Agenda packet, regular meeting — Orinda City Council, April 16, 2024

MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC MAY PARTICIPATE IN THIS MEETING

IN PERSON, OR VIEW ON ZOOM OR YOUTUBE AS LISTED BELOW
https://www.youtube.com/@cityoforinda9535/streams
Zoom Webinar:
https://tinyurl.com/OrindaCityCouncil
Phone:669 444 9171
Webinar ID:
810 2271 2723
In Person:

Orinda Library Auditorium
26 Orinda Way
Orinda, CA 94563
(925) 351-6676

CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA
Tuesday, April 16, 2024
7:00 PM - REGULAR MEETING

NOTICE OF TELECONFERENCED MEETING
Pursuant to Government Code Section 54953, Subdivision (b), this meeting will include teleconference participation by Councilmember Inga Miller from:

Sahlströmsgården
Utterbyn 20, 685 92 Torsby
Hotel Building
Call for Access: (925) 787-9058
City Council
Agenda Page 1 04.16.24
How to follow and/or participate in the meeting:

IN PERSON SPEAKER CARDS: If you would like to speak during the public forum or on an item listed on the agenda, you are invited to submit a speaker card to the City Clerk. You will be permitted to speak even if you elect not to submit a speaker card or decline to provide information requested on the card. After the City Council has heard from everyone who submitted speaker cards, anyone electing not to submit a speaker card may form a line at the lectern. Public comment is generally limited to 3 minutes per speaker per agenda item.

WRITTEN COMMENTS: You may also submit a public comment in advance of the meeting by following instructions below:

Deliver to City Hall at 22 Orinda Way or send an e-mail to [email protected] by 3pm on the day of the meeting. Those comments 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://tinyurl.com/Orinda-Public-Comments
REMOTE COMMENTS: Remote Public Comments have been discontinued for the foreseeable future.

City Council
Agenda Page 2 04.16.24
7:00 PM - REGULAR SESSION
A. CALL TO ORDER / ROLL CALL
Councilmembers: Brandyn Iverson, Inga Miller, Janet Riley Vice Mayor Latika Malkani, Mayor Darlene Gee
B. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
C. ADOPTION OF AGENDA
The City Council may take action on any item listed on the agenda.

D. ITEMS FOR THE GOOD OF THE CITY
D.1. Recognition of Outgoing Commissioners/Committee Members for their Service to Orinda: Lina Lee, Tom Schneider, Melanie Light, Jon Conner, Emily Warren, Stuart House, Natalie Fay
D.2. Proclamation Recognizing Orinda Baseball Association and Founder Bob Hegarty for their 40th Anniversary
D.3. Update from Assemblymember Bauer-Kahan's Field Representative, Antoinette St. John
D.4. Update from East Bay Municipal Utility District (EBMUD) 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. March 5, 2024 Regular Meeting

2. March 12, 2024 Special Meeting

3. March 12, 2024 Regular Meeting
City Council
Agenda Page 3 04.16.24
F.2. Adoption of a Resolution Authorizing the Closure to Vehicular Traffic for the Orinda Association's Fourth of July Parade and Associated Activities
Recommendation:

Staff recommends the City Council Adopt Resolution 11-24 Authorizing the Closure of a Portion of Moraga Way, Brookwood Road, Camino Pablo, Santa Maria Way, and Orinda Way for the Orinda Association's Fourth of July Parade and Associated Activities (Traffic Order No. 228) F.3. Ordering the Preparation and Filing of a Report for the Fiscal Year 2024-25 Assessments for the Orinda Street Lighting and
Landscaping Assessment District No. 1986-1
Recommendation:

Adopt Resolution No. 10-24, Ordering the Preparation and Filing of Report for Levy of Annual Assessments for Fiscal Year 2024-25 for Orinda Street Lighting and Landscaping Assessment District No. 1986-1.

F.4. Authorize Contract Amendment No. 2 with Theis Engineering & Associates for Municipal Engineering Services
Recommendation:

Staff recommends that the City Council approve Contract Amendment No. 2 with Theis Engineering & Associates to increase the contract value to $80,000.

F.5. Award Construction Contract to Performance Pipeline Technologies Inc. for the 2023 Annual Storm Drain Repair Project (Category B) City Project No. 5007
Recommendation:

Staff recommends that the City Council (1) award a construction contract to Performance Pipeline Technologies Inc. of Huntington Beach, California for an amount of $376,064 for said project; (2) authorize program expenditures up to $435,000, which includes a 15% contingency; (3) authorize the City Manager to execute contract on behalf of the City; (4) approve attached Budget Change Form #005-24 appropriating necessary additional funding of $85,000 from Fund #105 and (5) approve plans for the project.

F.6. Award Construction Contract to Cowan & Thompson Inc. for the Camino Sobrante Retaining Wall Replacement Project (CIP #5021) Recommendation:

Staff recommends that the City Council award a construction contract to Cowan & Thompson Construction Inc. of Martinez, California for the bid amount of $157,649; authorize program expenditure up to $181,000 (includes a 15% contingency); authorize the City Manager to execute the contract on behalf of the City; and approve Budget Change Form #006-24 appropriating an additional $16,000 in funding from Fund 105 for the project.

City Council
Agenda Page 4 04.16.24
G. PUBLIC HEARING
H. POLICY MATTERS
H.1. Fire Fuels Reduction Incentive Pilot Program Update Recommendation:

Receive Report, Discuss, Provide Direction, if any, on Three Components of the Existing Pilot Fire Fuels Reduction Incentive Program - 1) Administrative Changes; and 2) Program Parameter Changes; 3) Cost-sharing component.

H.2. Red Flag Days Parking Restrictions Program Review
Recommendation:

Receive Staff Report and presentation, and provide direction.

H.3. Proposed Parking Variance In-Lieu Fee Holiday for Qualifying Projects Within One Half-Mile of the BART Station, Consistent with Assembly Bill 2097, a New State Law that Preempted Certain Local Parking Requirements Effective January 1, 2023
Recommendation:

Receive presentation, take public testimony, and consider adopting a resolution temporarily suspending parking in-lieu fees for qualifying projects within one-half mile of the BART station, a major transit stop. This would include waiving parking in lieu fees for “The Station,” an approved commercial project at 25A Orinda Way.

H.4. Role of Council Liaisons to Commissions, Boards, and Other Bodies Recommendation:

Receive Report, Discuss, and Provide Direction, if any
I. COUNCILMEMBERS' REPORTS
J. CITY MANAGER'S REPORT
K. MATTERS INITIATED
L. ADJOURNMENT
The next meeting of the Orinda City Council will be held on Tuesday, April 30, 2024 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.

City Council
Agenda Page 5 04.16.24
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
~ Notices ~
There is a 90-day limit for the filing of a challenge in Court to certain City decisions that 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 file a challenge in Court, you may be limited by California law, including but not limited to Government Code §65009, to those issues raised in connection with 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. For information on the next City Council meeting, please call 925.253.4221 or visit the website at www.cityoforinda.org. Unless otherwise noted, City Council actions include a determination that the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) does not apply. ~ 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. March 5, 2024 Regular Meeting

2. March 12, 2024 Special Meeting

3. March 12, 2024 Regular Meeting
ATTACHMENTS:

A. City Council Minutes of March 5, 2024
B. City Council Closed Session Minutes of March 12, 2024 C. City Council Minutes of March 12, 2024
Respectfully Submitted by:

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

F.1
Packet Pg. 6
Orinda City Council Minutes Page 1 of 12 03.05.24
MARCH 5, 2024

CITY OF ORINDA

CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
Note: Written communications received from the public prior to the start of this meeting can be viewed on the City’s website meeting calendar. They are also kept in the City Clerk’s Office as part of the public record and available upon request ([email protected]). 7:00 P.M. – REGULAR MEETING– GARDEN ROOM, ORINDA LIBRARY A. CALL TO ORDER / ROLL CALL:

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

COUNCILMEMBERS PRESENT: Brandyn Iverson, Inga Miller (arrived late), Janet Riley
Vice Mayor Latika Malkani
COUNCILMEMBERS ABSENT: Mayor Darlene Gee
B. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE – Led by Vice Mayor Malkani.

C. ADOPTION OF AGENDA
MOTION by Councilmember Iverson, and seconded by Councilmember Riley, to adopt the agenda. Said motion carried by unanimous (3-0) roll call vote.

D. ITEMS FOR THE GOOD OF THE CITY
D.1. Proclamation Declaring March 2024 as Sudden Unexplained Death in Childhood Awareness Month
Vice Mayor Malkani read and presented the proclamation declaring March 2024 as Sudden Unexplained Death in Childhood (SUDC) Awareness Month to Suzanne and Donovan Tom.

Suzanne Tom said their first-born daughter, Haley, was born July 27, 1998. They moved to Orinda in June 1999 and attended their first July 4th parade. Little did they know, this was the last parade they would share with her, as Haley died in her sleep the following May at only 21 months old. She spoke about differences between SIDS and SUDC, and the SUDC Foundation is the only organization worldwide whose purpose is to promote awareness, advocate for research, and support those affected.

Their family created Haley’s Run for a Reason in 2005 to honor her and raise awareness for the SUDC Foundation. This 5-mile run and 2-mile walk kicked off Orinda’s 4th of July celebration. They have continued this event, are sincerely grateful for the support the City of Orinda has given them over the years, and read a quote from Mayor Gee.

F.1.a
Packet Pg. 7
Attachment: City Council Minutes of March 5, 2024 (3329 : City Council Minutes) Orinda City Council Minutes Page 2 of 12 03.05.24
Vice Mayor Malkani and Councilmembers thanked the Tom’s for hosting the run for so many years, which has been meaningful.

D.2. Proclamation Declaring March 2024 as Prescription Drug Abuse Awareness Month
Vice Mayor Malkani read and presented the proclamation declaring March 2024 as Prescription Drug Abuse Awareness Month, and introduced Darius Thomas from the Contra Costa County MEDS Coalition.

Darius Thomas, Ameri Corps Vista Member for the Contra Costa County MEDS Coalition, spoke about their focus on primary prevention of substance use disorders and prescription drug related overdoses through community education, misuse of medications which can lead to consequences which include sedatives, stimulants, and opioids, statistics on long-term opioid therapy, overdoses, encouragement to dispose properly of expired or unwanted medications, educational presentations, distribution of overdose rescue kits, and thanked the Council for their continued support in the Coalition’s work to prevent prescription drug abuse and overdose in the County.

Mr. Thomas said their website, www.cccmedscoalition.org identifies locations and resources about how to prevent opioid overdoses, signs, and symptoms, and they can also provide rescue training to everyone in Orinda
Vice Mayor Malkani noted the CVS drug store takes expired or unused prescription drugs. City Manager Biggs noted the City also takes disposal of sharps and other things Monday through Friday, 8 a.m. to 5:30 p.m. and alternating Fridays from 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.

Vice Mayor Malkani and Councilmembers thanked Mr. Thomas for the available education and resources of the MEDS Coalition.

E. PUBLIC FORUM
Vice Mayor Malkani noted the Council received a written public comment which is included in materials in the back of the room.

Mr. Dryer provided an update from the February 8th meeting, described their neighborhood’s two more incidents on Oak Road. He said crime continues to impact their neighborhood and how neighbors sleep at night, how they think about vehicles that drive by, and it continues to worsen. They appreciate neighbors rallying together, said they held a meeting last week where they submitted their overall plan, noted Wilder is having similar issues, and he believes there are hotspots that criminals are going to where they believe they can get away with crimes.

City Manager Biggs stated Police Chief Sullivan has been in contact with Mr. Dryer and can coordinate a future neighborhood watch meeting. The City is also working with the Orinda Association organizing a Town Hall that will look at public safety issues in April.

F.1.a
Packet Pg. 8
Attachment: City Council Minutes of March 5, 2024 (3329 : City Council Minutes) Orinda City Council Minutes Page 3 of 12 03.05.24
F. CONSENT CALENDAR
Vice Mayor Malkani asked if there were any requests for removal of items or public comments.

F.1. City Council Minutes
Recommendation:

Approve City Council Minutes:

1. February 20, 2024 Special Meeting

2. February 20, 2024 Regular Meeting

3. February 24, 2024 Special Meeting
F.2. Adoption of Resolution 07-24 Authorizing Street Closure to Vehicular Traffic and Parking Restrictions on a portion of Orinda Way every Saturday between 6:00 a.m. to 2:00 p.m. from April 1, 2024 to March 29, 2025 for the Contra Costa Certified Farmers’ Market Recommendation:

Adopt Resolution 07-24 authorizing the closure of a portion of Orinda Way (Traffic Order No. 227) to vehicular traffic to allow for space for farmers' market vendors.

MOTION by Councilmember Riley, and seconded by Councilmember Iverson, to approve Consent Calendar Items F.1.1, F.1.2, F.1.3, and F.2. Said motion carried by unanimous (3-0) roll call vote.

G. PUBLIC HEARING – None.

H. POLICY MATTERS
H.1. Housing Element Annual Progress Report for Calendar Year 2023 Recommendation:

Review the Housing Element Annual Progress Report for Calendar Year 2023 and direct staff to file the Report with the appropriate state agencies.

City Manager Biggs gave the staff report on behalf of the Interim Planning Director. This is the annual progress report due April 1st which covers the Housing Element certified by the State in 2023 under the 6th cycle and also covers reporting from the prior 5th housing cycle. He described the progress made by the City, the matrix summarizing the work programs, and said the City is making progress in a number of key areas such as rezonings, pursuit of opportunity sites outside the downtown, the Caltrans site, and staff could answer questions.

Councilmember Riley asked when they would look at the inclusionary housing and objective design standards.

F.1.a
Packet Pg. 9
Attachment: City Council Minutes of March 5, 2024 (3329 : City Council Minutes) Orinda City Council Minutes Page 4 of 12 03.05.24
Mr. Biggs stated the inclusionary housing should be on the next agenda. The downtown objective design standards will return as part of the downtown rezoning. The Council reviewed some standards that were a part of the documents developed with the Downtown Precise Plan and Safety Element in January of last year, which will come back for adoption and incorporation into the code at the same time they do the rezoning.

Councilmember Riley referred to page 56; Action 4-C; Building Code. She asked if there was a typographical error with the word “editions” in the right column. Mr. Biggs confirmed it is the edition of the book because there are several editions.

City Attorney Osa Wolff noted they use the word “edition” because the Building Code is updated every three years and was last updated in 2022, then adopted by the City January 17, 2023.

Councilmember Iverson said she hoped to get an update on SB 9 and ADU projects as those are implemented, given they are approved ministerially by staff. She asked how many are on home sites, duplexes, and triplexes, and those subdividing and flipping.

She asked if the council could be updated in the near future just for the Council’s information.

Councilmember Iverson referred to page 56; 4-D; Infrastructure Availability, and 4-E; Revised Parking Standards. She asked what the nature of those items was.

Mr. Biggs said 4-D is a general Housing Element requirement where they ensure water, sewer, and other things are not an obstacle to the production of housing. The City has held regular meetings with EBMUD and, in the future, there may be sites requiring water and sewer extended to them so they document their regular meetings in pursuit of housing.

Regarding 4-E, the Downtown Precise Plan includes a broader review of management of parking and shared parking. They are supposed to look at things to eliminate where parking becomes an obstacle to the production of housing. The City cannot require any parking within one-half mile of the BART station, so Housing Element law has not caught up with the current climate. When doing the broader downtown study, this will look at how to better manage existing parking.

Vice Mayor Malkani asked about the issue initiating the decertification process and what decertification is.

Mr. Biggs explained the Caltrans Gateway site has been identified as a possible site and staff met with Caltrans early on as to what would be necessary to free up the site. The City included it as a housing opportunity site and programmed it for about 200 units.

Unfortunately, HCD said they would not accept it because it was not ripe for development.

F.1.a
Packet Pg. 10
Attachment: City Council Minutes of March 5, 2024 (3329 : City Council Minutes) Orinda City Council Minutes Page 5 of 12 03.05.24
The City got HCD to agree that the City could continue working on the site, but there are two options to free up the site for housing. One is a traditional decertification process through Caltrans which would be initiated by a developer or a third party. The City cannot use this as a public purpose, and housing would not qualify as a public purpose. They met with Caltrans to initiate the process to determine obstacles.

Another path involving decertification would be initiated by Caltrans, which is the Governor’s Executive Order about three years ago to have State Departments identify sites that could be freed up for housing. The State would market the site for housing and lease it for $1 which makes it much more economically viable, but it still requires decertification.

Vice Mayor Malkani opened the Public Forum.

City Clerk Smith announced that the public comments received on this item are provided to the Council, on the City’s website, and also available in paper format on the back table.

There were no speakers.

Councilmember Iverson said in response to Councilmember Riley’s question about the inclusionary housing ordinance, she had also requested a Matters Initiated last year about a retail incentive. The State will not allow the City to require ground floor retail within one-half mile of transit, and she worries about the DPP goals being thwarted by this. She would like to do some incentives to encourage ground floor retail, and she hopes progress can be made in the next calendar year. She also asked staff to increase the font size when doing the 2024 Annual Report.

Noted Present:

Councilmember Miller was noted as present at 7:50 p.m.

Councilmember Miller echoed this request, and she also asked to encourage retail. She hoped to be able to create incentives by showing what is here in Orinda and to let developers know they have a ready and willing customer base that wants retail.

Vice Mayor Malkani said the report was informative and emphasized the level of detail, especially on the 5th Housing Element cycle. She was impressed by how much has been done and recognized the work ahead of the City in this cycle. She thanked Planning staff for their work and hoped the City will hire a permanent Planning Director in the very near future.

MOTION by Councilmember Iverson, and seconded by Councilmember Riley, to direct staff to file the Annual Progress Report with the appropriate state agencies. Said motion carried by unanimous (4-0) roll call vote.

H.2. Possible Locations for a Dedicated Off-Leash Dog Area and for Dedicated Pickleball Courts in Orinda
F.1.a
Packet Pg. 11
Attachment: City Council Minutes of March 5, 2024 (3329 : City Council Minutes) Orinda City Council Minutes Page 6 of 12 03.05.24
Recommendation:

Staff recommends the City Council Receive Reports on Possible Locations for a Dedicated Off-Leash Dog Area and dedicated Pickleball Courts in Orinda, discuss, and provide direction, if any.

City Manager Biggs introduced the item.

Director of Parks and Recreation Todd Trimble gave the staff report and overview regarding possible locations for a dedicated off-leash dog area and dedicated pickleball courts. Potential locations could be at Wilder Park as chosen by the Ad-Hoc Committee and Parks and Recreation Commission for the pickleball location and an area in the Orinda Oaks Park likewise for an off-leash area, and both facilities have garnered interest Councilmember Iverson asked for a recap of any concerns or positive or negative feedback was received at the Parks and Recreation Commission meetings.

Director Trimble summarized that they have worked closely with pickleball players who are new to the facility. When the City resurfaced the tennis courts at the end of 2020, they had the contractor put two pickleball court lines on Court 1 and the practice court.

Since then, they have added single pickleball courts on the remaining two tennis courts; Courts 2 and 3, up to 5 days of official drop-in times, and other improvements or additions requested by pickleball players.

Vice Mayor Malkani said there has been interest by both pickleball and tennis players for an on-line reservation system.

Mr. Trimble said this is a staff-driven effort which began a year ago focused on picnic area rentals. On-line rentals have many variables that can make on-line booking challenging, but staff is working on this. Tennis court reservations are more straightforward and are being focused on first, but these also have challenges with staff resources, but are meeting with Civic Rec software company.

Councilmember Riley said it sounds like the pros outweighed the cons for both sites. In looking at the location of the dog park, there are 12 parking spaces and she thinks there would be more than 12 people at one time. She asked how staff plans to handle the overflow.

Mr. Trimble said they can park on Hall near the corner, as well as Ivy where there is a staircase that goes up to the parking lot. The recommendation was for a space just above the meadow near the picnic area, which is popular. They would dip down into the facilities just north of that which are not used. There is also a PG&E transmission tower in the proposed acre circle and they have received preliminary approval by PG&E for the City to fence off the area.

Councilmember Riley said when it was suggested 5 or 6 pickleball courts could fit in that area and asked which way they would face.

F.1.a
Packet Pg. 12
Attachment: City Council Minutes of March 5, 2024 (3329 : City Council Minutes) Orinda City Council Minutes Page 7 of 12 03.05.24
Mr. Trimble said he was unsure, as this is a unique piece of land, relatively flat, not square, and it starts to slope up near the EBMUD portion. He based the number on the approximate square footage measured and based on the range which is desirable for space for a pickleball court and area around it. The area has some height on one side to prevent wind and further away from homes.

Vice Mayor Malkani opened the Public Forum.

David Richardson, 99 Tarrow Road, said he has participated in Haley’s Run and appreciates the Council’s adoption of the proclamation. He thanked staff and the Commission for tackling this issue, for using the Orinda Community Park as a stop along the way to permanent pickleball courts, working on access, lining, and community outreach. He suggested the Council create more consistent drop-in hours for the courts at the Community Parks, work on on-line reservations, and supported the City Manager’s recommendation that this be a mid-year addition to the CIP to fund design and construction. He supported orientation review, asked to continue to work on medium term solutions which are better nets for parks, and pointed out that the pickleball additions will promote health, fitness, and community benefits.

Roxie Jones echoed Mr. Richardson’s comments and thanked Mr. Trimble and his team for partnering with them on improvements for the short- and medium-term pickleball solutions. They would love more expanded drop-in hours, and as they move towards permanency she would like support of short- and medium-term options for the many players.

They took tallies every two-hour drop-in block and, over the last week, they had over 112 pickleball players which averaged 14 players per drop-in block. There were three active doubles courts at all times during drop-in times which compares to 32 tennis players.

She also said there are many players interested in the long-term solution, participating in fundraising efforts, and asked the Council to continue to involve them.

Parks and Recreation Commissioner and Ad-Hoc Committee member Steven Danziger said they did an exhaustive search looking for dedicated pickleball courts as well as a dog park location. He lives near Ivy Drive and if this moves forward, the City will need to listen to nearby neighbors because of mixed opinions in placing a dog park.

Regarding pickleball, he thinks the Wilder location meets all needs; it would be a positive aspect for the community. He thinks it could be rented out for tournaments and said staff has also accommodated tennis players to share the facilities.

Councilmember Iverson asked if the Commission has examined the operating aspects of the dog park such as water dishes or maintenance of the grounds.

Mr. Trimble said they did not do much of this at this time. They wanted to have some specific amenities at the dog park location, as there is parking, a restroom, and they would look at fencing, minor surface mulching, a double gated entry area, water access which is already in the park, as well as waste bags and Big Bellies.

F.1.a
Packet Pg. 13
Attachment: City Council Minutes of March 5, 2024 (3329 : City Council Minutes) Orinda City Council Minutes Page 8 of 12 03.05.24
Mr. Biggs said outreach would include neighbors and potential users. In his experience, it helps to have a Friends of the Dog Park entity that gets engaged, participates, and works with staff on it.

Councilmember Miller asked if the Commission or staff if there is an informal off-leash dog park now or not.

Mr. Trimble said they have seen that not just there, but other school locations. It is second nature for dog owners to get their dogs out and run. It is difficult to monitor, so it would be nice to have a dedicated dog park. People let staff know of any issues and he believes this will continue, which works well.

Councilmember Riley asked Roxy Jones if they kept track of whether people playing are Orinda residents. Ms. Jones said no, they did not know if it was of interest. She agreed that when doing it again, they will ask people if they live in Orinda or not.

Councilmember Riley said she has friends and family that drive from Orinda to San Francisco to play and she is simply curious. However, if the City has 5 new courts, she thinks people will come from everywhere.

Ms. Jones said they do have players now who are outside of Orinda because they have attended Parks and Recreation Commission meetings. They say they actually bring revenue into Orinda, and have people from Walnut Creek, Concord, and Oakland regularly. Many players though are Orinda residents.

Councilmember Riley said if there was an interest in fundraising, this will be very expensive for each court as well as other needs in the City. She asked if there was Friends of Pickleball which could raise funds. Ms. Jones said the players there now have expressed interest in doing that. They raise money for pens and erasers, have talked about buying some covers for shade, and some people bring them already. She noted they had a high number of 30 to 37 players during drop-in so they have a lot of participation, and is happy to help.

Councilmember Miller said she is appreciative of bringing this forward, said it makes the City better when there is a lot of interest in things, and is excited to move forward on these types of initiatives.

