IMPACT: None as a result this item, though implementation of the incentive program will be funded from the $400,000 of previously appropriated Measure R funds.

ATTACHMENTS:

A. Orinda Measure R Incentive Program 08112022
Respectfully Submitted by:

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

H.2.b
Packet Pg. 162 Attachment: 8.16.22 Staff Report - Fire Fuels Reduction Incentive Program (2933 : Fire Fuels Incentive Program) Measure R Fire Fuels Reduction Incentive
Pilot Program Application
The City of Orinda’s goal is to reduce the risk of wildfire spreading throughout Orinda and facilitate evacuations in the event of a wildfire. The Measure R Fire Fuels Reduction Incentive Pilot Program is for the removal of vegetation and offers a matching grant of up to $599 to encourage compliance with vegetation standards for the City of Orinda and the Moraga-Orinda Fire District (MOFD). This pilot program is first-come, first-served and runs from November 1, 2022 to August 31, 2023 or sooner if authorized funding of $400,000 is depleted. Applications must be submitted after work is complete.

ELIGIBILITY
Orinda property owners and/or residents along public streets designated as evacuation routes who meet one of the following criteria. Check all that apply:
o Are in a current Firewise community;
o Have had a Fire Adapted Community Assessment completed no more than 90 days prior to the work being done; o Received notice from MOFD that the property is not in compliance.

Qualifying work, check all that apply:
o Total removal of Eucalyptus and/or Monterey Pine trees within 6 feet of a habitable structure or a public street designated as an evacuation route measuring from back of curb or edge of pavement; o Total removal of dead or dying trees within 6 feet of a habitable structure or a public street designated as an evacuation route; measuring from back of curb or edge of pavement; o Remove ladder fuels (shrubs and bushes), creating 6 foot gap between the lower tree canopy and the ground; o Removal of Juniper and Bamboo within 10 feet of a public street designated as an evacuation route; and/or o Removal of hazardous vegetation or combustible material within a 3 foot by 15 foot area adjacent to a public street designated as an evacuation route measured from back of curb or edge of pavement.

APPLICANT INFORMATION
Date: _______________________________________________________________________________ Name: ______________________________________________________________________________ Property Address: _____________________________________________________________________ Mailing Address: _____________________________________________________________________ City, State, Zip: _______________________________________________________________________ Contact Phone: _______________________________________________________________________ Contact Email: ________________________________________________________________________

DESCRIPTION OF WORK
__________________________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________________________ H.2.c
Packet Pg. 163 Attachment: Measure R Fire Fuels Reduction Incentive Application Form (2933 : Fire Fuels Incentive Program) Amount requested for reimbursement (Max $599): ________________________

REQUIRED DOCUMENTS FOR REIMBURSEMENT
o Proof of residency (copy of applicant’s driver’s license, utility bill, etc); or o Copy of property tax record (only if applicant is the property owner but not the resident) o Copy of Firewise certificate or copy of either Fire Adapted Community Assessment, or MOFD violation notice o Copy of receipt from contractor for eligible work, work must be completed no more than 90 days prior to the request, and noted, from the contractor, type of eligible work (removal of Monterey Pine tree, dead tree, etc.) o Before and after photos of the project.

Hold Harmless:
“To the fullest extent allowed by law, the applicant shall defend, indemnify and hold harmless City and its officers, employees, agents and volunteers from and against any and all liability, claims, suits, losses, injuries, damage, demands, expenses and costs (including, without limitation, attorney fees and expert fees) arising out of, pertaining to, or relating to the applicant’s fuel reduction work.”
I certify that all the information noted in this application is accurate and true:

Signature of Applicant:______________________________________________ Date Signed: _________________ Submit the Signed Reimbursement Application Form and All Required Documents online or via US Mail to City of Orinda, Measure R Fire Fuels Reduction Incentive Pilot Program, 22 Orinda Way, CA 94563.

