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 30, 2024
7:00 PM - REGULAR MEETING
City Council
Agenda Page 1 04.30.24
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.
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
City Council
Agenda Page 2 04.30.24
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. Introduce Bhavna Chaudhary, Senior Accountant
D.2. Orinda Association Annual Report
D.3. Miner Road Contraflow Update
D.4. Local Hazard Mitigation Plan Presentation
E. PUBLIC FORUM
The public forum provides an opportunity for members of the public to speak on any item within the jurisdiction of the City Council that is not on the agenda.
Additionally, a speaker has the option of addressing the Council on an item listed on the agenda, if the speaker will not be present when that agenda item is taken up. When an item is not listed on the agenda, State law prohibits Council discussion or action. Councilmembers may only “briefly respond” to statements made and questions posed. For example, State law allows Councilmembers to ask questions for clarification and provide a reference to staff or other resources for factual information. Additionally, consistent with the “Matters Initiated” rule contained in its Policies and Procedures Manual, the Council may also direct staff to report back and/or place a matter on a future agenda for discussion.
F. CONSENT CALENDAR
F.1. City Council Minutes
Recommendation:
Approve City Council Minutes:
1. April 16, 2024 Special Meeting
2. April 16, 2024 Regular Meeting
F.2. Award Contract for San Pablo Creek Culvert Repair Project, City Project No. 4187
Recommendation:
Staff recommends that the City Council (1) award a construction contract to Bugler Construction, inc. of Pleasanton, California for an amount of $1,986,400 for said project; (2) authorize program expenditures up to $2,285,000, which includes a 15% contingency; (3) authorize the City Manager to execute contract on behalf of the City; and (4) approve plans for the project.
F.3. Contract Acceptance of the Community Center Solar, Battery Storage and Roof Replacement Project No. 4141 & 4164.
Recommendation:
City Council
Agenda Page 3 04.30.24
Staff recommends that the City Council adopt Resolution No. 12-24 Acceptance of Work for the Community Center Solar, Battery Storage and Roof Replacement Project No. 4141 & 4164 with NBC Construction, Inc. and authorize the City Clerk to sign and file the Notice of Completion with the Contra Costa County Clerk-Recorder.
F.4. Fire Fuels Reduction Incentive Pilot Program
Recommendation:
Review, Discuss, adopt Resolution 13-24 approving the updated Fire Fuels Reduction Incentive Pilot Program, and Provide Additional Direction, if any.
G. PUBLIC HEARING
H. POLICY MATTERS
H.1. 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 Monday, May 06, 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.
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 ~
City Council
Agenda Page 4 04.30.24
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.
The Orinda Association Annual Report and Program Update for 2023 The Orinda Association (OA) is a 501(c)3 dedicated to enhancing our community and enriching the quality of life for Orinda residents. We promote awareness and encourage dialogue among Orinda residents on issues of importance to the community, and mobilize volunteer efforts to enhance the beauty, character and security of Orinda.
Our main programs include The Orinda News, The Orinda Volunteer Center, the Annual 4th of July Parade, the Orinda Classic Car Show, the Orinda Seniors Around Town ride program and specialized Public Forums. The OA office is located at 26 Orinda Way and The OA website is www.orindaassociation.org.
In 2023 we welcomed New Board Members Lisa Burlini, Kathy Cordova, and Alex Drexel.
The 2023 roster of board members was as follows:
Officers: President Sally Hogarty, Vice President Kelly Sopak, Treasurer Cindy Powell, Secretary Eloise Sotelo; Board Members: Carlos Baltodano, Barb Brawner, Jacalyn Buettner, Lisa Burlini, Kathy Cordova, Alex Drexel, Chris Laszcz-Davis, Grace Paik, Bill Waterman, and Kate Wiley. City Council Liaison - Latika Malkani.
Sally Hogarty retired from The Orinda News in December 2022 after almost 30 years, and in December 2023 retired from The Orinda Association board of directors.
All officers and board members volunteer their time.
The Orinda News is mailed free of charge to almost 9,000 households and businesses throughout Orinda each month. The newspaper continues to be the primary local news source for people in Orinda. The Orinda Association covers all costs associated with the operation of the newspaper, including all office and staff costs.
The website for The Orinda News is regularly updated, see www.theorindanews.com.
The cost of developing, implementing, and maintaining the site is paid for by The OA.
The Volunteer Center is open from 9 am to 4 pm, Monday-Friday and maintains a Volunteer Guide online with local volunteer opportunities sorted by Adult and Youth, and nonprofit group listings. There is a short summary of each group, with website and contact D.2
Packet Pg. 5
Communication: Orinda Association Annual Report (ITEMS FOR THE GOOD OF THE CITY) information. Additionally, The OA supports other nonprofits with free publicity in The Orinda News.
The Lions Recycle for Sight collection box continues to be over-filled with eyeglasses for the monthly collection. This program is promoted on the Lions Club website and a classified ad in The Orinda News.
In June 2023 we presented three recipients with the OA’s William Penn Mott Jr.
Environmental Award at the Wilder Art and Garden Center: Barbara Leitner, the 2019 recipient, the Eagle and Gold Scouts of Orinda, the 2022 recipients, and Friends of Orinda Nature Area (FONA), the 2023 recipient. Toris Jaeger, of FONA was the first recipient of the Mott Award in 1993, 30 years ago.
Seniors Around Town (SAT) was established in 2005 and provides free, door-to-door transportation for Orinda seniors. Many riders are on fixed incomes; 30% live in Section 8/affordable housing. Orinda residents, who are registered SAT Volunteers, use their personal vehicles to provide transportation for Orinda seniors who are unable to drive themselves. The program provides rides to non-emergency medical appointments (e.g., dialysis, cancer treatment), personal care appointments and grocery shopping.
DRIVER
STATISTICS
Total # of Ride
Requests
Volunteer
Hours
Volunteer
Miles Driven
Jan – Dec 2023 1,395 1,061 15,045
The Orinda Classic Car Show supplies most of the funds to the SAT program. The Orinda Association provides end-to-end operations for this annual event. This includes website management, advertising, office and administrative support for car show vehicle registrations and payments, and coordination of non-staff volunteers. Additionally, coverage and advertising are provided by The Orinda News.
Orinda’s 4th of July Parade (est. 1984) and Celebration is funded with sponsorships and donations and produced by volunteers. The OA partners with Orinda Parks and Rec on activities in the park and the Library Plaza. The City of Orinda provides police and public works services prior to and day of event. In 2023, over 80 volunteers worked the day of the event and the Parade Committee, headed by Sally Hogarty and Carson Cordova, began nine months prior, providing over 800 volunteer hours planning and fundraising for the annual event.
The OA Public Safety Forum filmed in 2018 with local police, fire and emergency evacuation preparedness services became the basis of the Orinda Emergency D.2
Packet Pg. 6
Communication: Orinda Association Annual Report (ITEMS FOR THE GOOD OF THE CITY) Preparedness and Evacuation Video. This video covers prevention, preparedness and response to crime, fire, emergencies, and natural disasters particular to the East Bay and is still running on Contra Costa TV.
The small office location at 26 Orinda Way provides support for public and nonprofit groups, schools, clubs, and businesses to coordinate within Lamorinda. Orinda Community Foundation, ONE Orinda, Rotary groups, Orinda Historical Society, Cal Shakes, Orinda Starlight Village Players, Film Festivals, Garden Clubs, Friends of Orinda Creeks, Friends of Nature Area FONA, Tabor Sister City, JM Adobe Friends, Orinda Woman’s Club, Orinda Jr. Women’s Club, Art in Public Places, Friends of Orinda Library, Lamorinda Adult Respite Center, Farmers Market, School age volunteers, the Orinda Community and the City of Orinda are part of the nonprofit and service organizations network which supports our citizens.
The Orinda Association participates in donation drives and our office location in Library Plaza, next to the Community Center, serves as a central drop-off spot and the OA websites are regularly updated.
We look forward to continuing the services provided to our homebound Orinda Seniors, planning the 40th July 4th Parade and Park Activities, and the 20th Orinda Classic Car Show, and reaching out to the increasing number of Orinda organizations that, like us, look for ways to make our city even better!
The Orinda Association is a 501©3 organization and our annual Form 990 is available online.
D.2
Packet Pg. 7
Communication: Orinda Association Annual Report (ITEMS FOR THE GOOD OF THE CITY) Miner Road Contraflow Update
April 16, 2024
D.3
Packet Pg. 8
Communication: Miner Road Contraflow Update (ITEMS FOR THE GOOD OF THE CITY) • Conceptualized by Moraga Orinda
Fire District
• Demonstration Exercise
Conducted – January 26, 2019
• Contraflow Signage funded by
PG&E and Improvements
installed by City
• Installation Delayed due to
Community Concerns; Completed
September 2022
Miner Road Contraflow
Background
D.3
Packet Pg. 9
Communication: Miner Road Contraflow Update (ITEMS FOR THE GOOD OF THE CITY) Initial Improvements
• Activation Signage at Miner & Camino Pablo and Miner & Lombardy D.3
Packet Pg. 10
Communication: Miner Road Contraflow Update (ITEMS FOR THE GOOD OF THE CITY) Operational Enhancements
• Contraflow not Activated Since Installation
• Concerns about Activations and Safety
• Internal Workgroup Convened to Discuss and
Strategize and Held Field Review Meeting May 22,
2023
• Miner Road Contraflow Protocol Developed
D.3
Packet Pg. 11
Communication: Miner Road Contraflow Update (ITEMS FOR THE GOOD OF THE CITY) Protocol & Improvements
Step by Step Protocol for
Activation
Enhancements Identified and
Implemented
Additional Signage for Deployment
Upon Activation
No Left Turn and No Right Turn
Signs on Barricades
Pre-Staged in a Trailer for Quick
Deployment
Permanent Flippable Signs Added
at Intersecting Streets
D.3
Packet Pg. 12
Communication: Miner Road Contraflow Update (ITEMS FOR THE GOOD OF THE CITY) Activation Exercise
– December 2, 2023
• Advance Notice went out via
Multiple Channels
• Police, Public Works, Fire, and City
Management
• CERT and Other Volunteers • Managed from Emergency
Operations Center
• Decision to Activate Made • Announcements Made via Social Media and Other Channels
• Public Works Dispatched for Signage
Deployment and Activation – 15
Minutes
• Activation Exercise Duration – 40
minutes
D.3
Packet Pg. 13
Communication: Miner Road Contraflow Update (ITEMS FOR THE GOOD OF THE CITY) Activation Exercise – Debrief & Follow-up
Lessons Learned
• Activation Exercise Went Well
• Some Drivers Ignored No Left
Turn/No Right Turn Signs
• Staff Deployed to Address
Follow-Up
• Protocol Updated
• In Bound Traffic to be
Prohibited
• Barricade Placement and
Additonal Barricades
• Staffing at Intersections
• Education of Drivers and
Public
D.3
Packet Pg. 14
Communication: Miner Road Contraflow Update (ITEMS FOR THE GOOD OF THE CITY) Miner Road Contraflow
Next Steps • On-Going Education and Outreach Pre
-Fire Season
• Neighborhood Targeted • Annual Postcard/Mailing • Social Media • General Public • Additional Activation Exercise
D.3
Packet Pg. 15
Communication: Miner Road Contraflow Update (ITEMS FOR THE GOOD OF THE CITY) Presentation to Orinda City Council – April 30, 2024
Local Hazard
Mitigation Plan
D.4
Packet Pg. 16
Communication: Local Hazard Mitigation Plan Presentation (ITEMS FOR THE GOOD OF THE CITY) Presentation
Overview
Part 1: Plan Overview
Part 2: Identified Hazards
Part 3: How to Prepare
Part 4: Get Involved
D.4
Packet Pg. 17
Communication: Local Hazard Mitigation Plan Presentation (ITEMS FOR THE GOOD OF THE CITY) Local Hazard
Mitigation
Plan
The Local Hazard Mitigation Plan (LHMP) is a 5-year
plan that sets the mitigation priorities for the County.