Councilmember Iverson agreed and said the Parks and Recreation Department is great in reaching different communities. She loves seeing such organized groups of pickleball players and dog park interests where people can socialize. She thinks what can come out of this are good things with fairly modest operational and capital programming.

F.1.a
Packet Pg. 14
Attachment: City Council Minutes of March 5, 2024 (3329 : City Council Minutes) Orinda City Council Minutes Page 9 of 12 03.05.24
She voiced some frustration that it took more than a year to conduct all of the research which will continue and requested the next step be a very specific, as well as a defined process with a timeline. She also suggested having a sign when the lot is full telling people where to park, creating an email suggestion box for both pickleball players and dog park users, water for the dog park, and a reservation system with a “for pay” feature so if people reserve a no-show, the City can make some money without it being an obstacle.

Councilmember Riley said Piedmont has a computerized sign-up for about $7 for a couple of hours.

Mr. Trimble said they currently offer reservations and it is a pay for use system. Getting it on-line can be done but it is just a staff capacity issue.

Councilmember Riley questioned the timeline for putting this in the CIP.

Mr. Biggs said staff is hearing that the Council would like staff to scope and include these as capital projects at the mid-cycle budget in June, staff can provide more information on costs to do preliminary design and engineering, and include community outreach for both sites in June where the Council can look at trade-offs of other capital projects and resources needed.

Councilmember Miller asked and confirmed with Mr. Biggs that the Council could direct staff to bring back two proposed CIP programs from incorporation into the CIP.

Councilmember Iverson said she would like to simplify this and find a way to give the Parks and Recreation Commission a budget to get preliminary designs so they can have a cost estimate in order for the conversation in June to be substantive. She would like to move in a more decisive fashion and direct staff on how to do that.

Vice Mayor Malkani said this is the first time this is coming to the Council and if the Council has consensus to give staff direction that this is something to prioritize staff time.

It sounds like more information could be brought within a specified timeframe if the City can do it with existing resources. In the big picture, she would like to see this happen but the City does not have the money right now. If they do put it in the next CIP, she asked what that would take away from. She said if there is a process where if they have a more finite goal of the design and plan, she asked if they can use that to have a mix of community fundraising and City funding to make this happen.

Mr. Biggs said there is always the possibility of this. The next steps are not something staff could do. They would have to get a park designer or specialty facility designer to begin preliminary engineering. There is the Capital Projects Fund where some money is set aside. If the Council wanted to appropriate money, arguably, the Council could ask staff to bring back something sooner, appropriate funds, and then they would retain a firm to do preliminary engineering and design.

F.1.a
Packet Pg. 15
Attachment: City Council Minutes of March 5, 2024 (3329 : City Council Minutes) Orinda City Council Minutes Page 10 of 12 03.05.24
Until staff knows the Council wants staff to develop the CIP and bring it back, there are 50 unfunded but needed projects in the CIP which takes a while to get that organized, and it would displace other projects staff is already working on to advance these, but this is up to the Council.

Councilmember discussion ensued regarding requests for Matters Initiated items, the Council’s action to take $250,000 to the Capital Projects Reserve to fund off-leash areas, pickleball courts and the Camino Pablo median modifications, the need to appropriate money and budget it, the need to retain a firm for between $30,000 to $50,000 for design and engineering work for both locations, bringing back the item next week at the midyear budget review, and the need for the Council to adopt a resolution appropriating funds and the firm telling the City how much the projects would cost.

Further discussion ensued regarding allocation of costs for both projects, on-going maintenance, timing, staff resources, consider having one firm specializing in park design to and look at the two projects, evaluation of ADA access at the dog park including potential for grading and extension of trails, time taken for outreach, meetings scheduled with the Parks and Recreation Commission, potential cost savings to do help fund the project and do this in a single phase, other options, and the need to review fencing by PG&E.

Mr. Biggs said the next Council meeting is early next month and staff can talk with the firm working on the Community Center Park and their capacity, review the process in soliciting work from firms efficiently, and he suggested staff bring back something actionable at a future meeting to appropriate funds to allow this to move forward.

Vice Mayor Malkani confirmed there was consensus by Councilmembers on Mr. Biggs’ proposed next steps.

I. COUNCILMEMBERS’ REPORTS – Councilmember Miller reported on Recycle Smart’s work on the new contract period and reported they are launching a customer survey.

Councilmember Iverson reported on her attendance to the SWAT meeting for Mayor Gee as her alternate. Two presentations were given by BART to talk about their safe and clean plan changes. If the Council wants them to come and present, they can do that, and she will share their written presentation with the City Manager and/or ask them to present. The CCTA had a presentation about Measure J and there are many State mandates to get people out of single occupancy vehicles and what they have to do to show they are mitigating infrastructure impacts, and she agreed to share that presentation, as well.

Vice Mayor Malkani said she and Councilmember Iverson attended the League of California Cities-East Bay Division meeting and heard a legislative update, which she described. There are many laws around retail theft, waste and requirements for composting, and others.

F.1.a
Packet Pg. 16
Attachment: City Council Minutes of March 5, 2024 (3329 : City Council Minutes) Orinda City Council Minutes Page 11 of 12 03.05.24
Vice Mayor Malkani said she also attended the Lamorinda Arts Council Art Exhibit at Wilder which was lovely. This Wednesday afternoon, the Sunrise Rotary will hold their Good Character Awards at the Campolindo High School.

J. CITY MANAGER’S REPORT – City Manager Biggs reported on Wednesday, March 13th, Mayor Gee will give the State of the City Address at the Rotary Club and people can register and attend. Summer registration is open and Parks and Recreation staff has had a huge surge of registrations and this year, programs are 4 times as popular.

K. MATTERS INITIATED – Councilmember Miller thinks it would be useful to new Commissioners to have an item on the agenda whereby staff brings to the Council prior staff reports on the progress of Measure R goals and information that has been provided in the past so the Council and new and on-going SSTOC members can discuss those to the extent they may be informative.

City Attorney Wolff said Measure R is a general tax and revenues go into the General Fund which is budgeted through the two-yar budget process. The Council also receives advice from the SSTOC on Measure R.

Mr. Biggs explained there are annual reports on Measure R by the SSTOC. The SSTOC talks about their goals, and those do not get actuated until the Council incorporates them into the budget. What will come in June is the mid-cycle adjustment to the budget and the SSTOC reviews the budget as well, and they might make recommendations. If there is a broader issue about how Measure R is used, this also gets discussed through that process.

Councilmember Miller restated her request to have its own Council discussion and then to have a follow-up joint meeting with the SSTOC where they could further discuss how General Fund money is being spent.

City Attorney Wolf suggested a motion and a second and, if approved, the discussion would return at a future meeting.

Councilmember Iverson said she also remembers joint meetings with the Council and Planning Commission specific to the DPP and the downtown planning. She heard in the SSTOC’s annual report a few meetings ago that the numbers were in the right place so she was not sure she would support a Matters Initiated on the topic of goals. She might support just a one-time joint meeting.

Councilmember Miller said she would like the SSTOC and Council to make their relationships more functional. Mr. Biggs said a Matters Initiated would be a highlevel staff report and a meeting to discuss “alignment” and “discuss options about Measure R” which would allow the Council to engage with the SSTOC.

Councilmember Iverson said she did not want to overload staff. Mr. Biggs noted that staff is already trying to move items off the already full agenda but it is the will of the Council.

F.1.a
Packet Pg. 17
Attachment: City Council Minutes of March 5, 2024 (3329 : City Council Minutes) Orinda City Council Minutes Page 12 of 12 03.05.24
MOTION by Councilmember Miller, and seconded by Councilmember Riley, to bring back a discussion about whether the Council should have a meeting to discuss the topics Councilmember Miller indicated and whether that would involve a joint meeting with the SSTOC. Said motion carried by unanimous (4-0) roll call vote.

MOTION by Councilmember Iverson, and seconded by Vice Mayor Malkani, to bring a Matters Initiated on an update on SB 9 and ADUs from the Planning Director at a time of his choosing. Said motion carried by unanimous (4-0) roll call vote.

L. ADJOURNMENT
The Regular Meeting was adjourned at approximately 8:30 p.m. to the next Regular Council Meeting on Tuesday, March 12, 2024, at 7:00 p.m. ______________________________________
Sheri Marie Smith, City Clerk
F.1.a
Packet Pg. 18
Attachment: City Council Minutes of March 5, 2024 (3329 : City Council Minutes) March 12, 2024

CITY OF ORINDA

CITY COUNCIL CLOSED SESSION MINUTES
5:30 PM - SPECIAL MEETING
A. CALL TO ORDER/ ROLL CALL
Mayor Gee called the meeting to order at 5:30 p.m. and City Manager Biggs called the roll. All Councilmembers were present.

OPEN SESSION IDENTIFICATION OF CLOSED SESSION MATTERS
The Closed Session Matters were identified.

C. PUBLIC COMMENTS REGARDING CLOSED SESSION MATTERS
There were no public comments received.

D. CLOSED SESSION

1. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL -- EXISTING LITIGATION.

Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(d)(1), conference with Legal Counsel regarding existing litigation: ORINDANS FOR SAFE EMERGENCY EVACUATION v. City of Orinda, Contra Costa County Superior Court Case No. N23-0579.

E. OPEN SESSION REPORT REGARDING CLOSED SESSION
There was no reportable action.

F. ADJOURNMENT
The meeting adjourned at approximately 7:00 P.M.
_______________________
Sheri Marie Smith, City Clerk
F.1.b
Packet Pg. 19
Attachment: City Council Closed Session Minutes of March 12, 2024 (3329 : City Council Minutes) Orinda City Council Minutes Page 1 of 19 03.12.24
MARCH 12, 2024

CITY OF ORINDA

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

COUNCILMEMBERS PRESENT: Brandyn Iverson, Inga Miller (arrived late), Janet Riley
Vice Mayor Latika Malkani, Mayor Darlene Gee
COUNCILMEMBERS ABSENT: None
B. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE – Led by Mayor Gee.

C. ADOPTION OF AGENDA
City Manager Biggs stated the agenda is quite full with a couple of items that are not time-sensitive that could be pushed to the next meeting on April 16th. He called attention to a staff supplement in regards to Item H.1; the mid-year budget adjustment.

MOTION by Vice Mayor Malkani, and seconded by Councilmember Miller, to adopt the agenda. Said motion carried by unanimous (5-0) roll call vote.

Mayor Gee also noted that there is no need for a continued Closed Session at the end of the meeting and no reportable action from the Closed Session item heard before the regular meeting. She asked that the agenda be amended to reflect this.

MOTION by Councilmember Miller, and seconded by Councilmember Riley, to adopt the agenda, as amended. Said motion carried by unanimous (5-0) roll call vote.

D. ITEMS FOR THE GOOD OF THE CITY
D.1. Proclamation Declaring March, 2024 as American Red Cross Month Mayor Gee introduced Tim Leong from the American Red Cross.

F.1.c
Packet Pg. 20
Attachment: City Council Minutes of March 12, 2024 (3329 : City Council Minutes) Orinda City Council Minutes Page 2 of 19 03.12.24
Tim Leong, American Red Cross, Orinda homeowner recently retired from the Contra Costa Community College District as the PIO and volunteer and past member of the American Red Cross Contra Costa County Leadership Council, said this is his annual visit to accept the Council’s proclamation that acknowledges March as American Red Cross Month.

He attributed the thousands of volunteers’ great work of caring for one another in times of crisis and emergency who provide humanitarian support and services in the County, spoke of various projects their organization has completed locally during the past year, said they are a good steward of public funds wherein 90 cents of every dollar received is spent on support and services to fulfill their mission, and he thanked the City Council for the proclamation.

Mayor Gee and Councilmembers thanked Mr. Leong, presented the proclamation, and a photograph of the City Council and Mr. Leong was taken.

Mayor Gee opened the Public Forum, and there were no speakers.

E. PUBLIC FORUM
There were no speakers.

F. CONSENT CALENDAR
Mayor Gee requested removal of Item F.2 and asked if there were any other requests for removal of items or public comments. Councilmember Iverson requested removal of Item F.1.

F.3. Establishing the Rate per Equivalent Runoff Unit (ERU) for Fiscal Year 2024-25 and requesting the Contra Costa County Flood Control and Water Conservation District to Adopt an Annual Parcel Assessment for Drainage Maintenance and the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Program
Recommendation:

Staff recommends adoption of Resolution No. 03-24, establishing the Equivalent Runoff Unit (ERU) for Fiscal Year 2024-25 for the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Program at the same rate as was levied in the current year.

F.4. Accept contract with McGuire-Pacific Construction for the Red Flag Parking Sign Project #4197
Recommendation:

Staff recommends that the City Council adopt Resolution 09-24, "Acceptance of Work for the Red Flag Parking Sign Project No. 4197 by McGuire-Pacific Constructors and authorize the City Clerk to sign and file the Notice of Completion with the Contra Costa County Clerk-Recorder.

F.1.c
Packet Pg. 21
Attachment: City Council Minutes of March 12, 2024 (3329 : City Council Minutes) Orinda City Council Minutes Page 3 of 19 03.12.24
F.5. Award Construction Contract to Hardiman Construction Inc. for the Group 2 Stormdrain Lining Project (CIP Project Nos. 3101 & 3102) Recommendation:

Staff recommends that the City Council award the Construction Contract to Hardiman Construction Inc. of Larkspur, California for the bid amount of $582,150; authorize program expenditure up to $670,000 (includes a 15% contingency); authorize the City Manager to execute the contract on behalf of the City, and approve plans for the project.

F.6. Acceptance of 2023 Annual Pavement Rehabilitation Contract (CIP No. 4171)
Recommendation:

Staff recommends that the City Council adopt Resolution No.06-24 Acceptance of Contract for the 2023 Annual Pavement Rehabilitation Project (CIP No 4171) with Goodfellow Bros. LLC. and authorize the City Clerk to sign and file the Notice of Completion with the Contra Costa County Clerk-Recorder.

F.7. Authorize Contract Amendment No.2 with Wildland Corporation for services related to Chipper Services.

Recommendation:

Staff recommends that the City Council approve a Contract Amendment Wildland Corp to increase the not to exceed contract value from $225,000 to 400,000.

MOTION by Vice Mayor Malkani, and seconded by Councilmember Riley, to approve Consent Calendar Items F.3, F.4, F.5, F.6 and F.7. Said motion carried by unanimous (5-0) roll call vote.

Items Removed from the Consent Calendar:

F.1. Consider any Amendments and Adopt City Council Policy & Procedures Manual
Recommendation:

Adopt Resolution No. 08-24 adopting an amendment to the City Council Policies and Procedures Manual
Councilmember Iverson asked that the City Manager’s Report and Councilmember’s Reports, which are very useful, be moved to be heard at the beginning of meetings around the time the Council hears Items for the Good of the City. She asked if there was interest by Councilmembers to do this next year or this year.

Vice Mayor Malkani asked if this would be addressed through the Policy and Procedures Manual.

F.1.c
Packet Pg. 22
Attachment: City Council Minutes of March 12, 2024 (3329 : City Council Minutes) Orinda City Council Minutes Page 4 of 19 03.12.24
City Attorney Osa Wolff stated currently, Rule 3.1; Order of Business, lists Items A through M. Councilmember Reports are Item J and the City Manager Reports is Item K.

This is the usual order and, on any given night when the agenda is adopted, the Council can reorder the agenda. However, if the Council wants the standard order to be different, it would be an amendment to Rule 3.1.

Councilmember Riley asked if this has ever occurred through a rule. Ms. Wolff said this rule has been in place since her tenure but she remembers that occasionally the items get moved up on the order of the agenda on a given night.

Councilmember Riley said given the importance of other items, she suggested if something is very important under Councilmember Reports and City Manager Reports, that they can be moved up to earlier in the agenda.

Councilmember discussed ensued, and suggestions were made to address it only at individual meetings and see how it goes.

Mayor Gee opened the Public Forum, and there were no speakers.

MOTION by Councilmember Iverson, and seconded by Vice Mayor Malkani, to approve Consent Calendar Item F.1. Said motion carried by unanimous (5-0) roll call vote.

F.2. Appointment to the Traffic Safety Advisory Committee Recommendation:

Consider appointment of Molly Doctors Rajashekhar to the vacant position on the Traffic Safety Advisory Committee, or set interview date.

Mayor Gee said she asked this to be pulled, noting that after their interviews and decisions about commissions and committees a few weeks ago the Council had a Planning Commission resignation, as well as some people who had applied when they did not have the vacancy on the Planning Commission.

Now they have an opening and in speaking with the City Clerk, they now have potentially four candidates that either expressed interest or that the Council was interested in. One candidate expressed interest in taking the Parks and Recreation Commission position so she suggested an ad-hoc committee to interview all four candidates to match them for all vacancies for all of them in play for positions on the Planning Commission, the Parks and Recreation Commission, as well as Traffic Safety Advisory Committee.

Councilmember Miller suggested the entire Council interview the Planning Commission vacancy.

F.1.c
Packet Pg. 23
Attachment: City Council Minutes of March 12, 2024 (3329 : City Council Minutes) Orinda City Council Minutes Page 5 of 19 03.12.24
Councilmember discussion ensued, and City Attorney Wolff noted the item is for appointment of a candidate for the TSAC. She therefore recommended the Council place this on a future agenda as a special meeting to interview and appoint a Planning Commissioner or the next Council meeting to talk about the Planning Commission and Parks and Recreation Commission vacancies.

Mayor Gee opened the Public Forum, and there were no speakers.

Mayor Gee stated the Council will follow-up with staff to schedule a special meeting, and stated no action will be taken on Item F.2.

G. PUBLIC HEARING – None.

H. POLICY MATTERS
H.1. Quarterly Financial Report (2nd Qtr FY 2023-24) and Mid-Year Budget Adjustments
Recommendation:

Receive the report and authorize Staff to record the Budget adjustments as described in Attachment F (Budget Change Form).

Administrative Services Director Doug Alessio gave the staff report, historical background, and an overview of the quarterly financial report for the second quarter and mid-year budget adjustments. He commented that the City’s budget is on-track, with revenues and expenditures occurring as projected and some funds doing better than anticipated. He then briefly described proposed adjustments as outlined in the staff report and attachments.

Councilmember Miller referred to sales tax and the note that the City is only seeing the first quarter reported. She also asked about Fund 106.

Mr. Alessio said revenues do not flow in evenly throughout the year. There is a threemonth lag time and the City receives four property tax payments throughout the year. He confirmed they should soon hit the budget under Fund 106 which is a little lower than last year, primarily having to do with the cost of gasoline.

City Manager Biggs added the City sees much more robust revenue from Measure R which is the override, whereas the General Fund share of sales tax is about $1.4 million which has to do with things like auto sales and internet sales.

Councilmember discussion ensued regarding purchases over the internet, taxes seen, differences between cities which Mr. Alessio stated is complicated and diverse because companies report sales sometimes differently, as well as capture from the County pool, whether staff could develop the budget to show comparable period variance reporting, which Mr. Alessio said would be done monthly, would be complex and without much value.

F.1.c
Packet Pg. 24
Attachment: City Council Minutes of March 12, 2024 (3329 : City Council Minutes) Orinda City Council Minutes Page 6 of 19 03.12.24
Mayor Gee opened the Public Forum, and there were no speakers.

MOTION by Councilmember Iverson, and seconded by Vice Mayor Malkani, to authorize Staff to record the Budget adjustments as described in Attachment F (Budget Change Form), including the Supplemental. Said motion carried by unanimous (5-0) roll call vote.

H.2. Follow-Up Report on Inclusionary Housing Ordinance Options Recommendation:

Receive Report regarding Inclusionary Housing Ordinances, Discuss Key Parameters, and Direct Staff to Prepare an Ordinance for Review and Consideration.

City Manager Biggs gave the staff report and overview of the item, said staff seeks general feedback and direction from the Council as to whether to proceed with an ordinance. He spoke about meeting with MTC and learning of an adopted new TOD program which all agencies will have to comply with which will accomplish the required zonings, densities in the Housing Element goals, and three programmatic areas supportive of housing. There are five options under these three areas to be in compliance, and he noted one way to comply is through an inclusionary housing ordinance. He recommended proceeding with something that would be MTC-compliant.

Vice Mayor Malkani voiced concern that ABAG and MTC has mandated requirements in order to receive City grant funding. In looking at parameters in the staff report, two of them (percentage of units and in-lieu fees) were addressed, and she asked what were the three other items. She asked it ABAG/MTC’s requirements are finalized and asked what would be required of the five parameters if it were to meet that requirement.

Mr. Biggs stated MTC policies are now in effect and have been adopted. For an inclusionary zoning ordinance, the policy must apply to newly constructed residential or mixed-use residential projects, must apply to ownership and rental, exempt properties with fewer than 11 units, student housing, 100% affordable housing, senior housing, and other special housing types, which he described along with parameters, waivers, concessions, and incentives.

Councilmember discussion ensued regarding other Lamorinda cities’ percentage of affordability, targeting and analysis, zoning, and those cities with less than 30,000 in population that have a BART station falling into Tier 4, other cities with different tiers which results in higher densities, broader mix of income and affordability, the City’s ability to meet the feasibility requirement, and eligibility for funding.

Mayor Gee opened the Public Forum, and there were no speakers.

F.1.c
Packet Pg. 25
Attachment: City Council Minutes of March 12, 2024 (3329 : City Council Minutes) Orinda City Council Minutes Page 7 of 19 03.12.24
Councilmembers stated they found the information informative, hopes the ordinance is done consistent with the ABAG/MTC requirements and in sync with other surrounding cities, questioned whether other cities with BART stations will be able to be in compliance, spoke about affordable housing policy options and requirements for grants, that further analysis would return to the Council, the capability for 10% versus 15% affordability, that the City will have to have an in-lieu fee for projects of 11 units or more which is Tier 3, and MTC allows for incentives for additional affordability, density bonus law, the ability to revise the inclusionary housing ordinance as things evolve.

Councilmember Iverson said she found the packet informative, said the Danville detail was very helpful, as well as looking at minutes of their prior meeting, but she is still a bit resistant. She feels the main argument presented is that everyone else is doing it. If they do not, they are exclusive, and they might look bad. She spoke about the need to be thoughtful, described RHNA as a socially-engineered forced curve, cited the lack of turnover in Orinda’s housing, and the fact that not every project is well-suited to the mix of affordability. She did not want to miss the ability to get great quality projects in the downtown and opportunity sites, stressed the need to have condos, townhomes, and other development between 10 and 70 units that are attainable, smaller housing without rent control, and development of housing products that are one-bedroom apartments as well as $2-$3 million homes.

Councilmember Riley asked and confirmed that to be consistent with MTC TOD policy, the City must approve 15% affordability requirements unless the Council makes findings for lower affordability to go at 10%.

Mr. Biggs said out of the five options, the other two that may have possibility might be an affordable housing zoning overlay and whether the DPP would count for that, or perhaps the ministerial approvals. He said the City is already under an obligation to do that for ADUs and SB 9 projects, so he was not sure if existing mechanisms will say everything else needs to be ministerial. The DPP also calls for some streamlined approvals once implemented, including objective design standards; however, he was unsure as to whether that would meet the ABAG/MTC requirement of streamlined. He agreed to send additional descriptive language to the Council and stressed that the idea of an inclusionary ordinance pre-dated the Housing Element.

Mayor Gee thinks the ABAG/MTC requirements are their best guide, and said she appreciates Councilmember Iveson’s comments given today’s environment in California.

She is sensitive to Orinda as the type of community that is often targeted negatively politically at the beginning if they are not in the same boat as everyone else. Therefore, she supported moving forward.

Mayor Gee confirmed that Councilmember Iverson would not like to move forward, that remaining Councilmembers were supportive of moving forward, and said staff will return with additional information.

F.1.c
Packet Pg. 26
Attachment: City Council Minutes of March 12, 2024 (3329 : City Council Minutes) Orinda City Council Minutes Page 8 of 19 03.12.24
MOTION by Councilmember Miller, and seconded by Vice Mayor Malkani, to direct staff to prepare an Ordinance for review and consideration. Said motion carried by (4-1) roll call vote; Iverson opposed.

H.3. Annual Review and Update on Council Strategic Priorities Recommendation:

Receive Report, Discuss, and Provide Direction, if any.

City Manager Biggs gave the staff report, background, and overview of the Council’s annual review and update on Council strategic priorities. He worked with staff and referred to the matrix which includes a status of where departments are on each of the five strategic priorities as well as notes for each one which provide guidance. Staff will also be working on the mid-cycle budget adjustments in May to present at the first meeting in June.

Mayor Gee opened the Public Forum, and there were no speakers.

