Agenda — Pacifica City Council, April 25, 2022 (part 1 of 2)

CITY OF PACIFICA

CITY COUNCIL AGENDA
Council Chambers
2212 Beach Blvd
Pacifica, CA 94044
Mayor Mary Bier
Mayor Pro Tem Tygarjas Bigstyck
Councilmember Mike O'Neill
Councilmember Sue Vaterlaus
Councilmember Sue Beckmeyer
City Council Regular Meeting 1 April 25, 2022
SPECIAL and REGULAR MEETING
April 25, 2022 (MONDAY)
www.cityofpacifica.org
Off-street parking is allowed by permit for attendance at official public meetings.

Vehicles parked without permits are subject to citation. You should obtain a permit from the rack in the lobby and place it on the dashboard of your vehicle in such a manner as is visible to law enforcement personnel.

PLEASE SILENCE CELL PHONES DURING MEETING
Alternative Ways to Observe and Participate in the Meeting:

The primary method for observing and participating in the meeting is in-person at the meeting location published in the meeting agenda. However, there are alternative ways to observe and participate in the meeting:
• Watch on TV on local cable channel 26
• Watch a Live Stream of the meeting by following https://www.cityofpacifica.org/LiveStream or www.pacificcoast.tv
• Call-In Public Comments (offered on a pilot basis):
• When the Mayor announces the Agenda Item on which you would like to comment, dial-in to the number and enter the Conference ID listed below. You will be placed on hold in a call-queue.

Please mute any background sound and listen through your phone to be called upon by the last 4-digits of your phone number. State your full name at the start of your public comment. • Dial-in: 1-650-898-6965 | Conference ID: 383 609 442 # o Press * 5 to raise your hand in the call queue.
o Press * 6 to unmute when called upon to speak by the last 4-digits of your phone number.
o If you are not able to join the call-queue due to maximum capacity limit, please attempt to call back until you are able to be placed in the queue.

Please note that Alternative platforms for participation are subject to underlying technology functionality and may be modified or interrupted at any time without notice. • Written Public Comments:

BEFORE THE MEETING: Written public comments for the record may be submitted in advance by 12:00 p.m. on the meeting date by email to: [email protected] and will be made part of the written record but will not be read verbally at the meeting. Written public comments submitted by email should adhere to the following:
• Clearly indicate the Agenda Item No. or specify “Oral Communications” in the Subject Line for items not on the agenda
• Include the submitter’s full name
City Council Regular Meeting 2 April 25, 2022
Written public comments received by 12:00 p.m. on the meeting date will be provided in their entirety to the City Council prior to the meeting and will be made part of the written record but will not be read verbally at the meeting. Written public comments will be posted to the City’s website for review prior to the meeting.

AT THE MEETING: Materials in writing provided at the meeting should provide seven (7) copies to provide for each Councilmember, City Clerk and City staff. 5:30 PM - CLOSED SESSION
A. Conference with Legal Counsel – Anticipated Litigation- Initiation of litigation pursuant to paragraph (4) of subdivision (d) of Section 54956.9: (One potential case) 6:00 PM - STUDY SESSION
Pacifica Police Department Annual Report
PROPOSED ACTION: Receive the Pacifica Police Department Annual Report 7:00 PM - REGULAR MEETING
Call to Order
Roll Call
Reading of Land Acknowledgment
The City of Pacifica acknowledges that we occupy the unceded ancestral homeland of the Ramaytush Ohlone peoples, who are the original inhabitants of the San Francisco Peninsula. We honor the Ramaytush Ohlone peoples for their enduring commitment to Mother Earth. As the Indigenous protectors of this land and in accordance with their traditions, the Ramaytush Ohlone have never ceded, lost, nor forgotten their responsibilities as the caretakers of this place, as well as for all peoples who reside in their traditional territory. We affirm their sovereign rights as First Peoples and wish to pay our respects to the ancestors, elders, and relatives of the Ramaytush Ohlone peoples.

Salute to the Flag led by Councilmember Vaterlaus
Closed Session Report

SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS
00a. Open Space Preservation Award 2022

CONSENT CALENDAR
Persons wishing to address the Council on any Consent Calendar item may do so at this time. Each speaker will be allotted three minutes. Those wishing to address the Council on any item listed on the agenda should submit a speaker card to the City Clerk.

City Council Regular Meeting 3 April 25, 2022
Items on the consent calendar will be adopted by one motion unless a Councilmember requests, before the vote on the motion, to have an item discussed. Time limit on comments is three minutes or less.

1. Approval of Disbursements for 3/01/22 through 3/15/22.

PROPOSED ACTION: Move to approve attached lists of disbursements for 3/01/22 through 3/15/22.

2. Approval of Minutes
PROPOSED ACTION: Move to approve the minutes of the City Council Regular Meeting held on April 11, 2022.

3. Agreement with TPx for Managed Internet Services
PROPOSED ACTION: Move to approve the Amendment to the Agreement for Managed Software-Defined Wide Area Network (SD-WAN) Internet Services between the City of Pacifica and TPx Communications., to extend the term of the agreement by three years to September 10, 2025, for and to authorize compensation not to exceed $141,228 in Fiscal Year 2022-2023, 2023-2024, and through March 2025 in Fiscal Year 2024-2025, as reflected in the adopted City-wide budget, and to authorize the City Manager to execute the Amendment.

4. Approval of Second Amendment with Bartle Wells Associates for the City of Pacifica Sewer Rate Study FY2022-2027
PROPOSED ACTION: Approve the Following Actions for the City of Pacifica Sewer Rate Study FY 2022-2027 (“Study”):

1. Approve Second Amendment (Attachment 1) in an Amount Not to Exceed $27,786 and Increase the Total Compensation to $93,151 to the Consultant Original Agreement for Bartle Wells Associates; and

2. Establish a new Budget Authority of $98,000, which includes 5% contingency, for the Sewer Rate Study FY2022-2027; and

3. Authorize the City Manager to execute all documents related to this project.

5. Adoption of an Ordinance Amending Section 4-7.1901, “Removal or towing of vehicles” of Article 19 within Chapter 7, “Traffic” of Title 4 of the Pacifica Municipal Code Related to the Removal of Vehicles Illegally Parked on City Streets in Spaces Designated for Preferential Parking (Status: CEQA Exempt)
PROPOSED ACTION: Move to Adopt “An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Pacifica Amending Section 4-7.1901, “Removal or towing of vehicles” of Article 19 within Chapter 7, “Traffic” of Title 4 of the Pacifica Municipal Code Related to the Removal of Vehicles Illegally Parked on City Streets in Spaces Designated for Preferential Parking and finding the ordinance exempt under the California Environmental Quality Act.

6. Adoption of an Ordinance Adding Chapter 19, “Acquisition and Use of Military Equipment” of Title 4 “Public Safety” of the Pacifica Municipal Code PROPOSED ACTION: Move to Adopt an Ordinance of the City Council of the City Of Pacifica Adding Chapter 19, “Acquisition and Use of Military Equipment” of Title 4 “Public Safety” of the Pacifica Municipal Code, Approving the Pacifica Police Department Military Equipment Policy; and finding the Ordinance exempt under the City Council Regular Meeting 4 April 25, 2022
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).

ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
This portion of the Agenda is available for the public to address the City Council on any issue that is not on the Agenda. Any person wishing to address the Council shall be recognized by the Mayor during Oral Communications, provided, however, that during the Oral Communications portion of the agenda, only items not on the agenda for that meeting may be addressed. All remarks shall be addressed to the Council as a body and not to any member thereof. Councilmembers shall not enter into debate with speakers under Oral Communications. A maximum time of three minutes will be allowed for any speaker. Pursuant to Pacifica Municipal Code Title 2, Chapter 1, Section 2-1.118 any person making impertinent, slanderous, or profane remarks or who becomes boisterous while addressing the Council shall be called to order by the presiding officer and, if such conduct continues, may, at the direction of the presiding officer, be ordered barred from further audience before the Council during the meeting.

COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS
The purpose of Council Communications is for Councilmembers to inform each other of items of potential interest to other Councilmembers, such as interagency meetings.

STAFF COMMUNICATIONS
The purpose of Staff Communications is for the City Manager to offer announcements as appropriate.

PUBLIC HEARINGS

7. Update to the Park Development Impact Fee
PROPOSED ACTION: Move to:

1. Adopt resolution to update the Park Facilities Impact Fee and the Quimby Act Parkland In Lieu Fee within the City of Pacifica; and

2. Move to Introduce by title only and waive first reading of an “Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Pacifica, California repealing Chapter 19 of the Pacifica Municipal Code and replacing it with Chapter 19 (Park Facilities Impact Fee); repealing Section 10-

1.803 (Park Land Dedication) of the Pacifica Municipal Code and replacing it with Section 10-1.803 (Park Land Dedication) to establish updated Impact Fees and Quimby Act dedication requirements and in lieu fees imposed on New Development in the City of Pacifica”; and finding the Ordinance exempt under the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”).

CONSIDERATION

8. Vision 2025 & Beyond – Economic Opportunities Study – Award Contract, Appropriate Funds, Appoint Council Ad Hoc Committee on Public Engagement PROPOSED ACTION: (1) Authorize the City Manager to Award a Contract to Kosmont Companies to conduct an Economic Opportunities Study for the City of Pacifica as part of the Vision 2025 & Beyond Strategic Financial Sustainability Study; (2) Appropriate an additional $50,000 for the study; and (3) Appoint a two-member City Council Ad Hoc City Council Regular Meeting 5 April 25, 2022
Subcommittee on Public Engagement for the Economic Opportunities Study.

9. Award Civic Center Campus Facilities Project Construction Services Agreement PROPOSED ACTION: Approve the following actions for Civic Center Campus Facilities Improvement Project (Project Number PW#2021-23):

A. Adopt Resolution next in order for a Budget Amendment for Fiscal Year 2021-2022 the total project budget to $11,651,397 by appropriating additional Returned ERAF revenues (Disaster Accounting Fund) of $900,000 and appropriating General Fund Unassigned Fund Balance (Fund 1) of $751,397 to the project budget; and B. Authorize the City Manager to award and execute a Construction Services Agreement with W.E. Lyons Construction Company (Attachment "A") in an amount not to exceed $9,222,972.00 and authorize a budget authority for construction in the amount of $9,960,810.00, which includes alternates A2, A4, A5a ($747,665), and contingencies in an amount not to exceed eight percent (8%) of the Construction Contract amount; and C. Authorize staff to execute future Change Orders not to exceed the contingency amount.

ADJOURN
NOTICE: If you challenge a city's zoning, planning or other decision in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the City Council at, or prior to, the public hearing. Judicial review of any city administrative decision may be had only if a petition is filed with the court not later than the 90th day following the date upon which the decision becomes final. Judicial review of environmental determinations may be subject to a shorter time period for litigation, in certain cases 30 days following the date of the final decision The City of Pacifica will provide assistance for disabled citizens upon at least 24 hours advance notice to the City Manager’s Office (650) 738-7301, or send request via email to:
[email protected] if you need sign language assistance or written material printed in a larger font or taped, advance notice is necessary. All meeting rooms are accessible to the disabled.

The Pacifica Municipal Code is available on line at the City’s website (www.cityofpacifica.org/municode);

HOW TO OBTAIN CITY COUNCIL AGENDAS
Posted agendas:

Agendas are posted no later than Friday prior to the City Council meeting date, at the entrance to the City Hall location at the Pacifica Community Center, 540 Crespi Drive.

View on the Internet:

Follow the link to Council agenda, at www.cityofpacifica.org E-mail subscription:

Send a request to Sarah Coffey, at [email protected] City Clerk’s Office/City Manager’s Office
City Hall, 540 Crespi Drive
Council meetings:

Agendas are available at the City Council meeting

HOW TO REACH YOUR GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS
• Governor Gavin Newsom, State Capitol Building, Sacramento CA 95814 (916) 445-2841 • State Senator Josh Becker, 1528 So. El Camino Real, Suite 303, San Mateo CA 94402 (650) 212-3313
City Council Regular Meeting 6 April 25, 2022
• Assembly Member Kevin Mullin, 1528 South El Camino Real, Suite 302 San Mateo, CA 94402 (650) 349-2200
• Congresswoman Jackie Speier, 155 Bovet Road, Suite 780, San Mateo CA 94402 (650) 342-0300
• Senator Alex Padilla, B03 Russell Senate Office Building, Washington DC 20510 (202) 224-3553
• Senator Dianne Feinstein, #1 Post Street, Suite 2450, San Francisco CA 94104 (415) 393-0707
• President Joseph R. Biden, 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington DC 20500

CITY COUNCIL
• Mayor Mary Bier, [email protected]
• Mayor pro Tem Tygarjas Bigstyck, tbigstyck@ pacifica.gov • Councilmember Mike O’Neill, mo’[email protected]
• Councilmember Sue Vaterlaus, [email protected]
• Councilmember Sue Beckmeyer, [email protected]

CITY OF PACIFICA

COUNCIL AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT
4/25/2022
1 SUBJECT:

Pacifica Police Department Annual Report
RECOMMENDED ACTION:

Receive the Pacifica Police Department Annual Report
STAFF CONTACT:

Daniel Steidle, Chief of Police
650-738-7314
[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> Chris Clements, Police Captain
650-738-7314
[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> Bill Glasgo, Police Captain
650-738-7314
[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION:

On April 12, 2021, staff presented to City Council a Pacifica Police Department Annual Report.