Over 40 partners county-wide are a part of this plan:
16 cities, 20 special districts, and many County
Departments.
working with cities, special districts, and
county departments to identify priority
hazards in their jurisdictions.
identifying mitigation strategies for each
hazards identified.
asking the public for feedback on the plan.
Now that we have a draft, we want to hear
your comments!
The planning process includes:
D.4
Packet Pg. 18
Communication: Local Hazard Mitigation Plan Presentation (ITEMS FOR THE GOOD OF THE CITY) D.4
Packet Pg. 19
Communication: Local Hazard Mitigation Plan Presentation (ITEMS FOR THE GOOD OF THE CITY) County-Wide Hazards
Natural Hazards (Required)
Human-Caused / Technological
Hazards
• Wildfire
• Earthquake
• Landslide
• Climate Change
• Dam and Levee Failure
• Cybersecurity Threats
• Hazardous Materials Incidents
• Utility Interruptions
• Active Shooter Incidents
• Terrorism
• Flood
• Drought
• Sea Level Rise (new)
• Severe Weather
• Tsunami
D.4
Packet Pg. 20
Communication: Local Hazard Mitigation Plan Presentation (ITEMS FOR THE GOOD OF THE CITY) How to Prepare for Disasters
Preparing before a disaster can help you and your loved ones recover more quickly from a disaster.
Learn your
hazards
Visit
myhazards.caloes.ca.gov
Make a kit
Each pet and member of
your household should
have a kit.
Practice your plan and
check your emergency kit
at least twice a year.
Practice
your plan
D.4
Packet Pg. 21
Communication: Local Hazard Mitigation Plan Presentation (ITEMS FOR THE GOOD OF THE CITY) Get Involved in the
Planning Process
Read the plan!
Comment!
Share what you learned!
Check the County Website for more information.
Public Comment Period:
April 22 – May 31, 2024
D.4
Packet Pg. 22
Communication: Local Hazard Mitigation Plan Presentation (ITEMS FOR THE GOOD OF THE CITY) Thank you!
For questions or comments,
contact:
OES Staff
[email protected]
D.4
Packet Pg. 23
Communication: Local Hazard Mitigation Plan Presentation (ITEMS FOR THE GOOD OF THE CITY) AGENDA TITLE: City Council Minutes
RECOMMENDATION:
Approve City Council Minutes:
1. April 16, 2024 Special Meeting
2. April 16, 2024 Regular Meeting
ATTACHMENTS:
A. City Council Closed Session Minutes - April 16, 2024 B. City Council Minutes - April 16, 2024
Respectfully Submitted by:
Sheri Smith
City Clerk
Prepared By: Sheri Smith, City Clerk
Approved by:
F.1
Packet Pg. 24
April 16, 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 (Councilmember Inga Miller participating remotely.)
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.a
Packet Pg. 25
Attachment: City Council Closed Session Minutes - April 16, 2024 (3340 : City Council Minutes) Orinda City Council Minutes Page 1 of 22 04.16.24
APRIL 16, 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:
Mayor Gee called the Regular Meeting to order at approximately 7:00 p.m.
COUNCILMEMBERS PRESENT: Brandyn Iverson, Inga Miller (remotely), Janet Riley
Vice Mayor Latika Malkani, Mayor Darlene Gee
COUNCILMEMBERS ABSENT: None
B. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE – Led by Mayor Gee.
C. ADOPTION OF AGENDA
MOTION by Vice Mayor Malkani, and seconded by Councilmember Iverson, to adopt the agenda. Said motion carried by unanimous (5-0) roll call vote.
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
Mayor Gee and Councilmembers recognized outgoing Commissioners/Committee Members for their service to Orinda, Lina Lee, Tom Schneider, Melanie Light (in-person), Jon Conner, Emily Warren, Stuart House (in person; arrived late), and Natalie Fay.
D.2. Proclamation Recognizing Orinda Baseball Association and Founder Bob Hegarty for their 40th Anniversary
Mayor Gee and Councilmembers recognized Orinda Baseball Association and Founder Bob Hegarty for their 40th Anniversary. Mayor Gee read the proclamation into the record, and photographs followed.
F.1.b
Packet Pg. 26
Attachment: City Council Minutes - April 16, 2024 (3340 : City Council Minutes) Orinda City Council Minutes Page 2 of 22 04.16.24
Bob Hegarty thanked the Council and noted that when the field was built he did not know that it would be named after him, said he is glad it is not a memorial field, spoke about OBA’s field design and program, and read a poem into the record about having fun and teaching baseball the correct way.
D.3. Update from Assemblymember Bauer-Kahan's Field Representative, Antoinette St. John
Antoinette St. John, Field Representative for Assemblymember Bauer-Kahan’s Office, provided a brief overview of their San Ramon District Office and the purpose they serve in the district. She then described the following legislation the Assemblymember has introduced thus far:
AB 331; Automated Decision Tools Act: This bill will protect individuals from algorithmic discrimination by requiring developers and users to assess automated decision tools (ADTs) that make consequential decisions for any biases.
AB 1836: This bill will protect the face, name, image, and likeness of deceased artists from being replicated without consent for profit.
AB 3204: This bill will require AI models to register with the State if they plan to use personal information to train AI models.
AB 2085: This bill will create a more streamlined process for clinic development.
AB 2099: This bill will update penalties for harassing and doxing abortion patients and providers.
The Assemblymember is also providing education and hearings on menopause to address symptoms widely experienced by women that are often under-studied, underdiscussed and under-funded.
The Assemblymember is also partnering with two State Senators on legislation that will eliminate the option to receive unwoven plastic bags at grocery stores.
AB 2236; Plastic Bag Ban: This bill has received strong support from a broad coalition of environmental groups and support from the California Grocers Association.
AB 2021: This bill focuses on protecting youth from predatory tobacco sales and will raise penalties for on-line tobacco sellers who sell to those under the age of 21.
AB 1999: This bill looks to cap the fixed fee on utility bills at $10 instead of making it an income-based fee like PG&E had initially proposed.
F.1.b
Packet Pg. 27
Attachment: City Council Minutes - April 16, 2024 (3340 : City Council Minutes) Orinda City Council Minutes Page 3 of 22 04.16.24
AB 2054: This bill prevents a conflict of interest with the CPUC known as the revolving door effect where CPUC Commissioners are coming off of Boards and positions at entities that they are supposed to be regulating such as PG&E. This would impose a 3- year cooling off period which would hopefully inhibit the revolving door.
The Assemblymember also has spoken directly with homeowners about homeowner insurance availability and their recent experiences and described information about the Governor’s Executive Order and insurance reforms.
AB 2011: This bill will remove the sunset date for the small employer leave mediation program and expand the program to include reproductive loss as a qualifying event.
Mayor Gee thanked Ms. St. John, cited the insurance crisis, and noted she and the City Manager will be conversing with the Assemblymember later this week.
Mayor Gee and Councilmembers thanked Ms. St. John for her update and recognized the work of the Assemblymember.
D.4. Update from East Bay Municipal Utility District (EBMUD) Marguerite Young, EBMUD Boardmember, Ward 3, reported EBMUD appointed Louise Gomez to the Board to replace the seat occupied by John Coleman which has now made EBMUD a women-led Board and a majority board of people of color.
Director Young then provided a brief update of EBMUD’s trench soil removal work at Briones, stating they have improved the route, reduced hours, and further refined safety standards. They have conducted extensive outreach which she described, and introduced Mr. Cicala.
Gus Cicala, III, Senior Civil Engineer and Project Manager for the Briones Trench Soil Removal Project in 2024, provided a presentation on this year’s plans for the project, background of the project, the latest plan and timing for the project, best management practices implemented, enhanced work restrictions, outreach completed, and next steps for the trench soil management program. He thanked City staff for working with them on the project to date.
Councilmember Miller asked whether the trucks would be lining up on the freeway into Orinda as they did in the past, citing potential safety concerns.
Mr. Cicala said he spoke with their contractor today about not starting until 9:00 a.m. and they are planning to accurately get trucks there when needed at the site rather than having them queue up.
Mayor Gee and Councilmembers thanked EBMUD representatives for the update.
F.1.b
Packet Pg. 28
Attachment: City Council Minutes - April 16, 2024 (3340 : City Council Minutes) Orinda City Council Minutes Page 4 of 22 04.16.24
Mayor Gee opened the Public Forum, and there were no speakers.
E. PUBLIC FORUM
Michael Beller, Orinda Branch Librarian, reported they just completed National Library Week and spoke about circulation statistics, noting Story Time has been strong all year, with new electronic resources as well as the New York Times and the Wall Street Journal available electronically, and installation of a laptop loaning kiosk. He then described various events at the Library this month.
Nancy Ross Madnick referred to her request for speed humps on Dalewood Drive and asked if the City has heard anything from the Fire Chief.
City Manager Biggs said staff is evaluating this and looking at the question on the appeal because the Fire Chief rejected it for code areas which staff did not expect. Therefore, staff is consulting with the City Attorney and after review, will bring something forward to the Council and will let Ms. Madnick know when this is scheduled.