Councilmember Miller referred to Strategic Priority #1; Consider hiring of a staff Retail Broker and asked if staff believed the language should be broadened here such as stating it be a real estate or investment position.

Mr. Biggs explained Darin Hughes was a temporary planner who was funded to keep on full-time. Mr. Hughes is also spending about half his time on economic development and is networking with businesses and leasing agents.

Councilmember Miller said she thinks the position more includes someone approaching businesses to locate in Orinda to get leads. Mr. Biggs said once the City starts to see the DPP implementation and new space is created, Darin Hughes will reach and do that contact. They are networking with active brokers here and they need actual space offered. He clarified that he is hearing the Council would like to hear about next steps as part of the mid-year budget process.

Councilmember Miller referred to Strategic Priority No. 3; Housing and Downtown Development, and said the third bullet point on page 2 states, “Continue to assess viability of and pursue viable housing development on BART lot and Caltrans Gateway site.” She had thought that they were not saying this to the exclusion of mixed use there at the BART station.

Mr. Biggs said they believe the BART site will eventually be mixed-use development including some retail and it was not meant to be the exclusion of any of the other. This was the output from the Strategic Planning process, and they continue to get this feedback. They also think of eventually tracking a hotel which would serve as a source of additional revenue in TOT for the City.

Councilmember Riley said she would like to see some things added: 1) the evacuation exit in writing or the place where they talk about cutting through the medians as a priority; and 2) adding pickleball; and 3) adding a dog park to the list.

F.1.c
Packet Pg. 27
Attachment: City Council Minutes of March 12, 2024 (3329 : City Council Minutes) Orinda City Council Minutes Page 9 of 19 03.12.24
Mr. Biggs said the Council did that with its action tonight, and staff is working on the medians and exiting which is in the CIP. Staff can report on these individually and include existing and newer projects as well as grants awarded. He agreed to add Councilmember Riley’s three items in the matrix.

Councilmember Riley asked if the mini-park is on the matrix as well. Mr. Biggs said the Strategic Plan does not get into that level of detail by listing every project. He can mention it in the update and expand that narrative, but usually it is fairly high level and the Council would normally see the projects programmed in the budget and CIP.

Vice Mayor Malkani said she appreciates sharing of information, thinks there are few opportunities for Councilmembers to meet together in a noticed meeting with staff to hear whether a policy is or is not working so she can explain to residents who ask her about why a space is empty, for example.

Councilmember Iverson agreed and thinks strategic priorities are things like fiscal responsibility, emergency preparedness, safety, etc., and these are more like initiatives.

She agreed with the idea of having an interactive dialogue with Department Managers.

Mr. Biggs suggested a meeting at about this time or earlier next year when looking at the next two-year budget as a good time to do that, and agreed with staff follow-up.

Mayor Gee agreed, as well and has no disagreement with what was captured. She thinks many things are in progress, but one thing that is hard for her to assess is a real update or dialogue with Department Managers on issues surrounding technology, noting some improvements have been made.

Mr. Biggs spoke about the many things covered in the Housing Element, the DPP, and other work programs so it is a resource question. He thanked the Council for their support in adding two positions, said Measure R allowed them to get into wildfire management and, noted Orinda has the lowest per capita staffing where things sometimes fall to Department Managers. He hears the Council’s interest and can schedule discussion with Department Managers.

Councilmember Iverson noted that the infrastructure ad-hoc committee was formed to look at roads and drains and asked if the two ad-hoc members want to give guidance prior to the June’s mid-cycle review.

Mayor Gee said their first ad-hoc meeting will be on April 17th so it would be premature and confirmed there is no action for this item.

H.4. Measure R (Orinda Essential Services Measure, Approved by the Voters November 2020): Priorities and Alignment Discussion and Follow-Up, including possible joint meeting of the City Council and Supplemental Sales Tax Oversight Commission (SSTOC)
Recommendation:

F.1.c
Packet Pg. 28
Attachment: City Council Minutes of March 12, 2024 (3329 : City Council Minutes) Orinda City Council Minutes Page 10 of 19 03.12.24
Receive Report, Discuss, and Provide Direction, if any.

Mayor Gee said this item was initiated at the last Council meeting regarding Measure R, and priorities and alignment discussions regarding the City Council and SSTOC.

Mr. Biggs said typically with a Matters Initiated, staff provides a high-level staff report and resource materials so the Council can discuss whether another meeting should be scheduled and perhaps a joint meeting with the SSTOC.

Councilmember Miller referred to big ticket items in the City from the last item. Measure R makes up about 20% of the City’s General Fund expenditures which the City has discretion over, which is approximately $3.7 million a year. She provided history from the time the measure passed four years ago and there were concerns relating to it not providing enough funds for wildfire preparedness, and voters wanted a balance of wildfire preparedness, emergency preparedness, roads, and drains. People who opposed continue to be vocal about how the money should be spent and in absence of the voice of the Council it creates a void for confusion for Commissioners. This is unnecessary confusion because she believes the Council is on the same page about the purpose and uses of Measure R.

She wanted to initiate the item in order to have a discussion about what the priorities are, whether they are still the priority projects the Council identified in 2020, and with the caveat that there has been evolution in that thinking shared among Councilmembers and with staff. In 2020, they thought there would be an initial large spend on wildfire and then that would go away in 3 to 5 years which would be about now. She thinks the big spend was actually not occurring right away which is for the best. Instead, there was a continued program over time to roll out the program.

Assuming the Council is still committed to the priority projects from 2020 which are the four on the ballot and alluded to in the Bylaws, she thinks they owe it to Commissioners and the City as a whole to explain this is what they are doing. If this is no longer the intent and money should be spent differently, the Council should discuss this.

The discussion can also be a time to chart out how to have a productive conversation with the SSTOC about achieving those goals. The time at SSTOC meetings is predominantly wildfire because it was a new program, but that was not really the intent.

The Council expected that people would start to look at evacuation planning, flip signs, become involved in roads and drains for more balance. Right now, there is a lot of talk about metrics and it would be a valuable experience to hold a joint meeting with the SSTOC so they are seeing opportunities, identifying ways to contribute, and bring forward proposals.

Vice Mayor Malkani asked how are SSTOC agendas created. Mr. Biggs replied that it is mostly staff-driven but also the SSTOC has a Matters Initiated process so items originate from the Commission. He noted a correction in the staff report wherein a total of three annual reports, not two, have been produced.

F.1.c
Packet Pg. 29
Attachment: City Council Minutes of March 12, 2024 (3329 : City Council Minutes) Orinda City Council Minutes Page 11 of 19 03.12.24
Vice Mayor Malkani said when Councilmember Miller referred to priority programs, she asked if she was referring to what is listed in the Bylaws on page 89 of the packet.

Councilmember Miller confirmed.

Councilmember Riley said there are five programs, and the fifth is Coordination and Delivery of the Programs Funded by the Tax.

Mayor Gee opened the Public Forum, and there were no speakers.

Mr. Biggs said the resolution that formed the Commission did not list the priority projects, but they were in the attached Bylaws.

Councilmember Iverson said in November 2022 she found it interesting when she read the staff report for the November 9, 2022 meeting on page 391 of the packet. It had the purpose under discussion almost verbatim as the suggested purpose of this item. She asked what the takeaway was from that meeting which they are essentially having to repeat the exercise two years later.

Councilmember Miller said went back and read the minutes from the City Council meeting where the same thing came up. She apparently asked what happens in four years.

Mr. Biggs said he recalled the discussion, prepared the staff report, and was relatively new as the City Manager. Generally, the practice would be the Council would establish those priorities and then seek the advice or input of the SSTOC over time. The SSTOC provides an annual report where they identify more specific goals in the 4 programmatic areas.

The bottom line is that what was presented to the voters provides a framework for the measure and this is what staff operated under. It is a general tax so if the Council finds the need to add 4 police officers, the Council could decide to spend Measure R funds in support of police services.

Councilmember Iverson said it sounds like the question is identical to what they are proposing to ask now in the meeting. She asked if people felt resolved and content or was it just that they needed to revisit it every couple of years. Or, she asked if this was controversial and unresolved.

Vice Mayor Malkani said she was on the SSTOC then and recalled there was a direction from the Council, a consensus and hope in the first 2 or 3 years of Measure R to focus on wildfire prevention and resilience because there was so much to catch up on. They were excited there was finally funding to be able to move forward on much of what is now in place. She thinks also that Orinda was trying to be a leader in this area where only a handful of cities had done this. This involved a lot of information gathering by the SSTOC. Also, staff had to be hired at the time.

F.1.c
Packet Pg. 30
Attachment: City Council Minutes of March 12, 2024 (3329 : City Council Minutes) Orinda City Council Minutes Page 12 of 19 03.12.24
Where things are now is that the members are much more educated and informed than back then. She has not perceived a lot of push/pull between the need to fund different types of infrastructure in terms of her observations but remembers bringing up that they all need education on roads and drains because there were only a couple of Commissioners who served on the CIOC and had knowledge, but the rest did not to fully understand what projects were needed. So, she thinks the education happened after she left the SSTOC.

The first year and one-half focused on wildfire resiliency but after that, she did not see a lack of recognition that roads and drains are important. She hears community members having concerns the way Measure R was marketed, but it is a general tax. She also thinks roads and drains are important and they must figure out how to use limited funds to do their best to meet the needs of the City’s infrastructure. So personally, she does not feel the need to revisit this.

Councilmember Riley said on the question whether or not the Council should discuss the mission and purpose, it is interesting that the last section of the Bylaws allows the Council to review them, alter, amend, or repeal them, so she thinks it is a healthy exercise to revisit these listed funded programs which just takes a majority decision by the Council.

In looking at the surface, it could be very productive what the SSTOC does and whether or not anything should change.

Councilmember Iverson said the annual report felt very balanced and agreed with Vice Mayor Malkani’s comments. However, she does not attend the meetings and does not hear much from people so she is happy to follow her peer’s recommendations.

Mayor Gee said at this point, she is struggling a bit to figure out how to keep moving this forward. She is not opposed to a joint meeting with the SSTOC as they have done this in the past. She thinks the challenge with this topic is that they have about 5 things combined together “in a blender.” There is what the actual ballot measure language said, what a general sales tax is all about, a lot of intent, campaign marketing, and there are certain community members that continue to make a lot of things an issue that may not be that much of an issue at large.

She thinks one of the issues that continues to come up is the feeling that somehow intent and what was marketed is all a direct function of dollars. The City has put an enormous effort into wildfire prevention and accomplished some really incredibly positive things.

They have not added up to millions and millions of dollars, but she recalled that the only two items ever proposed in the fire prevention category that were not moved forward by the Council were the Professor Radke proposal and the survey.

F.1.c
Packet Pg. 31
Attachment: City Council Minutes of March 12, 2024 (3329 : City Council Minutes) Orinda City Council Minutes Page 13 of 19 03.12.24
Councilmember Miller stated there was more, and there were people very disappointed that the Council did not move forward with the cattle grazing, which she found to be very difficult. A land trust in the area got involved and further politicized it. It was unfortunate because if everyone had the facts the Council had and saw they had one contractor who bid and understood that the property was deed-restricted against that use and that they did not know that. She had bad feelings shared with her again this weekend. So, it was that they had two years studying it before they figured out that the deed did not allow for it.

But, when looking at documents, she does not have the sense there is something wrong.

Everything she sees is consistent in the ballot language, what was campaigned, and they have people who opposed Measure R not surprisingly coming in and saying they like the money to go as they campaigned against it—that it should be more for wildfire, and the fact that the City already turned all of its money for wildfire prevention to MOFD and be damned with the City doing its obligation to evacuate people. So, they have some people in the community who would like this to be a fire tax. Frankly, she thinks they would then get the City sued for treating it like a special tax. So, she does not see what the concern is.

Vice Mayor Malkani said in looking at the bylaws and priorities and not hearing any huge disagreement by the Council around them. Therefore, she asked what they need to discuss.

Councilmember Miller said she was asking for this discussion in the Matters Initiated and if all Councilmembers are on the same page that those priority projects are what they should be doing and they agree with staff, that the recommendations of staff have been good and they support staff’s funding decisions suggested by staff.

For example, staff has not wanted to say they will spend “x” number of dollars per year on wildfire prevention. Instead, it is what comes up, how can they best use this money.

The SSTOC, on the other hand, has a lot of discussion of “they have the budget and are not spending enough on wildfire.” She thinks what they spend every year will be an ongoing program and she thinks the Council supporting City staff will go a long way. So, she sat at every single SSTOC meeting except one June meeting and she felt like she was in the “hot seat” each time and thinks staff felt like that, as well, and felt there was a distrust that staff was speaking for the Council. She asked what the Council can do to make the SSTOC to feel that things are going well.

Vice Mayor Malkani said there is an implicit assumption and said she attended one meeting last year, but in the prior couple of years she did not perceive that tension.

Sometimes there is a staff report and at any time all 5 Councilmembers will agree with staff. Sometimes the 5 of them will not. She thinks Commissions will also do that sometimes.

F.1.c
Packet Pg. 32
Attachment: City Council Minutes of March 12, 2024 (3329 : City Council Minutes) Orinda City Council Minutes Page 14 of 19 03.12.24
Councilmember Miller rephrased and instead not reference those meetings because for her it has been very obvious at the proposals here. It has been hard sitting here and not being able to support the survey proposal, not being able to support the grazing, and her job was to make sure these could go through and she could not be successful. This is what she is talking about—getting successful programs for the Council to support.

Councilmember Iverson said what is strange is that it treats the SSTOC different from every other Commission as if it is a group where they are coming up with all of the ideas and agendas and they have a budget and the Council is supposed to support it, whereas the lion’s share of the dollars spent are Public Works. There were letters about roads and drains and the fact they are paid for not just by Measure R but by multiple counties, local, other sources, and she feels that some of this might be this conversation to clarify that it is not like there is a budget and here is what the roads and drainage needs are, and wildfire is a new infrastructure and the Council is interested in their advice on what is the right amount of spending year by year. To her, this was a little bit of the missing piece. This conversation is all of the essential infrastructure is not coming generated from the SSTOC, nor should it be.

Councilmember Miller stated this is very helpful.

Mayor Gee said again, how the money gets spent is fully at the Council’s direction. There are no fixed amounts for any category or it would have had to be through a special tax.

So, the Council is trying to prioritize the funds across multiple high-profile needs and to do that well. She thinks one of the frustrations she has had in terms of the community perception has been that because the fire prevention issue is such a new topic and does not have decades of proven ways to do it, as well as its public money that can only be spent certain ways, they cannot take the public money and start clearing out everyone’s backyard in Orinda.

So, when she looks at the list of priorities to begin with, to get all City properties in compliance, get the chipper, to do education and outreach, the City has made huge strides towards what they said they wanted to accomplish. The dollar value of the investment apparently does not seem to be enough money to certain people. Her general feeling is a good Council as any good fiscally responsible body does not spend tax dollars just to spend tax dollars. They spend it on good uses of the money and right now, if they have a lull in what is a good use in the fire prevention area, it does not mean they are not caring about it. It means they are not wasting the money while they wait to see what does present itself because there is so much in evolution. Admittedly, Public Works is easier because it is very real, much more defined, programs are on-going, and there is great dollar need in that arena. So, if the issue is whether to try to hold a joint meeting together and get consensus, she is confused as to what they would accomplish.

Councilmember Miller said she believes the Council has covered what she was looking for in having the conversation. She thinks the Mayor’s comments are well-stated.

F.1.c
Packet Pg. 33
Attachment: City Council Minutes of March 12, 2024 (3329 : City Council Minutes) Orinda City Council Minutes Page 15 of 19 03.12.24
Mayor Gee said the other comment that bothers her, and she is happy to step up and do it, is she does think the City needs to be more assertive in standing up and being more public about this issue. The Council has been put on the defensive more than once, are answering questions to the Orinda News that have been presented by someone else.

She would like to see them talk more about these issues as presented by the Council so they are leading the narrative. The fact there are certain individuals in disagreement or choose to present their views, they have every right, but she does not believe that represents more than a handful of people’s views.

She thinks because the Council is not putting out an equal narrative, she thinks they have tried hard to do a good presentation. She referred to City publications, NextDoor.com, does not do as much social media as others, but she thinks they are trying very hard to put out to residents what they are doing and getting the message across much better than they used to. She is not at all faulting the Council for what they are trying to get across, but this is obviously a big topic area. She also thinks collectively that the Council and SSTOC members need to keep looking for ways that are good choices to spend the money in the area of fire prevention. There are other things they can continue to look at, but one of the things the community has to understand is the concept of how you can spend this money as a City is not quite the same. They worked hard to incentivize people through grants and they can look at other things, but again, they simply cannot start clearing out everyone’s private property.

Councilmember Miller said she appreciates hearing that it was not only her that felt like this. She realized that their initial discussion was geared around the fact that they had evacuation responsibility, so it had to do with the public roadway. What happened was what a Commissioner described as “mission seepage.” They had a presentation where people talked about the fact that if you have trees in the back of your house, they are just as dangerous as on the street, which might be true, but it started with roadside clearing. So, getting into the backyard ends up being very hard for the City to get too involved beyond the grant program because they do not have the jurisdiction MOFD has in order to get there and enforce, or have some authority which is effective. Therefore, she shares the feeling that there are people in the community that the City should be clearing properties.

Mayor Gee said the Council needs to decide whether there is an action item, and Councilmember Riley said the question is whether to have a joint meeting.

Councilmember Miller said she thinks there should be a purpose to it and one would be to generate ideas that Commissioners have and to encourage and let people know how valued they are.

Councilmember Riley said she thinks they have an opportunity to thank the SSTOC for their valued service all the time, but this is not the purpose. The purpose is that the Council reiterates what they think the purpose of their Commission is. She asked if they should have that dialogue or members can read the minutes, or just let it go.

F.1.c
Packet Pg. 34
Attachment: City Council Minutes of March 12, 2024 (3329 : City Council Minutes) Orinda City Council Minutes Page 16 of 19 03.12.24
Councilmember Iverson made a motion that the Council does not need to hold another agenda item or a joint meeting, but she would invite the City Manager or his successor that if an opportunity presents itself where, just as with the Planning Commission, they held a joint meeting when there was a downtown plan to work on. So, the Council has not surfaced a need in this conversation tonight, so she suggested a motion that no follow-up meeting is needed.

Vice Mayor Malkani said she thinks this was helpful and thinks the outlook going forward is that it sounds like critical documents can be reviewed to be affirmed agreement. She thinks looking at ways to have continued collaboration and continued dialogue to the extent there is a subject matter, or if the SSTOC comes up with subjects they want to meet about with the Council about, that could return in the future. She said she does not always agree with all the public comment they get, but she does appreciate it. She reads it all even if it angers her or it is something she disagrees with because it is the function of government and holds Councilmembers accountable.

Mayor Gee said a motion is not needed, but asked staff if they need a motion.

Mr. Biggs said as a Matters Initiated, sometimes items do not move forward and he did not think a motion was needed, but it is up to the person that brought the Matters Initiated forward.

Councilmember Miller thanked everyone and said comments provided what she felt like they owed Commissioners and the community; to give clarity on this is important to the Council.

Councilmember Riley said what she does not like is that it was such a hard year for the former Mayor and it should not be that way. When struggling with people, you talk things out, so she was not sure having a joint meeting would help heal if there is healing to be done.

Councilmember Miller said she could turn to staff or Vice Mayor Malkani who is not feeling there is anything. It may just be that where it came from is that the Council was not approving the SSTOC’s proposals and she felt there was a sense of disappointment about that. She did not like sensing this, and she saw the lead up to the Council meeting.

Councilmember Riley said if she felt the disappointment, by not taking the next step, she did not think any healing or improvement in the relationship will occur.

F.1.c
Packet Pg. 35
Attachment: City Council Minutes of March 12, 2024 (3329 : City Council Minutes) Orinda City Council Minutes Page 17 of 19 03.12.24
Councilmember Miller asked staff if this could be helpful. Mr. Biggs shared a couple of observations, stating Measure R is relatively new starting in March, and revenue did not start to flow until April. Before he arrived, the Council appropriated and allocated money to certain categories of storm drainage, roads, and there was budgetary direction given out of the chute as well. The relationship has evolved, and people feel passionate about it. He also thinks some Commissioners are learning their role as well. But, even now on roads and infrastructure and storm drainage, the City is still implementing the programs developed by the prior CIOC. They only started recently to look at the bigger picture of road funding needs.

He will hear from some Commissioners that they do not yet understand how they will engage with the new infrastructure committee the Council has established, so this might be something for a future meeting topic that could address other items, but he does not think that body knows exactly how they will operate. It might take a meeting or two before it becomes clearer. He always tells a Commission if they feel strongly about something, staff will take it up to the Council. For example, regarding looking at sirens, when the Council had that discussion they agreed they are not quite there yet. But, they try to share and pass that onto them.

He thinks the discussion today is helpful because when the liaison to the SSTOC goes back and staff goes back, they will encourage members to listen to the discussion. They have a meeting tomorrow, but they may ask as a Matters Initiated that they might want to discuss this and maybe suggest a joint meeting with the Council, so it can go both ways.

Councilmember Riley said if they read the minutes, they will realize they have the opportunity to take the initiative.

Mayor Gee concluded by saying she thinks the biggest challenges with Measure R and with the SSTOC as an advisory body has been that the Council is tackling absolutely new ground, and she is the one person in the room when the CIOC was tackling absolutely new ground. They did not have enough money, had no plan, had been unsuccessful in figuring out how to get money, and even though they were dealing with something much more finite and clearer cut than fire prevention, they were struggling to make it work. That took many more years than the SSTOC has been in existence.

She would say to the community, the public, and Commissioners that in her opinion, the Council has done an excellent job of working toward those priorities and that mission, have made real progress, have spent the money absolutely consistently with the items highlighted in association with the general sales tax, have spent every penny of it either on fire prevention efforts, things to do with emergency evacuation, drainage, and roads.

It will continue to evolve and the Council will continue to look at ways to be effective with those tax dollars in every one of those categories. Some years it may jump up in one category and down in another, but that was exactly the intent. It was to give them flexible money to address the community’s needs.

F.1.c
Packet Pg. 36
Attachment: City Council Minutes of March 12, 2024 (3329 : City Council Minutes) Orinda City Council Minutes Page 18 of 19 03.12.24
She thinks it is more of a discussion from the Council’s perspective with the community of why and how they are approaching it the way they are. But, the idea that the Council is off-base is just not the right view. Everyone is entitled to their opinion, but they have a lot to take credit for and a lot to be proud of. She is satisfied they will continue to work together to figure out how to move those things forward.

I. COUNCILMEMBERS' REPORTS
Vice Mayor Malkani said she attended the Contra Costa County Mayors’ Conference last week where there was a report from the Promise Richmond group, which involved how much that community can use to help students be prepared for college and encourage college attendance and readiness. She also attended an Orinda Association meeting and thanked Chief Sullivan for doing a lot to work with the community members who want to put on a Town Hall on public safety.

Mayor Gee provided an update on the City Manager recruitment, stating they are putting the finishing touches on the recruitment brochure. The recruiting firm will be publishing that and it is expected that the application date will close sometime in April. She thanked those who have provided feedback and the City will continue to receive feedback this week. She looks forward to giving a talk about the State of the City at the Orinda Rotary Luncheon.

Vice Mayor Malkani gave a shout-out to Sunrise Rotary because last Wednesday they hosted the Good Character Awards of middle schoolers, which was a great event.

J. CITY MANAGER'S REPORT
Mr. Biggs stated on April 17th this will be the first meeting of the Council’s new Infrastructure Committee at 6:30 p.m. in the Sarge Room. To the Vice Mayor’s comment, they had the Council’s Public Safety Committee met to receive an update on public safety and the Police Department’s annual report. Out of that, the Orinda Association offered to host a Town Hall on public safety. They are getting close to landing on a date in April and more information will come soon, and the City will be publicizing it through social media.

He reminded everyone of events where the Rotary sponsors the Easter Egg Hunt on Saturday, March 30th. He noted that the next Council meeting will not be until April 16th due to Spring Break.

Mayor Gee said that there will also be a 2x2 Subcommittee meeting with MOFD on March 20th.

K. MATTERS INITIATED
Vice Mayor Malkani asked if anyone else would be interested in a discussion of the role of liaisons or committee appointees. It came up in one of her discussions with the City F.1.c
Packet Pg. 37
Attachment: City Council Minutes of March 12, 2024 (3329 : City Council Minutes) Orinda City Council Minutes Page 19 of 19 03.12.24
Manager. She realizes as a new-ish Councilmember she had a view of what that role is, and they may all benefit from a brief discussion of it on a future agenda.