This report covered short term and long term items largely focused on police officer training and community engagement. While short term items were completed at the time of the previous report, several long term items remained in progress or unscheduled.

This second Annual Report will provide updates in the areas discussed in the previous report, with the addition of information on the newly implemented Racial Identify and Profiling Act (RIPA) requirements.

Racial Identity and Profiling Act (RIPA)
In 2015, Assembly Bill 953 was passed, creating certain data collection and submission responsibilities for California law enforcement agencies. The Bill requires each state and local agency that employs peace officers to annually report to the California Department of Justice, Office of the Attorney General, data on all stops, as defined, conducted by the agency’s peace officers, and require that data to include specified information. The required reporting timeline is based on the size of the law enforcement agency. As is the case with other San Mateo County agencies, the first reporting date to the Department of Justice for the Pacifica Police Department is April 23, 2023, to include data collected for calendar year 2022. Beginning in Janaury 2022, the Pacifica Police Department began reporting to the Department of Justice, well ahead of the legal mandate.

Packet Pg. 7
Pacifica City Council 2
April 25, 2022
Pacifica Police Department staff spent the majority of 2021 preparing to meet the requirements of RIPA data reporting. This process involved the purchase of upgrades to the Police Department records management system, training of personnel, and extensive testing to assure required data is being captured, processed, and transmitted to the Department of Justice. Final testing of the program was conducted in the final quarter of 2021. This testing involved assuring officers were entering the proper data after each stop, that supervisors were able to view and approve the data entered in the records management system, and Records personnel were able to review data and successfully transmit to the Department of Justice. The final portion of the testing was to assure the Department of Justice agreed that the data submitted met the requirements provided by AB 953. While RIPA data collection has increased the workload of staff, particularly Records personnel, the Department has been successful in implementing this important program.

RIPA data is required to be collected by an officer during any stop. “Stop” means (1) any detention by a peace officer of a person; or (2) any peace officer interaction with a person, in which the peace officer conducts a search, including a consensual search, of the person’s body or property in the person’s possession or control. A “detention,” means a seizure of a person by an officer that results from physical restraint, unequivocal verbal commands, or words or conduct by an officer that would result in a reasonable person believing that he or she is not free to leave or otherwise disregard the officer.

The following data is required to be collected on each stop:
• Perceived age, race, gender, disabilities of the person stopped • Date, time, and location of the stop
• Reason for the stop
• Actions taken during the stop
• Search information
• Evidence found
• Property seized
• Result of the stop
While there are only (8) items listed above, each item has sub-categories that must be addressed by officers. Each stop requires 21-35 questions to be answered, with at a maximum, up to 125 data points for the officer to consider and determine if applicable to report.

Police Department staff is currently reporting required data to the Department of Justice at least twice per month, well ahead of the April 2023 legal requirement.

The next phase of the Pacifica Police Department RIPA data collection program has begun and is focused on taking raw data reported to the Department of Justice (all categories listed above) and compiling it in an easy to read and understandable format that can be presented to the community via the Police Department website on a quarterly basis. The data will be posted quarterly, beginning with the second quarter of 2022. Links will be provided for the community to view each quarterly report, with an annual report posted at the end of each calendar year.

While not required by law, the quarterly posting of data will serve to increase transparency.

For the purposes of this report, staff has compiled data regarding the first quarter of 2022 related to perceived race and gender of persons stopped. This information has been broken down into officer initiated stops (stops not related to active calls for service) and calls for service stops (stops directly associated with community initiated calls for service).

Packet Pg. 8
Pacifica City Council 3
April 25, 2022
Race Total
Asian 305 273 12.5% 32 1.5%
Black/African American 146 101 4.6% 45 2.1%
Hispanic/Latino 508 427 19.6% 81 3.7%
Middle Eastern or South Asian 112 96 4.4% 16 0.7%
Native American 6 4 0.2% 2 0.1%
Pacific Islander 51 41 1.9% 10 0.5%
White 1023 759 34.8% 264 12.1%
No Race Perceived or Reported 28 14 0.6% 14 0.6%
Total Stops 2179 1715 78.7% 464 21.3%
Gender Total
Female 666 523 24.0% 143 6.6%
Gender-Non Conforming 0 0 0.0% 0 0.0%
Male 1483 1176 54.0% 307 14.1%
Trangender Male/Boy 1 1 0.0% 0 0.0%
Transgender Female/Girl 0 0 0.0% 2 0.1%
No Gender Reported 29 14 0.6% 14 0.6%
Total Stops 2179 1714 78.7% 466 21.4%
*Percentages are rounded to the nearest tenth of a percent

0.0%

68.1%

0.0%

1.3%

3.4%

46.9%

1.3%
Total % of Stops

30.6%

0.3%

6.7%

23.3%

5.1%
Total % of Stops

14.0%
Officer Initiated Stops Calls For Service Stops
Officer Initiated Stops Calls For Service Stops
2022- First Quarter RIPA Data
A common question that will be asked about RIPA Data is how it compares to racial demographics from the U.S. Census. However, this is not a simple comparison because it would require all stops conducted to be only persons residing within Pacifica, yet it is clear that Pacifica receives a significant number of out-of-town visitors. In addition, RIPA reporting requirements do not require officers to obtain addresses from all persons stopped, nor would it be legal for an officer to require this information from a person stopped in all instances. For example, if a person is stopped for a vehicle code violation and the officer elects to verbally warn the person for the violation rather than issue a citation, no address would be collected.

Staff has reviewed collected data and determined the following for this first quarter of 2022:
• 2179 RIPA stop data entries were collected
• Of all stop data entries, 1169 have associated addresses entered, a rate of 54%. • Of those 1169 entries, 699 were Pacifica residents
According to the United States Census website (www.census.gov), the racial demographics related to Pacifica are as follows:

White alone: 60.3%
Black or African American alone: 2.7%
American Indian and Alaska Native alone: 0.5%
Asian alone: 21.0%
Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander alone: 1.7%
Two or More Races: 8.5%
Hispanic or Latino: 18.6%
White alone, not Hispanic or Latino: 51.4%
Packet Pg. 9
Pacifica City Council 4
April 25, 2022
Given the above, while RIPA data collection does not provide a perfect opportunity for analysis, it does provide the opportunity to determine if there are large discrepancies in the Census versus stop data comparisons, as well as significant changing trends as time progresses that could indicate a bias issue. Moreover, this data has proven to be valuable in understanding how the department may be perceived by the community regarding bias-free policing, providing opportunity for continued discussions with department staff related to bias, and as a tool for Police Department Command Staff to identify potential bias issues. It is understood that all persons have biases, and the goal of bias-free law enforcement efforts at the Pacifica Police Department has been to spark self-reflection by officers regarding potential unconscious bias, officers to be aware of their decisions and what factors are influencing their decisions while serving the community.

LONG-TERM ACTIONS
Below listed are long-term actions previously identified and progress on each item. COVID concerns have continued to play a role in the delay of some items. 1) Bias Training with Entire City Staff: In 2021, the City provided a webinar based bias training available to all employees. While schedules did not allow all to attend, future training in this area is currently being identified.
2) Bias Training with the Police Department and Community Members: The purpose of this training is to provide a facilitated program to create dialogue between officers and community members. This type of event is best conducted in person. COVID19 variants have continued to push this event further into the future. With the apparent stabilization of the COVID19 virus, staff is currently working to identify a facilitator for the event, with the target completion date of August 2022.
3) Community Police Academy: A Community Police Academy is an educational community outreach tool that allows community members to learn about the operations of their police department, as well as what drives law enforcement decision making. It serves as a mini course on law enforcement practices, allowing community members to better understand the many facets of law enforcement. Topics commonly included in Community Police Academy curriculum include criminal law, traffic law and enforcement, domestic violence law/protocol, community-oriented policing techniques, court systems, and use of force considerations. Curriculum is developed to address current issues in law enforcement and the community. In-person classes are required for this program which have not been viable until recently. The target date for the first class is October 2022.
4) Continue to Proactively Seek Community Outreach Opportunities: Specifically targeting different ethnic groups, religions, age groups, etc. to engage in communication opportunities to foster a better understanding of the community and its needs from law enforcement. This is item is continuous, with no end date. 5) Creation of a Police Chief’s Advisory Panel: This item is based on the community engagement discussion with City Council in February 2021. The purpose of the panel is to assemble a diverse group of community members (residents and business owners) to meet monthly with the Chief of Police to discuss and address community issues and issues related to policing in Pacifica. Solicitation for panel members will begin in May 2022.

OTHER RELATED PROGRESS
Packet Pg. 10
Pacifica City Council 5
April 25, 2022
In addition to the work on long-term actions, the Police Department has worked to increase training emphasizing de-escalation tactics. While de-escalation tactics have long been a part of firearm and defensive tactics trainings, in-house instructors continue to address de-escalation in a more emphasized fashion in each training session. Firearms and defensive tactics trainings are conducted to ensure proficiency with firearms and arrest/self-defense techniques.

Department-wide training has also been conducted on the issue of bias and cultural diversity in order to further our commitment to bias-free policing.

Law enforcement response to mental health crisis related incidents have continued to remain at the forefront of Department priorities. The Police Department has continued toward its longstanding goal of having 100% sworn staff members attend Crisis Intervention Training (CIT).

Last year, we reported 81% of officers have been CIT trained. As of this report, 88% of Police Department staff have received this training. The departure of some personnel and the addition of new officers in 2021 has affected this percentage.

The Department has experienced several incidents recently where CIT training as well as participation in numerous mental health and risk assessment programs within San Mateo County has provided for positive outcomes in critical situations. In one example, officers dealt with a male adult that was naked and armed with an axe on the bluff area between Rockaway Beach and Linda Mar Beach. Officers utilized CIT techniques and successfully communicated with the individual to drop the axe and allow officers to assist him in obtaining mental health assistance. In a second serious incident, officers worked for over 24 hours in a case involving a female adult that had stabbed her roommate resulting in serious injury.. After the person refused to come out of the residence and surrender to officers, officers utilized the assistance of a mental health clinician to assess the situation. Based on information obtained, officers were able to develop and successfully implement a plan to take the person into custody in a fashion least likely to further escalate the situation.

Future Opportunities
In 2021, (4) cities in San Mateo County implemented a pilot program where mental health professionals are embedded within their police departments to assist officers with mental health related calls and issues. These professionals are available when needed to neighboring agencies. Daly City and South San Francisco both have mental health professionals embedded within their police departments. The Pacifica Police Department will not hesitate to call upon their services when needed.

Related to the above pilot program, Stanford University is conducting research on the (4) communities that are part of the program. In effort to further research countywide needs, (9) jurisdictions, including Pacifica, have been identified for further research. Completion of an Agreement for data sharing to further this research in is progress. It is the hope of law enforcement in San Mateo County that research will result in the expansion of this important program.

As a continued effort, staff will continue to be looking for opportunities to provide effective, innovative training for officers related to de-escalation, bias, and social justice issues.

RELATION TO CITY COUNCIL GOALS AND WORK PLAN:

Continued staff work in the areas addressed in this report resonate with City Council Goals of An Engaged Community, Healthy and Compassionate Community, and Maintaining a Safe Community.

Packet Pg. 11
Pacifica City Council 6
April 25, 2022
FISCAL IMPACT:

There is no fiscal impact to receiving this report.

ORIGINATED BY:

Police
ATTACHMENT LIST:

Packet Pg. 12

CITY OF PACIFICA

COUNCIL AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT
4/25/2022
1 SUBJECT:

Approval of Disbursements for 3/01/22 through 3/15/22.

RECOMMENDED ACTION:

Move to approve attached lists of disbursements for 3/01/22 through 3/15/22.

STAFF CONTACT:

Yulia Carter, Chief Financial Sustainability Officer
(650) 738-7402
[email protected]
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION:

Staff has submitted the following disbursements for Council approval:
• Disbursements dated 3/01/22 through 3/15/22 in the amount of $669,237.92 as written on regular checks numbered 95338-59404 & 59406-59507 (Attachment 1). These disbursements are for Fiscal Year 2021-2022.

FISCAL IMPACT:

These disbursements are within budgeted appropriations.