For office use only:

Date of project ______________________ Date of Application___________________ Meets eligibility criteria__________________________
Attachment 3: Measure R Fire Fuels Reduction Incentive Pilot Program Approved by the Orinda City Council October __, 2022
with Resolution No. 53-22
H.2.c
Packet Pg. 164 Attachment: Measure R Fire Fuels Reduction Incentive Application Form (2933 : Fire Fuels Incentive Program) H.2.c
Packet Pg. 165 Attachment: Measure R Fire Fuels Reduction Incentive Application Form (2933 : Fire Fuels Incentive Program) Attachment 4: Measure R Fire Fuels Reduction Incentive Pilot Program Approved by the Orinda City Council October 11, 2022
with Resolution No. 53-22
Primary Evacuation Routes
Tarry Ln, Tappan Ln, and Van Tassel Ln to Lombardy Ln and to Miner Rd Tarry Ln and Sleepy Hollow Ln to Lombardy Ln to Miner Rd Van Ripper Ln and Van Tassel Ln to Lombardy Ln to Miner Rd Dalewood Dr to Lombardy Ln to Miner Rd or Sundown Terrace to Happy Valley Rd to Upper Happy Valley Rd to El Nido Ranch Rd
Honey Hill Rd to El Nido Ranch Rd or Miner Rd to Camino Pablo Manzanita Dr to Camino Pablo or Miner Rd to Camino Pablo Monte Vista Ridge Rd to Camino Pablo or Claremont Ave to Camino Pablo El Toyonal to Camino Pablo or Lomas Cantadas to Grizzly Peak El Toyonal to Camino Pablo
Orindawoods Dr to St. Stephens Dr or to Altarinda Rd to Camino Pablo; Honey Hill Rd to El Nido Ranch Rd
Muth Dr to Bates Blvd to Hwy 24
Bates Blvd to Hwy 24 or Tahos Rd to Hwy 24
Camino Pablo to Hwy 24
Moraga Way to Camino Pablo or Bates Blvd to Hwy 24; Overhill Rd to Moraga Way to Camino Pablo Brookwood Rd, Camino Encinas, or Stein Way to Moraga Way Wilder Rd to Hwy 24
Glorietta Blvd to Acalanes Rd to Hwy 24 or Rheem Blvd to Moraga Rd Oakwood Rd, Estates Dr, Scenic Dr, or Valley Dr to Orchard Rd to Moraga Way Alt: Scenic Dr to Overhill Rd
Surface road to Moraga Way or Crestview Dr to Valley View Dr to Moraga Way Wilder Rd to Hwy 24
Lost Valley Dr to Valley View Dr to Moraga Way
Orchard Rd to Moraga Way or Glorietta Blvd; Donald Dr to Hall Dr to Moraga Way Rheem Blvd to Moraga Rd; Alt Rheem Blvd to Glorietta Blvd Alice Ln to Zander Dr to Rheem Blvd or Donald Dr to Hall Dr to Moraga Way Ivy Dr to Moraga Way
Moraga Way; La Cresta Rd to Woodland Rd to Moraga Way; Valley View Dr to Moraga Way Moraga Way, Rheem Blvd, Glorietta Blvd, Camino Pablo

10.11.2022
H.2.d
Packet Pg. 166 Attachment: Primary Evacuation Routes (2933 : Fire Fuels Incentive Program) City Council
Staff Report
Agenda Item: H.3
Date: October 11, 2022
Department: City Clerk
AGENDA TITLE: City Council Meeting Scheule for 2023
RECOMMENDATION:

Review and Adopt City Council Meeting Schedules for 2023 BACKGROUND:

City Council meetings typically occur on the first and third Tuesdays of each month.

Each year, the City Council confirms its meeting schedule with some adjustments as desired or necessary given holidays and other factors.

DISCUSSION:

Attached is a proposed Notice of City Council 2023 Calendar for the City Council’s consideration. Staff recommends the following adjustments to the typical meeting dates:

1. Holding the first meeting in January on the 10th instead of the 3rd due the holidays.

2. Scheduling Saturday, January 28, 2023 for Commission Committee Interviews

3. Moving first meeting in April to the 11th due to Spring Break.

4. Moving first meeting in July to the 11th due to 4th of July holiday.

5. Canceling first meeting in August to allow for National Night Out participation.

6. Canceling the second meeting in November due to it being Thanksgiving Week.

7. Moving the first meeting in January 2024 to the 9th due to the holidays.

As always, if there is a need for a Special Meeting to be scheduled, those can be added as necessary.

NEXT STEPS:

Approval of the revised 2023 Notice of City Council Calendar will allow the dates to be shared with the community and City employees.