Mayor Gee asked if this is already in progress, and Mr. Biggs said the City has annual Commission training which is set for May 20th which also includes ethics training, but this is to inform Commissioners. They are also holding a Leadership Coffee with the Mayor and Vice Mayor given Boards are electing new Chairs and Vice Chairs to talk about how to run meetings. But there is nothing designed to reinforce what Councilmembers’ roles are as liaisons.

MOTION by Vice Mayor Malkani moved, and seconded by Councilmember Miller, to direct staff to schedule a Matters Initiated to discuss the role of Council liaisons.

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

Councilmember Iverson said while not a Matters Initiated, when interviewing the Council on Aging representative she would like the representative to provide an update on what they work on as representative for the Council on Aging.

Mr. Biggs added that there is a new date for the Wildfire and Safety Fair of June 1st which is also the deadline to have properties in compliance.

L. CLOSED SESSION

1. OPEN SESSION IDENTIFICATION of Closed Session Matters

2. PUBLIC COMMENTS of Closed Session Matters – None.

3. CLOSED SESSION

4. REPORT OUT OF CLOSED SESSION – No reportable action.

CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL -- EXISTING LITIGATION. Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(d)(1), conference with Legal Counsel regarding existing litigation: ORINDANS FOR SAFE EMERGENCY EVACUATION v. City of Orinda, Contra Costa County Superior Court Case No.

N23-0579.

M. ADJOURNMENT
The Regular Meeting was adjourned at approximately 9:53 p.m. to the next Regular Council Meeting on Tuesday, April 16, 2024, at 7:00 p.m. ______________________________________
Sheri Marie Smith, City Clerk
F.1.c
Packet Pg. 38
Attachment: City Council Minutes of March 12, 2024 (3329 : City Council Minutes) City Council
Staff Report
Agenda Item: F.2
Date: April 16, 2024
Department:

Public Works and
Engineering Services
AGENDA TITLE: Adoption of a Resolution Authorizing the Closure to Vehicular Traffic for the Orinda Association's Fourth of July Parade and Associated Activities RECOMMENDATION:

The Orinda Association is organizing and operating the annual Fourth of July parade and associated activities in the Orinda Downtown area of the Theatre District and Village District between 7:00 a.m. and 2:00 p.m. on Thursday, July 4, 2024.

SUMMARY:

The safety of all concerned, including participants and spectators, requires the usual street closures as noted below:
1) Partial Closure of the two northbound lanes of Camino Pablo between Moraga Way and Santa Maria Way.
2) Full Closure of Moraga Way between Camino Pablo and Bryant Way 3) Full Closure of Brookwood Road between Camino Pablo and Moraga Way 4) Partial Closure of the eastbound lanes of Santa Maria Way between Camino Pablo and Orinda Way
5) Full Closure of Orinda Way between Santa Maria Way and Camino Sobrante FISCAL IMPACT:

Nominal costs are associated with logistical support provided by City employees.

ATTACHMENTS:

A. Resolution 11-24 4th of July Street Closure TO# 228
Respectfully Submitted by:

Scott Christie
Public Works Director
Prepared By: Kevin McCourt, Assistant Engineer
F.2
Packet Pg. 39
Approved by:

F.2
Packet Pg. 40

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

Authorizing the Closure of a Portion )
of Moraga Way, Brookwood Road, )
Camino Pablo, Santa Maria Way, )
and Orinda Way for the Orinda )
Association’s Fourth of July Parade )
and Associated Activities
Traffic Order No. 228
Resolution No. 11-24
WHEREAS, the Orinda Association is organizing and operating the annual Fourth of July parade and associated activities in the Orinda Downtown areas of the Theatre District and Village District between 7:00 a.m. to 2:00 p.m. on Thursday, July 4, 2024; and WHEREAS, the parade procession stages in the east Orinda BART Station parking lot, exits and heads south along Camino Pablo within the closed northbound lanes, turns l e f t / n o r t h on Brookwood Road, then turns right onto Moraga Way, proceeding on and then turning right to go back northbound onto Camino Pablo, east on Santa Maria Way, and completing its route northbound on Orinda Way; and
WHEREAS, the Orinda Association plans to route the parade (procession between 11:00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m.) from staging area in the Orinda BART Station parking lot, through the Theatre District and routing back to its conclusion in the Village District near the Community Center, which will require the following street closures:
1) Partial Closure of the two northbound lanes of Camino Pablo between Moraga Way and Santa Maria Way.
2) Full Closure of Moraga Way between Camino Pablo and Bryant Way 3) Full Closure of Brookwood Road between Camino Pablo and Moraga Way 4) Partial Closure of the eastbound lanes of Santa Maria Way between Camino Pablo and Orinda Way
5) Full Closure of Orinda Way between Santa Maria Way and Camino Pablo WHEREAS, for the safety of all concerned including participants and spectators, this will require the various listed street closures on Thursday, July 4, 2024 between 7:00 a.m. to 2:00 p.m.; and
WHEREAS, under Section 21101, paragraph (e) of the Vehicle Code, a local authority may adopt by resolution, a temporary closure of a street for a special event when the closure is necessary for the safety and protection of the users of the street during the event; and
F.2.a
Packet Pg. 41
Attachment: Resolution 11-24 4th of July Street Closure TO# 228 (3337 : 4th of July Street Closure) NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council hereby authorizes the listed street closures in downtown Orinda for the Fourth of July Parade route and associated community activities on Thursday, July 4, 2024 from 7:00 a.m. to 2:00 p.m. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orinda at a regular meeting on April 16, 2024, by the following vote:

AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:

Darlene Gee, Mayor
ATTEST:

Sheri Marie Smith, City Clerk
F.2.a
Packet Pg. 42
Attachment: Resolution 11-24 4th of July Street Closure TO# 228 (3337 : 4th of July Street Closure) City Council
Staff Report
Agenda Item: F.3
Date: April 16, 2024
Department:

Public Works and
Engineering Services
AGENDA TITLE: Ordering the Preparation and Filing of a Report for the Fiscal Year 2024-25 Assessments for the Orinda Street Lighting and Landscaping Assessment District No. 1986-1
RECOMMENDATION:

BACKGROUND:

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

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

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

3. Courtney Lane

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

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

2. Redcoach Lane 7. Sundown Terrace

3. Coachwood Terrace 8. Silver Oak Terrace

4. Amber Valley Drive 9. Happy Valley Road

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

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

2. sidewalk replacement

3. street sweeping and litter pickup

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

5. water and electric utilities for landscaping (water, electrical irrigation) F.3
Packet Pg. 43
DISCUSSION:

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

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

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

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

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

Approval of the attached Resolution will provide sufficient time to prepare and file the appropriate reports and provide the tax information to the County Auditor by the filing deadline in early August 2024.

NEXT STEPS:

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

FISCAL IMPACT:

The estimated cost for services by NBS, including preparing the Engineer’s report, is approximately $7,200 and is charged as an expense allocated to each Zone. The preparation of the report is an annual requirement necessary to continue to collect the assessments.

ATTACHMENTS:

A. Resolution 10-24 L and L District 1986-1 - Order Report B. Orinda 1986-1_Timeline_2024-25
F.3
Packet Pg. 44
Respectfully Submitted by:

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

F.3
Packet Pg. 45

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

Ordering the Preparation and Filing of )
Report for Levy of Annual Assessments )
For Fiscal Year 2024/25 for Orinda ) Resolution No. 10-24 Street Lighting and Landscaping )
Assessment District No. 1986-1 )
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Orinda formed an Assessment District under Part 2 of Division 15 of the Streets & Highways Code (Landscape & Lighting Act of 1972, beginning with Streets & Highways Code, Section 22500); and WHEREAS, the Assessment District was designated as “Orinda Street Lighting and Landscaping Assessment District No. 1986-1”; and
WHEREAS, the improvements of the Assessment District consist of the maintenance or servicing, or both, of existing and future public lighting and landscaping facilities, and the installation or construction of public lighting and landscaping facilities and any facilities appurtenant to them or necessary or convenient for the maintenance or servicing of them, including grading, clearing, removal of debris, the installation or construction of curbs, gutters, walls, sidewalks or paving, or water, irrigation, drainage or electrical facilities; and WHEREAS, it is necessary to undertake proceedings pursuant to Streets & Highways Code, Sections 22620-22631, for the levy and collection of assessments for the Fiscal year 2024/25 within the existing Assessment District; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Orinda orders the preparation and filing of a report in accordance with Article 4 (beginning with Streets & Highways Code, Section 22565) of Chapter 1 of the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972.

ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Orinda at a regular meeting of said Council held on April 16, 2024, by the following vote:

AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:

RECUSED:COUNCILMEMBERS:

Darlene Gee, Mayor
ATTEST:

Sheri Marie Smith, City Clerk
F.3.a
Packet Pg. 46
Attachment: Resolution 10-24 L and L District 1986-1 - Order Report (3332 : Lighting & Lands. district 1st meeting)

CITY OF ORINDA
Orinda Street Lighting and Landscape Assessment District No. 1986-1 FY 2024/25 Timeline for Levy of Assessments
____________________________________________________________________________________________________ Regular City Council meetings are typically scheduled on the 1st and 3rd Tuesday of every month.

Category Action Performed By Due Date Note:

Timeline NBS prepares and delivers the proposed Fiscal Year 2024/25 Timeline. NBS February 14 Timeline Agency Staff reviews the proposed timeline and provides comments. Agency February 19 Budgets Agency Staff provides the District Budget. Agency March 27 Report NBS prepares and delivers the Annual Report. NBS April 9Council Meeting Council adopts one resolution: Ordering the Preparation of Annual Report. Council April 16 Report Agency Staff reviews the Annual Report and provides comments. Agency April 24Report NBS delivers the Annual Report for Agency Staff approval. NBS May 1 Council Meeting Council adopts two resolutions: Resolution of Intention and Approving Engineer’s Report. Council May 7 Notice The clerk publishes the Resolution Declaring Intent. The notice must be in the local newspaper not less than 10 days before the Public Hearing. Clerk May 21 No later than May 24th Council Meeting The council conducts the Public Hearing, then adopts the Resolution Confirming Levy Submittal NBS submits the assessment levy to the county auditor/controller. NBS August 10 Resolutions The clerk delivers copies of all approved Resolutions to NBS. Clerk June 26 Council June 18
the Diagram and the Assessment and Ordering the Levy.

F.3.b
Packet Pg. 47
Attachment: Orinda 1986-1_Timeline_2024-25 (3332 : Lighting & Lands. district 1st meeting) City Council
Staff Report
Agenda Item: F.4
Date: April 16, 2024
Department:

Public Works and
Engineering Services
AGENDA TITLE: Authorize Contract Amendment No. 2 with Theis Engineering & Associates for Municipal Engineering Services
RECOMMENDATION:

Staff recommends that the City Council approve Contract Amendment No. 2 with Theis Engineering & Associates to increase the contract value to $80,000.

BACKGROUND:

In March 2023, the City engaged Theis Engineering & Associates to (1) assist the city in applying to FEMA (Federal Emergency Management Agency) for reimbursement of eligible emergency damage assistance related to the Winter Storms 2022/23, and (2) assist the city in closing out the Wilder subdivisions. The current contract, including Amendment No. 1, is valued at $60,000, and is almost fully expended. The Wilder project work has been completed, and the FEMA process is well underway. However, additional work is required to complete the FEMA process, in particular for Parks & Recreation department’s Oak Park landslide damages and building damages in facilities.

DISCUSSION:

Theis Engineering & Associates has provided an estimate of the remaining work in a letter dated March 22, 2024 (Attachment A). Including contingency, the amount recommended for Amendment 2 is $20,000. The work performed will be billed on a time and materials basis, per the professional services contract terms. Since this amendment will result in the contract exceeding $60,000, City Council approval is required.

NEXT STEPS:

Upon City Council authorization, Contract Amendment No. 2 (Attachment B) will be forwarded to the City Clerk for processing and approval as to form by the City Attorney and signature by the City Manager.

FISCAL IMPACT:

The expenditures under this agreement are already sufficiently programmed in the operating budget as a General Fund Engineering expense and no additional appropriation is necessary at this time.

ATTACHMENTS:

A. Continuation of Services 3-22-24
F.4
Packet Pg. 48
B. Amendment 2 TEA
Respectfully Submitted by:

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

F.4
Packet Pg. 49

Page 1 ends

March 22, 2024
Scot Chris�e, P.E.

Public Works Director
City of Orinda
22 Orinda Way
Orinda, CA 94563
RE: Con�nua�on of FEMA Emergency Storm Related Damage Assistance Dear Mr. Chris�e,
At the request of the City of Orinda, Theis Engineering & Associates is pleased to con�nue its FEMA Emergency Storm Related Damage Assistance services to secure federal and state reimbursement funds from the Storm Events of January 2023. All work will con�nue to be performed by our Principal Engineers, Larry Theis and Jason Chen and their hourly rate is $215 (valid through August 30, 2024). We expect by the end of March/mid-April that our invoiced services will reach the current contract limit of $60,000.

Based on a conserva�ve es�ma�on of the efforts s�ll needed un�l FEMA funding authoriza�on, an amendment (#2) raising the contract limit from $60,000 to $80,000 should be sufficient to complete this work. We es�mate that an average of $3,000 for five addi�onal months will be required plus a $5,000 con�ngency totaling $20,000.

Please contact me if you have any ques�ons. I am prepared to execute an amendment for these addi�onal services at your request.

Sincerely,
Larry Theis
President
Theis Engineering & Associates
F.4.a
Packet Pg. 50
Attachment: Continuation of Services 3-22-24 (3331 : TEA contract amendment no. 2) 1 CITY OF ORINDA
AMENDMENT No. 2 TO SERVICES CONTRACT
Theis Engineering and Associates, Inc. (“Provider”) and the City of Orinda (“City”), a municipal corporation, previously entered into a contract with an effective date of March 7, 2023 relating to a professional services contract for municipal engineering. Section 18 of that agreement provides that “No waiver, modification or termination of this agreement is valid unless made in writing.”
City and Provider mutually agree to amend the agreement as follows:

1. Replace Section 4.a “Compensation” as follows:
a. City agrees to pay Provider at the rates described in Exhibit A, not to exceed a maximum contract price of $80,000 for all services performed under this agreement.

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

City of Orinda
__________________________________
City Manager Date
Attest
___________________________________
City Clerk
Approved as to form
___________________________________
City Attorney
Theis Engineering and Associates, Inc.
__________________________________
Date
__________________________________
Printed Title
__________________________________
Printed Name
Approved as to content
___________________________________
Director of Public Works or City Engineer
F.4.b
Packet Pg. 51
Attachment: Amendment 2 TEA (3331 : TEA contract amendment no. 2) City Council
Staff Report
Agenda Item: F.5
Date: April 16, 2024
Department:

Public Works and
Engineering Services
AGENDA TITLE: Award Construction Contract to Performance Pipeline Technologies Inc. for the 2023 Annual Storm Drain Repair Project (Category B) City Project No. 5007 RECOMMENDATION:

BACKGROUND:

The City of Orinda hired Drake Haglan and Associates (DHA) to inspect the City’s larger culverts, develop repair and/or replacement costs, and develop a budgeting prioritization list. DHA’s Culvert Prioritization Program Report, issued August 9, 2019, generally identified maintenance repair and/or replacement needs of the City’s larger culverts (Category “A” pipes) and developed a prioritization scheme for City/public storm drain pipes, including Category A pipes and the remaining smaller diameter pipes (Category “B” pipes). The estimated cost for rehabilitating all publicly maintained culverts/pipes in Orinda is approximately $30 million: $10 million for Category A and $20 million for Category B. The Category A pipes have funding identified and have been grouped into CIP projects, and several have already been rehabilitated.

The Category B pipes generally do not yet have funding identified, however the current CIP has annual projects planned for the next five years with funding of $350,000 per year. Staff prepared plans and specifications for the subject project and advertised for bids on February 9, 2024. The construction will include rehabilitating the storm drain pipes using one or a combination of trenchless construction methods such as lining with Thermoform PVC Liner, Cured-In-Place pipe liner, concrete spin-cast liner etc.

DISCUSSION:

On March 12, 2024, the City received three bids for the work required to construct the subject project. The total bid for each of the bidders is as follows:

Bidders Total Bid
Performance Pipeline Inc., Huntington Beach $376,064
Kerex Engineering, Inc., Martinez $484,190
Pipe and Plant Solutions, Inc., San Leandro $557,694
F.5
Packet Pg. 52
The engineer’s estimate for the bids was $380,000. Staff reviewed the bids and determined that Performance Pipeline Inc. is the lowest responsive and responsible bidder (Attachment A) and therefore is recommending that the contract (Attachment B) be awarded to them for $376,064. Staff recommends a 15% contingency which would allow program expenditures up to $435,000, to allow for change orders if warranted.

The current available funding for the project is $350,000, and therefore an additional appropriation of $85,000 is being requested.

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

NEXT STEPS:

Upon award of the subject construction contract, the contract will be sent to Performance Pipeline Inc. for them to sign and to provide the required insurance and bond documents. Upon review by the City Attorney and approval by the City Manager, the construction contract will be executed. Construction will be scheduled to start as soon as equipment and material has been procured by the contractor and when there is favorable weather conditions. The work is expected to be completed by end of summer 2024.

FISCAL IMPACT:

For the necessary additional funding noted above for this project, Staff recommends use of Measure L Sales Tax (Fund #105), which has sufficient fund balance available.

It should also be noted that the pipe at Location 5 (53 Ivy Dr.) is partially on private property, and the work in this contract includes lining both the public and private portion of the pipe. Through an agreement with the property owners, they will reimburse the city for lining costs of the private portion, which amounts to approximately $45,000.

ATTACHMENTS:

A. Orinda 2023 Annual SD Repair Submitted Bid Proposal 2024-03-12 B. Performance Pipeline Tech Contract -SD Repair 2023
C. Orinda 2023 Annual SD Repair Project Plans 2024-02-06 D. Budget Change Form #005-24
Respectfully Submitted by:

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

F.5
Packet Pg. 53
F.5
Packet Pg. 54
F.5.a
Packet Pg. 55
Attachment: Orinda 2023 Annual SD Repair Submitted Bid Proposal 2024-03-12 (3326 : Award Contract for 2023 Annual Storm Drain Repair F.5.a
Packet Pg. 56
Attachment: Orinda 2023 Annual SD Repair Submitted Bid Proposal 2024-03-12 (3326 : Award Contract for 2023 Annual Storm Drain Repair F.5.a
Packet Pg. 57
Attachment: Orinda 2023 Annual SD Repair Submitted Bid Proposal 2024-03-12 (3326 : Award Contract for 2023 Annual Storm Drain Repair F.5.a
Packet Pg. 58
Attachment: Orinda 2023 Annual SD Repair Submitted Bid Proposal 2024-03-12 (3326 : Award Contract for 2023 Annual Storm Drain Repair F.5.a
Packet Pg. 59
Attachment: Orinda 2023 Annual SD Repair Submitted Bid Proposal 2024-03-12 (3326 : Award Contract for 2023 Annual Storm Drain Repair F.5.a
Packet Pg. 60
Attachment: Orinda 2023 Annual SD Repair Submitted Bid Proposal 2024-03-12 (3326 : Award Contract for 2023 Annual Storm Drain Repair F.5.a
Packet Pg. 61
Attachment: Orinda 2023 Annual SD Repair Submitted Bid Proposal 2024-03-12 (3326 : Award Contract for 2023 Annual Storm Drain Repair F.5.a
Packet Pg. 62
Attachment: Orinda 2023 Annual SD Repair Submitted Bid Proposal 2024-03-12 (3326 : Award Contract for 2023 Annual Storm Drain Repair F.5.a
Packet Pg. 63
Attachment: Orinda 2023 Annual SD Repair Submitted Bid Proposal 2024-03-12 (3326 : Award Contract for 2023 Annual Storm Drain Repair F.5.a
Packet Pg. 64
Attachment: Orinda 2023 Annual SD Repair Submitted Bid Proposal 2024-03-12 (3326 : Award Contract for 2023 Annual Storm Drain Repair F.5.a
Packet Pg. 65
Attachment: Orinda 2023 Annual SD Repair Submitted Bid Proposal 2024-03-12 (3326 : Award Contract for 2023 Annual Storm Drain Repair F.5.a
Packet Pg. 66
Attachment: Orinda 2023 Annual SD Repair Submitted Bid Proposal 2024-03-12 (3326 : Award Contract for 2023 Annual Storm Drain Repair F.5.a
Packet Pg. 67
Attachment: Orinda 2023 Annual SD Repair Submitted Bid Proposal 2024-03-12 (3326 : Award Contract for 2023 Annual Storm Drain Repair F.5.a
Packet Pg. 68
Attachment: Orinda 2023 Annual SD Repair Submitted Bid Proposal 2024-03-12 (3326 : Award Contract for 2023 Annual Storm Drain Repair F.5.a
Packet Pg. 69
Attachment: Orinda 2023 Annual SD Repair Submitted Bid Proposal 2024-03-12 (3326 : Award Contract for 2023 Annual Storm Drain Repair F.5.a
Packet Pg. 70
Attachment: Orinda 2023 Annual SD Repair Submitted Bid Proposal 2024-03-12 (3326 : Award Contract for 2023 Annual Storm Drain Repair

Page 1 of 12 ends

CITY OF ORINDA

CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT
for
2023 Annual Storm Drain Repair Project (Category B)
Project No. 5007
THIS CONTRACT FOR CONSTRUCTION is made and entered into the date of the last signature affixed hereto by and between the City of Orinda, a municipal corporation (herein called the City) and Performance Pipeline Technologies Inc. dba Sanitation Systems, a TYPE OF BUSINESS located at 5292 System Drive, Huntington Beach, CA 92649 (herein called Contractor).

RECITALS
A. WHEREAS, the City has caused to be prepared in the manner prescribed by law, certain plans, specifications and other contract documents for the public work of construction titled 2023 Annual Storm Drain Repair Project (Category B) Project No. 5007 herein described and shown, and has approved and adopted the Contract Documents, as that term is defined below, including the specifications and plans, and has caused to be published in the manner and for the time required by law a Notice Inviting Bids for the work described in the Contract Documents (the Work), and
B. WHEREAS, Contractor in response to the City’s Notice has submitted to the City a sealed bid proposal “Proposal”, dated _March 11, 2024_(attached as Exhibit H) accompanied by a bid guaranty in an amount not less than ten percent (10%) of the amount bid for the construction of “All” or “Base Bid plus Additive Alternates” of the proposed Work in accordance with the terms of the Contract Documents, and C. WHEREAS, the City, in the manner prescribed by law, has publicly opened, examined, and declared the bids submitted and as a result has determined and declared Contractor to be the lowest responsible bidder and has duly awarded to Contractor a contract for all of the Work and for the sum or sums named in the bid proposal and in this Contract.

Accordingly, the City and Contractor agree as follows:

1. CONTRACT SUM: The City agrees to pay, and Contractor agrees to accept, in full payment for the above Work, the sum of Three Hundred Seventy-Six Thousand and Sixty Four dollars and Zero Cents, dollars ($376,064.00) to be paid in accordance with the Contract Documents.

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

F.5.b
Packet Pg. 71
Attachment: Performance Pipeline Tech Contract -SD Repair 2023 (3326 : Award Contract for 2023 Annual Storm Drain Repair Project 5007)

Page 2 of 12 ends

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

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

B. State of California Dept. of Transportation, 2018 Standard Specifications C. State of California Dept. of Transportation, Revised Standard Specifications attached to the Special Provisions
D. Special Provisions
E. State of California Dept. of Transportation, 2018 Standard Plans F. State of California Dept. of Transportation, Revised Standard Plans listed in the Standard Plan List and attached to the Special Provisions G. Any Supplemental Contract Information
II. Proposal & Sample Contract
A. List of Subcontractors
B. Non-Collusion Declaration
C. Public Contract Code Section 10162 Questionnaire
D. Public Contract Section 10232 Statement
E. Public Contract Code Section 102851.1 Statement
F. Bidder’s Bond
G. Construction Industry Survey
H. Addendum No. 1
I. Appendix C – Bidder Experience Form
III. Construction Contract
A. Compliance with Insurance Requirements declaration (Exhibit A) B. Performance Bond (Exhibit B)
C. Labor and Material Bond (Exhibit C)
D. Warranty and Guaranty (Exhibit D)
E. Affidavit Concerning Conflicts of Interest and Noncompetitive Practices (Exhibit E) F. Certificates of Insurance, Endorsements, and other evidence of insurance provided pursuant to this Contract and accepted by the City (Exhibit F) G. Contractor Safety Program: Self-Certification Worksheet (Exhibit G) Any work called for in one Contract Document not mentioned in another is to be performed and executed the same as if mentioned in all Contract Documents.