Stuart House apologized for arriving after Item D.1, thanked the Council for their good work, and appreciates the time he worked on the Traffic Safety Advisory Committee over the years.
F. CONSENT CALENDAR
Mayor Gee asked if there were any items for removal, and Councilmember Iverson said she has one small correction for Item F.1.3; the March 12, 2024 minutes which she gave to the City Clerk. There were no public comments.
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
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.1.b
Packet Pg. 29
Attachment: City Council Minutes - April 16, 2024 (3340 : City Council Minutes) Orinda City Council Minutes Page 5 of 22 04.16.24
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.
MOTION by Councilmember Miller, and seconded by Vice Mayor Malkani, to approve Consent Calendar Items F.1.1, F.1.2, F.1.3 (as corrected), F.2, F.3, F.4, F.5, and F.6.
Said motion carried by unanimous (5-0) roll call vote.
G. PUBLIC HEARING – None.
H. POLICY MATTERS
H.1. Fire Fuels Reduction Incentive Pilot Program Update F.1.b
Packet Pg. 30
Attachment: City Council Minutes - April 16, 2024 (3340 : City Council Minutes) Orinda City Council Minutes Page 6 of 22 04.16.24
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) Costsharing component.
City Manager Biggs gave the staff report on behalf of Micki Cronin who was on vacation.
She had worked with the SSTOC Ad-Hoc Committee with James Duff on this matter. He described the existing pilot program for the Fire Fuels Reduction Incentive Program, the recommendations presented to the SSTOC by the Ad-Hoc Committee in March, endorsement of the recommendations, and an additional request the Council consider a policy question to expand the dollar amount of the rebate from $599 to about $1,000- $2,500. If the Council is in concurrence with program changes and, depending on what the Council would like to do on the policy matter on the dollar amount, staff would work with the City Attorney and bring back a resolution on April 30th, if possible.
Vice Chair Rochelle Latimer, SSTOC, said she presented modifications one year ago and the Council held a robust discussion on the public benefit that fire knows no boundary and that the Council was open to expanding evacuation routes. They then moved onto fire apparatus roads. They did a considerable amount of research on what grants there are in the State and two they felt were most comparable for the cities of Novato and San Rafael. They offer up to $1,000 in rebate or matching funds. There are other more rural parts of the State that are providing $2,500 to $5,000 and often are contracting directly with tree service businesses.
Mayor Gee asked and confirmed an assessment by a Fire Ambassador of the property is done to ensure appropriate work is being done, and that the owner must meet all three conditions to be able to qualify for the work.
Councilmember Iverson voiced concerns with the annual grant versus increased, onetime grant because someone might be changing their home landscaping versus a smaller amount for annual maintenance.
Commissioner Latimer noted the issue as vegetation grows and they could remove ladder fuels or bushes that may be adjacent to tree limbs. It is not to necessarily to help an owner do their annual work but to address tree growth and death and added vegetation growth that would require additional funding.
Mayor Gee opened the Public Forum, and there were no speakers.
Councilmember Miller voiced support of the staff proposed changes, and voiced concerns with increasing the amount of the grant beyond the $599 as the cost on the Measure R funds was not contemplated, as well as the staff burden in providing the tax forms which takes away from the work. She did not want it to turn into a wealth transfer for those homes with the most fire protection needs.
F.1.b
Packet Pg. 31
Attachment: City Council Minutes - April 16, 2024 (3340 : City Council Minutes) Orinda City Council Minutes Page 7 of 22 04.16.24
She thinks they need to keep the fire apparatus road description in place and could further explain more of what the road is, but did not want to move away from codified language which gets to the legal basis for doing this.
Councilmember Reilly said she was pleased with the fact they had 100 successful applicants, can see them working in that momentum as opposed to increasing the amount, getting more people to apply, and education on the opportunity.
Councilmember Iverson voiced reservation stating some people know how to “work the system” to get an unfair advantage versus others and did not want it to be overly bureaucratic or bogged down in rules.
Vice Mayor Malkani said she favors increasing the amount to either $1,000 or $1,500 because it is a matching fund which encourages people to spend twice that amount. If it was increased to $1,500 but someone only spent $2,000 they would still only qualify for $1,000 of the grant.
Vice Mayor Malkani said she would not think this is something that would necessarily continue in perpetuity but as something to look at future funding for the next year. She voiced support to increase it to a higher amount such as $1,500 to encourage removal of larger vegetation.
Mayor Gee voiced support of the recommendations and increasing the grant amount to as much as $2,500. She is not worried about staff work on processing 1099’s, as the City still needs to try to prevent a terrible wildfire event. She understands the concern of pushing the system but she is less worried about that, noting applicants must have documentation that they are removing vegetation.
Councilmember Miller read the staff recommendation, thinks trees other than pine and eucalyptus should only be limbed up and not removed, and she was not in favor of increasing the amount beyond $599 because it is not the purpose of the money.
Councilmembers Riley and Iverson cited the good increase in participants which should be highlighted, and would agree to a more modest increase of $1,000.
Mayor Gee asked about all three sections; the recommended administrative changes, program changes, and the cost-sharing component.
Councilmember Riley questioned the definition of “the fire apparatus access road.” Councilmember discussion ensued regarding “the fire apparatus access road.” There was initial majority support of the administrative and program changes.
Councilmember Miller asked for the City Attorney’s opinion on this to ensure this is a staff-recommended change.
F.1.b
Packet Pg. 32
Attachment: City Council Minutes - April 16, 2024 (3340 : City Council Minutes) Orinda City Council Minutes Page 8 of 22 04.16.24
City Attorney Osa Wolff referred to packet page 108 in the middle under the heading, “Recommended Program Changes” which is where she is seeing the “fire apparatus access road” reference struck and not replaced by “road.” It is just deleted in two places, both in the context of removing eucalyptus and Monterey pines and removing ladder fuels. She asked the City Manager if this is a staff or committee recommendation, or possibly both.
City Manager. Biggs said other than the policy matter and this one question, the administrative changes originated with staff. They concurred with the Commission’s program changes and then it was the policy matter of the cost-sharing. He thought he understood the description of the “fire apparatus road” was to just take that term out but still have it restricted to “fire apparatus road.”
Commissioner Latimer said they were trying to encourage people to remove the eucalyptus trees in the backyard and not just adjacent to a street so it was the removal of the locations where they were encouraging work on the entire property.
Councilmember Miller recalled that they have sight line responsibility on apparatus roads and this is where the City can be involved, but the City is not the authority that oversees the whole property.
City Manager Biggs said as they were building the program initially, that was the starting point. It gets more to the question of what is the public benefit. The Fire District’s inspection priorities at that time were focused on evacuation routes and they defined that as within 15 feet of the road. Then, the iteration brought back last year was refined to be fire apparatus roads because the public benefit was to help people evacuate generally because the public would be using all roads and fire apparatus roads also serve and lead up to evacuation routes. Staff would need to return with a resolution and the public benefit would be proposed to be expanded again. He would say the fire inspection’s emphasis and their rules have changed. The policy question would be whether the Council agrees it is a broad public benefit in keeping with Measure R, and it is incrementally evolving as the City engages in these activities.
Vice Mayor Malkani said the staff report which is pulled from the application states, “Roads accessible by emergency vehicles are considered a fire apparatus access road.” Mr. Biggs said he would say this is most roads but probably the Fire District would say there are roads they consider not to be fire apparatus access roads.
Councilmember Miller thinks it is important to have an objective definition of what a road is.
Councilmember Iverson said she had misunderstood this had been legally vetted for the public benefit question. When re-reading it, in light of Councilmember Miller’s comments, it is true that ladder fuels are anywhere at all on your property so she asked what is the public benefit analysis of these program changes. She asked if this is a decision the Council is being asked to make and is comfortable with.
F.1.b
Packet Pg. 33
Attachment: City Council Minutes - April 16, 2024 (3340 : City Council Minutes) Orinda City Council Minutes Page 9 of 22 04.16.24
City Attorney Wolff stated this is the decision the Council is being asked to make. She thinks the policy change before the Council is whether to broaden where the work can be done. Currently, the program requires it to be in the vicinity of a fire apparatus access road, which is pretty broad but it is not the entire property. The proposed program change would make it basically the entire property; the front yard, back yard, near the road, not near the road, and the question is whether the Council feels comfortable there is public benefit that would be derived from allowing that kind of work to be funded. If yes, the Council could articulate that and staff could write it in a resolution.
Mayor Gee said she thinks it is a public benefit. Reducing fuel loads anywhere on the property, especially with the specificity called out, is an important public benefit as the fire will bounce all over. She is substantially less worried about someone trying to take advantage of what is a modest sum of money versus they are being incentivized to actually address and do.
Councilmember Iverson emphasized that she feels it is redistributive and she is struggling with how to not feel like they are creating winners and losers with just who knows about the incentive to take advantage.
Councilmember Miller said when they discussed it originally, she thinks there was a desire on her part to limit this as to what was within the City’s charter or duties to the community, what they collect the tax for, and what they are able to do. They have to be careful that the money available for fire protection is in MOFD. If the City was to take over those tasks, they do not have the money to do that other than through Measure R.
So, if they wanted to become the fire district, it would come at significant cost to residents and also to their duty to residents which is evacuation to get everybody out. The failure in one case to get that right is far too great a cost to pay. So, they are going through “mission seepage” and she respectfully could not support expanding the program in that way. They owe it to residents to ensure they fulfill those duties which the City does not have enough money to do as is.
Councilmember Iverson said she feels that after hearing the annual report, she has come around to thinking about wildfire resilience at the Town level as being a form of infrastructure. The City set out a duty to make the town more wildfire safe at a broad level through Measure R, and this is how she can justify the public benefit element as long as they keep remembering this is a pilot program. They cannot pay for everybody’s private landscaping, and she is very concerned about the long-term viability and fairness.
However, they have an under-use problem so she would support the changes in the spirit of trying to make more progress, see how it goes, and she supported the public benefit.
Councilmember Riley questioned the “fire apparatus access road” definition.
F.1.b
Packet Pg. 34
Attachment: City Council Minutes - April 16, 2024 (3340 : City Council Minutes) Orinda City Council Minutes Page 10 of 22 04.16.24
Commissioner Latimer said similar to the other two cities they are looking at they do not define where the work needs to be done. She wants to recognize they have a special tax that was specifically for wildfire defense so this is different than Measure R. But, best practices are to remove the fuel. It should not matter that the tree is adjacent to the street or 10 feet into the backyard. If they want to keep it along the street, they are making it simpler to remove the confusion, given 98% of the streets are fire apparatus accessible roads.