ORIGINATED BY:

Finance Department
ATTACHMENT LIST:

FY 2021-2022 Disbursements 59338-59404 & 59406-59507 -3-1 to 3-15-22 (PDF) 1 Packet Pg. 13
Report: CHECKREG Generated: 18DEC20 13:17 Run: THURSDAY MAR1722 14:30 Page: 1

REPORT PARAMETERS
---------------------------
ORGANIZATION : 001
BANK : 1
PRINT BY : CHECK #
SORT OPTION : CHECK #
PRINT DETAILS : N
ORG NAME FOR EXTRACT FILE : PACIFICA
Report: CHECKREG Generated: 18DEC20 13:17 Run: THURSDAY MAR1722 14:30 Page: 2

CITY OF PACIFICA

CHECK REGISTER
CHECK RANGE: 59338 - 59404
CHECK
BANK CHECK # CHECK AMT CHECK DATE VENDOR # ADDRS # VENDOR NAME TYPE STATUS ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 1 59338 $2438.11 03/04/22 00094 0 ADAM-HILL COMPANY, THE S OUTSTANDING 1 59339 $330.00 03/04/22 04066 0 ALERT PEST CONTROL COMPANY INC S OUTSTANDING 1 59340 $69.00 03/04/22 00136 0 ALHAMBRA S OUTSTANDING
1 59341 $632.51 03/04/22 04980 1 AMAZON.COM SALES, INC. S OUTSTANDING 1 59342 $228.65 03/04/22 03895 0 AMERICAN FIDELITY ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES LLC S OUTSTANDING 1 59343 $91.00 03/04/22 00011 0 C.W.E.A. S OUTSTANDING
1 59344 $360.00 03/04/22 01690 0 CALTEST ANALYTICAL LAB S OUTSTANDING 1 59345 $4300.00 03/04/22 03438 0 CELLEBRITE USA INC. S OUTSTANDING 1 59346 $78.00 03/04/22 05466 0 CENOTTI, ANTHONY M III S OUTSTANDING 1 59347 $887.01 03/04/22 00510 0 CINTAS CORPORATION #464 S OUTSTANDING 1 59348 $58.40 03/04/22 03246 0 COAST COUNTIES PETERBILT & COAST COUNTIES PAC S OUTSTANDING 1 59349 $55.00 03/04/22 05082 0 COASTSIDE NEWS GROUP, INC. S OUTSTANDING 1 59350 $445.50 03/04/22 05082 1 COLUMN, PBC S OUTSTANDING 1 59351 $367.43 03/04/22 02168 1 COMCAST S OUTSTANDING
1 59352 $29832.46 03/04/22 03787 0 CONTRACT SWEEPING SERVICES S OUTSTANDING 1 59353 $50.00 03/04/22 00022 10 COUNTY OF SAN MATEO S OUTSTANDING 1 59354 $100.00 03/04/22 00022 28 COUNTY OF SAN MATEO ANIMAL LICENSING S OUTSTANDING 1 59355 $1500.97 03/04/22 00611 2 CSG CONSULTANTS, INC. S OUTSTANDING 1 59356 $82.88 03/04/22 00025 0 DALY CITY/CITY OF S OUTSTANDING 1 59357 $5625.00 03/04/22 00645 1 DAVEY TREE EXPERT COMPANY S OUTSTANDING 1 59358 $601.94 03/04/22 03469 0 EVANTEC CORPORATION S OUTSTANDING 1 59359 $370.50 03/04/22 00755 1 EWING IRRIGATION PRODUCTS, INC S OUTSTANDING 1 59360 $7408.24 03/04/22 02767 0 FLYERS ENERGY, LLC S OUTSTANDING 1 59361 $1954.85 03/04/22 00875 0 GRANITE ROCK COMPANY #26577 S OUTSTANDING 1 59362 $60526.00 03/04/22 03616 0 GROUP 4 ARCHITECTURE RESEARCH PLANNING INC S OUTSTANDING 1 59363 $418.23 03/04/22 00892 0 HACH COMPANY S OUTSTANDING 1 59364 $219.00 03/04/22 04850 1 HOME DEPOT USA, INC. S OUTSTANDING 1 59365 $1200.00 03/04/22 00981 1 ICMA MEMBERSHIP RENEWALS S OUTSTANDING 1 59366 $255.63 03/04/22 02511 0 IDEXX LABORATORIES S OUTSTANDING 1 59367 $313.73 03/04/22 02252 0 INTERSTATE ALL BATTERY CENTER S OUTSTANDING 1 59368 $64.42 03/04/22 01812 4 KBA DOCUSYS S OUTSTANDING 1 59369 $1379.24 03/04/22 01095 0 LINDA MAR HARDWARE S OUTSTANDING 1 59370 $67.76 03/04/22 01007 0 MATCO TOOLS S OUTSTANDING 1 59371 $431.80 03/04/22 01142 0 MC MASTER-CARR SUPPLY COMPANY S OUTSTANDING 1 59372 $50.00 03/04/22 00001 341 MOORE, JANELLE S OUTSTANDING 1 59373 $3305.00 03/04/22 01184 0 MUNICIPAL POOLING AUTHORITY S OUTSTANDING 1 59374 $1128.75 03/04/22 05416 0 MUNICIPAL RESOURCE GROUP, LLC S OUTSTANDING 1 59375 $42742.50 03/04/22 04632 0 NICHOLS CONSULTING ENGINEERS, CHTD S OUTSTANDING 1 59376 $221.57 03/04/22 01217 0 OFFICE DEPOT S OUTSTANDING 1 59377 $2499.84 03/04/22 01232 0 ORKIN INC. S OUTSTANDING 1 59378 $161230.82 03/04/22 01240 0 PACIFIC GAS & ELECTRIC CO. S OUTSTANDING 1 59379 $198.06 03/04/22 01243 0 PACIFIC MANOR HARDWARE, INC. S OUTSTANDING 1 59380 $205.00 03/04/22 01249 0 PACIFICA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE S OUTSTANDING 1 59381 $7299.00 03/04/22 01249 0 PACIFICA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE S OUTSTANDING 1 59382 $1292.35 03/04/22 01297 0 PARS S OUTSTANDING
1 59383 $494.27 03/04/22 01289 0 PENINSULA UNIFORMS & EQUIPMENT, INC S OUTSTANDING 1 59384 $135.52 03/04/22 01317 0 PREFERRED ALLIANCE, INC. S OUTSTANDING 1 59385 $403.71 03/04/22 01336 0 QUILL CORPORATION S OUTSTANDING 1 59386 $3946.06 03/04/22 04802 0 RECORDS CONTROL SERVICES S OUTSTANDING 1 59387 $2264.96 03/04/22 03306 1 ROBERT HALF MANAGEMENT RESOURCES S OUTSTANDING 1 59388 $499.94 03/04/22 05445 1 SAFEWARE, INC. S OUTSTANDING Report: CHECKREG Generated: 18DEC20 13:17 Run: THURSDAY MAR1722 14:30 Page: 3

CITY OF PACIFICA

Page 1 of 4 ends

http://pac-gems/fms/BISystem/ReadROCFile.asp?sWC=C&iIdx=&FileName=D:\GemsEn... 3/17/2022

1.a
Packet Pg. 14
Attachment: FY 2021-2022 Disbursements 59338-59404 & 59406-59507 -3-1 to 3-15-22 (4940 : Disbursements - Dated 3/01/22 through 3/15/22) 1 59394 $2127.41 03/04/22 05465 0 SIGILLO SUPPLY, INC. S OUTSTANDING 1 59395 $18492.40 03/04/22 03026 0 STARVISTA S OUTSTANDING 1 59396 $340.28 03/04/22 04299 0 THE GOODYEAR TIRE & RUBBER COMPANY S OUTSTANDING 1 59397 $236.00 03/04/22 01029 2 THE PERMANENTE MEDICAL GROUP INC. S OUTSTANDING 1 59398 $165.20 03/04/22 01599 0 THOMAS FISH COMPANY S OUTSTANDING 1 59399 $503.51 03/04/22 01647 0 ULINE SHIPPING SUPPLY SPECIALISTS S OUTSTANDING 1 59400 $1216.20 03/04/22 01653 1 UNITED RENTALS (NORTH AMERICA) S OUTSTANDING 1 59401 $3315.84 03/04/22 03835 0 US FOODS, INC S OUTSTANDING 1 59402 $250.12 03/04/22 02899 1 UTILITY TELECOM GROUP, LLC S OUTSTANDING 1 59403 $1100.00 03/04/22 01729 0 WITMER-TYSON IMPORTS, INC. S OUTSTANDING 1 59404 $1037.97 03/04/22 04999 1 XEROX FINANCIAL SERVICES S OUTSTANDING TOTAL # OF ISSUED CHECKS: 67 TOTAL AMOUNT: 380,484.24
TOTAL # OF WIRES: 0 TOTAL AMOUNT: 0.00
TOTAL # OF VOIDED/REISSUED/UNCLAIMED CHECKS: 0 TOTAL AMOUNT: 0.00 TOTAL # OF ACH CHECKS: 0 TOTAL AMOUNT: 0.00
TOTAL # OF UNISSUED CHECKS: 0
Report: CHECKREG Generated: 18DEC20 13:17 Run: THURSDAY MAR1722 14:30 Page: 4

FUND TOTALS
-----------

FUND FUND NAME ISSUED TOTAL VOIDED/REISSUED TOTAL
------ ------------------------------ --------------- ---------------------- 001 GENERAL FUND 82,759.90 0.00
009 STREET CONSTRUCTION FUND 41,390.00 0.00
010 GAS TAX MAINTENANCE FUND 37,836.43 0.00
018 SEWER CHARGE FUND 148,315.65 0.00
022 GENERAL CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT 61,878.50 0.00
035 BEACH PARKING FUND 84.82 0.00
071 MOTOR POOL OPERATIONS FUND 8,218.94 0.00
================ ================
TOTAL - 380,484.24 0.00
Report: CHECKREG Generated: 18DEC20 13:17 Run: THURSDAY MAR1722 14:30 Page: 5

CITY OF PACIFICA

CHECK REGISTER
CHECK RANGE: 59406 - 59507
CHECK
BANK CHECK # CHECK AMT CHECK DATE VENDOR # ADDRS # VENDOR NAME TYPE STATUS ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 1 59406 $319.80 03/04/22 05469 0 BENEFIT COORDINATORS CORPORATION S OUTSTANDING 1 59407 $9251.76 03/04/22 03741 0 BENEFIT COORDINATORS CORPORATION S OUTSTANDING 1 59408 $29.50 03/04/22 01757 1 CALIFORNIA ASSN OF PROFESSIONAL FIREFIGHTERS S OUTSTANDING 1 59409 $242.76 03/04/22 00814 1 CALIFORNIA STATE DISBURSEMENT UNIT S OUTSTANDING 1 59410 $132.39 03/04/22 00814 1 CALIFORNIA STATE DISBURSEMENT UNIT S OUTSTANDING 1 59411 $240.00 03/04/22 00814 1 CALIFORNIA STATE DISBURSEMENT UNIT S OUTSTANDING 1 59412 $661.50 03/04/22 01757 0 CLEA S OUTSTANDING
1 59413 $50.00 03/04/22 00814 0 FRANCHISE TAX BOARD S OUTSTANDING 1 59414 $350.00 03/04/22 00814 0 FRANCHISE TAX BOARD S OUTSTANDING 1 59415 $100.00 03/04/22 00814 0 FRANCHISE TAX BOARD S OUTSTANDING 1 59416 $4.00 03/04/22 01764 3 NATIONAL D.R.I.V.E S OUTSTANDING 1 59417 $831.92 03/04/22 01758 1 PACIFICA FIREFIGHTERS UNION S OUTSTANDING 1 59418 $800.00 03/04/22 01759 0 PACIFICA POLICE OFFICERS ASSOCIATION S OUTSTANDING 1 59419 $200.00 03/04/22 01760 0 PACIFICA POLICE OFFICERS SAVINGS S OUTSTANDING 1 59420 $420.00 03/04/22 01769 0 PACIFICA POLICE SUPERVISORS ASSOCIATION S OUTSTANDING 1 59421 $1401.16 03/04/22 01758 5 SMC FIREFIGHTERS IAFF Local 2400 S OUTSTANDING 1 59422 $92.00 03/04/22 01758 4 SMC FIREFIGHTERS PAC S OUTSTANDING 1 59423 $1008.00 03/04/22 01768 0 TEAMSTERS LOCAL #350 S OUTSTANDING 1 59424 $2665.50 03/04/22 01764 0 TEAMSTERS LOCAL #856 S OUTSTANDING 1 59425 $64355.00 03/04/22 01771 0 TEAMSTERS LOCAL 856 S VOIDED 1 59426 $3221.81 03/04/22 01766 0 VISION SERVICE PLAN-CA S OUTSTANDING 1 59427 $61802.00 03/04/22 01771 0 TEAMSTERS LOCAL 856 S OUTSTANDING 1 59428 $30.00 03/11/22 00115 0 AHEARN JANE S OUTSTANDING 1 59429 $145.41 03/11/22 00122 0 AIRGAS USA, LLC S OUTSTANDING 1 59430 $347.46 03/11/22 00136 0 ALHAMBRA S OUTSTANDING 1 59431 $523.34 03/11/22 04980 1 AMAZON.COM SALES, INC. S OUTSTANDING 1 59432 $315.03 03/11/22 00009 2 AT&T MOBILITY S OUTSTANDING 1 59433 $900.00 03/11/22 04561 0 AVINA, ANGEL S OUTSTANDING 1 59434 $25282.78 03/11/22 03634 0 BAY POWER LLC GENERATOR SYSTEM DESIGN AND SER S OUTSTANDING 1 59435 $579.69 03/11/22 02463 1 BAY POWER, INC. S OUTSTANDING 1 59436 $373.67 03/11/22 00293 0 BEARING AGENCIES INC S OUTSTANDING 1 59437 $420.87 03/11/22 00452 0 CALPICO INC. S OUTSTANDING 1 59438 $227.00 03/11/22 01690 0 CALTEST ANALYTICAL LAB S OUTSTANDING 1 59439 $2441.00 03/11/22 03814 1 CAPPSTONE, INC. S OUTSTANDING 1 59440 $1126.33 03/11/22 00510 0 CINTAS CORPORATION #464 S OUTSTANDING 1 59441 $318.00 03/11/22 05296 0 CLAIRE BREES S OUTSTANDING 1 59442 $363.00 03/11/22 05082 1 COLUMN, PBC S OUTSTANDING 1 59443 $686.16 03/11/22 02168 1 COMCAST S OUTSTANDING
1 59444 $3921.67 03/11/22 00595 0 COTTON, SHIRES & ASSOCIATES, INC. S OUTSTANDING 1 59445 $522.47 03/11/22 00628 1 D C LOCK & SECURITY SERVICE S OUTSTANDING 1 59446 $2695.75 03/11/22 00025 0 DALY CITY/CITY OF S OUTSTANDING 1 59447 $928.06 03/11/22 04397 2 DENTONI WELDING WORKS, INC.-SAN LEANDRO S OUTSTANDING 1 59448 $625.00 03/11/22 00001 357 DIXON, ALYSSA S OUTSTANDING 1 59449 $82.95 03/11/22 00714 1 EBI AGGREGATES-BRISBANE S OUTSTANDING