4. EFFECTIVE DATE: This Contract shall not be effective and no payments to Contractor will be made until:
a. The City has received satisfactory evidence that Contractor has met all of the insurance requirements of this Contract;
b. All required signatures, including those of the City Manager, the City Attorney, and the City Clerk have been obtained; and
F.5.b
Packet Pg. 72
Attachment: Performance Pipeline Tech Contract -SD Repair 2023 (3326 : Award Contract for 2023 Annual Storm Drain Repair Project 5007)

Page 3 of 12 ends

c. All bonds required by this Contract have been obtained and filed with the City.

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

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

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

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

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

6. INSURANCE TYPES AND LIMITS: Contractor shall promptly obtain, at its own expense, all the insurance described in this section, and submit coverage verification for review and F.5.b
Packet Pg. 73
Attachment: Performance Pipeline Tech Contract -SD Repair 2023 (3326 : Award Contract for 2023 Annual Storm Drain Repair Project 5007)

Page 4 of 12 ends

approval by the City. This insurance shall be in addition to any other form of insurance or bonds required under the terms of this Contract.

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

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

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

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

Companies writing the insurance under this article shall be authorized to do business in the State of California. Insurance is to be placed with insurers possessing an A.M. Best rating of no less than A:VII.
a. Workers’ Compensation Coverage. Contractor shall maintain workers’ compensation insurance and employer’s liability insurance for Contractor’s employees in accordance with Sections 3700 et seq. of the California Labor Code. In addition, Contractor shall require each subcontractor involved with the Work to be performed under this Contract to similarly maintain workers’ compensation insurance and employer’s liability insurance for all of subcontractor’s employees in accordance with Sections 3700 et seq. of the California Labor Code. The workers’ compensation policy shall include employers’ liability in an amount not less than $1,000,000 for each accident, bodily injury by disease, and $1,000,000 for each employee bodily injury by disease. The workers’ compensation policy shall be endorsed with a waiver of subrogation in favor of the City for all Work performed by Contractor, its employees, agents and subcontractors.
b. General Liability Coverage. Contractor shall maintain commercial general liability insurance and umbrella or excess liability insurance covering all operations by or on behalf of Contractor providing insurance for bodily injury liability and property damage liability for the following limits per occurrence and including coverage for:
(1) premises, operations and mobile equipment; (2) products and completed operations; (3) broad form property damage (including completed operations); (4) explosion, collapse, and underground hazards; (5) personal and advertising injury; and (6) contractual liability.

F.5.b
Packet Pg. 74
Attachment: Performance Pipeline Tech Contract -SD Repair 2023 (3326 : Award Contract for 2023 Annual Storm Drain Repair Project 5007)

Page 5 of 12 ends

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

If Contractor maintains higher limits than the minimums shown above, the City requires and shall be entitled to coverage for the higher limits maintained by Contractor. Any available insurance proceeds in excess of the specified minimum limits of insurance and coverage shall be available to the City. c. Automobile Liability Coverage. Contractor shall maintain automobile liability insurance in amounts not less than $2,000,000 per occurrence for bodily injury and property damage for all activities arising out of or in connection with the Work to be performed under this Contract. A combination of an automobile liability policy and a “follow-form” excess liability or umbrella policy may be utilized to achieve these limits. All automobiles and trucks owned, non-owned or hired shall be covered. d. Builder’s Risk (Course of Construction) Coverage. Contractor shall maintain builder’s risk (Course of Construction) insurance covering all risks of loss in the amount not less than the completed value of the project with no coinsurance penalty provisions. The City shall be named as a loss payee in the builder’s risk policy.

7. ADDITIONAL INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS:
a. The general liability and automobile liability policies are to contain, or be endorsed to contain, the following provisions:
i. Additional Insureds. The City and its officers, officials, employees, agents, volunteers, and those individuals identified in section 7-1.06D(2) of the special provisions shall be covered as additional insureds with respect to liability arising out of work or operations performed by or on behalf of Contractor, including materials, parts or equipment furnished in connection with such work or operations and automobiles owned, leased, hired, or borrowed by or on behalf of Contractor. General F.5.b
Packet Pg. 75
Attachment: Performance Pipeline Tech Contract -SD Repair 2023 (3326 : Award Contract for 2023 Annual Storm Drain Repair Project 5007)

Page 6 of 12 ends

liability coverage can be provided in the form of an endorsement to Contractor’s insurance (at least as broad as ISO Form CG 20 10, CG 11 85, or both CG 20 10 and CG 20 37 forms if later revisions used), or as a separate owner’s policy. Forms covering additional insureds only for liability caused in whole or part by Contractor’s acts or omissions are NOT acceptable.
ii. Contractor’s Policy Primary. For any claims related to the Work, Contractor’s policy shall be considered primary insurance as to the City, its officers, officials, employees, agents and volunteers. Any insurance or self-insurance maintained by the City, its officers, officials, employees, or volunteers, shall be excess of Contractor’s insurance only and shall not contribute with it. b. Period of Effect. All insurance required by this Contract shall remain in full force and effect at all times during the prosecution of the Work and until the final completion and acceptance thereof. In addition, the general liability coverage shall be maintained for a minimum of five (5) years after final completion and acceptance of the Work. In the event Contractor fails to obtain or maintain completed operations coverage as required by this Contract, the City at its sole discretion may purchase the coverage as required and the cost will be paid by Contractor. The Notice to Proceed does not relieve Contractor of the duty to obtain such insurance as required herein.
c. Notice. Contractor shall not cancel, assign, or change any policy of insurance required by this Contract or engage in any act or omission that will cause its insurer to cancel any insurance policy required by this Contract except after providing 30 days prior written notice to the City. If an insurance policy required by this Contract is unilaterally cancelled or changed by the insurer, the Contractor shall immediately provide written notice to the City and obtain substitute insurance meeting the requirements of this Contract. Each insurance policy required by this Contract shall provide that coverage shall not be canceled, except with notice to the City. Nothing in this subsection relieves Contractor of its obligation to maintain all insurance required by this Contract at all times during the prosecution of the Work. Insurance policies shall have provisions requiring that City be given minimum 10 day notice of cancellation for nonpayment of premium. d. Deductibles and Self-Insured Retentions. Any deductibles or self-insured retentions must be declared to and approved by the City. At the option of the City, either (1) the insurer shall reduce or eliminate such deductibles or self-insured retentions as respects the City, its officers, officials, employees, agents and volunteers; or (2) Contractor shall provide a financial guarantee satisfactory to the City guaranteeing payment of loses and related investigations, claim administration and defense expenses. e. No insurance policy required herein shall be written as claims-made coverage. Insurance must be written on an occurrence basis.
f. Failure of the City to enforce in a timely manner any of the provisions of this Contract, including the Contract’s insurance provisions, shall not act as a waiver to enforcement of any of these provisions at a later date. The City reserves the right to require complete, F.5.b
Packet Pg. 76
Attachment: Performance Pipeline Tech Contract -SD Repair 2023 (3326 : Award Contract for 2023 Annual Storm Drain Repair Project 5007)

Page 7 of 12 ends

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

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

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

10. PROHIBITED INTEREST: Contractor represents that to the best of its knowledge no officer or employee of the City has any financial interest in this transaction or in the business of Contractor; has used his or her position considering or approving the Contract for private F.5.b
Packet Pg. 77
Attachment: Performance Pipeline Tech Contract -SD Repair 2023 (3326 : Award Contract for 2023 Annual Storm Drain Repair Project 5007)

Page 8 of 12 ends

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

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

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

CITY OF ORINDA CONTRACTOR
Director of Public Works Performance Pipeline Technologies Inc.

City of Orinda 5292 System Drive
22 Orinda Way Huntington Beach, CA 92649
Orinda, California 94563 Fax: (714) 333-4027
Fax: (925) 253-7699 Attn: Gene Glassburner

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

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

F.5.b
Packet Pg. 78
Attachment: Performance Pipeline Tech Contract -SD Repair 2023 (3326 : Award Contract for 2023 Annual Storm Drain Repair Project 5007)

Page 9 of 12 ends

Contractor shall maintain any and all ledgers, books of account, invoices, vouchers, canceled checks and other records or documents evidencing or relating to charges for services or expenditures and disbursements charged to the City for a minimum period of three (3) years, or for any longer period required by law, from the date of final payment to Contractor under this Contract.

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

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

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

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

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

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

15. CONFLICTS OF INTEREST AND NONCOMPETITIVE PRACTICES AFFIDAVIT:

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

F.5.b
Packet Pg. 79
Attachment: Performance Pipeline Tech Contract -SD Repair 2023 (3326 : Award Contract for 2023 Annual Storm Drain Repair Project 5007)

Page 10 of 12 ends

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

23. SPECIAL NOTICE:

CONTRACTORS ARE REQUIRED BY LAW TO BE LICENSED AND REGULATED BY THE CONTRACTORS’ STATE LICENSE BOARD WHICH HAS JURISDICTION F.5.b
Packet Pg. 80
Attachment: Performance Pipeline Tech Contract -SD Repair 2023 (3326 : Award Contract for 2023 Annual Storm Drain Repair Project 5007)

Page 11 of 12 ends

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

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

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

This Contract is executed by the City upon approval by the Council at its regular meeting of April 16, 2024.

CITY OF ORINDA CONTRACTOR
By: By:

David Biggs Print Name:

City Manager Title:

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

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

Osa L. Wolff
City Attorney
Exhibits
A. Compliance with Insurance Requirements declaration
B. Performance Bond
C. Labor and Material Bond
D. Warranty and Guaranty
E. Affidavit Concerning Conflicts of Interest and Noncompetitive Practices F. Insurance Documents To Be Provided by Contractor
i. Workers’ Compensation Certificate of Insurance
ii. Workers’ Compensation Insurance Endorsements
iii. Automobile Liability Certificate of Insurance
iv. Automobile Liability Insurance Endorsements
F.5.b
Packet Pg. 81
Attachment: Performance Pipeline Tech Contract -SD Repair 2023 (3326 : Award Contract for 2023 Annual Storm Drain Repair Project 5007)

Page 12 of 12 ends

v. General Liability Certificate of Insurance
vi. General Liability Insurance Endorsements
vii. Builder’s Risk (Course of Construction) Certificate of Insurance viii. Builder’s Risk (Course of Construction) Insurance Endorsements G. Contractor Safety Program – Self Certification Worksheet H. Contractor In-Use Off-Road Diesel-Fuel Regulations Assurances I. Proposal submitted by Contractor
F.5.b
Packet Pg. 82
Attachment: Performance Pipeline Tech Contract -SD Repair 2023 (3326 : Award Contract for 2023 Annual Storm Drain Repair Project 5007)

EXHIBIT A

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

A. Additional Insureds.

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

B. Primary Insurance.

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

C. Builder’s Risk.

With respect to my builder’s risk (course of construction) insurance coverage, I have attached to this Contract an endorsement naming the City as a loss payee.

D. Waiver of Subrogation.

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

E. Notice of Cancellation.

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

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

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

CONTRACTOR NAME
Date:

CONTRACTOR SIGNATURE
[Signature must be notarized. Attach acknowledgement form.] SIGNATORY’S TITLE/OFFICIAL CAPACITY
F.5.b
Packet Pg. 83
Attachment: Performance Pipeline Tech Contract -SD Repair 2023 (3326 : Award Contract for 2023 Annual Storm Drain Repair Project 5007)

EXHIBIT B

PERFORMANCE BOND
Bond No:

Premium:

Contract No:

WHEREAS, the City of Orinda, State of California, and , (Principal), have entered into a Contract in which Principal agrees to install and complete certain designated public improvements described as 2023 ANNUAL STORM DRAIN REPAIR PROJECT (CATEGORY B) PROJECT NO.: 5007, Various Locations in the City of Orinda, and; WHEREAS, the Principal is required under the terms of the Contract for furnish a bond for faithful performance of the Contract.

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

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

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

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

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

F.5.b
Packet Pg. 84
Attachment: Performance Pipeline Tech Contract -SD Repair 2023 (3326 : Award Contract for 2023 Annual Storm Drain Repair Project 5007) IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this instrument has been duly executed by the Principal and Surety above named, on , 20 .

Date:

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

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

NAME AND ADDRESS OF CONTRACTOR:

NAME AND ADDRESS OF SURETY:

F.5.b
Packet Pg. 85
Attachment: Performance Pipeline Tech Contract -SD Repair 2023 (3326 : Award Contract for 2023 Annual Storm Drain Repair Project 5007)

EXHIBIT C

LABOR AND MATERIAL BOND
Bond No:

Premium:

Contract No:

WHEREAS, the City of Orinda, State of California, and , (Principal), have entered into a Contract in which Principal agrees to install and complete certain designated public improvements described as 2023 ANNUAL STORM DRAIN REPAIR PROJECT (CATEGORY B) PROJECT NO.: 5007, Various Locations in the City of Orinda, and; WHEREAS, under the terms of the Contract, Principal is required to file a good and sufficient payment with the City of Orinda to secure the claims to which reference is made in Title 15 (commencing with Section 3082) of Part 4 of Division 3 of the Civil Code of the State of California.

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

THE CONDITION OF THIS OBLIGATION IS SUCH that:

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

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

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

F.5.b
Packet Pg. 86
Attachment: Performance Pipeline Tech Contract -SD Repair 2023 (3326 : Award Contract for 2023 Annual Storm Drain Repair Project 5007) This bond shall inure to the benefit of any of the persons and entities identified in Section 3181 so as to give a right of action to those persons or their assigns in any suit brought on the bond.

Should the conditions of this bond be fully performed, then this obligation shall become null and void, otherwise it shall be and remain in full force and effect.

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

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

Date:

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

NAME AND ADDRESS OF CONTRACTOR:

NAME AND ADDRESS OF SURETY:

F.5.b
Packet Pg. 87
Attachment: Performance Pipeline Tech Contract -SD Repair 2023 (3326 : Award Contract for 2023 Annual Storm Drain Repair Project 5007)

EXHIBIT D

WARRANTY AND GUARANTY
To the CITY OF ORINDA,
Contractor hereby warrants and guarantees for one (1) year from and after the date of completion of the services provided for in this Contract that said materials and labor necessary for the 2023 ANNUAL STORM DRAIN REPAIR PROJECT (CATEGORY B) PROJECT NO.: 5007, Various Locations in the City of Orinda, shall operate as provided for in the Contract Documents. During the term of this warranty, Contractor shall provide all materials, parts and labor, at its own expense, which are necessary to repair and/or correct any and all defects, installation or operational failures in the equipment from any cause.

Notwithstanding the foregoing, Contractor shall not be required to bear the expense of correction of any failure in the equipment that is caused by the sole or active negligence or willful misconduct of the City.

The warranties of each part or component supplied are in addition to the warranties required of Contractor in other Contract Documents.

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

CONTRACTOR NAME
Date:

CONTRACTOR SIGNATURE
[Signature must be notarized. Attach acknowledgement form.] SIGNATORY’S TITLE/OFFICIAL CAPACITY
F.5.b
Packet Pg. 88
Attachment: Performance Pipeline Tech Contract -SD Repair 2023 (3326 : Award Contract for 2023 Annual Storm Drain Repair Project 5007)

EXHIBIT E

AFFIDAVIT CONCERNING CONFLICTS OF INTEREST AND

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

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

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

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

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

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

CONTRACTOR NAME
Date:

CONTRACTOR SIGNATURE
[Signature must be notarized. Attach acknowledgement form.] SIGNATORY’S TITLE/OFFICIAL CAPACITY
F.5.b
Packet Pg. 89
Attachment: Performance Pipeline Tech Contract -SD Repair 2023 (3326 : Award Contract for 2023 Annual Storm Drain Repair Project 5007)

EXHIBIT F

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

F.5.b
Packet Pg. 90
Attachment: Performance Pipeline Tech Contract -SD Repair 2023 (3326 : Award Contract for 2023 Annual Storm Drain Repair Project 5007)

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

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

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

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

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

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

F.5.b
Packet Pg. 91
Attachment: Performance Pipeline Tech Contract -SD Repair 2023 (3326 : Award Contract for 2023 Annual Storm Drain Repair Project 5007) Bidder Safety Program Self-Certification Worksheet
PART A - Safety Programs
Please indicate below whether your firm has the following written safety programs. If any of the programs listed do not apply to your operations or this project, please make note of this in the “Comments” column.

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

F.5.b
Packet Pg. 92
Attachment: Performance Pipeline Tech Contract -SD Repair 2023 (3326 : Award Contract for 2023 Annual Storm Drain Repair Project 5007) PART B - Safety Equipment - Identify what safety equipment will be available and used for this project.

Type Description/Comments
[ ] Gas detectors
[ ] Ventilation equipment
[ ] Approved harnesses and
lanyards
[ ] Mechanical hoists
[ ] Fire extinguishers
[ ] First aid kits
[ ] Respirators
[ ] Hard hats
[ ] Hearing protectors
[ ] Safety goggles
[ ] Steeled toed footwear
[ ] Hand protection
[ ] Fall protection
[ ]
[ ]
PART C - Specialized Training and Certification - Identify the areas of specialized training or certification that will have been completed by employees who will be assigned to this Project. Be prepared to provide documentation as requested.
[ ] CPR/first aid [ ] Confined space operations and
rescue
[ ] Scaffolding
[ ] Fork lift operation [ ] Respirators [ ] Air-Supplying [ ] Air-Purifying
[ ] Flagging
[ ] Cranes/hoists operation [ ] Trenching and shoring
competent person
[ ]
[ ] Heavy equipment
operation
[ ] Welding [ ]
[ ] Powder-actuated tools
use
[ ] Asbestos abatement [ ]
F.5.b
Packet Pg. 93
Attachment: Performance Pipeline Tech Contract -SD Repair 2023 (3326 : Award Contract for 2023 Annual Storm Drain Repair Project 5007) PART D - Jobsite Safety Practices

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Name (Print) Title
Signature Date
(CEO or equivalent signature required)
573296.1
F.5.b
Packet Pg. 94
Attachment: Performance Pipeline Tech Contract -SD Repair 2023 (3326 : Award Contract for 2023 Annual Storm Drain Repair Project 5007) Exhibit H –Contractor In-Use Off-Road Diesel-Fuel Regulations Assurances The City of Orinda requires that all work done on City property or otherwise on behalf of the City is performed in accordance with the State’s environmental health and safety laws, codes and regulations. To this end, please check the appropriate boxes and provide information as required below related to compliance with California Air Resources Board (CARB) In-Use Off-Road Diesel-Fueled Fleets Regulations. Failure to do so may affect your contract with the City. This form must be updated annually or anytime changes occur. Contractor agrees to provide the City with any documents referenced below within one business day of the request.

COMPLIANCE MEASURES
I. Does the project involve the use of vehicles subject to 13 CCR 2449, the In-Use Off-Road DieselFueled Fleets Regulation? (More information on these regulations is available here:
https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/our-work/programs/use-road-diesel-fueled-fleets-regulation) YES NO
II. If the answer in Section I above is NO, Contractor does not need to check any boxes for items 1, 2, and 3 below and no further information is required.

If the answer above in Section I is YES, unless an exemption applies Contractor must provide to the City:
1) a valid Certificate of Reported Compliance for its fleet and 2) valid Certificates of Reported Compliance for fleets of any subcontractors. Contractor must check YES or N/A, as applicable, for items 1, 2, and 3 below.
•
A. If Contractor will use covered equipment that is subject to an exemption from Off-Road Regulation requirements, Contractor must provide detailed documentation identifying the exemption and supporting the applicability of the exemption.

B. For Contractors asserting the emergency operations exemption, Contractor must include:
1) a description of the emergency, 2) the address or description of the specific location where Contractor performed work to address the emergency, 3) the dates on which the emergency work was performed, and 4) an attestation by the Contractor that the vehicles operated on the project were only used to carry out emergency work.

Please respond YES or N/A for each item below. YES N/A

1. Contractor has provided the City of Orinda with
a copy of a valid Certificate of Reported
Compliance for Contractor’s own fleet.
(N/A if exemption
applies)

2. Contractor has provided the City of Orinda with
a copy of a valid Certificate of Reported
Compliance for any subcontractors’ fleet.
(N/A if exemption
applies or there are
no subcontractors)

3. Contractor has provided documentation
supporting a claimed exemption to the Off-Road
Regulation.
(N/A if no
exemption applies)
Contractor:
____________________________________________________ (print company name) hereby certifies that the foregoing is true and correct.

Contractor Signature Above
Print Name & Title & Date Above
1739127.1
F.5.b
Packet Pg. 95
Attachment: Performance Pipeline Tech Contract -SD Repair 2023 (3326 : Award Contract for 2023 Annual Storm Drain Repair Project 5007)

CITY OF ORINDA
2023 ANNUAL STORM DRAIN REPAIR PROJECT
(Category B)
PROJECT NO. 5007

CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA

SITE MAP VICINITY MAP

Sheet 1 of 6 22 Orinda Way | Orinda, Ca 94563
Project Location
Location 5
53 Ivy Drive
Location 3
3 Woodland Road
Location 1 and 2
673 Moraga Way
Location 4
22 Lost Valley Drive
Location 6
173 Camino Pablo

NOT TO SCALE NOT TO SCALE
2/6/2024
F.5.c
Packet Pg. 96
Attachment: Orinda 2023 Annual SD Repair Project Plans 2024-02-06 (3326 : Award Contract for 2023 Annual Storm Drain Repair Project 5007) NOTE: SEE PROJECT SPECIAL PROVISIONS FOR TYPES OF ACCEPTABLE PIPE REPAIR METHODS. 2023 Annual Storm Drain Repair Project Location 1: 673 Moraga Way (80 LF) . Location 2: 673 Moraga Way (93 LF)
Sheet 2 of 6 22 Orinda Way | Orinda, Ca 94563
Ex. Open pipe
and Headwalls
Loc. #1 673 Moraga Way
Pipe: PL-970
Size: 36’’ x 22’’ CMPA
Repair Length: 80 LF
2 Estabueno Dr.
35 Eastwood Dr.
673 Moraga Way

NOT TO SCALE
Loc. #2 673 Moraga Way
Pipe: PL-971
Size: 36’’ x 24’’ CMPA
Repair Length: 93 LF
Ex. Catch Basin
CB-2638
Depth to Invert: 30’’ ±
Ex. Catch Basin
CB-2637
Depth to Invert: 25.5’’ ±
F.5.c
Packet Pg. 97
Attachment: Orinda 2023 Annual SD Repair Project Plans 2024-02-06 (3326 : Award Contract for 2023 Annual Storm Drain Repair Project 5007) NOTE: SEE PROJECT SPECIAL PROVISIONS FOR TYPES OF ACCEPTABLE PIPE REPAIR METHODS. 2023 Annual Storm Drain Repair Project | Location 3: 3 Woodland Road (80 LF) Sheet 3 of 6 22 Orinda Way | Orinda, Ca 94563
Ex. Manhole
Depth to Inv.: 10’-3’’ ±
Loc. #3 503 Moraga Way
Pipe: PL-785
Size: 72’’ CMP
Repair Length: 80 LF (Within
Easement)
Ex. Manhole in Yard
(Within Easement)
3 Woodland Road
2 Woodland Rd
501 Moraga Way

NOT TO SCALE
Ex. Private Fencing
6 Woodland Rd
Ex. Open Pipe
and Headwall
F.5.c
Packet Pg. 98
Attachment: Orinda 2023 Annual SD Repair Project Plans 2024-02-06 (3326 : Award Contract for 2023 Annual Storm Drain Repair Project 5007)

NOTE: SEE PROJECT SPECIAL PROVISIONS FOR TYPES OF ACCEPTABLE PIPE REPAIR METHODS. 2023 Annual Storm Drain Repair Project | Location 4: 22 Lost Valley Dr. (12LF) Sheet 4 of 6 22 Orinda Way | Orinda, Ca 94563
Ex. Open Pipe and
Headwalls
23 Lost Valley Dr.
26#A Lost Valley Dr.
22 Lost Valley Dr.
25 NOT TO SCALE Lost Valley Dr.
26 Lost Valley Dr.

Loc. #4 22 Lost Valley Dr.