Last year, when they presented, the Council moved towards the broader perspective of most streets because of the public benefit of the fire not knowing any boundaries and things from backyards spread quickly to the front yard.
Vice Mayor Malkani said they talked about the policy issue but getting into the legal issue, this goes to the part in the staff report under qualifying work, bullet #5 which suggests to remove the phrase “fire apparatus.” Since this is coming back for a resolution, if the City Attorney or staff believes it would be helpful to include the language somewhere in the application, the sentence that “Roads accessible by emergency vehicles are considered a fire apparatus access road” maybe the word “road” can be used in the general description with an asterisk and the explanation of a road being limited could be defined below so people would not necessarily be discouraged in the first instance.
Mayor Gee noted this is what the application already says.
Mr. Biggs said in looking back at the language, he thinks this gets back to how this program evolved and the importance of focusing on the word “road.” The reason this was put in here is there is the Fire Code that talks about a minimum height of 15 feet. If you have a tree overgrowing and if branches are more than 15 feet, this could impede the fire truck, as well as 3 feet of the fire apparatus road. So, this tried to accomplish very specific language because the Fire District was out citing people and they were driving up and down the streets with a pole on a truck that if it was not 15 feet, people would get a citation.
The Fire District inspects fire apparatus roads and the front yards of homes every year, whereas they are moving from neighborhood to neighborhood with more detailed inspections with broader fire fuel reduction requirements. So, he thinks this is still trying to address that and eliminating a potential conflict or confusion about the Commission’s recommendations to broaden the program to allow fire fuel reductions to occur on other elements of the property, which is the limbing up and removal of dead and dying trees.
This is where staff might help clarify that because it is a different requirement when it is along the edge of the road. Also, they may separately include general fire fuel reductions potentially across the parcel.
F.1.b
Packet Pg. 35
Attachment: City Council Minutes - April 16, 2024 (3340 : City Council Minutes) Orinda City Council Minutes Page 11 of 22 04.16.24
City Attorney Wolff said in looking at packet page 115 and the bullet list of qualifying work, currently if you want to get reimbursed for eucalyptus or Monterey pine removal it must be within 6 feet of a habitable structure or fire apparatus road. She thinks the proposal is to just not have any location requirement for that bullet. Staff can remove the “habitable structure” and remove “the apparatus road” and similarly remove the “ladder fuels.” There is a requirement that it be within 10 feet of a fire apparatus road and she thinks the proposal is to delete that.
She said regarding the last bullet regarding removal of hazardous vegetation, that comes from an MOFD requirement and is necessarily tethered to the location of the road. There is not a requirement for removal of that kind of hazardous or combustible material unless it is next to a road. So, she thinks they cannot delete the reference to a road from that last bullet. They might be able to help clarify what is meant by “fire apparatus road” in that bullet, but the road is the thing that makes the requirement apply.
Mr. Biggs added that the one provision of the 3x15 area is still applicable. He thinks to the Commission’s point, some residents find fire apparatus road confusing. He noted staff will bring back the language to ensure it is accomplishing what the Council’s direction is.
Councilmember Miller said she appreciates the discussion and indicated she will vote against the motion which solely relates to her concern about the mission seepage visa vi the City versus the Fire District.
MOTION by Councilmember Iverson, and seconded by Vice Mayor Malkani, to recommend the program and administrative changes as recommended in the staff report; to recommend the program changes as recommended in the staff report on packet page 115, except that bullet #5 which is specific to the 15 feet and 3 foot setback on a fire apparatus road should stay as is, with adding parenthetical language to define it to that bullet; removing “fire apparatus road” to the bullets above bullet #5; and to increase the cost sharing component to $1,000. Said motion carried by (4-1) roll call vote; Miller voted no.
H.2. Red Flag Days Parking Restrictions Program Review
Recommendation:
Receive Staff Report and presentation, and provide direction.
City Manager Biggs introduced the item.
Assistant Engineer Kevin McCourt provided the staff report, background, and an overview of the Red Flag Days parking restrictions and options for the program moving forward. Staff can identify areas with direct line of sight to remove signs that may be deemed unnecessary, identify areas where topography or trees clearly do not allow parking to remove signs, and identify locations wherein replacing one of the Red Flag Day signs to “No Parking Anytime’ would be appropriate.
F.1.b
Packet Pg. 36
Attachment: City Council Minutes - April 16, 2024 (3340 : City Council Minutes) Orinda City Council Minutes Page 12 of 22 04.16.24
City Engineer Sivakumar Nataraja added information about options for the Council to consider and said staff is not seeking an approval. Staff did not have too many examples available when doing the research and most were from Southern California, noting the geography and road layouts are quite different. Based on what direction the Council provides, staff will follow-up with a Traffic Order and possibly a policy option for moving forward with future Red Flag Day signage implementations.
Mayor Gee referred to the list of roads identified in the original expansion and asked and confirmed with Mr. Nataraja that all of these have signs installed.
Councilmember Iverson said some examples had foldable signs and asked if this is an option or is it too labor intensive.
Mr. Nataraja said two types of signs have been implemented. The foldable signs are usually at the beginning and end of a limit so these are the ones that trigger activation of the Red Flag Day enforcement. The signs in between are the ones that say “No parking during Red Flag Days.” If the question is whether the City can make all signs to be foldable, it is a custom sign and it is possible to change them.
City Manager Biggs clarified that staff, however, would not be able to go out and flip hundreds of signs.
Councilmember Iverson referred to towing and asked if it is something the City can consider, given it states “needs further research.”
Mr. Nataraja said staff is looking into this right now. There is a California Vehicle Code (CVC) related implementation staff can follow, but they are trying to figure out how it would apply in this particular situation. If this is a priority by the Council, staff can determine next steps as to how to implement it. Some examples have towing wording in the sign itself and they realize there might be a requirement to add the specific Vehicle Code section to enforce towing. So, depending on Council feedback, they will be able to follow-up with more details.
Vice Mayor Malkani asked to shed more light on the options in terms of the Red Flag Day policy options, restrictions on widths, and asked what was the basis for less than 28 feet and 28 to 36 feet, and examples such as referring to Dalewood as a wide street.
Mr. Nataraja said the basis for that is coming from 20 feet being the minimum road width for a fire department access restriction for two travel lanes. The 28 feet would be a street with one parking side available. Anything less than 28 feet would mean that parking access is limited. The next reasoning for the 28 to 36 feet is when one is at 36 feet, they are able to allow parking on both sides plus still have a 20-foot road width in between, and this is where the 36 feet is coming from. Regarding Dalewood, he believes it is 38 to 40 feet curb to curb so that would come under a street greater than 36 feet.
Technically, this would be a street where they would not install signs.
F.1.b
Packet Pg. 37
Attachment: City Council Minutes - April 16, 2024 (3340 : City Council Minutes) Orinda City Council Minutes Page 13 of 22 04.16.24
City Manager Biggs added there are other streets such as in the downtown area across from Safeway or Starbucks, it is two lanes and two parking bays. A street like that would not have any parking restrictions. Sometimes there are streets with parking restrictions because of their width. The thought was that streets with 36 feet allow two travel lanes and two parking lanes so it does not interfere with fire vehicle access which comes out of the Fire Code, as well as for evacuation. Regarding no parking on the fire access side, such as on Miner Road or Dalewood, that would be fire trucks coming in from Camino Pablo into where the fire is.
Councilmember Riley referred to the second to the last slide and the bullets. She referred to the last bullet and read it, and asked staff to elaborate on this.
Mr. Natarajan said for the second bullet, the direct line of site area are locations like Miner Road where the road width is there where potentially someone can park, but the road is straight passage so at any given point, someone is seeing multiple signs in the driver’s view. This was a comment that came up, and staff is proposing that as one of the options where they will go and eliminate some of the signs in between to create more separation. When someone is looking at signs they are not looking at 4 or 5 in a row but rather 2 or 3 depending on the terrain.
The next bullet point is a similar manner but it lists areas where there is a hill on one side and a steep downslope on the other side which limits parking naturally. People tend not to park there, and so in those areas, they are trying to identify areas where additional signs can be recommended for removal.
As an extension of this thought, the current CVC does allow enforcement when a vehicle is parked in a way it is interfering with the travel lane, such as on a street like Charles Hill Circle. One thought was to remove some signs and replace some to say “no parking anytime” except “during Red Flag Days.” It is something to consider.
Councilmember Riley said this would be somewhat complicated. Mr. Nataraja noted it would be in a very limited circumstance so it will not conflict with Red Flag Day signage.
These are presented as an option and staff will need to investigate and gather information. When they return with a Traffic Order Request, they can present exactly what that looks like and which streets would qualify under all of the bullet points.
Councilmember Miller said because there were questions from residents based on the width of specific roads, she asked if staff looked at the width of Upper Miner Road and Charles Hill Road and where they fall in this.
Mr. Natarajan said at this time, they did not verify recommendations yet. They plan to do these based on direction from the Council. Dalewood is wider than 36-foot requirement so it would qualify as a street where they would not need restriction signs.
Mayor Gee asked if there is anything in the recommendations here regrading warnings and citations or any of those aspects of the Southern California program.
F.1.b
Packet Pg. 38
Attachment: City Council Minutes - April 16, 2024 (3340 : City Council Minutes) Orinda City Council Minutes Page 14 of 22 04.16.24
City Manager Biggs said right now the City only does warnings on first day and then they cite after that. The Council made that change. Mr. Natarajan then displayed the recommendations for the implementation and said there is flexibility in changing it at any time.
Mayor Gee asked if there were legal restrictions on the amount of a citation.
City Manager Biggs noted it is in the fee schedule and it escalates depending on the number of citations and violation.
Councilmember Iverson and Mayor Gee commented this is a very serious issue but it is challenging to believe the City has the resources to be instituting towing. Mayor Gee said she would not mind seeing a very large dollar citation to discourage people to violate.
City Manager Biggs said at this point, the City has a part-time parking enforcement person and they can call on them to come in on Red Flag Days, and police can provide limited enforcement, as well. The Safety Element has this program to roll out in other neighborhoods, and he thinks this is why the Council wanted to hold discussion on criteria based on concerns heard to date.
Mayor Gee opened the Public Forum.
City Clerk Smith announced the Council received comments from Crystal D’Amato and Sandy Pearson.
Nancy Ross Madnick said her family measured Dalewood Drive twice in front of their house and it is 40 feet curb to curb.