Page 2 of 4 ends

http://pac-gems/fms/BISystem/ReadROCFile.asp?sWC=C&iIdx=&FileName=D:\GemsEn... 3/17/2022

1.a
Packet Pg. 15
Attachment: FY 2021-2022 Disbursements 59338-59404 & 59406-59507 -3-1 to 3-15-22 (4940 : Disbursements - Dated 3/01/22 through 3/15/22) 1 59450 $1032.82 03/11/22 04386 1 EDGEWORTH INTEGRATION LLC S OUTSTANDING 1 59451 $109.95 03/11/22 00489 0 ENTERSECT S OUTSTANDING 1 59452 $59.00 03/11/22 03047 0 FASTRAK VIOLATION PROCESSING DEPARTMENT S OUTSTANDING 1 59453 $4235.51 03/11/22 02767 0 FLYERS ENERGY, LLC S OUTSTANDING 1 59454 $250.00 03/11/22 00001 62 FREDERICK, RYAN S OUTSTANDING 1 59455 $100.00 03/11/22 03823 1 GIBSON JR, EUGENE S OUTSTANDING 1 59456 $42.00 03/11/22 03804 0 GODSOE, LIZ S OUTSTANDING Report: CHECKREG Generated: 18DEC20 13:17 Run: THURSDAY MAR1722 14:30 Page: 6

CITY OF PACIFICA

CHECK REGISTER
CHECK RANGE: 59406 - 59507
CHECK
BANK CHECK # CHECK AMT CHECK DATE VENDOR # ADDRS # VENDOR NAME TYPE STATUS ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 1 59457 $908.05 03/11/22 00872 0 GRAINGER S OUTSTANDING 1 59458 $750.00 03/11/22 03947 1 GRANICUS, INC. S OUTSTANDING 1 59459 $1960.78 03/11/22 00896 0 HALF MOON BAY BUILDING & GARDEN SUPPLY S OUTSTANDING 1 59460 $14909.63 03/11/22 00919 1 HERC RENTALS INC. S OUTSTANDING 1 59461 $146.00 03/11/22 04494 0 ISIDRO, ALLEN S OUTSTANDING 1 59462 $375.00 03/11/22 04085 0 JAMES FORD, INC. S OUTSTANDING 1 59463 $42.71 03/11/22 05468 0 KATHY DOMENICI S OUTSTANDING 1 59464 $127.62 03/11/22 01812 4 KBA DOCUSYS S OUTSTANDING 1 59465 $325.00 03/11/22 04216 0 KIRBY POLYGRAPH AND INVESTIGATIVE SVCS LLC S OUTSTANDING 1 59466 $563.48 03/11/22 01055 2 KONE INC S OUTSTANDING 1 59467 $1487.50 03/11/22 01070 0 LAURETTA PRINTING COMPANY S OUTSTANDING 1 59468 $1136.41 03/11/22 01078 1 LEHR AUTO ELECTRIC, INC. S OUTSTANDING 1 59469 $1000.00 03/11/22 05471 0 LISA ECCLESTON S OUTSTANDING 1 59470 $54.74 03/11/22 02358 0 MAC TOOLS DISTRIBUTOR S OUTSTANDING 1 59471 $234.07 03/11/22 01142 0 MC MASTER-CARR SUPPLY COMPANY S OUTSTANDING 1 59472 $591.25 03/11/22 05416 0 MUNICIPAL RESOURCE GROUP, LLC S OUTSTANDING 1 59473 $154.00 03/11/22 03801 0 NAPIER, NORA S OUTSTANDING 1 59474 $178.20 03/11/22 01194 0 NATIONAL CONSTRUCTION RENTALS, INC S OUTSTANDING 1 59475 $121.65 03/11/22 03981 0 NORTHERN SAFETY CO. INC S OUTSTANDING 1 59476 $3959.50 03/11/22 02486 0 O'REILLY AUTO PARTS S OUTSTANDING 1 59477 $504.07 03/11/22 01217 0 OFFICE DEPOT S OUTSTANDING 1 59478 $4483.96 03/11/22 02027 0 OLIVER PACKAGING AND EQUIPMENT COMPANY S OUTSTANDING 1 59479 $12480.00 03/11/22 01261 0 PACIFICA SCHOOL DISTRICT S OUTSTANDING 1 59480 $1955.20 03/11/22 00054 2 PAPE MACHINERY S OUTSTANDING 1 59481 $116.00 03/11/22 03802 0 PATINO, JOE S OUTSTANDING 1 59482 $625.00 03/11/22 00001 340 PERHAM, SCOTT S OUTSTANDING 1 59483 $48.00 03/11/22 02539 0 PITTSINGER, R JANE S OUTSTANDING 1 59484 $5481.94 03/11/22 03531 0 PRECISE MAILING S OUTSTANDING 1 59485 $352.45 03/11/22 01336 0 QUILL CORPORATION S OUTSTANDING 1 59486 $6757.84 03/11/22 03306 1 ROBERT HALF MANAGEMENT RESOURCES S OUTSTANDING 1 59487 $68.45 03/11/22 01795 0 ROSS, LAURIE S OUTSTANDING 1 59488 $242.31 03/11/22 05445 1 SAFEWARE, INC. S OUTSTANDING 1 59489 $1000.00 03/11/22 05472 0 SHARON MASSEY S OUTSTANDING 1 59490 $278.63 03/11/22 01498 0 SMART & FINAL S OUTSTANDING 1 59491 $125.00 03/11/22 00049 7 SMCLETMA S OUTSTANDING 1 59492 $8880.00 03/11/22 01531 1 ST. FRANCIS ELECTRIC, INC. S OUTSTANDING 1 59493 $625.00 03/11/22 00001 344 SUNDBY, KYLE S OUTSTANDING 1 59494 $610.51 03/11/22 02642 2 T-MOBILE CORPORATION S OUTSTANDING 1 59495 $119.28 03/11/22 03785 1 THATCHER COMPANY INC S OUTSTANDING 1 59496 $525.00 03/11/22 03272 0 THIRD DEGREE COMMUNICATIONS, INC. S OUTSTANDING 1 59497 $525.00 03/11/22 03272 0 THIRD DEGREE COMMUNICATIONS, INC. S OUTSTANDING 1 59498 $10600.00 03/11/22 04359 0 TORRES CLEANING SERVICES, INC S OUTSTANDING 1 59499 $265.97 03/11/22 04418 1 U.S. BANK EQUIPMENT FINANCING, INC. S OUTSTANDING 1 59500 $136.26 03/11/22 01647 0 ULINE SHIPPING SUPPLY SPECIALISTS S OUTSTANDING 1 59501 $30.42 03/11/22 02663 0 UNDERWOOD, EILEEN S OUTSTANDING 1 59502 $35.00 03/11/22 01661 0 UPS STORE #1906 S OUTSTANDING 1 59503 $731.45 03/11/22 03835 0 US FOODS, INC S OUTSTANDING 1 59504 $889.68 03/11/22 03980 0 VERITIV OPERATING COMPANY S OUTSTANDING 1 59505 $2520.50 03/11/22 01684 0 VERIZON WIRELESS S OUTSTANDING 1 59506 $912.29 03/11/22 01673 0 VWR INTERNATIONAL S OUTSTANDING 1 59507 $938.87 03/11/22 02679 0 WESTERN TRUCK FAB S OUTSTANDING Report: CHECKREG Generated: 18DEC20 13:17 Run: THURSDAY MAR1722 14:30 Page: 7

CITY OF PACIFICA

FUND TOTALS
-----------

Page 3 of 4 ends

http://pac-gems/fms/BISystem/ReadROCFile.asp?sWC=C&iIdx=&FileName=D:\GemsEn... 3/17/2022

1.a
Packet Pg. 16
Attachment: FY 2021-2022 Disbursements 59338-59404 & 59406-59507 -3-1 to 3-15-22 (4940 : Disbursements - Dated 3/01/22 through 3/15/22)

FUND FUND NAME ISSUED TOTAL VOIDED/REISSUED TOTAL
------ ------------------------------ --------------- ---------------------- 001 GENERAL FUND 143,972.77 59,791.00
010 GAS TAX MAINTENANCE FUND 8,949.94 0.00
018 SEWER CHARGE FUND 34,957.34 0.00
022 GENERAL CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT 363.00 0.00
034 SEWER FACILITY CONSTRUCT. FUND 16,909.63 0.00
035 BEACH PARKING FUND 60.08 0.00
038 DISASTER ACCOUNTING FUND 2,138.98 0.00
065 SELF-FUNDED DENTAL PLAN FUND 4,720.80 4,564.00
071 MOTOR POOL OPERATIONS FUND 12,326.15 0.00
================ ================
TOTAL - 224,398.69 64,355.00

Page 4 of 4 ends

http://pac-gems/fms/BISystem/ReadROCFile.asp?sWC=C&iIdx=&FileName=D:\GemsEn... 3/17/2022 NO FY 2021-2022 CHECKS ISSUED ON 3/1/22-3/3/22.

TOTAL AMOUNT OF CHECKS= $380,484.24 + $288,753.69 = $669,237.92

1.a
Packet Pg. 17
Attachment: FY 2021-2022 Disbursements 59338-59404 & 59406-59507 -3-1 to 3-15-22 (4940 : Disbursements - Dated 3/01/22 through 3/15/22)

CITY OF PACIFICA

COUNCIL AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT
4/25/2022
1 SUBJECT:

Approval of Minutes
RECOMMENDED ACTION:

Move to approve the minutes of the City Council Regular Meeting held on April 11, 2022.

STAFF CONTACT:

Sarah Coffey, City Clerk
650-738-7307
[email protected]
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION:

Move to approve the minutes of the City Council Regular Meeting held on April 11, 2022 (Attachment A).

FISCAL IMPACT:

None.

ORIGINATED BY:

City Clerk
ATTACHMENT LIST:

Attachment A: Minutes of April 11, 2022 City Council Meeting (PDF) 2 Packet Pg. 18

CITY OF PACIFICA

CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
Council Chambers
2212 Beach Blvd
Pacifica, CA 94044
Mayor Mary Bier
Mayor Pro Tem Tygarjas Bigstyck
Councilmember Mike O'Neill
Councilmember Sue Vaterlaus
Councilmember Sue Beckmeyer
City Council Regular Meeting 1 April 11, 2022
April 11, 2022 (MONDAY)
www.cityofpacifica.org
Mayor Mary Bier called the meeting to order on April 11, 2022 at 7:01 PM 7:00 PM OPEN SESSION
Call to Order
Mayor Bier called the meeting to order at 7:01 p.m.

Attendee Name Title Status Arrived
Mary Bier Mayor Present
Tygarjas Bigstyck Mayor Pro Tem Present
Mike O'Neill Councilmember Present
Sue Vaterlaus Councilmember Present
Sue Beckmeyer Councilmember Present
City Clerk Coffey took a verbal roll call.

Staff Present: Kevin Woodhouse, City Manager; Michelle Kenyon, City Attorney; Lisa Petersen, PW Director; Christian Murdock, Acting Planning Director; Dan Steidle, Police Chief; Sam Bautista, PW Dep. Director; Michael Perez, PB&R Director; Yulia Carter, Chief Finan.

Sustainability Officer; Irene Camarena, HR Mgr.; Ken Fong, IT Analyst; Josh Montemayor, Management Analyst; Sarah Coffey, City Clerk.

Reading of Land Acknowledgment
Mayor Bier read the Land Acknowledgement.

Salute to the Flag led by Councilmember O'Neill

SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS
A. Proclamation - John Nibbelin
Mayor Bier read a proclamation honoring John Nibbelin for his tenure on the Planning Commission.

2.a
Packet Pg. 19
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of April 11, 2022 City Council Meeting (4965 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 2 April 11, 2022
John Nibbelin appreciated the opportunity to share his thoughts, stating that it has been a privilege to serve on the Planning Commission for eight years, and also to have that work acknowledged.

He stated that it was an opportunity to learn about the city and meet so many informed people.

He also thanked his family and friends. He felt learning how Pacifica does business was probably the most valuable thing he has learned, and he has been moved and impressed by the civility people bring to matters even when disagreeing and it is a journey to build a good community and share perspectives. He is humbled and gratified by this proclamation and thanks Council for it.

Mayor Bier stated that the Council has comments and it would be great if he stayed at the podium.

Councilmember O’Neill mentioned having a picture of them in front of a school bus at the Lantos Tunnel and he stated that the Council was soliciting people, and also mentioned his role as the attorney for the Pacifica School District and Jefferson High School District, and his service in the military reserve. He was happy for him as he is progressing in his career. He stated that he will be missed, and thanked him for all his service.