Pipe: PL-758
Size: 36’’ CMP
Repair Length: 12 LF
(connected To Ex. HDPE)
Ex. Open Pipe
Lost Valley Drive
F.5.c
Packet Pg. 99
Attachment: Orinda 2023 Annual SD Repair Project Plans 2024-02-06 (3326 : Award Contract for 2023 Annual Storm Drain Repair Project 5007)

NOTE: SEE PROJECT SPECIAL PROVISIONS FOR TYPES OF ACCEPTABLE PIPE REPAIR METHODS 2023 Annual Storm Drain Repair Project | Location 5: 53 Ivy Drive (187 LF)

Sheet 5 of 6 22 Orinda Way | Orinda, Ca 94563
Ex. Catch Basin
Loc. #5 53 Ivy Dr.

Pipe: PL-891
Size: 48’’ CMP
Repair Length: 187 LF
Ex. 48’’ CMP
Outfall
3 Descanso Dr.
2 Descanso Dr.

NOT TO SCALE
53 Ivy Dr
5 Descanso Dr.

Ex. 48’’ CMP Open Pipe 22 LF
57 LF
108 LF
Ex. Outfall
F.5.c
Packet Pg. 100 Attachment: Orinda 2023 Annual SD Repair Project Plans 2024-02-06 (3326 : Award Contract for 2023 Annual Storm Drain Repair Project 5007) NOTE: SEE PROJECT SPECIAL PROVISIONS FOR TYPES OF ACCEPTABLE PIPE REPAIR METHODS 2023 Annual Storm Drain Repair Project | Location 6: 173 Camino Pablo (35 LF) . Sheet 6 of 6 22 Orinda Way | Orinda, Ca 94563

NOT TO SCALE
Ex. Open Pipe
New Pipe Invert Shall
Match Existing
173 Camino Pablo
Woodland Road
175 Camino Pablo
Woodland Road
171 Camino Pablo
Woodland Road
177 Camino Pablo
Woodland Road
Remove Existing 12’’ CMP
Ex. Pipe Length 36 LF
Loc. #6 173 Camino Pablo
Pipe: PL-1326
Size: 12’’ HDPE
New Pipe Alignment
Installation Length: 35 LF
Ex. Catch Basin
CB-2392
Depth to Invert: 24’’ ±
F.5.c
Packet Pg. 101 Attachment: Orinda 2023 Annual SD Repair Project Plans 2024-02-06 (3326 : Award Contract for 2023 Annual Storm Drain Repair Project 5007)

CITY OF ORINDA
BUDGET CHANGE FORM FISCAL YEAR 2023-24
Funds Appropriated Yr 1 of Biennial Budget Adopted 6/20/2023 CHANGE FORM # 005-24
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 2023-24:
105-35-00-7127-5007

MEASURE L SALES TAX / PUBLIC WORKS / NO PROGRAM /

CONSTRUCTION / ANNUAL STORM DRAIN REPAIR PROJECT
(CATEGORY B)
$85,000.00

As Presented at the City Council Meeting on: April 16, 2024 #################(Finance Use Only)###################
NOTE: FY 2023 Not In System – NEED TO INCORPORATE WITH MID-CYCLE ADJ Posted By: Date:

REASON FOR BUDGET CHANGE ENTRY: At the City Council meeting on April 16, 2024, the City Council was asked to award the construction contract for CIP 5007and appropriate an additional $85,000 from Fund 105.

F.5.d
Packet Pg. 102 Attachment: Budget Change Form #005-24 (3326 : Award Contract for 2023 Annual Storm Drain Repair Project 5007) City Council
Staff Report
Agenda Item: F.6
Date: April 16, 2024
Department:

Public Works and
Engineering Services
AGENDA TITLE: Award Construction Contract to Cowan & Thompson Inc. for the Camino Sobrante Retaining Wall Replacement Project (CIP #5021) RECOMMENDATION:

BACKGROUND:

The subject retaining wall, near the frontage of 56 Camino Sobrante, has been in distressed condition for several years. However, during the winter storms in early 2023, the wall was impacted to the extent that it is now judged to be in failed condition. Staff evaluated potential FEMA/OES disaster funding, however since the road is part of the federal aid system, the only coverage available was through FHWA/Caltrans. Such coverage would require a federal project delivery process, requiring significant administrative costs and time delays which would not be warranted given the relatively small size of this project.

In July 2023 the city advertised for bids for a combined project which included the subject project along with a road stabilization project on upper El Toyonal (north of Chapparal Pl.), in which a latent landslide was reactivated. The city received three bids, with the low bid being $433,200. The Camino Sobrante Wall line item was $244,300. The bids were rejected at the September 5, 2023 city council meeting. The city was able to perform the El Toyonal road stabilization project, using a modified repair plan, prior to the start of the storm season in 2023/24, and decided to rebid the Camino Sobrante Wall by itself.

DISCUSSION:

With respect to CEQA guidelines, the project was determined to be Categorically Exempt under section 15301, class 1, and a Notice of Exemption was filed with the County Clerk on 2-24-2024. The plans for the project were approved by City Council at their September 5, 2023 meeting.

1. Award Construction Contract
The Project was advertised for bids on February 5, 2024. Nine bids were received on March 5, 2024, with results as shown below. The Engineer’s Estimate for the project was $ 220,000.

F.6
Packet Pg. 103
Bidder Bid Amount, $
Cowan & Thompson Construction Inc. 157,649
B&D Excavation 187,200
RWR Construction 198,980
Sandstone 205,000
Central Pacific 228,650
Kerex Engineering 239,000
Valentine Corporation 258,369
North Bay Excavation 286,409.50
Dunn Co. Inc 301,467
The apparent low bidder, Cowan & Thompson Construction Inc., submitted a bid of $157,649. Staff has reviewed the bid documents and found Cowan & Thompson to be responsive and responsible and therefore is recommending that the contract be awarded to them. In addition, Staff is recommending that a contingency of approximately 15% ($24,000) be authorized to accommodate potential changes or unforeseen changes in conditions.

NEXT STEPS:

Upon approval of the award of the construction contract, the contract (standard city construction contract, as provided in the bid documents) will be delivered to the contractor for signature and evidence of insurance preparation. After the completed contract documents have been reviewed by the City Attorney, the contract will be executed by the City Manager. Project construction is estimated to begin in June 2024, after schools are out of session.

FISCAL IMPACT:

The approved budget for Project 5021 is $165,000, funded by Fund 704, Road/Drainage Stabilization. In order to accommodate the recommended contract contingency noted above, additional funding of $16,000 is required. It is recommended to utilize Fund 105 (Orinda Add-on Sales Tax, Measure L) as this funding source has sufficient resources available. This is reflected on Budget Change Form #006-24 which is attachment A.

ATTACHMENTS:

A. Budget Change Form #006-24
Respectfully Submitted by:

Scott Christie
Public Works Director
Prepared By: Scott Christie, Public Works Director
F.6
Packet Pg. 104
Approved by:

F.6
Packet Pg. 105

CITY OF ORINDA
BUDGET CHANGE FORM FISCAL YEAR 2023-24
Funds Appropriated Yr 1 of Biennial Budget Adopted 6/20/2023 CHANGE FORM # 006-24
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 2023-24:
105-35-00-7127-5021

MEASURE L SALES TAX / PUBLIC WORKS / NO PROGRAM /

CONSTRUCTION / CAMINO SOBRANTE RETAINING WALL

REPLACEMENT
$16,000.00

REASON FOR BUDGET CHANGE ENTRY: At the City Council meeting on April 16, 2024, the City Council was asked to award the construction contract for CIP 5021and appropriate an additional $16,000 from Fund 105.

F.6.a
Packet Pg. 106 Attachment: Budget Change Form #006-24 (3330 : award retaining wall contract 56 Camino Sobrante) City Council
Staff Report
Agenda Item: H.1
Date: April 16, 2024
Department: City Council
AGENDA TITLE: Fire Fuels Reduction Incentive Pilot Program Update RECOMMENDATION:

BACKGROUND:

At the June 21, 2022, City Council Meeting the City Council set aside $400,000.00 for a grant/incentive program. After the program development from the Supplemental Sales Tax Oversight Commission (SSTOC) and City Staff, recommendations were provided to the City Council On October 11, 2022, regarding program parameters with the City Council adopting Resolution No. 53-22, approving a Fire Fuels Reduction Incentive Pilot Program, with the appropriated Measure R funds.

Initially, the program was limited to only residents who lived along identified major evacuation routes, to increase the number of submittals the SSTOC revisited the program and recommended that the City Council expand the scope of the program. At the April 18, 2023, City Council meeting the City Council approved broadening of the program, utilizing the Fire Code definition of a Fire Apparatus Access Road, which in practice includes most roads and driveways, to replace the more restrictive Major Evacuation Route, language.

Prior to the program’s expansion in April of 2023, a total of five applications were received, and only two were found to meet the program’s requirements. As of the end of March 2024, 100 applications have been approved, and more than a dozen are currently under review. Applicants have reported that most work was done with the MOFD vegetation ordinance in mind, although not all received citations. The reported costs also vary by applicant, with some not meeting the maximum benefit of $599.00, while other’s expenses for vegetation removal were more than the spending cap for cost-sharing. On average, an Orinda resident who applies for the reimbursement has spent over $2,000 on fire fuel mitigation.

DISCUSSION:

The SSTOC established an Ad Hoc Committee on September 13, 2023, to explore additional possible revisions to the program. City Staff has worked with the SSTOC’s Ad-hoc subcommittee on how to best improve the Fire Fuels Reduction Incentive Pilot Program. The Ad-hoc subcommittee provided a report to the full SSTOC on March 13, 2024, and the SSTOC approved a report from the Ad Hoc outlining those recommended H.1
Packet Pg. 107
changes, with the Ad Hoc tasked to refine that based on the Commission discussion for inclusion with this staff report and which is provided as Attachment 1. The Commission’s recommended changes are summarized below:

Recommended Administrative Changes:
• Staff are recommending that the program does not accept cash payment for expenditure reimbursement. Residents must submit verifiable proof of payment, (credit card receipt or copy of a canceled check are potential examples)
• Require submission of both invoice and proof of payment • Eligibility based upon FAC-A assessment increased from within 90 days of assessment to within one calendar year (January 1, to December 31). • Clarify that an MOFD citation must be their official document and specifically matches the applicant's property.
• The Submitted receipts need to itemize specific work that qualifies for reimbursement. • Add a section to include the Firewise Leader’s contact information to verify they are active in a Firewise neighborhood.

Recommended Program Changes:
• Orinda residents can apply for the incentive each calendar year. • Expand eligible work by expanding eligible expenses to include ladder fuels, as well as trees, and increasing the eligible zone to cover the entire property. o Total removal of Eucalyptus and/or Monterey Pine trees within 6 feet of a habitable structure or a fire apparatus road measuring from back of curb or edge of pavement;
o Removal of ladder fuels (shrubs and bushes), creating a 6-foot gap between the lower tree canopy and the ground. And within 10 feet of fire apparatus road;
• Addition of qualified work to include “Removal of vegetation in Zones 0-2 (also referred to as immediate to extended zones) to bring the property into compliance with City and MOFD code;”
The Commission believes the term Fire Apparatus Road is difficult to understand, even with the definition of a fire apparatus road at the top of the application. The Commission is proposing to simply the language in the application from a fire apparatus road to just “road” as noted below.

Under Qualifying work, bullet number five, it is suggested to remove the phrase:
“fire apparatus“ from “Removal of hazardous vegetation or combustible material to a minimum height of 15 feet within 3 feet of a fire apparatus road measured from back of curb or edge of pavement” to be less confusing for the applicant (roads accessible by emergency vehicles are considered a fire apparatus access road.)
Cost Sharing Component:

The SSTOC is also requesting the City Council to consider increasing the cost-sharing amount from $599. The Commission is suggesting an increase somewhere between H.1
Packet Pg. 108
$1,000 and no more than $2,500 for consideration while maintaining the 50% costsharing up to the new maximum amount. o Currently, the maximum amount is $599 to stay below the taxable reportable income threshold. Going over $599 triggers a Form 1099. This has staff implications of time to file a Form 1099, fielding questions, and the costs of mailing the tax form out at the end of the year. (The City already issues hundreds of 1099’s each year, and the City Manager and Director of Administrative Service do not believe that this administrative burden should be a factor in the Council’s considerations).
o The SSTOC recommends raising the max amount from $599 based on the updated analysis from regional incentive programs.
o The SSTOC believes that one of the reasons for residents not applying for the Fire Fuels Reduction Incentive Program is that $599 isn’t enough money to motivate people to complete the application.
o The average self-report expenditure is over $2,000.

City staff concur with the Recommended Administrative Changes, are supportive of the Recommended Program changes; and defers to the City Council as a policy matter the Cost Sharing Component.

NEXT STEPS:

Should the City Council choose to adopt any Fire Fuels Reduction Incentive Program changes, staff will create a resolution outlining the program changes including any required articulation of the public benefit in doing so, and to bring a Resolution back to the City Council for approval at a future meeting (April 30, 2024).

FISCAL IMPACT:

The City Council has already appropriated $400,000 in Measure R Funding for the program, of which approximately $350,000 remains unspent.

ATTACHMENTS:

A. SSTOC Survey and Incentive Ad Hoc Report - March 2024 B. Fire Fuels Reduction Incentive Pilot Program Application Respectfully Submitted by:

Micki Cronin
Senior Management Analyst
Prepared By: Micki Cronin, Senior Management Analyst
Approved by:

H.1
Packet Pg. 109
H.1
Packet Pg. 110
SSTOC Survey and Incen�ve Grant Ad Hoc Commitee
March 2023 Report
The Survey and Incen�ve Ad Hoc subcommitee in conjunc�on with the Outreach and Educa�on Coordinator James Duff conducted an updated analysis of other defensible space/vegeta�on management grant programs within the state of California. This was done to supplement and expand upon the original analysis undertaken when the program was first established and again when a first round of modifica�ons was considered. Our goals were to learn:
• what other programs exist
• criteria for selec�on
• maximum amount awarded
• what is working well
• what could be improved upon
The majority of the programs are in more rural areas of the state and are designed to help lower income or seniors accomplish defensible space work. Many grant programs are being run by FireSafe Councils with funding from grants (e.g., Cal Fire), their respec�ve coun�es, and PG&E and other local u�li�es.

Grant awards ranged from $900 - $5,000 o�en with the Fire Safe Councils paying contractors directly at the larger grant amount levels.

There are two areas, Marin County, and the City of Truckee (area serviced by a fire district), that passed parcel taxes for the specific purpose of funding wildfire preven�on efforts. Both areas have a number of grant programs.

Comparable Grant Programs
For our comparisons, we considered the defensible space/vegeta�on management grants offered by Novato Fire Protec�on District and San Rafael Fire Department, both significantly funded through Marin County’s Measure C parcel tax which is overseen by the Marin Wildfire Protec�on Agency (MWPA).

Below is a summary of their programs.

Novato San Rafael
Maximum reimbursement per year $1,000
Must pick if you are seeking
reimbursement from Novato
or MWPA.
$1,000
Maximum reimbursement during
Measure C/10 year
$15,000
(from all Measure C sources)
$15,000
(from all Measure C sources)
Matching reimbursement .50 to the $1.00 50%
Any applicant criteria (e.g., senior, low
income)
None Work must be completed by
a licensed San Rafael
business
Defensible Space Inspec�on Full inspec�on required
Photos are taken and used
to compare to completed
work photos
Full inspec�on required
Photos are taken and used
to compare to completed
work photos
H.1.a
Packet Pg. 111 Attachment: SSTOC Survey and Incentive Ad Hoc Report - March 2024 (3335 : SSTOC Incentive Update) Survey and Incentive Grant Ad Hoc
March 2024 Report

Page 2 of 4 ends

Items covered: • Trimming trees
• Removing hazardous
vegetation
• Improving horizontal &
vertical spacing of
vegetation
• Installing rock
• Removing Mulch
• Removing complete deck
systems and installing
hardscape
(only items on the
inspec�on will be covered
for reimbursement)
Projects must address issues
within 100 feet of structures
or within 10 feet of a road or
driveway. Emphasis is on
star�ng at the home and
working out the first 30 feet.

This work includes:
• Removing or reducing the
amount of plants within
30 feet of structure or 10
feet of road
• Creating space between
existing plants and trees
• One-time removal of
dead plants and debris
• Purchase of a fireresistant tarp for wood
piles
Documenta�on required • Invoices/receipts related
to work outlined in your
last assessment report.
• Proof of Payment –
deposited check,
bank/credit card
statement,
Venmo/PayPal invoice,
etc.
• Pictures of work
completed.
• Signed grant program
agreement.
• Payments must be made
directly from the resident
to a business.
• Bills and invoices must be
itemized to clearly
demonstrate all costs are
related to mi�ga�on
work included in your
defensible space report.
• Proof of Payment –
deposited check,
bank/credit card
statement,
Venmo/PayPal invoice,
etc.
• Pictures of work
completed.
• Signed grant program
agreement.

H.1.a
Packet Pg. 112 Attachment: SSTOC Survey and Incentive Ad Hoc Report - March 2024 (3335 : SSTOC Incentive Update) Survey and Incentive Grant Ad Hoc
March 2024 Report

Page 3 of 4 ends

Special Tax vs General Tax dis�nc�on
Measure R was approved as a General Tax which requires a simple majority and was passed with a majority of 58.7%.
“To help maintain and enhance essen�al City services, including wildfire risk reduc�on throughout Orinda, prepara�on for emergencies and disasters, repair of public storm drains, con�nued public street maintenance, and other city services, shall the City of Orinda increase its exis�ng one-half cent sales tax to one cents, which would generate approximately $2.4 million annually for a period of twenty years, with financial audits, public review of all expenditures, and a ci�zens’ oversight commitee?” -Measure R ballot language In comparison Marin County’s Measure C is a Special Tax which is narrow in scope and received at minimum the required 2/3rds voter approval. This funding mechanism is to be directed toward a very specific issue or ini�a�ve and is restricted from being used on other projects, programs or costs not related to wildfire risk reduc�on.
“The revenues raised by this tax are used solely to plan, finance, implement, manage, own, and operate a mul�-jurisdic�onal agency to prevent and mi�gate wildfires in Marin County.” -Marin Wildfire Prevention Authority Given this differen�a�on any use or designa�on of Measure R funds should ensure it remains a General Tax.

Recommenda�on
Recognizing that fire knows no boundaries on a property, we recommend the qualifying work be expanded to focus on Zones 0 – 2, in addi�on to work along any road or driveway. Our goal is to have residents remove as much vegeta�on as possible.

The other changes relate to the �ming of the inspec�ons/cita�ons, how o�en a resident can reapply, what types of payment methods are acceptable, and when the applica�on must be submited following the comple�on of the work. This is based on recommenda�ons from Ms. Cronin and Mr. Duff.

Ad-Hoc Applica�on recommenda�ons:
• Orinda residents can apply for incen�ve annually based on calendar year. • Eligibility based upon FAC-A assessment increased from 90 days to within calendar year (January 1, to December 31)
• Expand eligible work by removing the qualifica�on of tree removal, expanding eligibility to en�re property
• Remove limits of ladder fuel mi�ga�on, expanding scope to en�re property • Addi�on of qualified work to include “Removal of vegetation in in Zones 0-2 (also referred to as immediate to extended zones) to bring property into compliance with City and MOFD code;”
• Remove phrase fire apparatus from “Removal of hazardous vegetation or combustible material to a minimum height of 15 feet within 3 feet of a fire apparatus road measured from H.1.a
Packet Pg. 113 Attachment: SSTOC Survey and Incentive Ad Hoc Report - March 2024 (3335 : SSTOC Incentive Update) Survey and Incentive Grant Ad Hoc
March 2024 Report

Page 4 of 4 ends

back of curb or edge of pavement” so as to be less confusing for applicant (roads accessible by emergency vehicles is considered a fire apparatus access road.) • Inclusion of link to California Forest and Fire Service (CAL Fire) Ready for Wildfire website under Resources heading
Addi�onal City staff recommenda�ons
• Language specifying that payments must be made with methods other than physical cash • Inclusion of IBHS’ Wildfire Prepared Home in resources sec�on. • Inclusion of link to sign up for home assessment in applica�on when checking boxes for eligibility • Language to specify that MOFD no�fica�on has to be official and specific to applicant’s property • Note that regular landscaping is not eligible for reimbursement • Added lis�ng contact informa�on of firewise leader as way to prove ac�ve involvement in firewise community
• Separated Receipt and Proof of Payment from each other, now they require their own individual upload
These recommenda�ons are also illustrated in the redline version of the applica�on form.

Increased Marke�ng of Grant Program
One of our goals is to encourage more people to voluntarily comply with local code as well as best prac�ces for defensible space on their proper�es. With slightly more than half the grant applica�ons using no�fica�on from MOFD that their property is not in compliance as jus�fica�on for the work, we have room to improve the voluntarily compliance. As such we encourage the City to create a comprehensive marke�ng plan to promote all measure R-funded programs and resources. This could include newspaper adver�sing, collabora�on with the Chamber of Commerce for business promo�on, proac�ve media outreach and the like.

H.1.a
Packet Pg. 114 Attachment: SSTOC Survey and Incentive Ad Hoc Report - March 2024 (3335 : SSTOC Incentive Update) H.1.b
Packet Pg. 115 Attachment: Fire Fuels Reduction Incentive Pilot Program Application (3335 : SSTOC Incentive Update) H.1.b
Packet Pg. 116 Attachment: Fire Fuels Reduction Incentive Pilot Program Application (3335 : SSTOC Incentive Update) H.1.b
Packet Pg. 117 Attachment: Fire Fuels Reduction Incentive Pilot Program Application (3335 : SSTOC Incentive Update) H.1.b
Packet Pg. 118 Attachment: Fire Fuels Reduction Incentive Pilot Program Application (3335 : SSTOC Incentive Update) City Council
Staff Report
Agenda Item: H.2
Date: April 16, 2024
Department:

Public Works and
Engineering Services
AGENDA TITLE: Red Flag Days Parking Restrictions Program Review RECOMMENDATION:

Receive Staff Report and presentation, and provide direction.

BACKGROUND:

In 2021, the City undertook an initial implementation of Red Flag Day Parking Restrictions in the El Toyonal area. The City found that the El Toyonal Red Flag program met expectations, and desired to expand the Red Flag Program. On July 19, 2022 the City Council adopted Resolution 36-22 and Traffic Order No. 216, expanding the Red Flag Parking Restrictions to additional streets that are located within the Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone (VHFSZ) noted below:
• Monte Vista Road from Camino Pablo to Monte Vista Ridge Road • Claremont Ave from Camino Pablo to the second western Holly Lane intersection
• Manzanita Drive from Camino Pablo to Bobolink Road
• The entire length Vista Del Mar
• The eastern portion of Camino Don Miguel from Miner Road to Vista del Mar
• The western leg of Sleepy Hollow Lane from Lombardy Lane to the Normandy Lane and Washington Lane intersection
• Lombardy Lane from Miner Road to Tarry Lane
• Dalewood Drive from Lombardy Lane to Sundown Terrace
• Honey Hill Road from Miner Road to Charles Hill Road
• Charles Hill Road from Honey Hill Road to El Nido Ranch Road • Sundown Terrace from Happy Valley Toad to Silver Oak Terrace On December 5, 2023, City Council adopted Resolution 65-23 and Traffic Order No. 225 to add Miner Rd., from Camino Pablo to Ranch Rd. which was inadvertently left off Traffic Order No. 216. This segment of Miner Rd., along with the above road segments, were included in the contract to install Red Flag No Parking signage, which was awarded in June 2023. The contract was accepted by City Council in March 2024.

At its January 23, 2024 meeting, City Council discussed the placement of the Red Flag No Parking signs within the expanded area (refer to Attachment A, meeting minutes).

After hearing public comments regarding the placement of signs on wider streets such as Dalewood Drive, and the spacing between signs, Council directed staff to gather H.2
Packet Pg. 119
additional information, review the criteria for placement of the Red Flag No Parking signs and present options at a future City Council Meeting.

Staff will summarize the findings in a PowerPoint presentation and present options for potentially revising the program implementation in order to find a balance between fire safety needs with concerns from residents.

DISCUSSION:

Staff conducted research by contacting various jurisdictions that have also implemented similar Red Flag Parking Restrictions. Although there are few agencies in southern California that have implemented a Red Flag Day No Parking program, staff were unable to identify a similar program in the northern California region. Orinda is currently one of the first cities in northern California to implement a Red Flag Day No Parking program. Some neighboring cities such as Oakland and Berkeley issue Red Flag Warning notifications and advise parking off-street, but they do not have a formal Red Flag No Parking Program in place.