Councilmember Iverson voiced support of all recommendations and would encourage rolling out future implementations or even correcting prior ones. There are narrow, twisty roads like El Toyonal or Manzanita and she would like prioritization in Phase 2 in areas where people who live nearby are concerned about not being able to evacuate and where staff has good knowledge of.
Councilmember Riley said she likes options based on width of the street, asked for more study about the last three items on the last slide, but possibly it is a judgment call.
City Manager Biggs said staff wanted to give the Council options and those implemented are the safest option given the City goes through several criteria but could receive further direction from the Council.
Councilmember Riley recalled they did not do that initially because of challenges to the parking tickets, enforceability, so they would be softening their chances of winning cases.
F.1.b
Packet Pg. 39
Attachment: City Council Minutes - April 16, 2024 (3340 : City Council Minutes) Orinda City Council Minutes Page 15 of 22 04.16.24
Councilmember Miller echoed comments and appreciation of staff’s work. The one tweak she would make, which may not be supported here, would be to go with Pasadena’s more strict standards for streets greater than 27 feet where they are restricted on one side, but staff’s recommendations are perfectly reasonable and has more community support. She also suggested people experience an evacuation zone.
Vice Mayor Malkani appreciates staff’s work, suggested that to the extent there is a resolution that comes back, it would be helpful to articulate the rationale for the widths, determine whether the criteria should be tweaked differently where there are contraflow streets in place. She liked the idea of identifying areas with direct line of sight and reduce signs but she wants to keep thinking about enforceability or what would bring about culture change.
She referred to the last bullet point on changes for “no parking anytime,” and is still has confusion about so this might be a separate issue. Lastly, one public comment included a photo and placement of a “no parking” sign that seemed it would prevent parking on any day and hoped the City can act quickly to remove these.
City Manager Biggs said the idea of doing warnings on the first three Red Flag Days was done in El Toyonal for years, and the Council requested changing this, so he was not sure the Council wanted to go back to the three after the first year. They could also say for the first two years as people get used to it, warnings will be given for the first three Red Flag Days, but after that, he did not think it should be more than one day. This is where they found people ignore it.
Vice Mayor Malkani said she would like to see more strict enforcement, but thinks the kinks should be worked out and have rules be clearer.
City Attorney Wolff referred to the last bullet and said she pointed out that there are some places where parking is never appropriate, but when a sign is placed in that spot and it states No Parking on Red Flag Days, the implication is it is okay on other days. So, she thinks staff is recommending that if they find places where parking should never be okay, this is the specific sign that should be placed there and not the Red Flag Day sign.
Councilmember Iverson added that it seems the “No Stopping” seems unnecessary and asked to drop this.
City Attorney Wolff stated the Council had a long discussion about this when the El Toyonal restrictions went into place. The ultimate direction was to include “No Stopping” so this is a policy choice the Council can make. Mr. Biggs said the administrative regulations allow for 5 minute-delivery and unloading, so if a UPS truck were to stop and deliver quickly or a school bus, they would not be cited.
F.1.b
Packet Pg. 40
Attachment: City Council Minutes - April 16, 2024 (3340 : City Council Minutes) Orinda City Council Minutes Page 16 of 22 04.16.24
Councilmember Iverson asked why there is no stopping, and Councilmember Miller said there was a lot of concern around construction trucks. Mayor Gee said they are moving into the realm of whether you can define everything and common sense. She would suggest adding an item that allows for individual property owner discussions with the City about a particular sign, given some placement of signs cause problems for neighborhoods.
She is of the mind to have the most severe citation where people get one warning, given how serious this is and would not mind a $1,000 citation. They are trying to protect the public’s safety and enforcement is important.
EXTEND MEETING
MOTION by Vice Mayor Malkani, and seconded by Councilmember Miller, to extend the meeting until 10:30 p.m. Said motion carried by unanimous (5-0) roll call vote.
Councilmember Miller questioned why not tow versus a $1,000 parking ticket. Mayor Gee said she is fine with towing or a large citation, but is worried the City does not have the resources to make towing happen. Whatever the Council decides, she just thinks it should be a relatively severe penalty.
Councilmember Miller asked how towing would work, and City Manager Biggs said their parking enforcement person could write about 10 citations in the time it would take to call the tow company, and staff must remain on site until the towing company arrives. Also, if there are evacuation orders, there are different authorities that would allow towing. If a vehicle is blocking Fire truck access, they will also push it off the road.
Mayor Gee referred to the work done to date and said the bulk of comments have been on Dalewood and Charles Hill Road. She then confirmed staff had sufficient direction and will return to the Council.
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.
City Manager Biggs introduced the item, noting a developer made a request based on change in State law that limits the City’s ability to impose minimum parking requirements on projects and paying a parking in-lieu fee. They made a request for this item and staff made it more non-specific to an individual project.
F.1.b
Packet Pg. 41
Attachment: City Council Minutes - April 16, 2024 (3340 : City Council Minutes) Orinda City Council Minutes Page 17 of 22 04.16.24
Interim Planning Director Robert Reber added that the station at 25A Orinda is at the heart of this agenda item because the developer is prepared to pull their building permits and must pay impact fees. One of those is the parking fee. When the project was approved by the Planning Commission in June 2022 it was evaluated for the amount of parking on site to be provided. That project was determined to provide 80 on-site parking spaces. They can request a parking variance in which they pay a fee that goes to the City in lieu of providing on-site parking. The fee is over $800,000. Under the new bill that took effect after the project was entitled, they would not have to provide that parking but would have to go back through entitlements to qualify for that. So, the project is faced with having to pay the fee or go back through entitlements to garner the benefits of AB 2097. The developer representative is also present.
Councilmember questions ensued regarding the need to go back through the entitlement process, and City Attorney Wolff stated the City would get 30 days from having received the application to determine whether the exception findings could be made, and staff does not think those findings would apply in this case. Mr. Biggs said the intent of the bill is to take away discretion of local government and findings would be to impose parking and not to make findings that they qualify for no parking.
Councilmember Miller confirmed the approval in 2022 indicated that bike parking shall be provided at 5% of the requirement for automobile parking spaces. A total of 4 bike parking spaces are required based on the 80 required parking spaces. She asked if the 12 bike spaces remain in the plan.
Mr. Reber said these can still be required and the developer could provide further clarification for bike parking; however, there is nothing in the State language that would prohibit the City from requiring on-site bike parking.
Councilmember Miller asked if the Council is being asked to make a policy decision to relieve the developer of the $800,000+ fee and the reason would be to promote downtown development and to relieve time on reviewing a resubmittal.
Mr. Biggs said if the developer re-applies it would delay them and they would have to pay the additional amount. So, it is trying to be economic-development friendly. If they could pay $30,000 or $40,000 and reapply and get out of the parking requirement, this would not seem very productive nor would it benefit the community. If the Commission heard the application again, staff would ask to provide “x” number of bike spaces based on the amount of parking you would have had to apply but the City cannot impose. So, that would not change that condition. He also thinks that the PC were going to provide 12 spaces in front of the building in an area the PC wanted to see developed as a plaza.
So, there would have been parking in front of the building, but the PC eliminated that, as well because they are trying to bring retail closer to the street, have more interaction, etc. So, the policy decision was to let them use the parking in-lieu program.
F.1.b
Packet Pg. 42
Attachment: City Council Minutes - April 16, 2024 (3340 : City Council Minutes) Orinda City Council Minutes Page 18 of 22 04.16.24
Councilmember Miller said when reading the agenda item for the PC meeting, there was the plaza and also discussed were parklets which she thought were where the 6 onstreet parking would have been, but maybe the plaza and parklets are one in the same.
Also, if the Council were to grant this, she asked if they would also be eliminating that, especially for bicycles and changing the PC approval.
Mr. Biggs said the approach was made because of timing and does not change any of the other underlying approvals. By proposing the in-lieu parking holiday from the fee, all other elements remain in place. So, bike parking would remain, but Mr. Reber said he was not sure how many were proposed. Also, normally things are not retroactive and staff believes this is not retroactive, but this is something that is not 100% clear. It has been planned checked and it has been determined to be in compliance with the PC approval. Staff just has not checked these underlying facts because they are not disturbed by what is before the Council tonight.
Councilmember Miller said depending on other’s thoughts, she has many open questions and this is the first she heard that this could be retroactive law. She feels this is something that could return at another meeting or that could go to the Downtown Subcommittee, but it seems to require a lot more thought.
Councilmember Riley said procedurally and legally, she asked if the Council can do what staff is proposing to do which is take a holiday from in-lieu fees and keep the original approved plan intact.
City Attorney Wolff said the plan is approved which does not include any parking. The only change proposed is not to collect the in-lieu fee. The Council could absolutely tell the applicant they have the option to re-apply. This is the second time the Council has had this sort of proposal recently. The first time it had to do with a change of use downtown, and while the amounts are different, the idea is the same.
Mayor Gee said she has at least four very big questions, and suggested a motion to extend the meeting.
EXTEND MEETING
MOTION by Councilmember Iverson, and seconded by Councilmember Miller, to extend the meeting until 10:45 p.m. Said motion carried by unanimous (5-0) roll call vote.
Councilmember Iverson said she is very surprised there is even talk of continuing this.
When she heard the idea of this, she was very concerned because the City was relying on the in-lieu fees when the PC made the decision in 2022, but the law changed. Given that for a little bit of time and up to $50,000 there is no way the City will ever see that $800,000. She cannot think of why they would put cost and process on a shovel ready project, and voiced support of this.
F.1.b
Packet Pg. 43
Attachment: City Council Minutes - April 16, 2024 (3340 : City Council Minutes) Orinda City Council Minutes Page 19 of 22 04.16.24
Vice Mayor Malkani said given the amount of time she is asked what is going on with 25A in the community, she asked if this is still a viable project and she asked for the timeline and how that timeline interacts with whether the applicant comes before the Council or not.
Mr. Reber said he cannot speak to economic viability or when they would break ground, but the project has proceeded on a steady timeline from when it was entitled in June 2022 where it had 12 months to pull building permits. They did that by February 2022.
They have been under plan check for the past 14 months, are completing that, and are ready for building permits being issued. They have paid over $100,000 in plan check fees so they made a considerable investment. If the Council chooses to waive the parking in-lieu fee, they would still be subject to other impact fees, which he described.
Vice Mayor Malkani said she would like to hear more information on why the project is still economically viable, and she very much wants it to be.
Mayor Gee said she has a question that bothers her. Even looking at State law which she does not agree with, the reality is one of the things the City can hold accountable is existing residential and commercial parking located within one-half mile of the project.