Mayor pro Tem Bigstyck thanked John Nibbelin, first, for his service to our country, and stated that he had the honor of serving with him for a short part of his record for serving every human being in any way he can and he was able to sit next to him on the Planning Commission as well as the Pacifica Resource Center Board of Directors and has seen firsthand what some of his service looks like, and it is enough to be inspiring. He is grateful and humbled to call him a friend, adding that the county is fortunate as he steps into a role where the entire county can be touched by his extraordinary commitment to service and his professionalism.

Councilmember Vaterlaus also considered him a friend. She stated that they started on the Planning Commission at the same time and shared a story. She felt their whole time together was great, as it was nice to talk to him. He was always considerate and had so many ideas and she appreciated it and knows he is great in his new job.

Councilmember Beckmeyer stated that he is amazing, inspiring and humble. She agreed with Mayor pro Tem Bigstyck's comments. She thought the opportunity to learn from him in working at the school district with the workforce housing project was where she began to know him and forgot he was on Planning Commission until she got on Council. She was happy for him and looks forward to having the opportunity to work with him again in this new role.

Mayor Bier congratulated him on his new position, stating that they are lucky to have him and the county is in good hands. She stated that the first time she met him was at a PRC Board meeting.

She stated that he has a kindness that exudes from him. As she learned more about him, she realized you never know who is sitting next to you, and she was glad it was him. She felt it was a pleasure to watch him serve and be his friend.

Mr. Nibbelin thanked all of them, again stating that he is humbled and appreciated all of that.

Councilmember O’Neill stated that this is the nicest they have ever talked to a lawyer.

Mayor Bier stated that they will take a picture.

B. Proclamation - National Volunteer Week - April 17-23, 2022

2.a
Packet Pg. 20
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of April 11, 2022 City Council Meeting (4965 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 3 April 11, 2022
Mayor Bier stated that PB&R Director Perez will speak after the reading of the proclamation, and they will also have Horace Hinshaw and Sally Benton Martinez present to speak then she read a proclamation honoring National Volunteer Week, April 17-23, 2022.

PB&R Director Perez stated that, on behalf of PB&R’s Senior Services, he thanked Council for recognizing their volunteers and the efforts they give so passionately in serving our community.

He stated that 100 individuals will be honored for 12,000 hours of service at their Annual Senior Services Recognition dinner on April 20, adding that the City Manager, PB&R Commissioners and Councilmembers have been invited to serve the volunteers to express gratitude and appreciation for their hard work and efforts on behalf of the community. He mentioned some of the things they do to support their program and share their time, talents and efforts to support the critical programs and services for aging adults to enhance their quality of life. He stated that they annually deliver 30,000 meals to homebound and frail Meals on Wheels clients, 18,000 meals to the congregate and Grab and Go lunch programs. He mentioned family members who live away from the area and know their loved ones are getting their needs met is a relief to them. He stated that sometimes the volunteers serve as first responders when they come to situations, especially the Meals on Wheels volunteers. He stated that the PB&R Department is fortunate to also have dedicated youth volunteer base from pre-Covid and they are working to build back programs as they continue to re-open programming, mentioning some of the groups involved, and volunteers in all departments, such as Police, Public Works, commissioners and committees, and mentioned other groups that are dependent on volunteers who are working to make Pacifica a great community. He stated that they had two individuals to receive the proclamation, Seniors In Action Council Chair Horace Hinshaw and Sally Benton Martinez, a Meals on Wheels volunteer who also works in their lunchroom.

Mr. Horace Hinshaw proudly accepted this proclamation on behalf of the seniors as well as the whole community. He stated that they were happy to live in a city with a base of thousands of volunteers who control and operate these programs, as mentioned by Mr. Perez. He was thinking about where he first saw things happening, and his recollection goes back to the 1950s when a group of young men who decided they needed to operate a baseball program in Pacifica for young kids and they started building a field, but everything that started over the years has volunteers who are willing to help. He referred to the senior citizens, stating that they desperately need help, and they are trying to get meals delivered to homebound people. He stated that Covid-19 has hit them badly as they have added more people over the last two years than they ever had for home meals. He encouraged volunteers to be a Meals on Wheels person to help out. He stated that this recognizes not only the seniors in Pacifica but volunteers for every program should be thanked for this volunteer week.

Sally Benton Martinez stated that, about two years ago, she started volunteering by serving food to those who come for lunch time. She enjoyed that, then when Covid came, everything shut down. She stated that she is now delivering Meals on Wheels and she continues to serve lunches on Wednesday. She stated that, through serving Meals on Wheels, she has met many wonderful people who are so charming, loving and happy to see who come to them and to be able to chat.

She is pleased to be serving on this job and she looks forward to more access to board jobs as well.

Councilmember O’Neill stated that Pacifica is like a quilt and the volunteers keep that quilt together. He referred to PB&R Director Perez mentioning many of the volunteers, but there are others such as Spindrift Theater, Pacifica School volunteers, etc., and he stated that volunteering is very strong in America. He thanked them, mentioning that, when his mother was alive, the utilized Meals on Wheels and she loved it, such as when a volunteer would bring his two or three2.a Packet Pg. 21
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of April 11, 2022 City Council Meeting (4965 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 4 April 11, 2022
year old with him, which was the highlight of her day. He thanked the volunteers who find a need and fill it as it is important for the fabric of Pacifica, mentioning many organizations and their volunteers, especially the two representing them at this meeting.

Mayor pro Tem Bigstyck stated that he was talking to someone about how he was raised, which were good qualities but a sense of community service was not instilled in him until he got to the university. He continued that at some point it occurred to him that he wanted to make something better in himself and led to wanting something better for his community and he started coming to Council meetings and started learning about opportunities in Pacifica that he didn’t know existed.

He stated that returning to Pacifica and caring about something got him to doing community service. He stated that if anyone cares about anything in the community, the community will grab them and take them on a journey of service to the community as it is filled with so many opportunities to make it better by what we do together. He thanked Mr. Hinshaw and Ms. Martinez for being here as two representatives inspiring others who are serving the community and have inspired him. He appreciated that they are honoring the spirit that exists in our community.

Councilmember Beckmeyer stated that, when she sees Mr. Hinshaw, the first thing she thinks of is sports. She thought that was the very first major involvement at a volunteer level. She stated that those connections carried into school and you see the people you know in sports in school and you start getting involved in PTO, etc., and then you are on Council. She thanked Mr.

Hinshaw. She stated that it is an opportunity to learn, grow, and demonstrate to our children the need for it, and she loves seeing that. She stated that a new group formed at Cabrillo School, a green team, and people love the opportunity to come out on the weekend and do service projects at school and bringing their kids and they are doing it together. She stated that, while you can tell people a lot of things, but when you demonstrate it, that is when they learn. She looks forward to someday being able to do Meals on Wheels. She thanked them for all the service to our seniors through the Seniors In Action program.

Councilmember Vaterlaus stated that she has always been a volunteer, and she started when her daughter went into kindergarten and it has been a long time. She appreciated all the volunteers because it is a commitment and you do it. She stated that there are so many opportunities to volunteer for so many different things, such as sports, schools, seniors, etc. She stated that she only did Meals on Wheels once but it was a moving experience, which she thought was the best part of their day to stop and talk to them. She stated that it was a great experience and she thanked all of them for continuing to do it.

Mayor Bier referred to Mayor pro Tem Bigstyck’s comments, stating that when someone really cares about something, the community comes around to them. She stated that, when her nephew was killed in 2005, they started the community coalition and people came to her family to help them heal and do the work. She stated that Councilmember Vaterlaus was around that table, and then PB&R Director Perez was around that table. She stated that the people she met through that experience really formed how she wanted to serve her community and they gave her a broader vision of how she could be of service. She stated that it was a beautiful experience and she sees that happening over and over in our city and we are lucky. She asked them if they would like to take a photo.

CONSENT CALENDAR
City Manager Woodhouse stated that he wanted to make a clarifying statement regarding a few of the consent calendar items. He stated that there are two legislative support letter consent items, No. 6, regarding Seamless Transit Transformation Act, and No. 7, Homeowners’ Relief Act,

2.a
Packet Pg. 22
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of April 11, 2022 City Council Meeting (4965 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 5 April 11, 2022
asking that the mover of the motion to adopt at this meeting clarify that the motion if the intent of the mover is to authorize the mayor to send support letters. He stated that he wrote the recommendation as consider to authorize the mayor to support. He then stated that Item 13's ordinance requires the reading in entirety of the title of that ordinance and City Clerk Coffey is available to read that at the time of the motion.

Mayor Bier asked if any Councilmember would like to pull anything from the consent calendar.

Councilmember Vaterlaus stated that she needed to recuse herself from item 14.

City Attorney stated that you don’t have to pull that, but recuse yourself from the voting and City Clerk will make note of that in the vote.

Mayor Bier seeing no Councilmember wanting to pull any item, she then opened public comment.

Christine Boles, Pacifica, stated that, regarding Item No. 10, she sent Council a letter today on technical questions on that item and she hoped they would consider pulling it to give staff a chance to answer some of those. She was excited to see the Manor overcrossing on the agenda and that there is grant funding, but added some clarifications she had, and hoped they can consider more than one alternative design, again mentioning her thoughts on that, and added support for letters in Items 6 and 7.

Mgmt. Analyst Montemayor introduced call-in speakers.

Deeg Gold, Pacifica, encouraged them to remove Item 10 from the consent calendar, sharing concerns by Pacific Manor residents regarding widening the Manor overpass, etc., and suggested listening to their concerns.

Suzanne Moore, Pacifica, stated she was speaking on Items 10 and 13. She referred to Item 10, asking that it be pulled and consider at least three options because of the residents’ concerns.

Regarding Item 13, she referred to Section 2 which speaks to the Police Department’s actions, and shared her suggestions for pulling it at this time with possible alternative options for success.

Julie Starobin, Pacifica, stated she was speaking on item 10, and was asking that they remove it and discuss it later, sharing her thoughts on the issue.

Mayor Bier stated that she lost connection and asked her to call back again and they will restart her time.

Rick Nahass, Pacifica, thanked Council for supporting seamless transit, regarding Item 6, and he was in support of it, sharing his thoughts on it.

Julie Starobin, Pacifica, stated again that this was on Item 10, and she thought they should remove this from the consent calendar to keep the two projects separate, sharing her reasons for her suggestion to an alternative plan.

Remi Tan, Pacifica, thanked Council for support for the seamless transit, and shared his thoughts on this issue.

Mgmt. Analyst Montemayor stated there were no more hands raised.

2.a
Packet Pg. 23
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of April 11, 2022 City Council Meeting (4965 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 6 April 11, 2022
Mayor Bier stated that there was another card for Item 12 and introduced the speaker.

Bob Hutchinson, Pacifica, stated that Item 12 was on the Pacifica Pier, and he shared some questions he had as well as his concerns.

Mgmt. Analyst Montemayor introduced a call-in speaker.

Dan Evenhouse, Pacifica, asked that the proposed Milagra on ramp be decoupled from the other item, sharing his thoughts on that issue.

Mayor Bier closed public comment.

Mayor pro Tem Bigstyck stated that they heard a lot of questions from the audience and he felt like making a deliberative statement. He stated that, for questions only, he would not have to pull it but making a deliberative statement sounds like deliberation.

City Attorney Kenyon stated he does not have to pull it.

Mayor pro Tem Bigstyck stated he would start with Item 12, asking City Manager Woodhouse what involvement the Coastal Commission has in overseeing the pier repairs and why it is taking as long as it is taking.

City Manager Woodhouse stated that he will start and PW Director Petersen can also chime in with details. He stated that it is an emergency repair project and, in pursuit of the repair options and the funding strategy, they received $0.5 million from the stated with Senator Becker and Assemblymember Mullen’s initiative to provide the funding. He stated that, in the design process, they realized that they could repair all of the railings if they received a little bit more funding and they approached the Coastal Conservancy to provide the additional funding. He stated that they have before them the resolution that they have to adopt as part of the process to receive that grant funding from the Coastal Conservancy. He stated that, in terms of the actual work, they are waiting for the end of crab season, as the pier will be required to be closed for a period of time during repair. He then asked if PW Director Petersen has any additional details.

PW Director Petersen stated that everything the City Manager said was correct. She added that they have been working with the Coastal Commission, and like everyone, they are short staffed and they feel like they will be getting that permit fee very soon and within the time frame when they want to put it out to bid, probably within the June timeframe and have it started by summer.

She stated that they are feeling pretty good and they can move it forward like it should.

Mayor pro Tem Bigstyck asked Councilmembers, before he asks questions on Item 10, if they feel a need to pull it.

City Attorney Kenyon stated that decision was already made that they were not going to pull items.

She stated that, if Council does not want to act on an item, there is no need to pull it as they can approve the consent minus the item they do not want to approve.

Mayor pro Tem Bigstyck stated he will ask a few questions and make a statement. He stated that they received an email with questions which he forwarded to staff, and he wasn’t sure if staff was ready to answer any of those questions. He heard a lot about building alternatives and the neighborhood doesn’t favor the on ramp option. He stated that, from reading the staff report, his interpretation was that this was a study and after they study it and what it means to build an on

2.a
Packet Pg. 24
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of April 11, 2022 City Council Meeting (4965 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 7 April 11, 2022
ramp, they have the opportunity that is delineated in the report that in discussion with the TA is the Manor Drive overcrossing and Milagra Drive on ramp can be analyzed together, but Manor Drive overcrossing can be a stand-alone project going forward. He pointed out that they have that option in their menu, and it shows that the next step includes Council telling the consultant to have a robust community outreach. He stated that what they are being asked by many community members is to pull this so there is more time for the community to give input, but he was reading that by signing off on the next step they are giving the community an opportunity to give input. He wanted to make sure he was on the right track. He then asked if the City Manager wanted to say anything as he received a copy of the questions from the one email.