Responses from jurisdictions with active Red Flag Parking Restriction Programs varied, partly due to the inception of these programs in 2006 and 2009, and gaps in the current staff's understanding of their setup. The following is a brief summary of their programs.

City of Pasadena
• Streets Greater than 27 feet are restricted on one side, less than 27 feet, parking is restricted on both sides
• Parking Enforcement Policy:

1. The first 3 Red Flag notifications or first 10 days, whichever is less, vehicles parked in restricted areas would receive warnings.

2. The next 3 Red Flag notifications or 10 days, whichever is less, vehicles parked in restricted areas would receive tickets; and, Thereafter vehicles parked in restricted areas would be ticketed and towed.

Los Angeles Fire Department
• Fire Station Commanders identified problem areas for evacuation and fire company access during brush fires, focusing on narrow roads, tight curves, and critical intersections. Fire and Transportation Departments verified these locations with the City’s Department of Transportation who then installed the necessary signs.
• Parking Enforcement Policy: Vehicles in violation of the restrictions are towed.

City of Beverly Hills
• The City of Beverly Hills’ Fire Department made the initial recommendations for areas within the Wildland Urban Interface (WUI) and Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones (VHFHSZ) to implement a Red Flag Parking Program. The H.2
Packet Pg. 120
recommended areas were evaluated by the City’s Department of Transportation and the Police Department before the Traffic and Parking Commission granted final approval for the installation of program signage. • Parking Enforcement Policy: Vehicles in violation of the restrictions are towed.

City of Orinda Current No Parking Program Expansion
For the recent expansion of the Red Flag Parking program, signs were installed based on the following criteria:
• Enforceability
• Engineering Expertise
• If possible, locate sign post at property lines (reduced impact on residents) • Clarity that the entire subject area is enforced
• Avoid conflict with utilities and other existing features • (The width of the street was not used as a criteria for sign placement) While staff affirms that the current signage placement complies with the plans and is standard practice, the City Council may explore the following alternative options:

Options for various street widths:
• <28’ – No Parking During Red Flag Days (both directions) • 28’-36’ – No Parking on Emergency Vehicular Access Side • >36’ – No Red Flag Parking Restriction (Parking allowed on both sides) Options for Enforcement
• For the first year, issue warnings for the first three red flag events • Citations will be given after the first three red flag events of the program • Year three onward, towing will be implemented for either repeat offenders or during an evacuation. This option will require further evaluation prior to implementation.

Options for Education
• Send out Pre-fire season reminder (currently done for El Toyonal annually and planned for Miner Road area this spring)
• Send out Red Flag Notifications and reminders about Parking Restrictions to subscribers of alerts from City.
• Send out Red Flag Notifications and reminders about Parking Restrictions through publishing such as Orinda Outlook and Nextdoor
• Send out Red Flag Notifications through Nixle
• Additionally include a note reminding residents not to park blocking a traffic lane on any street at any time (per Orinda Municipal Code Chapter

10.44.050 G)

NEXT STEPS
• Based on direction received regarding options for various street widths, if City Council approves, identify Red Flag parking restriction signs for removal in the following areas:

H.2
Packet Pg. 121
• With street width 28’-36’ – Parking allowed on one side of street (restricted on emergency vehicular access side)
• With street width >36’ – Parking allowed on both sides of street • On Streets less than 28 feet wide, identify locations with direct line of site, such as long straight segments of roadway without many driveways or other improvements in between and determine if some of the No Parking signs could be removed while still making the No Parking restrictions clear and enforceable.
• On Streets less than 28 feet wide, identify locations where topography or trees clearly do not allow parking and determine if some of the No Parking signs could be removed while still making the No Parking restrictions clear. Staff will also look for locations where one of the removed signs could be replaced with ‘no parking any time’ sign if appropriate.

FISCAL IMPACT: Should the Council elect to modify aspects of the Red Flag Parking Restriction program per the options presented, there could be both staff time and costs associated with that effort. Signs that will be removed as a result of this action will be salvaged for using on future Red Flag Parking Restriction program expansion.

ATTACHMENTS:

A. 01-23-2024 CCMM - Red Flag Discussion
Respectfully Submitted by:

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

H.2
Packet Pg. 122
Staff recommends that the City Council review, discuss, and receive public input on the proposed solid waste rate adjustments. The input will be provided to Orinda Board Members on the RecycleSmart JPA (Councilmember Miller and Councilmeber Riley), for the JPA consideration of rate adjustments to be effective March 1 , 2024. As proposed the adjustment is a 4.8% increase, including an increase in the vehicle impact/street maintenance component levied as a regulatory fee. The increase is based on container size and for most residential customers it is estimated to increase monthly garbage rates by an additional $2.50 - $2.85 per month.

City Manager Biggs gave the staff report and overview of the proposed solid waste rate adjustment for · the Council's review, and he described the process of the JPA's consideration of the adjustments to be effective March 1, 2024.

Councilmember Riley stated they seek to keep the rate as even as possible over the years so a spike would not occur when they potentially get a new hauler in 2027.

Vice Mayor Malkani referred to page 62 of the packet and mention that the JPA consultants have calculated a 3.43% rate increase for operating cost, and reserves is

1.37%. She asked and confirmed the recommendation for the rate increase is consistent with what the consultants have recommended. She thanked Councilmembers Riley and Miller for their work as representatives on the JPA.

Mayor Gee opened the Public Forum, and there were no speakers.

Councilmember Miller commented that the rates were reviewed and they believe the increase was fair.

Mayor Gee stated this is an item that _will be recommended back to the JPA Board. She thinks given the economic climate the increase seems reasonable and thanked Councilmembers Miller and Riley for their work.

Vice Mayor Malkani said she has noticed and has heard that service is improving and confirmed complaints have been reduced and operations are a lot better.

H.2. Red Flad Days Parking Restrictions and Evacuation Route Update Recommendation:

Receive Report, Discuss, and Provide Direction, if any.

City Manager Biggs gave the staff report and overview of the matter, stating the item arose from Council discussion on an item that would have corrected the existing traffic order for Miner Road where a section was left out. The City is updating the evacuation guide but the existing guide directs people to their primary exit point.

Orinda City Council Minutes Page 5 of 14 01.23.24
H.2.a
Packet Pg. 123 Attachment: 01-23-2024 CCMM - Red Flag Discussion (3339 : Red Flag Days Parking Restrictions) Assistant Engineer Kevin Mccourt gave a PowerPoint presentation regarding Red Flag Day parking restrictions. Typically, the fire season is June through November and there are about 20-30 days per year considered Red Flag Days which can vary. When implemented, Orinda experienced about 14 events spanning over 30 days and over the last 2 years there was only one combined event.

Three criteria trigger a Red Flag event by the National Weather Service: 1) Relative humidity of 15% or less with sustained winds of 25 mph or greater or frequent wind gusts of 35 mph or greater for a duration of 6 hours; 2) relative humidity of 10% or less for 10 hours or more or widespread and/or significant dry lightning; and 3) If the Fire Chief declares a Red Flag Day in response to any extreme hazard.

He presented El Toyonal and Loma Vista parking restrictions, the El Toyonal Parking and Access Study by W-Trans, and signage placed throughout the street based upon MOFD input in August of 2020. He described segments of signage, the Red Flag Warning Day procedure, issues surrounding limited staff for parking enforcement, call outs on the weekend, issues with residents receiving notifications, and issues with finding parking. He then described Red Flag Day policies, locations of MOFD warning signs, Red Flag outreach.

Mr. Mccourt then presented the City current project of evacuation routes in Zone Haven in North Orinda. On June 7, 2022 the Council requested staff create an expanded program based on evacuation routes for northern Orinda, a,nd on July 19, 2022, the Council approved Red Flag sign installation on key evacuation routes and accepted the map of the proposed streets to receive new signs. Miner Road was left off the list and it was continued without action during the December 5, 2023 meeting. Staff would bring this back to the Council as well as other changes. Current implementation includes 270 signs installed for 6.5 miles of road based upon criteria that affects sign placement, and he reviewed installations on Dalewood Drive, Sundown Terrace, and El Toyonal.

Mr. Biggs said this is a local determination about Red Flag Parking Day restrictions, with the goal of minimizing any potential incidents during an evacuation. The Safety Element calls for expansion of Red Flag Days into other areas,-and the City began with El Toyonal as a pilot project and then moved to Miner Road.

Mayor Gee referred to the expanded program the Council approved and asked and confirmed with Mr. Biggs that all signs have been installed. He noted they wanted to ensure the signs meet the federal and state guidance in the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD), that it is enforceable, and that risk was assessed and the City relies on its engineers in designing the system.

Mayor Gee referred to the slide showing the map listing all streets in the expanded program, and she confirmed all signs have been installed on these streets.

Orinda City Council Minutes Page 6 of 14 01.23.24
H.2.a
Packet Pg. 124 Attachment: 01-23-2024 CCMM - Red Flag Discussion (3339 : Red Flag Days Parking Restrictions) Councilmember Riley asked if Zone Haven recommends more streets than the Council decided, and Mr. Biggs said in the Safety Element there is a more expansive evacuation route map, but .not all of those are in very high fire severity zones. So, the evacuation map is much more complete now than what is captured here.

Mayor Miller asked if this allows the city to ticket or towing, and Mr. Mccourt stated it is just for citations. The Municipal Code would need to be amended if the Council wished to do something of that nature.

Councilmember Miller said they have what was described as a donut on Lombardi. She recalled there is also a segment in the middle of Miner Road which has a different name.

Somehow it was not on an evacuation route.

Mr. Biggs pointed to the red map and the evacuation route in the Safety Element includes all of Miner Road, but people have the choice of going out one way or the other, so they did not show it as a complete segment. People know how to get to one point or another, and they will be told which direction to go based on resources deployed and where a fire is.

Councilmember Miller asked if vehicles could be towed. Police Chief Sullivan said in the situation where the vehicle was cited, the officer could have towed the vehicle but it was addressed at that time. The Vehicle Code does allow for vehicles to be towed when they are blocking the roadway unnecessarily.

Councilmember Riley asked if this is also true for a parked car on Red Flag Day. Mr.

Biggs said it would not be done under the Red Flag provisions but under the Municipal Code, and the City is not going to be sending tow trucks up into an evacuation zone during an event.

Vice Mayor Malkani asked what would be the impact of fewer signs on enforcement. Mr.

Mccourt said he thinks there is a larger basis for whoever receives the citation to fight it.

If there is not a sign within a relative short distance, it will be overturned, and this is why they choose to use the 200 feet.

Vice Mayor Malkani asked if it be 200 feet to have any enforcement of citations or she said if it is not2O0 feet and citations are given she asked if people can just not pay them, or were there other options. Mr. Biggs said many people dispute parking tickets because they argue they could not see the sign or it was too far away and they get thrown out in court, so it can vary. The City tries to do it on the basis it is enforceable, reduces liability, and meets the manual standard of 200 feet, but again, it is not black and white.

Mayor Gee said she would assume most people understand engineering is always done to criteria and standards and the City in this case has used the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD. All agencies that have streets install signage in alignment with that manual. If not in alignment with that manual, where does that leave things.

Orinda City Council Minutes Page 7 of 14 01.23.24
H.2.a
Packet Pg. 125 Attachment: 01-23-2024 CCMM - Red Flag Discussion (3339 : Red Flag Days Parking Restrictions) City Attorney Osa Wolff said this has been a staff-driven process and no one has asked her to-research this as to whether there is a legal standard about spacing, towing, etc.

Engineering staff has sought advice from consultants and these are the results. She could perform research on this, but has not done so to date.

Mr. Biggs said cities sometimes get sued because evacuations have not been successful such as in Lahaina and Paradise, so this is not just about physical improvements but whether the City is doing all it can. Jf the neighborhood really does not want it and the Council decides not to have signs in the area, at least the City did its best efforts to try to ensure safety.

Mayor Gee asked if the City has received any more feedback from the El Toyonal neighborhood which is the neighborhood that has had the most tested usage. She has not seen any emails or concerns raised from that neighborhood.

Mr. Biggs said he has not and the expansion was viewed as a success in El Toyonal. He would note that in the last 2 years they have only had 1 Red Flag Day. When it was busier, they did get people complaining about getting citations, lack of parking, but it seemed the majority of residents were happy with the program.

Councilmember Riley referred to the W-Trans study done in 2020 and said this company was hired to focus on that El Toyonal neighborhood in the study. The report said they recommended prohibiting all stopping and all parking in that area to maximize safety during an evacuation, but this was not done for any other neighborhood. So, she asked if that was not needed this time or she asked if the City had enough expertise based on that hands-on experience.

Mr. Biggs said they launched off of that hands-on experience but they had a separate engineering firm that designed the project; CSW. The Council eventually did not approve the program on no parking and no stopping. There can be 5-minute unloading and things like that, so in looking at other Red Flag programs, generally it prohibits parking in those designated areas.

Councilmember Riley said at that time, residents drove this initiative, so the Council decided to not have residents give input before the City launched it in other areas. Mr.

Biggs said this was on the basis that the pilot was successful.

Vice Mayor Malkani·said there was some -discussion before that although Dalewood is a wide street that there was concern on the part of MOFD that it would need to be free.of vehicles because it would be used for a staging area. In her mind, that was suggested but never clarified to her. She therefore wondered if they received clarification whether that was a position of MOFD or if the Fire Chief has waived in on Dalewood recently.

Orinda City Council Minutes Page 8 of 14 01.23.24
H.2.a
Packet Pg. 126 Attachment: 01-23-2024 CCMM - Red Flag Discussion (3339 : Red Flag Days Parking Restrictions) Mr. Biggs said that statement was made, but this was shared by someone in the community. He asked the Fire Chief about ·it at their joint staff meeting in January. The Fire Chief said he has no official position on Red Flag Days and that he would not plan on using any areas of staging area because those are decisions made on the day and in the field. So, it was not directly responded to other than he did not want to weigh in on the matter.

Mayor Gee opened the Public Forum.

Bill Eggler voiced opposition to signs for Red Flag Days, believes they are confusing to the.public, said roads are narrow and vehicles cannot park on them, the flip signs must be managed by the Public Works Department staff which will likely require more staff, and he questioned who would enforce this, and asked the City to terminate the Red Flag Days and have signs removed.

Liz Boyle described instances of flipped signs on Dalewood and Happy Valley and Sundown Terr-ace and her frustration in trying to get someone from the Fire and Police Departments to flip them back, given the days were not Red Flag Days. Signs are too small, need a directional arrow and towing enforcement warnings to be enforceable.

Lombardi needs signs in the place they do not have them because people park their cars in this narrow road all the time and El Toyonal is an awful place for fire danger and the City should have some signs there. She lastly presented results of the pilot for the El Toyonal, which was not good.

Lisa Rudolph said .the El Toyonal project was requested by the residents and had a community forum to share concerns. She asked why neither one of those ever occurred for the Dalewood area. She is not against the Red Flag signs and no parking but Dalewood is specifically a place where they are not needed. This decision to expand the program is based on science and research, yet the width of the road was _never taken into consideration. She also thinks the Red Flag Warning Days and actual evacuations and the need to tow vehicles are confusing. Very few people park on Dalewood and if there is a fire, no cars will be parking there.

Sandy Pearson, Miner Road, said she is a strong supporter of this program and knows El Toyonal needed some help. She drove up Claremont Avenue and there would be no way for a fire truck to get up there with any parking along the road. The Honey Hill, Charles Hill, and the Miner Road section above Lombardi Lane should not have been included, noted street width was not used as criteria, and there has never been any parking problems on Honey Hill or Charles Hill because they are wide. There are over 28 signs over a 2: mile stretch on El Toyonal and she believes there are 40 signs on Honey Hill in one-half mile which is unnecessary, and she asked the program to be modified.

Orinda City Council Minutes Page 9 of 14 01.23.24
H.2.a
Packet Pg. 127 Attachment: 01-23-2024 CCMM - Red Flag Discussion (3339 : Red Flag Days Parking Restrictions) Councilmember Miller said she is hearing they need the number of signs and some larger . numbers of signs in some areas, thinks it is worth continuing to review this to ensure ·• they have too many signs in one area versus another. The community has become more attuned to fire risks, how to prevent fires, to evacuate if there is a fire, and the City is charged with.making sure people get out. The City should make sure people know when there is a Red Flag Day because this is a matter of life and death.

She then spoke about implementing the program in El Toyonal, recognition of the fact the Council could not have a conversation with every neighborhood in town regarding installation of signage, and priority to do this first on evacuation routes to make the . biggest difference, and questioned installation of signs on wide roads.

Councilmember Iverson said part of the reason she wanted to bring this up was to talk about frustrations voiced when signs were going up on Dalewood and Sundown Terrace:

All Councilmembers drove that neighborhood, talked with people, and she did not think the signs made sense. She is hopeful for Public Works to do a ground up analysis that assesses whether a sign is needed or not, wondered if they should remove some signs that are overkill, recognizing that fire safety is the priority here.

Councilmember Riley said the number one goal is evacuation but she is thinking about how to reduce the number of signs. The point of the multiple signs is to conform with the code so if the citation is challenged, then they can say they followed the code and did what they we~e supposed to do. The goal is evacuation, so she questioned why they care if they lose the petty fight over a citation after the fact. Therefore, she thinks they might not be so concerned about the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD.

Vice Mayor Malkani said in general she thinks having no parking on Red Flag Days on narrow roads, especially evacuation routes, is a very good idea and it is something that is a priority. However, she feels she cannot give more direction on what to do without more information. She is still not sure of the purpose ofhaving signs on wide roads. This requires a conversation with the Fire Chief and may be something to be addressed in the 2x2 meeting.

The reason there are citations is because they have a deterrent effect because they do not want people parking on the street on roads in a manner on Red Flag Days that will impede residents from being able to evacuate and which will impede fire trucks from getting in. So, if the number of signs relates to whether they can tow a vehicle early in the day and not during the event, then maybe they do need the number of signs. That question is not clear to her yet either, so she would like·more information before making modifications.

Councilmember Miller spoke about a trip to Los Angeles in Bronson Canyon near Hollywood Hills, and displayed pictures to look at what people do sometimes with parking and showed that cars were being towed rather than ticketed.

Orinda City Council Minutes Page 10 of 14 01.23.24
H.2.a
Packet Pg. 128 Attachment: 01-23-2024 CCMM - Red Flag Discussion (3339 : Red Flag Days Parking Restrictions) - -~------------- ----------~
Mayor Gee said she is willing to revisit the criteria of how the City is implementing this, Along with Councilmember Miller she was on the Council that made the decision to move forward with what they did. They made that decision because of the urgency of fire concern and danger in Orinda. They hear about it every day and it was not possible to hold a Town Hall with all streets on every evacuation route in the community. Frankly, if they had tried, it would not have been successful either. She is willing to revisit it.

Additionally, no one needs to worry about taxpayer dollars for signs because they likely can be used somewhere else in town, but she thinks they should revisit the criteria. She does not have any immediate feeling? about what the criteria should be. It makes sense on a street where someone could not park a car under any circumstances, they probably do not need a sign. She was unsure about widths of streets and is puzzled as to why Dalewood is so distraught because she has driven it multiple times. But, she is also willing to entertain maybe it is not appropriate and they should take the width of the street into account. They all know what they are trying to achieve and do not care about the citation. They are trying to prevent disaster and frankly, driving around town, people need direction, and thinks the issue needs to be revisited to try to maintain balance.

Mayor Gee said because they have a lengthy Closed Session tonight, if agreeable to the Council and staff, she recommended tabling Items H.3 and H.4 and continuing them to another meeting. Councilmembers and staff concurred.

H.3. Emergency Communication and Outreach Update Including Report on Siren Systems
Recommendation:

Receive Report, Discuss, and Provide Direction, if Any.

This item was continued to a future meeting.

H.4. Legislative Advocacy Approach Options
Recommendation:

Receive Report, Discuss, and provide Direction, if any.

This item was continued to a future meeting.

H.5. City Manager Recruitment Services
Recommendation:

Form a City Council Ad Hoc Committee of two (2) Members to review Executive Search Proposals and make a recommendation to the Council as to which firm to retain, or any alternative course which may be determined by the Council.

Mayor Gee announced the Council has held multiple discussions with City Manager Biggs, are sorry to be losing him, understands why, and he will be retiring from the City and the Council needs to find a replacement.

Orinda City Council Minutes Page 11 of 14 01.23.24
H.2.a
Packet Pg. 129 Attachment: 01-23-2024 CCMM - Red Flag Discussion (3339 : Red Flag Days Parking Restrictions) City Council
Staff Report
Agenda Item: H.3
Date: April 16, 2024
Department: Planning Department
AGENDA TITLE: Proposed Parking Variance In-Lieu Fee Holiday for Qualifying Projects Within One Half-Mile of the BART Station, Consistent with Assembly Bill 2097, a New State Law that Preempted Certain Local Parking Requirements Effective January 1, 2023
RECOMMENDATION:

BACKGROUND:

State Assembly Bill (AB) 2097 prohibits public agencies from imposing minimum automobile parking requirements for residential, commercial, and other development projects located within a 1/2-mile of a “major transit stop” or a “high-quality transit corridor.” Major transit stops are defined to include existing rail or bus rapid transit stations, such as Orinda’s BART station. Thus under AB 2097, the City is precluded from imposing parking minimum requirements on virtually any new development (with some exceptions, as discussed below) within 1/2 mile of the Orinda BART station—an area that includes nearly the entirety of the Downtown Orinda districts (see Attachment B). For example, when the Orinda Planning Commission approved on February 14, 2023, the conversion and expansion of the former Bank of America building at 31 Orinda Way into a future mixed-use building (restaurant & office), City Planning staff determined that under the then new AB 2097 law, the project—given its proximity to the BART station—was exempt from Orinda’s usual parking requirements.

Projects that were approved prior to January 1, 2023 (the date that AB 2097 took effect) would still be subject to the City’s parking minimum requirements in effect at the time of project approval (Orinda Municipal Code, Chapter 17.16—Off-Street Parking and Loading). One such project—and the only one of which City staff is aware—is “The Station” at 25A Orinda Way. Approved by the Planning Commission on June 14, 2022, the project is to construct an 18,287-square-foot, mixed-use building, including:
• 1,200 square feet of retail;
• 2,800 square feet of fitness facility;
• 2,555 square feet of restaurant (market hall with individual food stalls); and • 11,732 square feet of office space.

Because the project would provide no off-street loading or parking spaces, the applicant requested and received approval of a parking variance in-lieu fee for all 80 of the offH.3 Packet Pg. 130
street parking spaces that would otherwise be required for the project. Under parking variance in-lieu rates stipulated in the City’s current Master Fee Schedule, The Station at 25A Orinda Way would be obligated to pay $823,810 of parking variance in-lieu fees.

Like other City fees, parking variance in-lieu fees are established by resolution and incorporated into the Master Fee Schedule. The current parking in-lieu fee is based on a study prepared by Harris & Associates in January 2019, which estimated the cost of a new parking space in Orinda, factoring land costs, construction, and other considerations. Per Ordinance 20-01 (which established the parking variance in-lieu fee for nonresidential development in the Downtown Districts), the City is to deposit all collected parking in-lieu fees into a dedicated parking fund for the City to expend as needed to increase the supply or reduce the demand for public or private parking.

Examples of valid fund uses could include a range of parking-related expenses such as funding additional parking facilities, infrastructure improvements, transportation demand management, leasing of available private spaces, or other parking-related programs as approved by the City Council. Although the Parking In-Lieu Fund is an open account, there are presently no parking in-lieu funds available as no such fees have ever been collected.

Hypothetically, The Station developer could resubmit the project to the City for reapproval, in which case AB 2097 would apply, and the project would likely not be required to provide any off-site parking, and thus the developer would likely not have to pay any parking in-lieu fees. The prior costs to process the project applications amounted to approximately $49,000. While reprocessing the same project would likely not incur as much in application fees, City staff would expect to require at a minimum that the applicant pay a $25,000 deposit to cover anticipated costs involved in reviewing and processing the applications.1 Nonetheless, from the applicant’s perspective, any cost of resubmitting the project applications would be significantly less than and offset by the savings in parking in-lieu fees.

Staff estimate that having to resubmit the project for entitlement approvals would likely delay construction of the project at least 4 to 6 months. Rather than subjecting the project to another costly and time-consuming process that would likely not result in a materially different project, simply to take advantage of the currently applicable AB 2097 parking provisions, and rather than creating a project-specific benefit, City staff recommends that the City Council approve the draft resolution (see Attachment A) establishing a fee holiday for in-lieu fees applicable to qualifying projects within 1/2 mile of the BART station (i.e., projects covered by AB 2097).