While originally and maybe to a certain extent there is enthusiasm for this project, she thinks the reality is people have also shown multiple times that if this project were to get built, there is not enough parking in the area. The library and community center are right across the street. There are other commercial activities in the surrounding area, and there is not enough parking. She does not understand why the Council would not be able to have the findings that this would detrimentally impact important functions in the City that would be considered commercial.
The second question is, if the Council were to allow this in-lieu holiday, she asked if this is transferable if the developer were to sell the property or project.
City Attorney Wolff stated the in-lieu holiday would stay in place until the end date noted in the resolution. This was currently January 2026 but the Council could set that date to be whatever the Council wants.
City Manager Biggs said as staff understands the availability of parking, most of the time there are hundreds of spaces available. The most convenient spaces are taken, but that is not the threshold to use in this analysis.
His understanding is the last time there was a survey done about parking availability in the downtown, and the Downtown Precise Plan contemplates getting to a point where there is more shared parking, installation of meters in private lots such as in Lafayette which Orinda will likely get to that point. But, respectfully, staff disagrees. There is no shortage of parking in downtown Orinda at this time as was documented in a 2019 parking survey. It has gotten better since BART has dropped off. The developer would need to provide the break ground date and he has told staff he is planning on proceeding right away, and he suggested the developer could speak under the public forum to answer questions.
F.1.b
Packet Pg. 44
Attachment: City Council Minutes - April 16, 2024 (3340 : City Council Minutes) Orinda City Council Minutes Page 20 of 22 04.16.24
Mayor Gee opened the Public Forum.
Paul Ugenti, representing the two families developing this property together, said leasing has been going great and they have gotten to a point of pulling building permits and getting construction financing which they are doing, and contractor’s bids that are certified. When they pull a building permit it gets to the Statement of Action and all conditions of approval. Their attorney notified them of AB 2097 as a possibility of impacting their project and they approached the City. They are open to whatever consequences will be.
They are excited about the momentum and the project is doing well. They have leases in place for 85% and are negotiating leases for the remaining balance of space. The office is accounted for. They have two offers from two competing executive office outfits; one a regional and a national company which is an amazing application for this space and the project with the market hall on the ground floor, executive offices on the second floor and a fitness center they are negotiating a lease with right now.
Regarding ground breaking date, they are just getting to the stage of when they pull their permits and contractors are now on board, and construction financing will be done. They have worked diligently to overcome COVID, construction costs, financing issues, but they keep coming back with the importance of the commitment to the community, and said this project is a community builder.
Also to think about is if State law is changing this is a good application of local and State law and applying value to a project to help deal with the consequences. He emphasized that it is hard to do development; it takes a lot of collaboration and sometimes federal and State help. So, they would be very appreciative to not have to take steps backwards to go forward and he thinks this is a burden they would face doing so moving forward without the Council’s help.
Vice Mayor Malkani said she is less familiar with the rollout for a project like this, and she asked if Mr. Ugenti had a sense of a groundbreaking date.
Mr. Ugenti said if financing happens tomorrow, they are 60 to 90 days from breaking ground. If financing happens in 60 days, they are 180 days from breaking ground. Many things that have happened with approved projects in 2022 were simpler. They are no longer excavating the entire site to create subgrade parking so they see this as a phenomenal come to market project because they have tenants getting on board, restaurants that want to be involved, and it is a simpler way to bring value to the community.
They were happy to get rid of parking spaces in lieu of a plaza with fire pits and shipping container breweries and outdoor space for the kids and places to eat. They think they and the PC put thought with this in crafting their vision. He would like to therefore say on the outset, ground breaking would be 180 days and sooner if they get financing.
F.1.b
Packet Pg. 45
Attachment: City Council Minutes - April 16, 2024 (3340 : City Council Minutes) Orinda City Council Minutes Page 21 of 22 04.16.24
City Clerk Smith announced that Nick Waranoff submitted a comment which is available in the packet and on the back table.
Councilmember Miller suggested the Council ask staff to bring this back at the next meeting after talking with the applicant with some specific criteria. The applicant is looking to the City for invest with them. She can get behind the City being in that position.
If the City is going to invest $850,000 to show the broader world that Orinda is open for business she can get behind that. But, the deal has to be in writing and it cannot be that the applicant tells them what it is and the Council votes on it. It must be an agreement in writing. If the pleasure of the Council is to do this, she thinks they would look at what a reasonable amount of time would be to get the place leased, built and opened, that amount is forgiven based on specific criteria to review. Otherwise, she has a lot of questions about the process and unintended consequences.
Mayor Gee said to clarify, she thinks the belief is that they are not giving up the $850,000.
The belief is that the applicant could reapply and qualify under the new State law and the City would not get the money anyway.
Councilmember Riley said she has a hard stop for the meeting and asked if she can depart the meeting at 11:00 p.m.
City Attorney Wolff said a unanimous vote of the City Council will be required to continue meetings beyond 11:00 p.m. Therefore, there would be four Councilmembers present and the meeting could continue.
EXTEND MEETING
MOTION by Vice Mayor Malkani, and seconded by Councilmember Iverson, to extend the meeting until 11:00 p.m. Said motion carried by unanimous (5-0) roll call vote.
Mayor Gee asked if there were any other comments or a motion by the Council.
MOTION by Councilmember Iverson, and seconded by Councilmember Riley, to approve the parking holiday as proposed with no change to the approved project.
Said motion failed by (2-3) roll call vote; Gee, Miller and Malkani voted no.
Councilmember Riley said this means that the applicant can re-file if they choose, and Mr. Biggs confirmed.
H.4. Role of Council Liaisons to Commissions, Boards, and Other Bodies Recommendation:
Receive Report, Discuss, and Provide Direction, if any
This item was continued to the next meeting.
I. COUNCILMEMBERS' REPORTS
F.1.b
Packet Pg. 46
Attachment: City Council Minutes - April 16, 2024 (3340 : City Council Minutes) Orinda City Council Minutes Page 22 of 22 04.16.24
Vice Mayor Malkani reported 1) The Chamber of Commerce hosted a St. Patrick’s Day band and party which was very vibrant in Theater Square; 2) The Lamorindians posted a Holy Celebration with the assistance of Parks and Recreation staff at Orinda Oaks Park which was a great event; and 3) The “Help Eliminate Waste Including Plastic Waste - Ridwell” is now in the area and she thinks residents are excited about it.
Mayor Gee reported a 2x2 subcommittee was held with MOFD after the last Council meeting, tomorrow night is the first Infrastructure Subcommittee meeting, and the Orinda Association is hosting a Town Hall on Thursday night at 5:30 p.m. in this room.
J. CITY MANAGER'S REPORT
City Manager Biggs said the Mayor’s letter to the Insurance Commissioner, Governor, and legislators is on the website under “Other Insurance Resources.” He stated Vice Mayor Malkani represented the City at the Contra Costa Mayors’ Conference and asked other cities to sign onto this effort. He has also reached out to the City Manager’s Group and they are engaging with the League, as well. They will speak later this week with the Assemblymember, and a recent letter from the Insurance Commissioner will be posted to the website, as well.
The Wildfire Prevention Fair will be held June 1st 10:30 a.m. to 1:00 p.m. in the Orinda Community Park. The Orinda Action Days are coming up this weekend on April 20th which is also Earth Day. He complimented Darren Hughes who is working on some economic development items, and has worked with the owners of Theater Square for the first of which they hope will be a regular series of a Maker’s Market. It will have popups, vendors, crafts, and others that will be held on May 3rd from 5:30 to 8:30 p.m. in Theater Square.
The City’s weekly Food Truck events resumed last Thursday, so now through the fall these will be held every Thursday and soon the City will kick off the Summer Concert Series, as well as Movie Nights.
K. MATTERS INITIATED
There were no Matters Initiated.
L. ADJOURNMENT
The Regular Meeting was adjourned at approximately 10:50 p.m. to the next Regular Council Meeting on Tuesday, April 30, 2024, at 7:00 p.m. ______________________________________
Sheri Marie Smith, City Clerk
F.1.b
Packet Pg. 47
Attachment: City Council Minutes - April 16, 2024 (3340 : City Council Minutes) City Council
Staff Report
Agenda Item: F.2
Date: April 30, 2024
Department:
Public Works and
Engineering Services
AGENDA TITLE: Award Contract for San Pablo Creek Culvert Repair Project, City Project No. 4187
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the City Council (1) award a construction contract to Bugler Construction, inc. of Pleasanton, California for an amount of $1,986,400 for said project; (2) authorize program expenditures up to $2,285,000, which includes a 15% contingency; (3) authorize the City Manager to execute contract on behalf of the City; and (4) approve plans for the project.
BACKGROUND:
The subject concrete box culvert conveys San Pablo Creek from the Safeway parking lot to Orinda Way, covering a distance of 1,300 feet. Since this culvert traverses Camino Sobrante, it qualifies as a bridge and is included in routine bridge inspections that Caltrans performs as a service to local agencies. Caltrans Bridge Inspection reports dating back to the early 2000s indicate the culvert inverts (the concrete on the floor/bottom) have erosion/abrasion damage, and recommended lining the invert of the double-barrel box culvert to protect the existing rebar and prolong its useful life. The city engaged Schaaf & Wheeler Consulting Civil Engineers to perform investigative work and preliminary engineering, and determine the extent of the damage. Their investigation found significant concrete loss and structural rebar loss in the invert sections, and also leaning concrete walls within the 82-linear-foot open channel segment. The Project will remedy the deficiencies by lining the invert, stabilizing the open channel segment’s leaning walls, and replacing a short length of an existing 12- inch-diameter corrugated metal pipe that conveys stormwater flows into the culvert system just south of Orinda Way.
The work to be done generally consists of removing debris in the culvert, cleaning the culvert invert, preparing concrete surfaces and exposed rebar, installing new rebar along the culvert invert, overlaying/lining the culvert invert with specialized abrasionresistant concrete, installing new concrete beam and steel struts (in the open channel section), repairing a storm drain connection to the culvert, and bypass of creek channel flows as necessary for construction.
DISCUSSION:
Design/Plans
Schaaf & Wheeler prepared plans and specifications for the project. City Council approval of the construction plans (Attachment A) is recommended, in accordance with design immunity defense requirements listed under California Government Code Section 830.6.