City Manager Woodhouse stated he was correct that, concerning the overcrossing and on ramp, this was to study them together but, in terms of project implementation, they can be separated and a future decision made about the on ramp portion. He appreciated the question and clarification because CalTrans processes are extremely complicated and take many years to work through, and it is hard to keep track of all the phases, but PW Dep. Director Bautista is here and knows all of the information in great detail. He thought, because it was important and a complex project, he would like to have him come up and make some clarifying statements about the level of public engagement the next phase will entail, study components, future separation of projects should it be the desire in the end.

PW Dep. Director Bautista added that CalTrans would like them to analyze the vicinity, including both the overcrossing and the on ramp, but in terms of participation, they can be stand-alone projects and as stated in the staff report, they would like to advance the on ramp. He stated that they completed the first phase, i.e., preliminary planning study, and had a robust community engagement plan at that time with community meetings and will they plan to do that for the next several days to make sure the community is engaged with the project, not just in Manor but trying to get all of Pacifica engaged. He stated that it is an important project and they need to upgrade that overcrossing due to safety reasons. He was ready to answer any other questions.

Mayor pro Tem Bigstyck thought that was it for now. He thought the community eager to give more feedback, especially in regard to the on ramp project. He stated that, as soon as they know when those meetings are going to be, he will look forward to hearing that information. He stated that he will be voting yes on this, referring to his comment at the last meeting on this subject, stating that he was interested in the study of the on ramp project. He isn’t convinced he wants to vote yes on it, but he wants to personally understand it before he votes on it one way or the other, or make a quick decision when this is a more complicated issue. He stated that they did not know at the last meeting but definitively know now is that they can separate off the overcrossing from the on ramp if they so desire. He stated that, knowing that they have that mechanism in place when they so desire, he feels more comfortable studying to find out how he favors the on ramp project.

Councilmember Vaterlaus had a question about Item 11, i.e., they are paving certain parking lots, and she stated that the left off the center one in Rockaway that also belongs to the city, and asked if there was a plan to pave that parking lot at some time.

City Manager Woodhouse stated that he would bring either PW Dep. Director Bautista or PW Director Petersen up to see if they have an answer to that question.

PW Dep. Director Bautista asked which parking lot she mentioned.

Councilmember Vaterlaus stated that there is the beach parking lots and she was thinking about

2.a
Packet Pg. 25
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of April 11, 2022 City Council Meeting (4965 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 8 April 11, 2022
the one in the middle of Rockaway that the city owned that is very highly used.

Councilmember O’Neill asked if it was next to the UPS store.

Councilmember Vaterlaus responded affirmatively, reiterating that it was the one in the middle of Rockaway, not on the beach.

PW Dep. Director Bautista stated that it isn’t, and they call it the Rockaway south parking lot.

Councilmember Vaterlaus stated it as between Dondee and Old County Road.

PW Dep. Director Bautista thought that is it, the small one, not one of the parking lots, if it is on Dondee and Old County Road, the small parking lot that is in between the buildings, and it is not included as it is just a long parking stretch.

Councilmember Vaterlaus asked if he had any idea when that parking lot will be paved, and is it on a plan.

PW Dep. Director Bautista stated that currently it is not on a plan, but it will be something that they will look into the future of capital improvement years.

Mayor pro Tem Bigstyck moved to approve the consent calendar with authorization for the mayor to send letters of support for Items 6 and 7.

City Attorney Kenyon stated that he need to read the item .

Mayor Bier stated that it was Item 13.

City Attorney Kenyon stated that if couldn’t they can ask the City Clerk to do it.

Mayor pro Tem Bigstyck moved to introduce an ordinance amending Section 4-7.1901, “Removal or towing of vehicles” of Article 19 within Chapter 7, “Traffic” of Title 4 of the Pacifica Municipal Code related to the removal of vehicles illegally parked on the city streets in spaces designated for preferential parking, status CEQA exempt; seconded by Councilmember O’Neill.

Mayor Bier stated that they have a motion and a second.

Councilmember Vaterlaus stated she was voting yes, but recusing from Item 14.

City Clerk Coffey announced the vote.

Items #1-13: Vote: 5-0
Item 14: Vote 4-0 (Recused: Vaterlaus)
RESULT: ADOPTED AS AMENDED [UNANIMOUS]
MOVER: Tygarjas Bigstyck, Mayor Pro Tem
SECONDER: Mike O'Neill, Councilmember
AYES: Bier, Bigstyck, O'Neill, Vaterlaus, Beckmeyer

1. Approval of Disbursements for 2/16/22 through 2/28/22.

2.a
Packet Pg. 26
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of April 11, 2022 City Council Meeting (4965 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 9 April 11, 2022
PROPOSED ACTION: Move to approve attached lists of disbursements for 2/16/22 through 2/28/22.

2. Approval of Minutes
PROPOSED ACTION: Move to approve the minutes of the City Council Regular Meeting held on March 28, 2022.

3. Continuation of Proclamation of Local Emergency of the Pacifica Coastline from Westline Drive to the End of Beach Boulevard.

PROPOSED ACTION: Accept report and make a determination that conditions of local emergency continue to exist within the Pacifica Coastline from Westline Drive to the end of Beach Boulevard.

4. Continuation of Proclamation of Local Emergency at the Anza Pump Station.

PROPOSED ACTION: Accept Report and Make a Determination that Conditions of Local Emergency Continue to Exist at the Anza Pump Station at the Pacifica State Beach.

5. Continuation of Proclamation of the Existence of a Local Emergency Regarding Novel (new) Coronavirus ("COVID-19”).

PROPOSED ACTION: Accept report and make a determination that conditions of local emergency continue to exist regarding Novel (new) Coronavirus ("COVID-19”).

6. Seamless Transit Transformation Act (SB 917)
PROPOSED ACTION: Consider whether to authorize the Mayor to send a letter of support on behalf of the City Council for SB 917, the Seamless Transit Transformation Act, introduced by Senator Becker.

7. Homeowners Relief Act (SB 847)
PROPOSED ACTION: Consider whether to authorize the Mayor to send a letter of support on behalf of the City Council for SB 847, the Homeowners Relief Act, introduced by Senator Hurtado.

8. Reclassify a Vacant Financial Services Manager position to a Deputy Finance Director in the Administrative Services Department and Establish the Job Classification and Salary Schedule for the Position.

PROPOSED ACTION: Adopt a resolution to reclassify the vacant Financial Services Manager position to a Deputy Finance Director classification within the Administrative Services Department and adopt the Deputy Finance Director job classification and salary schedule.

9. Authorization for City Manager to sign a letter to the San Mateo County Aging and Adult services indicating intent to respond to their Request for Proposals (RFPs) for Senior Services programs for 2022-2026.

PROPOSED ACTION: Move to authorize the City Manager to sign a letter to the San Mateo County Aging and Adult Services Department indicating our intent to respond to their Request for Proposals (RFPs) for Senior Services Transportation, Congregate Nutrition and Home Delivered Meals/Supplemental Home Delivered Meals (non-seniors)

2.a
Packet Pg. 27
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of April 11, 2022 City Council Meeting (4965 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 10 April 11, 2022
programs for fiscal periods 2022-2026. Move to authorize City staff to subsequently prepare and submit the proposal to San Mateo County Aging and Adult Services Department and authorize the City Manger to sign associate contractual agreements and amendments.

10. Project Study Report-Project Development Support (PSR-PDS) and the Project Approval and Environmental Document (PA&ED) for the Highway 1 / Manor Drive Overcrossing Improvement Project.

PROPOSED ACTION: Move to approve a Master Agreement for Consultant Services and Task Order No. 1 with AECOM of San Jose, California (Attachment 1) in an amount not to exceed $2,797,892.00 for the preparation of a Project Study Report-Project Development Support (PSR-PDS) and the Project Approval and Environmental Document (PA&ED) for the Highway 1 / Manor Drive Overcrossing Improvement Project; authorize budget authority in the amount of $2,937,892.00, which includes a 5% contingency amount of $140,000; and authorize the City Manager to execute all project related documents.

11. FY 2021-22 Pacifica Beach Parking Lots Seal Coat Project PROPOSED ACTION: Approve the following actions for the FY 2021-22 Pacifica Beach Parking Lots Seal Coat Project:

A. Authorize the City Manager to award and execute a Construction Services Agreement with DRYCO Construction Inc. (Attachment 1) in an amount not to exceed $174,245.90 and authorize a budget authority for construction in the amount of $200,000, which includes contingencies in an amount not to exceed twelve percent (12%) of the Construction Services Agreement amount; and
B. Authorize staff to execute future Change Orders not to exceed the contingency amounts.

12. Pacifica Pier Repairs – Coastal Conservancy Required Resolution PROPOSED ACTION: Adopt Resolution approving the application of specified State of California grant funds in the amount of $260,000 for the Pacifica Municipal Pier Repair.

13. Introduction of an Ordinance Amending Section 4-7.1901, “Removal or towing of vehicles” of Article 19 within Chapter 7, “Traffic” of Title 4 of the Pacifica Municipal Code Related to the Removal of Vehicles Illegally Parked on City Streets in Spaces Designated for Preferential Parking (Status: CEQA Exempt)
PROPOSED ACTION: Move to Introduce by Title Only and Waive further reading of “An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Pacifica Amending Section 4-7.1901, “Removal or towing of vehicles” of Article 19 within Chapter 7, “Traffic” of Title 4 of the Pacifica Municipal Code Related to the Removal of Vehicles Illegally Parked on City Streets in Spaces Designated for Preferential Parking and finding the ordinance exempt under the California Environmental Quality Act.

14. Adoption of an Ordinance to approve Rezoning RZ-201-18 and Development Plan DP-79- 18 to rezone from the R-1/B-4/HPD zoning district to the P-D/HPD zoning district and to authorize a single-family residential use, filed by Matthew and Margaret Murphy, at the eastern terminus of Talbot Avenue (APN 016-270-110) in Pacifica (File No. 2018-057).

Recommended California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) status: Class 3 Categorical Exemption, CEQA Guidelines Section 15303.

2.a
Packet Pg. 28
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of April 11, 2022 City Council Meeting (4965 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 11 April 11, 2022
PROPOSED ACTION: Move to adopt an Ordinance entitled “An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Pacifica approving Rezoning RZ-201-18 and Development Plan DP-79-18 to establish a Planned Development (P-D) zoning district with development plan at TBD Talbot Avenue (APN 016-270-110).”

ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
Therese Dyer, Pacifica, stated that she left some information with the mayor and she is aware of this ADA coordinator that they need. She stated that Tina Wehrmeister represented them before, but she understands she is gone and the one that City Manager Woodhouse appoints needs to meet certain requirements that she pointed out, and then read one section regarding requirements, and asked who they are going to appoint. She complimented Council for working together, except mentioned a concern about Councilmember O’Neill mentioning two struggling restaurants.

Mayor Bier asked her to make her comments general.

Ms. Dyer stated that it is permissible, referring to the City Attorney’s booklet allowing her to address any individual of Council and she felt she could address that he was out of line when he referred to those two restaurants.

Mayor Bier stated she was out of time.

Ms. Dyer stated she had the booklet that stated she was within her right to state that.

Christine Boles, Pacifica, stated that she was disappointed that none of her questions got answered and some affect the contract and scope of work and public safety. She hoped staff will get back to her. She then read news about a nearby fire the previous day, then mentioned that Anna Eshoo said federal funds were coming available for wildfire and she wanted us to be in line to get some of that and mentioned concerns regarding that issue.

Bob Hutchinson, Pacifica, referred to Ms. Dyer’s comments, and the booklet by the City Attorney on the Brown Act which specifically refers to 1st Amendment rights and expressed his concerns on this issue.

Mgmt. Analyst Montemayor introduced the call-in speakers.

Suzanne Moore, Pacifica, stated she attended the Oddstad Workforce Housing presentation and listened to many neighbors, some in support and others not, and expressed her thoughts, concerns and suggestions for solutions.

Remi Tan, Pacifica, commented on the General Plan and concerns about reflecting RHNA numbers, then addressed his concerns about a retaining wall in the Manor beach area that appears about to fall, presenting a hazard.

Cheryl Dickinson, Pacifica, stated she was calling about fire dangers, and seconded everything Ms. Boles said on that subject and expressed her specific concerns, addressed her concerns about the illegal fireworks, and also expressed her concerns about the dangers to pedestrians from bikers and her wish for the city to expand Linda Mar’s bike lane.

2.a
Packet Pg. 29
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of April 11, 2022 City Council Meeting (4965 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 12 April 11, 2022
Mayor Bier addressed City Attorney Kenyon, as it was mentioned in their agenda for speakers to address the Council as a whole, and she wanted to confirm she was doing the right thing.

City Attorney Kenyon understood and thought the statements she was making in her preliminary comments are fine to make. She stated that the point is that they are not cutting off public comments, but the mayor can direct the community as to how she would like them to be addressed, i.e., not personal attacks.

COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS
Councilmember O’Neill stated that he wanted to address the caller in regard to the fire and the comments from the podium. He stated that he didn’t have the particulars in front of him about a free disposal chipper program, but if you clean out the brush in front of your house, he thought it was an unlimited amount if you put it out there and the city has a truck through a grant program from the federal government to clear out the brush from your house. It is ongoing but will be possibly ending in May. He stated that he has received flyers about the program and it is posted on NextDoor as well. So citizens can put the brush, etc., on the street and the truck will come by and clean it up. He knows it is in the south end of town but he assumes it is in the north end as well. He asked confirmation from the City Manager.

City Manager Woodhouse clarified that it was only some designated areas of the city and are continuing the program with the remaining grant funds they received last year and they have applied for a new batch of grant funds for this year to continue the program. He stated that the current program details are available on North County Fire Authority website and the continuation of the program if they get the grant funds. They will push information out through Connect with Pacifica.

Councilmember O’Neill thought they should put a reminder in there for Connect with Pacifica.

Councilmember Vaterlaus stated that they miss Tina Wehrmeister but they are happy to have the staff they have as they love them too. She stated that she went to two going away parties for Tina Wehrmeister. She attended a meeting on the business license tax and they are working on that. She had four in-person constituent meetings, stating that it was nice to meet people in person as it makes a huge difference instead of on the phone. She attended the Diane Papan event, Kevin Mullin event and Anna Eshoo with Jerry Hill event, and all of them were productive.

She felt it was good to meet with different people. She got to talk to Senator Josh Becker about what we are working on as far as getting the units we converted to all affordable into our RHNA numbers, and he is working on a bill for that. She attended the Recovery Coordination Committee Council, which is only every month now but they did want to tell everyone that San Mateo and San Francisco now are the highest counties as far as Covid and in Washington, D.C., an entire group of 58 people got Covid. She stated that Congresswoman Jackie Speier asked everyone to wear a mask when they could. She thought it was important. She attended the PCT opening.

She stated that it was a busy week.

Councilmember Beckmeyer stated that her week wasn’t as busy. She attended one farewell event for Tina Wehrmeister to wish her well. She was pleased with our current planning staff and how much work and effort they put in for us. She attended the Create and Connect Fair on Palmetto Avenue on April 2. She stated that it was so much fun with beautiful weather. She heard so many positive comments as she was walking around and it was energizing and great to hear people discovering new places or visiting businesses they hadn’t set foot in since the pandemic or didn’t know they were open. She thanked Josh for all his help getting that off the

2.a
Packet Pg. 30
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of April 11, 2022 City Council Meeting (4965 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 13 April 11, 2022
ground. She knows it was a bit of a rush and thanks to Josh Kizler and Kelly from the Royal Bee for all the work they did to put that together, as well as Aaron at Cotton Crustacean. She stated there wasn’t anything new to report from the Beautification Advisory Committee, just that there is going to be an effort to nominate businesses and individuals who have a beautiful curb appeal or their yard is beautiful and they want to acknowledge someone. She stated that there is information on the city’s website and there will be rolling applications quarterly. She stated that if they know of someone, they can contact her and she will get them the information or check the city’s website. She attended the Kevin Mullin and Anna Eshoo event, and got to see Jerry Hill.

She attended the Rotary Day of Service at Coyote Point which turned out to be so informative and helpful for her on the Resource Management and Climate Protection committee because office of sustainability was there, etc. She stated her last visit was to the PCT open house and it was a terrific event. She stated that she has worked with them and bring students there from Cabrillo School and when she was taken on the tour, she was astounded by what she saw. She stated it would behoove everyone to learn more about PCT.

Mayor pro Tem Bigstyck reminded everyone about the war in Ukraine and his heart is going out to them, and he feels it is important to keep that in perspective. He didn’t have as many meetings over the last two weeks which was helpful because they had a major corporate walk through at Safeway where he works and it was good to be able to focus his energy on that. He then stated that he has been talking about how their contract negotiations are going and he was happy to report that it looks like Safeway has decided to offer them substantial raise including health care and he is awaiting the official packet to get into the details of what it means, but it looks like they have averted a strike. He stated that a few weeks ago, he had a charming lunch with Linda Mason in San Bruno. He has mentioned various businesses in the past to help support local businesses in Pacifica, but while he was in town, she was excited to show him some of her businesses, one being Pinot’s Palette where you do some painting and drink a little wine and have a good time.

He stated that there was an establishment called Atlas which was a pizza parlor and they had the room to place a venue for music in the back and they are going to get up and running. He stated that there was another establishment that had outdoor dining. He stated that all that was to say that he wants us to continue spending dollars in Pacifica and supporting our local business, but it was impressive to see what San Bruno is doing with their businesses and gave him some good things to bring back to Pacifica to see what we might be able to do here. He attended Tina Wehrmeister’s goodbye party with fellow councilmembers and staff. He stated she is missed.

He stated that a young man reached out to him about deepening his understanding about our traffic problems in Pacifica and it was nice to meet with someone who is a student who wanted to learn more about the community and get more involved. He spent the weekend hanging out with Councilmember Vaterlaus at these events and was his good fortune as every time he thinks he has become grateful to know her, he learns more about her and become even more grateful. He stated that the first event was for Diane Papan where Senator Josh Becker was present and Lt.

Governor Eleni Kounalakis was present and she had a historic moment where she was the first woman to sign state law into law because our current governor as Governor Newsom was on vacation and she was the acting governor. She had the honor of meeting her for that event as well as Kevin Mullin’s event where Jackie Speier spoke. He stated that the next day they got to hang out with Anna Eshoo in front of Mazzetti’s where Jerry Hill came for a visit. He stated that it was always good to see him and a Councilmember from Menlo Park, Ray Mueller, showed up.

He stated that he was friends with Josh Becker’s staffer and she invited him to an event where there were representatives of a union and also a bunch of people into affordable housing and he had the opportunity to meet some people and converse in an informal setting about what affordable housing means to them and what housing issues we are having means to them with the reality of solutions we can find within the context of being in a county that is 56% open space and finding solutions so people can live here and serve in places like Safeway. He stated that

2.a
Packet Pg. 31
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of April 11, 2022 City Council Meeting (4965 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 14 April 11, 2022
the open house at PCT where he and fellow councilmembers got to play a game on live television which was fun. He stated it was to bring awareness to the fact that PCT is in danger of losing their house and we are lucky to have the longest running public television station in the country here in an amazing facility, and they do have a go fund me to hopefully save their house. He stated that the current owner is offering them something of a deal, but that deal is like $750,000 and they need to raise that money by tomorrow and if anyone is interested in visiting that go fund me so we don’t have to worry about broadcasting and being transparent and it would be an asset to our community. He stated that he met with the Police Chief and he has never seen the inside of the police station and he got a better understanding of how our system works in Pacifica and he will be able to talk about that later. He stated that, in the coming weeks, he will have proper meetings but one of the meetings he doesn’t normally have is the virtual conference on April 19 and 20 called protecting your city from wildfire. He stated that it was brought up at this meeting about how deeply concerned we are about wildfire and he gets to experience it every day at his job as his customers mention how wonderful weather we are having and he responds that it is pleasant and that brings concern into his mind. He stated that the opportunity of hobnobbing with local politicians provides opportunities such as deepening relationships with California lawmakers such as Mr. Becker and Mr. Mullin and he has discussed with them and will continue to discuss that it is a concern that can possibly be addressed in part by raising or civil fines from $1000 to something greater than that, to which they both responded to him, that, not only would it be a great idea to raise the civil fines, but they need to look at those who are bringing the illegal fireworks over state lines and not merely slapping them on the wrist. He stated that, as helpful as it might be to find those in our community who are bad actors, it would be a good idea to make it painful for those who provide the opportunity for our community to act as bad actors. He was reminded to follow up with a representative of mid-coast council with whom he has been discussing our mutual fire concerns and maybe finding mutual opportunities to support one another in finding funding. He was looking forward to that virtual conference for two days to deepen his understanding of how to address wildfire.

Mayor Bier stated that she would like to adjourn the meeting in honor of Dr. Mark Acero who was a lifetime Pacifican and chiropractor in town, a musician and friend to everyone and it was a big loss for our community, and she hoped it was okay with fellow councilmembers to adjourn in his honor. She stated that May is Mental Health Awareness Month and they are getting geared up for it, and they will talk about the mayor’s mental health initiative. She mentioned it at the Pacifica Collaborative on Thursday and they had so many people contact her afterwards with activities, etc., that will be going on in our community and she was excited about that. She stated that she wanted to apologize publicly that she missed her turn with the collaborative. She stated that they will be having a Mental Health First Aid training on May 14, and she thanked PB&R Director Perez for coordinating the effort. She stated that they were able to get money to get the trainings brought for free and that was a wonderful addition to what will be happening in May. She stated that there will be a be sensitive, be brave suicide prevention presentation at the library which is two hours long. She didn’t have the date yet, but encouraged the public to look for information about it and she will make sure to get everything out through Connect to Pacifica. She stated that she will be meeting with Cindy Abbott to talk about activities they can do at the Sanchez Art Center. She stated that some Oceana students will be presenting their brilliance and resilience workshop at IBL. She stated that they will be lighting the buildings in green for mental health awareness month, and she was excited about that. She stated that all the mayors in the planning teams are going to be doing press conferences and they will also be participating in a panel at the progress seminar that all of our elected officials attend every year, and she was excited to be on a panel at the progress seminar. She also had the honor to stand with Seton staff who were striking for a contract that need to sign really bad, and she was able to join many of our local elected who are out there supporting our staff at Seton. That hospital serves so many people in Pacifica, as well

2.a
Packet Pg. 32
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of April 11, 2022 City Council Meeting (4965 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 15 April 11, 2022
as north county and we need those workers to be treated well. She listened to the congressional candidate climate forum and it was interesting. She knows there were some people from Pacifica on the line. She stated that we are going to have a Pacifica Pride Day on June 4, and was excited about that. They are working with Katie from Table Wine, and she thanked her for coming to us and wanting to organize all of this which is cool and they are also working with Coast Pride on that event as there is going to be Pacifica HotRods as they are just getting all their ducks in a row and they are hoping they will be doing a car parade with a small walking parade down Palmetto and there will be businesses participating and she felt it was exciting that they get to do something about love. She got to chat with Anna Eshoo and the PCT Open House, adding that we need PCT and she thought we have to be talking about that out in our communities. She stated that, when touring the station, she was reminded of all the things that her students have been able to do there, they created digital stories in their media lab and have done podcasts in their podcast booth and memories that go back as far as I can remember. She stated that going back to channel 8 when she was growing up and it was an important part of our community and let us support that.

Mayor pro Tem Bigstyck stated that just remembered that he meant to ask a question for the City Manager to address in his notes. He asked, regarding the ADA coordinator, if he could mention who is stepping up into that position, he would appreciate it.

STAFF COMMUNICATIONS
City Manager Woodhouse stated that he has a couple of brief comments, and starting with the ADA coordinator, upon Asst. City Manager/Planning Director Wehrmeister departure, he designated Acting Planning Director Murdock as the city’s ADA coordinator. He then pointed out a few upcoming events, and they will hear a bit more about the framework for the concept of celebrating employees and a lot of recruitments they have going on in the public sector are challenging currently, and they are working on those challenges. He also stated that, as they are coming out of Covid, they have at the beginning of May a return to our employee recognition and service awards event, which is a great event in recognizing the years of service of many employees all the way up to some beyond 30 years of service. He stated that May is National Public Works Recreation Week and a couple years pre-Covid we did this with Public Works having an open house at the corporation yard on Milagra during the day and that is challenging for people to attend, but they are working to get some schools to come by and see the equipment with lots of exciting things at the Public Works corporation yard. He then mentioned that, on the economic development front, May 13-21 is the Peninsula Restaurant week being promoted widely on the peninsula and last week they sent an email directly to all Pacifica restaurants as it is free to sign up to receive promotion and hopefully during that week lots of people will visit their local favorite best restaurants and they will continue to push that information out up until that time.

Mayor Bier called a five-minute break then reconvened the meeting.

PUBLIC HEARINGS - NONE.

CONSIDERATION

15. Introduction of an Ordinance Adding Chapter 19, “Acquisition and Use of Military Equipment” of Title 4 “Public Safety” of the Pacifica Municipal Code PROPOSED ACTION: Move to Waive the First Reading of and Introduce by Title an Ordinance of the City Council of the City Of Pacifica Adding Chapter 19, “Acquisition and Use of Military Equipment” of Title 4 “Public Safety” of the Pacifica Municipal

2.a
Packet Pg. 33
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of April 11, 2022 City Council Meeting (4965 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 16 April 11, 2022
Code, Approving the Pacifica Police Department Military Equipment Policy; and finding the introduction of the Ordinance exempt under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).

Police Chief Steidle presented the staff report.

Mayor Bier opened public comments.

Gloria Stofan, Pacifica, expressed her concern of Pacifica’s approval of compliance with AB481 for acquisition and use of military equipment, referred to a past bad story in Pacifica regarding a military tank and the death of a citizen, Errol Chang, and suggested postponing this item until they have public input.

Christine Boles, Pacifica, thanked the Police Chief for his presentation, and asked an explanation of the process and expressed her concerns and suggestion to give more time to discuss it further, and shared her concern for racism in Pacifica with a story.