Projects not covered by AB 2097 that the City could continue to subject to parking minimums and in-lieu fees include hotels, motels, bed and breakfast inns, or other transient lodgings. The State also does give local agencies the option to impose minimum parking requirements in limited instances where not imposing or enforcing minimum parking requirements on the project would have a demonstrably and substantially negative impact on any of the following:
1 Required permit applications for The Station at 25A Orinda Way would likely include: Design Review; Commercial Use Permits; Elevated Deck Permit; Exception Permits; Revocable Encroachment Agreement; Tree Removal Permit; and Variance.

H.3
Packet Pg. 131
• The City’s ability to meet its share of the Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) for low- and very low-income households; or
• The City’s ability to meet any special housing needs for the elderly or persons with disabilities; or
• Existing residential or commercial parking located within one-half mile of the project.

The City would need to formally invoke and substantiate findings demonstrating such negative impacts within 30-days of receiving a completed application. However, these findings may not be made for projects that meet any of the following criteria:
• Residential projects with at least 20% of the total dwelling units for very low-, low, or moderate-income households, students, the elderly, or persons with disabilities; or
• Residential projects that contain fewer than 20 dwelling units; or • Projects that are subject to and satisfy other parking reductions of any other applicable law.

The proposed fee holiday would be accomplished by temporarily waiving the collection of fees under the City’s Master Fee Schedule, which is periodically adjusted by resolution of the City Council. The proposed parking variance in-lieu fee holiday could take effect immediately, with a suggested sunset of date of January 31, 2026 (coincides with deadline to meet certain existing City obligations per the City’s adopted and Statecertified Housing Element). The proposed fee holiday would be distinct and separate from the temporary parking variance in-lieu fee holiday (effective October 18, 2023 to June 30, 2024) that the Council adopted last year that applies only to certain commercial uses (personal care and restaurants/bars) in existing buildings (Resolution No. 60-23). Thus the proposed indefinite parking in-lieu fee holiday would supplement— not supplant—the existing short-term parking in-lieu fee holiday, though both serve the purpose of promoting economic development in Orinda by eliminating burdensome parking variance in-lieu fees.

FISCAL IMPACT: Likely no fiscal impact. The City of Orinda has not collected any Parking In Lieu Fees since the time the City established the fee. The City would not receive parking in-lieu fees for qualifying projects entitled prior to January 1, 2023.

However, those same projects could reapply for the same entitlements, and if approved, be automatically exempted from any minimum parking requirements and thus also be exempt from paying any parking in-lieu fees.

ATTACHMENTS:

A. Resolution XX-24 Establishing Parking Variance In-Lieu Fee Holiday for AB 2097 Projects - Final
B. Attachment B - Map of Properties within Half Mile of BART Station Respectfully Submitted by:

H.3
Packet Pg. 132
Robert Reber
Prepared By: Robert Reber,
Approved by:

H.3
Packet Pg. 133
Resolution No. 60-23

Page 1 of 2 ends

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

Establishing a Parking Variance )
In-Lieu Fee Holiday for Projects )
Within One Half-Mile of the BART ) Resolution XX-24
Station )
WHEREAS, on June 20, 2023 the Orinda City Council adopted the Master Fee Schedule for Fiscal Year (FY) 2023-24 pursuant to Resolution 36-23; and WHEREAS, Section VII of the adopted Master Fee Schedule stipulates Parking In-Lieu Variance Fees ranging from $1,381 to $5,528 per parking space for existing buildings and from $2,210 to $10,505 per parking space for new buildings; and
WHEREAS, State Assembly Bill (AB) 2097, effective as of January 1, 2023, generally prohibits public agencies from imposing minimum automobile parking requirements for residential, commercial, and other development projects located within a 1/2-mile of a “major transit stop” or a “high-quality transit corridor”; and WHEREAS, the Orinda Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) station meets the AB 2097 definition of a “major transit stop,” and
WHEREAS, the City will be reviewing its parking requirements and updating them as appropriate for consistency with AB 2097; and
WHEREAS, during this review period, the City will continue to ensure its existing parking requirements are only applied to the extent they are consistent with AB 2097; and
WHEREAS, projects within one-half mile of the Orinda BART station approved prior to January 1, 2023 would, when unable to meet the City’s minimum off-street parking requirements (Orinda Municipal Code, Chapter 17.16—OffStreet Parking and Loading), be subject to the Parking Variance In-Lieu Fee; and WHEREAS, requiring projects entitled prior to January 1, 2023, to reapply for approval—thus incurring additional application processing costs and delays— to take advantage of the same AB 2097 benefits and cost savings enjoyed by projects approved after January 1, 2023, creates an unnecessary burden on economic development in Downtown Orinda; and
WHEREAS, a temporary Fee Holiday waiving the Parking In-Lieu Variance Fee for all qualifying projects within one-half mile of the Orinda BART station, H.3.a
Packet Pg. 134 Attachment: Resolution XX-24 Establishing Parking Variance In-Lieu Fee Holiday for AB 2097 Projects - Final (3336 : Parking In-Lieu Fee Resolution No. XX-24

Page 2 of 2 ends

regardless of whether the projects were approved before or after AB 2097 took effect, will streamline and equitably encourage new business investment in downtown Orinda, consistent with the DPP and City Council priorities.

NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Orinda finds and declares that:

1. Fee Holiday. The City Council hereby accepts and adopts the Parking Variance In-Lieu Fee Holiday for qualifying projects that are within one halfmile of the BART station and that meet other AB 2097 criteria.

2. Existing Fees Superseded. During the Fee Holiday effective period, the Parking In-Lieu Variance Fees for as specified in Section VII of the FY 2023- 24 Master Fee Schedule, shall not be required for qualifying projects within one-half mile of major transit stops or high-quality transit corridors, as provided in State Assembly Bill 2097.

4. Municipal Code Provisions Still Applicable. This resolution does not modify any municipal code requirements, including the need for a parking variance pursuant to OMC Section 17.33.2.

5. Effective Date(s). This Fee Holiday is effective commencing April 17, 2024, and continuing until January 31, 2026.

Approved and adopted by the Orinda City Council at a regular meeting on April 16, 2024.

AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:

Darlene Gee, Mayor
Sheri Marie Smith, City Clerk
1766841.1
H.3.a
Packet Pg. 135 Attachment: Resolution XX-24 Establishing Parking Variance In-Lieu Fee Holiday for AB 2097 Projects - Final (3336 : Parking In-Lieu Fee H.3.b
Packet Pg. 136 Attachment: Attachment B - Map of Properties within Half Mile of BART Station (3336 : Parking In-Lieu Fee Holiday Per AB 2097) City Council
Staff Report
Agenda Item: H.4
Date: April 16, 2024
Department: Administration
AGENDA TITLE: Role of Council Liaisons to Commissions, Boards, and Other Bodies RECOMMENDATION:

Receive Report, Discuss, and Provide Direction, if any
BACKGROUND: At the Council meeting of March 12, 2024, Vice Mayor Malkani requested as a matter initiated that the City Council discuss the roles of Council Liaisons. The Council approved that request, and this item is presented to allow for that discussion.

To facilitate the City Council’s discussion, some initial information is being provided by staff. The role of Council Liaisons is Orinda is not seemingly defined in writing. The Council’s Policies & Procedures Manual does not define the role. Discussion of interactions between Councilmembers and appointed commissioners is limited to the following rule applicable only to certain matters before the Planning Commission:
" ii. Commissions and Committees. A Council member must not express opinions on the merits of an item that is or will be the subject of a quasi-judicial hearing within the subject matter jurisdiction of the Planning Commission to a Planning Commissioner prior to or during the hearing. In case such communications have occurred, any such communication from a Council member to a Planning Commissioner prior to a decision of the Commission on the matter shall be disclosed by the Commissioner in the course of the hearing of the subject by the Planning Commission. "
Staff’s broader understanding is that Liaisons are intended to occasionally attend meetings of the bodies to which Liaisons are assigned to express gratitude for their work and to serve as a resource as needed, though assigned staff play that role on a regular basis. Liaisons are typically not tasked to express opinions, represent the Council, or participate actively in the meetings of the body.

This League of California Cities publication “Your Role as a Local Elected Official,” which is used for the New Council Members training conducted by the League, may also be useful. It has a segment that addresses this matter and is attached. Also attached is a Western City Magazine article on the subject titled: “The Ethical Hazards of City Council Members Attending Other Board Meetings.” As a matter initiated, staff has not yet undertaken research to any significant level for examples of language used by other cities regarding the role of Liaisons. However, two H.4
Packet Pg. 137
examples are attached as an initial point of reference. Staff would be happy to do additional research if requested by the City Council as a part of this item.

NEXT STEPS: Depending upon Council discussion and direction, future steps could include adding language to clarify the role of Council Liaisons to the Council’s Policy & Procedures Manual.

FISCAL IMPACT: None as a result of this item.

ATTACHMENTS:

A. Current Council Liaison Listing
B. League Publication: "Your Role as an Elected Official" (excerpt) C. Western City Magazine article: “The Ethical Hazards of City Council Members Attending Other Board Meetings” (12/1/2010)
D. Language Example - Burbank
E. Language Example - Bend
Respectfully Submitted by:

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

H.4
Packet Pg. 138

ORGANIZATION
2024
Appointments COUNCIL RESPONSIBILITY MEETINGS
Mayors' Community Liaison Group Darlene Gee Mayor facilitates meeting w/ community leaders 2nd Wednesday, 8:30am Lamorinda Mayors' Meeting Darlene Gee Mayor serves as Council representative bimonthly breakfast meeting Mayors' Conference (Contra Costa County) Darlene Gee
Mayor serves as conference delegate; all Council
invited to attend 1st Thursday, 6:30 pm
COMMISSION and COMMITTEE Liaisons: Attend Some Meetings and Report to Council.

Art in Public Places Committee (APPC) Janet Riley See Commission Charge 3rd Monday, 3:30pm Finance Advisory Committee (FAC) Inga Miller See Commission Charge 4th Wednesday, 6pm Historic Landmarks Committee (HLC) Janet Riley See Commission Charge Quarterly Parks and Recreation Commission (PRC) Latika Malkani See Commission Charge 2nd Wednesday, 7pm Planning Commission (PC) Brandyn Iverson See Commission Charge 2nd & 4th Tuesday, 7:00 pm Supplemental Sales Tax Oversight Commission Latika Malkani See Commission Charge Quarterly Traffic Safety Advisory Committee (TSAC) Brandyn Iverson See Commission Charge 3rd Monday, 7:00 pm Library Parcel Tax Oversight Committee Janet Riley Attend Meetings as needed meets twice a year Affordable Housing Sub-Committee
Inga Miller
Brandyn Iverson Attend Meetings as Council Subcommittee meets as needed Library Facility Steering Committee
Darlene Gee
Janet Riley Attend Meetings as Council Subcommittee meets as needed City/School 2x2 Committee
Inga Miller
Brandyn Iverson Attend Meetings as Council Subcommittee meets as needed Wilder Subcommitee
Inga Miller
Brandyn Iverson Attend Meetings as Council Subcommittee meets as needed Public Safety Council Subcommittee
Inga Miller
Latika Malkani Attend Meetings as Council Subcommittee meets as needed Inclusion, Diversity, Equity, Action (School Partnership) Darlene Gee
Latika Malkani
Fire Prevention 2x2 with MOFD
Darlene Gee
Latika Malkani
Downtown Planning & Housing Element Subcommittee
Inga Miller
Brandyn Iverson Attend Meetings as Council Subcommittee meets as needed Infrastructure Subcommittee
Darlene Gee
Latika Malkani Attend Meetings as Council Subcommittee meets as needed OTHER AGENCIES: Attend Some Meetings; Report to Council Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) Darlene Gee
Attend 2 meetings; serve as City's voting
delegate. two meetings annually
Central Contra Costa Solid Waste Authority Board
(CCCSWA)
Inga Miller
Janet Riley
Attend monthly regular board meeting; serve on
1-2 board committees w/ monthly meeting last Thursday, 3:00 pm Contra Costa County Transit Authority (CCCTA)
Amy Worth
Darlene Gee (alt) Attend monthly board meeting 3rd Thursday, 9:00 am CITY OF ORINDA - CITY COUNCIL APPOINTMENTS 2024
COUNCIL SUB-COMMITTEE:

H.4.a
Packet Pg. 139 Attachment: Current Council Liaison Listing (3328 : Role of City Council Liaisons) Lamorinda School Bus Program (LSBP JPA)
Brandyn Iverson
Darlent Gee (alt) Attend monthly JPA meetings 2nd Monday, 9:30 am League of CA Cities Voting Delegate (LOCC)
Mayor
Vice Mayor
Serve as City's voting delegate at annual
conference one meeting annually
-League of CA Cities East Bay Division Delegate
Mayor
Vice Mayor
Attend monthly dinner meetings; open to all
Council members 3rd Thursday, 6:00 pm
SouthWest Area Transportation Committee (SWAT)
Darlene Gee
Brandyn Iverson
(alt) Subgroup of CCTA. Attend Monthly Meetings 1st Monday, 3:00 pm -Lamorinda Project Management Committee
(LPMC)
Darlene Gee
Brandyn Iverson
(alt)
Meets as needed after SWAT meeting/ subgroup
of SWAT 1st Monday as needed
-Lamorinda Fee and Financing Authority (LFFA)
Darlene Gee
Brandyn Iverson
(alt)
Meets as needed after SWAT meeting/ subgroup
of SWAT 1st Monday as needed
COUNCIL LIAISON WITH CITY PARTNERS:

Serve as Primary Contact Person for Council;
Attend Some Meetings; Report to Council
Acalanes Unified High School District (AUHSD) Inga Miller " " 1st/3rd Wednesday, 7:30 pm Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) Darlene Gee " " 2nd/4th Thursday, 9am Chamber of Commerce Latika Malkani " " 3rd Wednesday, 4pm East Bay Municipal Water Utility District (EBMUD) Inga Miller " " 2nd/4th Tuesday, 1:15 pm East Bay Regional Park District (EBRPD) Latika Malkani " " 1st/3rd Tuesday, 2:00 pm Friends of Orinda Creeks Inga Miller " " 4th Wednesday, 8:00 am Libraries-
-Friends of Orinda Library Janet Riley " " 3rd Wednesday, 9:15 am -Library Regional Board Janet Riley " " meets as needed Moraga-Orinda Fire District Darlene Gee " " 3rd Wednesday, 7:00pm Orinda Association (OA) Latika Malkani " " 2nd Monday, 7:30 pm Orinda Historical Society Janet Riley " " quarterly
Orinda Seniors Advisory Committee Latika Malkani " " 1st Tuesday Orinda Teen Advisory Committee Brandyn Iverson " " 1st Monday Orinda Union School District (OUSD) Brandyn Iverson " " 2nd Monday, 4:00 pm Orinda/Tabor Sister City Committee Darlene Gee " " 4th Thursday H.4.a
Packet Pg. 140 Attachment: Current Council Liaison Listing (3328 : Role of City Council Liaisons) Your Role As A Local Elected Official
Council Conduct with Boards, Commissions and Committees “We rarely find that people have good sense unless they agree with us.” --Francois, Duc de La Rochefoucauld
The City has established several Boards, Commissions and Committees (collectively referred to as City Commissions) as a means of gathering more community input. Citizens who serve on City Commissions become more involved in government and serve as advisors to the City Council. They are a valuable resource to the City’s leadership and should be treated with appreciation and respect.

If attending a City Commission meeting, express personal opinions only.

Council Members may attend any City Commission meeting, which are always open to any member of the public. However, they should be sensitive to the way their participation – especially if it is advocating a certain position – could be viewed as unfairly affecting the process. Any public comments by a Council Member at a City Commission meeting should be clearly made as individual opinion and not a representation of the feelings of the entire City Council, unless the Council has taken a position on the topic. Council Members should not appear before a commission on behalf of an individual, business or developer.

Remember that City Commissions serve the community, not individual Council Members.

The City Council appoints individuals to serve on City Commissions, and it is the responsibility of City Commissions to follow policy established by the Council. But City Commission members do not report to individual Council Members, nor should Council Members feel they have the power or right to threaten City Commission members with removal if they disagree about an issue. Appointment and re-appointment to a City Commission should be based on such criteria as expertise, ability to work with staff and the public, and commitment to fulfilling official duties. A City Commission appointment should not be used as political “reward.” Concerns about an individual City Commission member should be discussed with the Mayor. · Be respectful of diverse opinions.

A primary role of City Commissions is to represent many points of view in the community and to provide the Council with advice based on a full spectrum of concerns and perspectives.

Council Members may have a closer working relationship with some individuals serving on the City Commissions, but must be fair and respectful of all citizens serving on City Commissions.

Keep political support away from public forums.

City Commission members may offer political support to a Council Members, but not in a public forum while conducting official duties. Conversely, Council Members may support board and commission members who are running for office, but not in an official forum in their capacity as a Council Member.

League of California Cities New Mayors and Council Members Academy H.4.b
Packet Pg. 141 Attachment: League Publication: "Your Role as an Elected Official" (excerpt) (3328 : Role of City Council Liaisons) December 1, 2010 City Forum Michael Dean
The Ethical Hazards of City Council
Members Attending Other Board Meetings
Michael Dean is a Sacramento-based principal and the ethics chair at the legal firm of Meyers Nave. Dean serves as city attorney for the City of Dixon and assistant city attorney for the cities of Colusa and Plymouth.

He can be reached at [email protected]. This column is provided as ethics advice and is not intended as legal advice.

Imagine this scenario: The planning commission is considering whether to recommend a zoning change to the city council, which would allow more residential use in the downtown area and promote the mixed-use vision in its General Plan. Wouldn’t any city council member want to know as much information as possible? Attending the planning commission meeting and listening to the perspectives of the city planner, engineer, architect, commission members and others might seem like a smart move. The council member may even be able to ask questions of the participants or give his or her views, thus learning about the issues and influencing the matter before it comes before the city council. In fact, city council members can often be found in the audience of planning commission meetings, listening to the proceedings and occasionally participating.

However, this may not be such a good idea. As innocent as a council member’s motives may be, when he or she personally attends a planning commission meeting or another subordinate committee meeting, he or she may be crossing an ethical boundary. Council members do not violate any laws by attending commission meetings. However, they run the risk of:
• Potentially revealing a biased view, thereby causing their own disqualification should the matter at hand subsequently come before the council;
H.4.c
Packet Pg. 142 Attachment: Western City Magazine article: “The Ethical Hazards of City Council Members Attending Other Board Meetings” (12/1/2010) (3328 :
• Interfering with the role of the commission as an independent advisory body; and
• Not acting in accordance with the views of the city council as a whole.

Most city council members know to steer clear of the somewhat hazy legal boundaries that might cause them to be disqualified from the decision-making process due to bias. Many if not most planning commission or other commission decisions are merely advisory to or at least appealable to the city council. Because the right to due process is attached to many of these types of commission decisions, the participants in such proceedings have the right to an unbiased decisionmaker at the city council level. A council member who comments at the commission meeting and indicates a firm position on a particular matter may be subjected to a challenge for bias when the same issue reaches the city council.

RELATED ETHICAL CHALLENGES
Beyond the issue of perceived bias, participating in a commission meeting raises other ethical questions. For instance, council members generally have the authority to remove a commission member. With this power, a council member’s mere attendance at a meeting can be highly influential, especially when he or she makes his or her opinions known.

Merely indicating that one is not speaking for the entire council, but rather providing one’s own opinion, does not address the significant impact of the “boss” offering an opinion. This influence may also jeopardize a significant role of the commission, which is to provide independent recommendations or decisions to the city council. After all, none of the cities’ commissions are required to exist; if the city council wants to have the role of decision-maker, it could take that role. But when a city establishes a commission, the city council has also by implication indicated its desire to have an independent body make decisions or recommendations. The presence of the appointing authority at the commission meetings affects that independence.

H.4.c
Packet Pg. 143 Attachment: Western City Magazine article: “The Ethical Hazards of City Council Members Attending Other Board Meetings” (12/1/2010) (3328 :

Likewise, in a council-manager form of government, the intent and expectation is that a city council will act as a whole, not as individuals.

Council members normally receive the same information simultaneously from city staff or from their subordinate commissions or the public’s testimony. This allows the council members as a body to draw conclusions in a fair and balanced way based upon the same factual foundation.

City council members may undermine this expectation when they individually attend meetings of a subordinate commission. To some extent the council member who attends collects information that will not reach other council members in quite the same way. Those council members who attend may also subtly influence either the outcome of the commission’s deliberations or how the matter will eventually be presented before the council — in ways not available to the council members who did not attend the commission meeting.

Of course, council members do not completely give up their rights as private citizens, and they are both free to and expected to gather information relevant to the performance of their duties. They are entitled to attend a commission’s public meeting. However, to remain firmly upright on the ethical tightrope, council members should wait until the commission makes its recommendation to the city council in its entirety — thus preserving the original intent of both the independent commission and the city council.

ALTERNATIVES TO ATTENDING IN PERSON
This does not deprive council members of the ability to learn what occurs at a commission meeting. A city council member may listen to most meetings online, on television or by using the city clerk’s taped recordings. Information can also be obtained by reading the commission’s meeting minutes. A council member’s personal presence at or participation in a commission meeting, on the other hand, could reveal a biased view, disrupt the independence of the commission or exert undue influence on the commission, regardless of the council member’s intent. It is best avoided.

H.4.c
Packet Pg. 144 Attachment: Western City Magazine article: “The Ethical Hazards of City Council Members Attending Other Board Meetings” (12/1/2010) (3328 :

FOR MORE INFORMATION
Learn more about bias in the October 2006 “Everyday Ethics” column, “When an Elected Official Feels Passionately About an Issue: Fair Process Requirements in Adjudicative Decision-Making.”
This article appears in the December 2010 issue of Western City Did you like what you read here? Subscribe to Western City H.4.c
Packet Pg. 145 Attachment: Western City Magazine article: “The Ethical Hazards of City Council Members Attending Other Board Meetings” (12/1/2010) (3328 :

ATTACHMENT 3
A3-1

CITY COUNCIL

LIAISON DEFINITION OF ROLE AND PURPOSE
POLICY

1. COUNCIL LIAISONS. The Council Liaison is the Council Member who is specifically assigned to be the liaison between the Commission and the City Council. The primary role of the Liaison is that of facilitator of communications from the Commission to the Council. A Council Member who is appointed to sit as a member of a board, commission or committee is not a liaison for purposes of this definition. a. Definition of the Role. The Council Liaison shall facilitate communications between the Commission and the Council. The Liaison should not be an advocate for the Commission, give direction or influence a decision of the Commission. The Liaison may, however, assist and provide information.
b. Purpose. The Liaison acts as:
i. Spokesperson on behalf of the Council when so directed by the Council when seated as a body.
ii. Contact person, if the Commission or an individual
Commissioner wants such a channel of communication.
iii. Monitor the Commission to identify procedural and
structural issues relating to the effective functioning of the Commission for Council.
c. Participation Expectation. Attendance is discretionary with the Council Member, although attendance at Commission meetings is not required, it is encouraged. Liaisons shall have no vote on the Commission and shall not act as an ex officio member of a Commission.

Approved June 12, 2018
H.4.d
Packet Pg. 146 Attachment: Language Example - Burbank (3328 : Role of City Council Liaisons) From Council Rules:

1.065 Liaison to Boards, Commissions and Committees
The Mayor may appoint Council members to act as liaison to boards, commissions, committees or other bodies that advise the Council. In the event a Council liaison is unable to attend a meeting of the board, commission or committee, the liaison will either contact another Council member to act as liaison for the meeting or ask the Mayor to find a substitute. When attending a meeting of a City board, commission or committee as liaison, Council members will:
(1) Not attempt to lobby or influence the board, commission or committee on any item under its consideration. It is important for the advisory body to make objective recommendations to the Council on items before them. However, nothing in this section precludes the Council member from explaining what the Council expects from the board, commission or committee, or explaining Council policy.
(2) Not vote at the body’s meeting on any item.
(3) This rule applies only when the Council member is acting as liaison; it does not apply when the Council member is a member of the board, commission or committee and does not apply to non-city bodies when the Council member is the representative of the City.

H.4.e
Packet Pg. 147 Attachment: Language Example - Bend (3328 : Role of City Council Liaisons)

Orinda City CouncilApril 16, 2024

Orinda City Council
April 16, 2024