F.2
Packet Pg. 48
Construction Bids:
The city advertised for bids for construction on March 26, 2024, in accordance with applicable public contracting regulations. On April 23, 2024, the City received five bids for the work required to construct the subject project. The Engineer’s Estimate for the work was $2,300,000. The total bid for each of the bidders is as follows:
Bidders Total Bid
Bugler Construction, Inc., Pleasanton, CA $1,986,400.00 Buhler Commercial, San Francisco, CA $1,999,901.00
Anvil Builders Inc., Emeryville, CA $2,300,821.20
GSW Construction Inc., San Francisco, CA $2,786,064.45
Steve P. Rados, Inc., Santa Ana, CA $3,731,600.00
Staff reviewed the bids and determined that Bugler Construction, Inc. is the lowest responsive and responsible bidder (Attachment B). During the review, Staff determined that Bugler had a math error where the listed Toal Bid amount of $1,991,400 was incorrect; the correct total is $1,986,400 based on the Unit Costs and engineer’s estimated quantities. In accordance with the specifications, this may be considered a minor irregularity and does not change the position of Bugler as the low bidder. Staff notified Bugler of the math error and they accepted the corrected Bid Total. Therefore, staff is recommending that the contract be awarded to Bugler Construction, Inc. for $1,986,400. Staff recommends a 15% contingency which would allow program expenditures up to $2,285,000 to allow for change orders if warranted.
NEXT STEPS:
Upon award of the subject construction contract, the contract will be sent to Bugler Construction, 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. All work must be completed all work done during the dry season between May 1 and October 15. The work is expected to be completed in October 2024.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The funding sources for this project are Fund 704 (Road/Drainage Stabilization) and Fund 106 (Add-On Sales Tax Measure R). There is sufficient funding already appropriated to complete this project.
ATTACHMENTS:
A. Project Plans, CIP 4187
B. Orinda San Pablo Creek Culvert Repair bid summary detail Respectfully Submitted by:
F.2
Packet Pg. 49
Scott Christie
Public Works Director
Prepared By: Ryan Okane,
Approved by:
F.2
Packet Pg. 50
Item No. Item Description Unit Estimated Quantity Unit Cost Item Cost Unit Cost Extension Unit Cost Extension Unit Cost Extension Unit Cost Extension Unit Cost Extension Average 1 Mobilization and Demobilization LS 1 $150,000.00 $150,000.00 $190,000.00 $190,000 $27,514.00 $27,514 $100,000.00 $100,000 $270,000.00 $270,000 $370,000.00 $370,000 $191,503 2 Pdestrian and Traffic Control LS 1 $30,000.00 $30,000.00 $3,000.00 $3,000 $65,448.00 $65,448 $73,500.00 $73,500 $62,000.00 $62,000 $200,000.00 $200,000 $80,790 3 Water Pollution Control Plan (WPCP) LS 1 $25,000.00 $25,000.00 $2,000.00 $2,000 $37,688.00 $37,688 $8,700.00 $8,700 $24,000.00 $24,000 $2,500.00 $2,500 $14,978 4 Remove and Replace Chain Link Fence LF 250 $35.00 $8,750.00 $100.00 $25,000 $141.00 $35,250 $190.00 $47,500 $20.00 $5,000 $200.00 $50,000 $130 5 Temporary Creek Diversion Systems (TCDS) LS 1 $100,000.00 $100,000.00 $250,000.00 $250,000 $160,296.00 $160,296 $71,000.00 $71,000 $90,000.00 $90,000 $440,000.00 $440,000 $202,259 6 Cleaning & Preparation SF 29,440 $10.00 $294,400.00 $5.00 $147,200 $6.60 $194,304 $10.98 $323,251 $5.26 $154,854 $15.00 $441,600 $9 7 Debris Removal & Disposal CY 30 $600.00 $18,000.00 $400.00 $12,000 $3,196.00 $95,880 $1,800.00 $54,000 $660.00 $19,800 $1,500.00 $45,000 $1,511 8 Abrasion Resistant Concrete (ARC) CY 140 $4,000.00 $560,000.00 $2,100.00 $294,000 $1,954.00 $273,560 $1,610.00 $225,400 $6,407.15 $897,001 $5,000.00 $700,000 $3,414 9 Drill and Bond Dowel (Chemical Adhesive) LF 1,250 $78.00 $97,500.00 $75.00 $93,750 $68.00 $85,000 $95.00 $118,750 $44.08 $55,100 $150.00 $187,500 $86 10 Epoxy Coated Rebar Reinforcing LBS 56,000 $2.50 $140,000.00 $2.50 $140,000 $3.00 $168,000 $3.40 $190,400 $2.36 $132,160 $4.00 $224,000 $3 11 Non‐Shrink Grout to Fill Voids CY 15 $4,000.00 $60,000.00 $400.00 $6,000 $7,284.00 $109,260 $4,200.00 $63,000 $2,466.67 $37,000 $4,500.00 $67,500 $3,770 12 High Performance Concrete CT 400 $1,500.00 $600,000.00 $1,400.00 $560,000 $816.00 $326,400 $1,200.00 $480,000 $1,625.00 $650,000 $1,500.00 $600,000 $1,308 13 Injection Epoxy for Concrete Cracks LF 250 $150.00 $37,500.00 $75.00 $18,750 $313.50 $78,375 $290.00 $72,500 $172.00 $43,000 $300.00 $75,000 $230 14 Repair Center Wall LS 1 $5,000.00 $5,000.00 $15,000.00 $15,000 $26,554.00 $26,554 $5,300.00 $5,300 $20,000.00 $20,000 $5,000.00 $5,000 $14,371 15 Repair Storm Drain LS 1 $20,000.00 $20,000.00 $25,000.00 $25,000 $29,015.00 $29,015 $37,400.00 $37,400 $25,000.00 $25,000 $10,000.00 $10,000 $25,283 16 Steel Strut EA 12 $9,000.00 $108,000.00 $3,000.00 $36,000 $13,143.00 $157,716 $17,700.00 $212,400 $6,750.00 $81,000 $10,000.00 $120,000 $10,119 17 Concrete Beam LF 191 $300.00 $57,300.00 $700.00 $133,700 $414.00 $79,074 $820.00 $156,620 $739.00 $141,149 $1,000.00 $191,000 $73518 Site Restoration LS 1 $15,000.00 $15,000.00 $35,000.00 $35,000 $50,567.00 $50,567 $61,100.00 $61,100 $79,000.00 $79,000 $2,500.00 $2,500 $45,633 $2,327,000.00 $1,986,400.00 $1,999,901.00 $2,300,821.20 $2,786,064.45 $3,731,600.00 $233,000.00
$2,560,000.00
Bugler Construction, Inc. Buhler Commercial Anvil Builders Inc. GSW Construction Inc. Steve P. Rados, Inc.
City of Orinda San Pablo Creek Culvert Repair Project
Bid Opening 4/23/2024
Bid Item List
MAIN PROJECT AREA
SUBTOTAL
CONTINGENCY (10%)
TOTAL CONSTRUCTION COST
Engineers est.
F.2.b
Packet Pg. 51
Attachment: Orinda San Pablo Creek Culvert Repair bid summary detail (3343 : Award Contract for San Pablo Creek Culvert Repair Project, City City Council
Staff Report
Agenda Item: F.3
Date: April 30, 2024
Department:
Public Works and
Engineering Services
AGENDA TITLE: Contract Acceptance of the Community Center Solar, Battery Storage and Roof Replacement Project No. 4141 & 4164.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the City Council adopt Resolution No. 12-24 Acceptance of Work for the Community Center Solar, Battery Storage and Roof Replacement Project No. 4141 & 4164 with NBC Construction, Inc. and authorize the City Clerk to sign and file the Notice of Completion with the Contra Costa County Clerk-Recorder.
BACKGROUND:
On April 5, 2022, the City Council awarded a construction contract to NBC Construction, Inc. of San Francisco, California in the amount of $646,711 for performance of the Community Center Solar, Battery Storage and Roof Replacement Project No. 4141 & 4164 and authorized an approximate 15% contingency fund for a total construction budget of $7473,700. The Contractor entered into a construction contract with the City subsequent to review and approval by the City Attorney.
The project improves resiliency of the Community Center, which also acts as a resource center during extended power outages such as the Public Safety Power Shutoff (PSPS). Replacing the aging roofing not only eliminated various water impacts to the building but also resulted in efficient installation of the solar panels. By implementing this project, the Community Center will include a solar photovoltaic system and a backup battery that will provide back-up power during outages for an extended period of time, multiple days depending on weather. In addition, the existing generator system is also set-up as an alternate back-up in case of additional need due to unforeseen circumstances. This set-up will improve the ability of the community center building to maintain back-up power for a number a days when there is a need.
Part of the project is also grant funded. In November 2019, the California Governor’s Office of Emergency Services (Cal OES) announced a Resiliency grant program for local agencies to improve resiliency during PSPS events. City Staff submitted a grant application for a solar panel system with battery backup and was selected to receive funding through the Cal OES program in the amount of $217,551.
DISCUSSION:
The project endured multiple delays during the construction phase due to issues related to material procurement, changes during construction per request from MOFD, inspection and approval by PG&E, and extended weather delays. In addition, due to the advanced system put in place, some additional existing equipment originally thought to be capable of handling the demands of the back-up system also needed replacement.
F.3
Packet Pg. 52
The construction work was scheduled into two phases, with the roof replacement work performed first, followed by the solar system installation. This resulted in mitigating any adverse impact to the operation of the Community Center activities. Due to the delays not directly being the result of the contractor’s performance of the work, no liquidated damages were assessed to the Contractor upon substantial completion of the project.
The project included one change order in the amount of $29,508.45, to relocate a water line that was in conflict with the solar panels, installing custom cabinets for safety of the battery pack per request from MOFD, and a new transfer switch to improve operational efficiency.
NEXT STEPS:
Upon City Council approval, the City Engineer will sign the Notice of Completion and the City Clerk will record it with the Contra Costa County Clerk-Recorder’s Office. The 5% withheld retention will be paid to NBC Construction Inc. thirty-five (35) days after recordation of the Notice of Completion, provided that no stop notices are outstanding.
FISCAL IMPACT: The following is a summary of the project construction costs:
Authorized Cost Based On Award Plus Contingency
Original Base Bid = $ 646,711.00
Contingency $ 96,989.00
Total Authorized Contract $ 743,700.00
Actual Costs At Close-out
Base Project Costs $ 646,711.00
Change Order #1 $ 29,508.45
Total Final Contract $ 676,219.45
Net funding surplus $ 67,480.55
Any surplus funding will be made available for future Capital Improvement projects.