FISCAL IMPACT:

None as a result of this item.

ATTACHMENTS:

A. 2023 Council Calendar
B. 2023 Word Calendar
Respectfully Submitted by:

H.3
Packet Pg. 167
Sheri Smith
City Clerk
Prepared By: Sheri Smith, City Clerk
Approved by:

H.3
Packet Pg. 168
Office of the City Clerk
Sheri Marie Smith
Phone: 925.253.4221
Fax: 925.254.2068
[email protected]
NOTICE OF CITY COUNCIL 2023 CALENDAR
Regular 2023 City Council Meetings are generally held on the first and third Tuesdays of each month, with some exceptions due to holidays. All meeting dates are shown below:

January
Tuesday, January 10, 2023 – 7pm Regular Meeting (Change due to Holidays) Tuesday, January 17, 2023 – 7pm Regular Meeting
Saturday, January 28, 2023 – 9am (Commission Committee Interviews) February
Tuesday, February 7, 2023 – 7pm Regular Meeting
Tuesday, February 21, 2023 – 7pm Regular Meeting
March
Tuesday, March 7, 2023 – 7pm Regular Meeting
Tuesday, March 21, 2023 – 7pm Regular Meeting
April
Tuesday, April 11, 2023 – 7pm Regular Meeting (Change due to Spring Break) Tuesday, April 18, 2023 – 7pm Regular Meeting
May
Tuesday, May 2, 2023 – 7pm Regular Meeting
Tuesday, May 16, 2023 – 7pm Regular Meeting
June
Tuesday, June 6, 2023 – 7pm Regular Meeting
Tuesday, June 20, 2023 – 7pm Regular Meeting
July
Monday, July 11, 2023 – 7pm Regular Meeting (Change due to July 4th Holiday) Tuesday, July 18, 2023 – 7pm Regular Meeting
August
Tuesday, August 15, 2023 – 7pm Regular Meeting (No Meeting on 8/1 National Night Out) September
Tuesday, September 5, 2023 – 7pm Regular Meeting
Tuesday, September 19, 2023 – 7pm Regular Meeting
H.3.a
Packet Pg. 169 Attachment: 2023 Council Calendar (2884 : City Council Meeting Schedule for 2023) October
Tuesday, October 3, 2023– 7pm Regular Meeting
Tuesday, October 17, 2023– 7pm Regular Meeting
November
Tuesday, November 7, 2023– 7pm Regular Meeting
December
Tuesday, December 5, 2023– 7pm Regular Meeting
Tuesday, December 19, 2023 – 7pm Regular Meeting
2024
January
Tuesday, January 9, 2024 – 7pm Regular Meeting
Tusday, January 23, 2024 – 7pm Regular Meeting
H.3.a
Packet Pg. 170 Attachment: 2023 Council Calendar (2884 : City Council Meeting Schedule for 2023) ◄ December January 2023 February ►
Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
8 9 10
City Council Mtg
Planning Commission
11 12 13 14
15 16
Martin Luther King,
Jr. Day
17 City Council Mtg
18 League of Ca. Cities
New Mayor’s &
Councilmembers
Academy - Sacramento
19 League of Ca. Cities
New Mayor’s &
Councilmembers
Academy - Sacramento
20 League of Ca. Cities
New Mayor’s &
Councilmembers
Academy - Sacramento
21 22 23 24
Planning Commission
25 26 27 28
City Council
Committee &
Commission
Interviews 9am
29 30 31
H.3.b
Packet Pg. 171 Attachment: 2023 Word Calendar (2884 : City Council Meeting Schedule for 2023) ◄ January February 2023 March ►
Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat 1 2 3 4
567
City Council Mtg
89 10 11
12 13 14
Planning Commission
15 16 17 18
19 20
President’s Day
21 City Council Mtg
22 23 24 25
26 27 28
Planning Commission
H.3.b
Packet Pg. 172 Attachment: 2023 Word Calendar (2884 : City Council Meeting Schedule for 2023) ◄ February March 2023 April ►
Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat 1 2 3 4
567
City Council Mtg
89 10 11
12 13 14
Planning Commission
15 16 17 18
19 20 21
City Council Mtg
22 First Day of Ramadan
23 24 25
26 27 28
Planning Commission
29 30 31
H.3.b
Packet Pg. 173 Attachment: 2023 Word Calendar (2884 : City Council Meeting Schedule for 2023) ◄ March April 2023 May ►
Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat 1
23 Spring Break
4 Spring Break
5 Passover Begins
Spring Break
6 Spring Break
7 Spring Break
8 9
Easter
10 11
City Council Mtg
Planning Commission
12 13 14 15
16 17 18
City Council Mtg
19 20 21 22
23 24 25
Planning Commission
26 27 28 29
30 H.3.b
Packet Pg. 174 Attachment: 2023 Word Calendar (2884 : City Council Meeting Schedule for 2023) ◄ April May 2023 June ►
Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat 1 2
City Council Mtg
345
Cinco de Mayo
6 789
Planning Commission
10 11 12 13
14 Mother’s Day
15 16
City Council Mtg
17 18 19 20
21 22 23
Planning Commission
24 25
Shavuot
26 27
28 29
Memorial Day
30 31
H.3.b
Packet Pg. 175 Attachment: 2023 Word Calendar (2884 : City Council Meeting Schedule for 2023) ◄ May June 2023 July ►
Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat 1 2 3
456
City Council Mtg
789 10
11 12 13
Planning Commission
14 15 16 17
18 Father’s Day
19 20
City Council Mtg
21 22 23 24
25 26 27
Planning Commission
28 29 30
H.3.b
Packet Pg. 176 Attachment: 2023 Word Calendar (2884 : City Council Meeting Schedule for 2023) ◄ June July 2023 August ►
Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat 1
234
Independence Day
5678
9 10 11
City Council Mtg
Planning Commission
12 13 14 15
16 17 18
City Council Mtg
19 20 21 22
23 24 25
Planning Commission
26 27 28 29
30 31
H.3.b
Packet Pg. 177 Attachment: 2023 Word Calendar (2884 : City Council Meeting Schedule for 2023) ◄ July August 2023 September ►
Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat 1
National Night Out
2345
678
Planning Commission
9 10 11 12
13 14 15
City Council Mtg
16 17 18 19
20 21 22
Planning Commission
23 24 25 26
27 28 29 30 31
H.3.b
Packet Pg. 178 Attachment: 2023 Word Calendar (2884 : City Council Meeting Schedule for 2023) ◄ August September 2023 October ►
Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
1 2
3 4
Labor Day
5 City Council Mtg
6 7 8 9
10 11 12
Planning Commission
13 14 15
Rosh Hashana
16 17 18 19
City Council Mtg
20 League of Ca. Cities
Annual Conference
Sacramento
21 League of Ca. Cities
Annual Conference
Sacramento
22 League of Ca. Cities
Annual Conference
Sacramento
23 24
Yom Kippur
25 Yom Kippur
26 Planning Commission
27 28 29 30
H.3.b
Packet Pg. 179 Attachment: 2023 Word Calendar (2884 : City Council Meeting Schedule for 2023) ◄ September October 2023 November ►
Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
123
City Council Mtg
4567
89 10
Planning Commission
11 12 13 14
15 16 17
City Council Mtg
18 19 20 21
22 23 24
Planning Commission
25 26 27 28
29 30 31
Halloween
H.3.b
Packet Pg. 180 Attachment: 2023 Word Calendar (2884 : City Council Meeting Schedule for 2023) ◄ October November 2023 December ►
Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat 1 2 3 4
567
City Council Mtg
89 10 11
Veterans Day
12 13 14
Election Day
Planning Commission
15 16 17 18
19 20 21 22 23
Thanksgiving
24 25
26 27 28
Planning Commission
29 30
H.3.b
Packet Pg. 181 Attachment: 2023 Word Calendar (2884 : City Council Meeting Schedule for 2023) ◄ November December 2023 January ►
Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat 1 2
345
City Council Mtg
6789
10 11 12
Planning Commission
13 14 15 16
17 18 19
City Council Mtg
20 21 22 23
24 Christmas Eve
25 Christmas
26 27 28 29 30
New Year’s Eve
31 H.3.b
Packet Pg. 182 Attachment: 2023 Word Calendar (2884 : City Council Meeting Schedule for 2023)

Orinda City CouncilOctober 11, 2022

Orinda City Council
October 11, 2022