ATTACHMENTS:
A. Resolution 12-24 Acceptance of Community Center Solar Project B. Notice of Completion
Respectfully Submitted by:
Scott Christie
Public Works Director
Prepared By: Sivakumar Natarajan, City Engineer
Approved by:
F.3
Packet Pg. 53
F.3
Packet Pg. 54
BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ORINDA
In the Matter of:
Acceptance of Work for the Community
Center Solar, Battery Storage and Roof
Replacement Project (CIP No. 4141 &
4164), in the City of Orinda and
Authorizing the City Clerk to sign and file
the Certificate of Completion with the
Contra Costa County Clerk-Recorder
)
) Resolution No. 12-24
)
)
)
)
)
WHEREAS, NBC Construction, Inc., has completed the work in accordance with the construction contract documents for the Community Center Solar, Battery Storage and Roof Replacement Project (CIP No. 4141 & 4164); and WHEREAS, the Director of Public Works has recommended that the work be accepted as complete.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the work accomplished by NBC Construction, Inc., under the terms and conditions of the above-referenced construction contract documents is hereby accepted.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Clerk is hereby authorized to sign and file the Certificate of Completion with the Contra Costa County Clerk-Recorder.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Director of Finance is hereby authorized to release all withheld project retention thirty-five (35) days after recordation of the Certificate of Completion, provided that no stop notices are outstanding.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orinda at a regular meeting on April 30, 2024, by the following vote:
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:
_________________________________
Darlene K. Gee, Mayor
ATTEST:
____________________________
Sheri Marie Smith, City Clerk
F.3.a
Packet Pg. 55
Attachment: Resolution 12-24 Acceptance of Community Center Solar Project (3342 : Acceptance of Community Center Solar PV Project)
RECORDING REQUESTED BY AND
WHEN RECORDED, RETURN TO:
City Clerk/Public Works Dept.
City of Orinda
22 Orinda Way
Orinda, CA 94563
NO FEE DOCUMENT
(Government Code section 27383)
TITLE:
Notice of Completion for
Community Center Solar, Battery Storage and Roof Replacement Project (CIP No. 4141 & 4164)
(Contractor: NBC Construction, Inc.)
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN by the undersigned, those certain improvements, to wit:
Community Center Solar, Battery Storage and Roof Replacement Project (CIP No.4141 & 4164), at 28 Orinda Way, Orinda, CA 94563.
Project location is in the City of Orinda, Contra Costa County, California:
Property Owner: Interest in Property is owned by City of Orinda (a municipal corporation, 22 Orinda Way, Orinda CA 94563).
The contract which has heretofore been let to NBC Construction, Inc., and which contract was filed for record in the City Clerk’s office in the City of Orinda, Contra Costa County, California, was completed in accordance with the plans and specifications, and the work was completed and accepted by the City of Orinda, on 4/30/2024
Information pertaining to the estimate of cost, names of bidders with prices bid, changes in adopted and approved plans and specifications, and the total cost of work is on file at the City Clerks’ office of the City of Orinda.
CITY OF ORINDA,
a municipal corporation
Date: ________________ By: ____________________________________ Sivakumar Natarajan, City Engineer
City of Orinda
22 Orinda Way
Orinda, CA 94563
I hereby certify, under penalty of perjury, that the above Notice of Completion was duly accepted by the City Council of the City of Orinda at a regular meeting thereof held on 4/30/2024. ______________________________
Sheri Smith, City Clerk
F.3.b
Packet Pg. 56
Attachment: Notice of Completion (3342 : Acceptance of Community Center Solar PV Project) City Council
Staff Report
Agenda Item: F.4
Date: April 30, 2024
Department: Administration
AGENDA TITLE: Fire Fuels Reduction Incentive Pilot Program RECOMMENDATION:
Review, Discuss, adopt Resolution 13-24 approving the updated Fire Fuels Reduction Incentive Pilot Program, and Provide Additional Direction, if any.
BACKGROUND:
At the June 21, 2022, City Council Meeting, the City Council appropriated $400,000 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 Measure R funds which had been set aside. At the April 16, 2023, City Council meeting it was approved to broaden 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.
At the April 18, 2024, City Council meeting, after some discussion, the City Council approved the recommended administrative, and program changes with clarification to one point (that language related to Fire Apparatus Access Road in the context of roadside fuel abatement of three feet from the edge of pavement or roadway and fifteen feet up, remains) and increase the cost-sharing from $599.00 to $1,000.
The established pilot program using voter-approved Measure R funds, which has wildfire prevention as one of its focus areas, encourages fire fuel reduction and removal of hazardous vegetation on individual private properties helps reduce the spread of wildfire, protects structures, and minimizes impacts from a wildfire on the community in general, the new updates to the Fire Fuels Reduction Incentive Pilot Program aim to increase participation in the program and reduce the potential wide spread of wildfire to adjacent parcels and beyond.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The City Council has already appropriated $400,000 in Measure R Funding for the program, of which approximately $350,000 remains unspent as of the date of this report.
ATTACHMENTS:
A. Fire Fuels Reduction Incentive Pilot Program Resolution 13-24 F.4
Packet Pg. 57
B. Weblink to: April 16, 2024 City Council Staff Report on Fire Fuels Reduction Incentive Pilot Program Update
Respectfully Submitted by:
Micki Cronin
Senior Management Analyst
Prepared By: Sheri Smith, City Clerk
Approved by:
F.4
Packet Pg. 58
BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ORINDA
In the Matter of:
Updating the Orinda Measure R
Fire Fuels Reduction Incentive
Pilot Program
)
)
)
) Resolution No. 13-24
WHEREAS, the City of Orinda has been operating a Fire Fuels Reduction Incentive Pilot Program since November 1, 2022, with initial modifications approved on April 18, 2023, and additional modifications being proposed.
WHEREAS, on April 18, 2023, the City of Orinda broadened the program from evacuation routes to “fire apparatus roads” to include more/all of Orinda and continue to incentivize homeowners and/or residents to undertake activities on their own properties related to fire fuel reduction in order to accelerate making Orinda a more fire safe community and in ways to benefit the public generally; and WHEREAS, it has been documented that fuel reduction on individual private properties can help reduce the spread of wildfire, protect structures, and minimize impacts from a wildfire on the community in general; and WHEREAS, Orinda property owners along on fire apparatus roads can assist in ensuring egress is available in event of wildfire or other natural disaster by ensuring they are in compliance with vegetation standards for the City of Orinda and the MOFD associated with fuel reduction along street rights-of-way; and WHEREAS, encouraging compliance with City of Orinda and the MOFD fire fuel reduction and vegetation standards through code compliance efforts and enforcement is being pursued; and
WHEREAS, the Council wishes to update the Fire Fuels Reduction Incentive Pilot Program, which is a pilot program that is using voter-approved Measure R funds (general tax revenues) for wildfire prevention by encouraging fire fuel reduction and removal of hazard vegetation.
WHEREAS, the proposed updates to the Fire Fuels Reduction Incentive Pilot Program have been recommended to the City Council by the Supplemental Sales Tax Oversight Commission (SSTOC) which is the oversight body of Measure R funds for the City of Orinda.
F.4.a
Packet Pg. 59
Attachment: Fire Fuels Reduction Incentive Pilot Program Resolution 13-24 (3344 : Fire Fuels Reduction Incentive Pilot Program April 18, 2024
WHEREAS, as of April 16, 2024, the City Council reviewed proposed changes, discussed the public benefits associated with those changes, and directed staff to return with a resolution approving the recommended changes with appropriate public benefit findings; and
WHEREAS, these updates and modifications to the Fire Fuels Reduction Incentive Pilot Program will benefit the public by increasing participation in the program and reducing the potential spread of wildfire to adjacent parcels and beyond.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Orinda hereby approves the following updates to the Fire Fuels Reduction Incentive Pilot Program:
1. The Program will not accept cash payment for expenditures, residents must submit verifiable and itemized invoice and payment; and
2. Eligibility requirement is further defined that an applicant must have a FAC-A assessment within one calendar year, have an MOFD citation that specifically matches the applicant's property, or are in an active firewise neighborhood.
3. Orinda residents can reapply for the Fire Fuels Reduction Incentive Pilot Program each calendar year, so long as funds are available; and
4. Eligible work is expanded to include removal of ladder fuels (shrubs and bushes) creating a 6-foot gap between the lower tree canopy and the ground and or the removal of Eucalyptus and/or Monterey Pine anywhere on the property rather than being limited to those areas near structures and/or fire apparatus access roads; and 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 ordinance.
5. The program reimbursement amount will change from $599 to $1,000 as of April 16, 2024, for applications in process and submitted after that date.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orinda at a regular meeting on April 30, 2024, by the following vote:
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS:
F.4.a
Packet Pg. 60
Attachment: Fire Fuels Reduction Incentive Pilot Program Resolution 13-24 (3344 : Fire Fuels Reduction Incentive Pilot Program April 18, 2024
_________________________________
Darlene Gee, Mayor
ATTEST:
________________________________
Sheri Marie Smith, City Clerk
F.4.a
Packet Pg. 61
Attachment: Fire Fuels Reduction Incentive Pilot Program Resolution 13-24 (3344 : Fire Fuels Reduction Incentive Pilot Program April 18, 2024 City Council
Staff Report
Agenda Item: H.1
Date: April 30, 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.1
Packet Pg. 62
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.1
Packet Pg. 63
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.1.a
Packet Pg. 64
Attachment: Current Council Liaison Listing (3341 : 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.1.a
Packet Pg. 65
Attachment: Current Council Liaison Listing (3341 : 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.1.b
Packet Pg. 66
Attachment: League Publication: "Your Role as an Elected Official" (excerpt) (3341 : 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.1.c
Packet Pg. 67
Attachment: Western City Magazine article: “The Ethical Hazards of City Council Members Attending Other Board Meetings” (12/1/2010) (3341 :
• 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.1.c
Packet Pg. 68
Attachment: Western City Magazine article: “The Ethical Hazards of City Council Members Attending Other Board Meetings” (12/1/2010) (3341 :
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.1.c
Packet Pg. 69
Attachment: Western City Magazine article: “The Ethical Hazards of City Council Members Attending Other Board Meetings” (12/1/2010) (3341 :
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.1.c
Packet Pg. 70
Attachment: Western City Magazine article: “The Ethical Hazards of City Council Members Attending Other Board Meetings” (12/1/2010) (3341 :
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.1.d
Packet Pg. 71
Attachment: Language Example - Burbank (3341 : 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.1.e
Packet Pg. 72
Attachment: Language Example - Bend (3341 : Role of City Council Liaisons)