Carolyn Jaramillo, Pacifica, expressed her concerns regarding compliance with AB481 and urged Council to take their time and hold a community engagement meeting to address citizen’s concerns.

Mgmt. Analyst Montemayor introduced call-ins.

John Lindsey Coland, Pacifica, stated that he worked with a committee that worked on developing this legislation and he expressed his thoughts on the perceptions of this subject by many people, questioned how the police plan to use the equipment, and suggested Council get more clarification.

Suzanne Moore, Pacifica, stated she asked Council to decline approving this policy for further community discussion and input. She agreed with Ms. Jaramillo that there has been little outreach on this item at this time, sharing some of her thoughts on this subject.

Clara Davis, Pacific, echoed the sentiments of previous speakers and urged Council to not make a decision on this policy at this time as there is a lot to discuss and a lot of input they can get from the community, and she shared her thinking on the use of military equipment.

Julie Starobin, Pacifica, stated that she was against approving the proposed policy regarding military weapons, expressing her thoughts on the subject.

Dan Evenhouse, Pacifica, stated he has concerns about the proposal for what he considers militarization of police in Pacifica, mentioning his concerns and various experiences with the police and suggested that Council take more time and get more input.

Deeg Gold, Pacifica, encouraged Council to delay voting on the proposed ordinance on the military equipment and expressed her thoughts on the subject and suggestions for getting more public input.

George Carpenter, Pacifica, stated he found this upsetting, and he urged Council to not approve the ordinance and hold a well-publicized study session for more community input, and expressed his thoughts against military equipment and suggested other alternatives to invest in, such as a

2.a
Packet Pg. 34
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of April 11, 2022 City Council Meeting (4965 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 17 April 11, 2022
crisis intervention team, etc.

Mayor Bier closed public comments.

Councilmember Beckmeyer let everyone know that she had a conversation with Chief Steidle about this topic prior to the meeting, so she didn’t have any questions but she wanted to clarify a couple of points. She referred to their packet where they find the list of types of equipment that are to be evaluated against what our department has. She asked Chief Steidle if she is correct in saying they have four of those.

Chief Steidle stated that technically they have three and he was offering them as transparency of the 4th.

Councilmember Beckmeyer asked if he put the trailer on there.

Chief Steidle stated that the trailer is military equipment according to the code, but the patrol rifles are not considered military equipment, but in the essence of transparency they thought it was important include them.

Councilmember Beckmeyer assumed it was because the community was very concerned about this.

Chief Steidle agreed.

Councilmember Beckmeyer referred to the draft of the policy, stating that on page 228, under Section 705.5, it was important for everyone to realize that there are some constraints put on the Chief and police department around obtaining anything from that list of 16 items and seeking funds to obtain them, collaborating with law enforcement agency that has such equipment and all the items must be brought forward to Council prior to use or expansion of any kind of items. She stated that we know we technically have three, and four for full disclosure, and she referred to Packet page 229, Section 705.8, community engagement, and it was referring to an annual report and she wanted to ask if this was a new annual report or would it be combined with the annual report they already provide to Council. She asked how he envisions this working.

Chief Steidle stated that he wasn’t sure how it would be constructed, but if it were on the same day, it would be a separate agenda item and he would say that it would be a completely separate item from the annual report.

Councilmember Beckmeyer stated that it could be on the same day or not as it was not necessarily part of it.

Chief Steidle agreed, and as he read it, it would be its own item.

Councilmember Beckmeyer stated that it was new per this policy and that is an additional level of reporting to the community.

Chief Steidle agreed.

Mayor pro Tem Bigstyck admitted frustration as he has studied this to his satisfaction as well as talking to the Chief Steidle and he asked to see the mobile command center, as it is referred to.

Before addressing his perception, he stated that the second time he ever walked through the

2.a
Packet Pg. 35
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of April 11, 2022 City Council Meeting (4965 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 18 April 11, 2022
doors was after the shooting of Erroll Chang and it brings up a lot of emotion when his name is brought up and he mentioned the death of Michael Brown in Missouri, and he was having lunch at La Playa around the corner where the standoff was happening and with what was going in Ferguson after he was killed, he was livid that anything like that could happen in his community, and that was what brought him through those doors. He stated that when he got through the doors and noticed the officers present in the room, he wasn’t watching the evening news and was in the presence of human beings whom he felt inclined to start with the premise that they are trying to protect and serve our community even though some of the officers were involved in the proceedings that led to the death. He stated that he voiced that as he started off in this room with this deeply emotional discussion going on, he wants to navigate some of what he is hearing from the community that he doesn’t necessarily agree with because of the passion that brought him in here to begin with. He stated that he was discussing this with John Nibbelin whom they were honoring who has a great deal of military service and as they were discussing this issue and Mr.

Nibbelin’s response was asking what military equipment. He asked Chief Steidle if the items he noted as military equipment were actually used by the military.

Chief Steidle stated that the items he listed are some variation of patrol rifles are used, but they are different.

Mayor pro Tem Bigstyck asked if they were patrol rifles like the ones he didn’t need to put in this report.

Chief Steidle responded affirmatively.

Mayor pro Tem Bigstyck asked if he put that in this report for the sake of transparency as he thought he said that his officers didn’t feel comfortable leaving it out and he didn’t feel comfortable leaving it out.

Chief Steidle stated that he is correct. The command staff were discussing authoring the staff report and with coordination in writing this ordinance, it didn’t sit right with them if they were asking the community to trust them, they would be required to put something that looks like a paint ball gun into the policy, but although they didn’t have to include it leave out something that the average community member who looks at it is probably the most intimidating piece of equipment in a patrol vehicle, explaining that was the reason they put it in there.

Mayor pro Tem Bigstyck stated that he wanted to be clear. As he is hearing it and trying to reconcile this within himself, he is not a gun person and he didn’t know much about them, but the one thing that could be construed as military equipment is the one thing they didn’t need to put in the report, and it is frustrating him because he feels like, through no fault of any commentators or anyone involved in this process, except for potentially someone who had a hand in writing the law, he stated that this could be confusing and he thought it strikes him as misleading, i.e., the term military equipment. He stated that, when he thinks of chemical equipment, he thinks serin gas. He stated that, by this standard, he has given away chemical weapons to many young women because he thought they should have pepper spray in their purse to defend themselves.

He stated that he wasn’t suggesting that this is as benign as a pepper spray as he has been hit by a paintball gun and it hurts. He thought, if he ever had the exposure, it would be worse than a paintball gun and worse than pepper spray. He apologized as he was venting his frustration as he is trying to reconcile what he is hearing from the community with his frustration of the characterization. He was trying to understand where this law is coming from. What he was hearing from the community, which is also frustrating him, is that the community is expressing a desire to be heard, expressing their frustration about how they are perceiving law enforcement,

2.a
Packet Pg. 36
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of April 11, 2022 City Council Meeting (4965 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 19 April 11, 2022
clarifying that he is saying perceiving as he is not in their shoes and he doesn’t know what is and what isn’t, but he is hearing what they are trying to figure out what they want policing to be in their community. He stated that it was outside the scope of what they are discussing at this time, but he was invited the chief to help figure out creative ways to bring the community in further so they can get closer to something like the same page. He stated that after the death of Errol, and it was the community’s good fortune that they had Mary Ann Nihart as their mayor in that moment.

She was a nurse in the psychological profession and she did everything in her power to not just bring heightened mental health training to our community which he understood has saved lives but also the greater San Mateo County. He stated that the death meant that everyone in the area got training to save lives. He was not suggesting it should have happened or that we are out of the woods. He asked if we already own all this equipment.

Chief Steidle stated that there isn’t a piece of equipment on there that they haven’t owned, except for the command post, the first three were for two decades or longer.

Mayor pro Tem Bigstyck asked that, for two decades that are longer, they have been used what is being characterized by this legislation as military equipment.

Chief Steidle responded affirmatively.

Mayor pro Tem Bigstyck stated that, specifically, he wants to see the command post earlier which is why he went to meet the Chief. He heard command posts, and he thought it was a military thing and somehow it will be covered in black with little symbolism and it is this big white trailer that you would see hitched to any truck that says police clear as day over it. He was not brought up to find the concept of police as friendly. As much as equipment can be construed as friendly, this supposedly military grade command center, according to this legislation, was something he found to be friendly. He asked Chief Steidle what that mobile command center is used for.

Chief Steidle stated that initially, it was purchased on a grant from the California Office of Traffic Safety and was designed as a DUI check point command center. However, we were able, under the grant, as long as they can use it as a DUI check point command center, also use it for other purposes. He stated it is usually used for a major crime scene or a major traffic collision where they are going to have staff deployed for an extended period of time, such as 6, 7, 8 hours or longer. It allows them to operate their own dispatch center and they have access to computers in there and everything they would need to function in the field at a major scene and also provide shelter and warmth for some colder evenings when they have these incidents.

Mayor pro Tem Bigstyck stated that this wasn’t the tank that got rolled down to San Pedro Point, but a big white box. He didn’t hear him begging for armored vehicles or drones, but to the contrary, he was saying that, on occasion, they need to borrow assistance from outside where they have drones. He stated that the other thing he heard him say was that ultimately when people bring in their equipment from outside because something is happening so bad that we need to bring people and equipment from outside, he has the final say.

Chief Steidle agreed that they have a final say and, if there is an incident going on and a tactical team is involved with what is defined as military equipment that they do not possess and decisions are being made, an outside agency is not making those decisions. They may make recommendations and talk to us about what their capabilities are and what their intentions are, but the final decision rests with him and the accountability for that decision rests with him. He stated that the policy he is referring to that he is bringing in, it is true that they are required to operate within their own military equipment policy. They cannot bring something into our

2.a
Packet Pg. 37
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of April 11, 2022 City Council Meeting (4965 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 20 April 11, 2022
community that they are not approved by their governing body to have, and they haven’t been property trained in. They have to adhere to what their standards are that governs the use of that equipment and we know that equipment being brought in has already been vetted and they have already been properly trained in it.

Mayor pro Tem Bigstyck stated that he is about to shut down his meandering.

Mayor Bier asked if that has changed fromin the past.

Chief Steidle stated that it has not changed.

Mayor Bier concluded that it has always been the case that it is our final call. She was wondering what has changed since the death of Errol Chang.

Chief Steidle asked if in terms of the final call or what is she talking about.

Mayor Bier thought just the kind to let the community know that things have changed since then.

Chief Steidle stated that what has changed since then is, in a large part, not just in Pacifica but around the county, state and country as the way we are approaching these incidents , that was an incident where an officer had been assaulted with a deadly weapon and they knew there was a weapon or a rifle in the house. He stated that, what has changed since then, as one caller mentioned, our incident coupled with an incident that occurred in Half Moon Bay is our approach in both Sheriff’s office and Pacifica PD were founding members of the San Mateo County mental health collaborative, because that they found in the incidents, especially our incidents that we are talking about with Errol Chang is that we had zero resources, zero ability to get any information we needed to get advice on what we can do and we asked ourselves two things; 1) when we had that crisis situation, since then in his time of chief for seven years, they have done this numerous occasions, most recently with a stabbing suspect where we are on the phone with the clinician saying this is what we have, what does it look like to them or if they know a diagnosis, can they tell them about it, and what are they going to do to resolve this and how can they get compliance and what do they need to avoid doing to prevent escalating the situation. He stated that is what they have done and one of the callers mentioned that around the country the focus is beyond deescalation and that is true. He stated that he will reiterate that the Pacifica Police Department was one of the leading agencies in this county and continues to operate at the forefront of that.

Mayor pro Tem Bigstyck reiterated that it was Errol’s life that brought him through that door to begin with. He stated it is hard for him because he what he learned after walking through that door was there is a remarkable line between protecting people who would protect us in making sure that lives such as Errol’s are never again lost. He stated that there is a lot of emotion that comes with that. When he hears the Chief say that he has the final say, he goes back to that [incident] and he was not the one in charge in that moment. Mayor pro Tem Bigstyck was thankful that he wasn’t in charge in that moment and somebody was and he didn’t know what they get to go through as a result of making that decision and whether or not they have come to the conclusion that they made the right one. He does know that, after that decision was made by someone who was not him, services got put into place. The way they approached it changed.

He stated that, what hasn’t changed is the equipment they use. He stated that we are signing off on what California says they have to in order to say that exactly what they have been doing is what they are going to continue to do. What is different from that moment up until now is the change of culture that has absolutely led to lives being saved. He stated, if that culture is continuing to change, not only will more lives be saved, but hopefully these so-called military

2.a
Packet Pg. 38
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of April 11, 2022 City Council Meeting (4965 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 21 April 11, 2022
grade equipments will no longer need to be as frequently used. He thought they need to change the culture more than the apparatus, until we are in a culture where it is truly safe, both for those who are serving us and those who need to be treated better.

Councilmember Vaterlaus stated that basically this is an inventory of what we already have and it doesn’t list when these items should be used or when they should not be used. She asked if she is correct.

Chief Steidle stated that it is an inventory and gives a brief description as the discussed earlier, in the policy regarding the purpose and the use and again they are writing a policy and they are talking about use of military equipment as defined under legislation or any type of equipment in law enforcement. He stated that they can sit there all night and talk about all the potential uses, but they will never get as no two situations are the same. He stated that it is a very broad explanation of the use so the community and Council knows how the department intends to use it and what they use it for.

Councilmember Vaterlaus added the training that is required to use it.

Chief Steidle stated that the training and oversight, policy, and complaint processes.

Councilmember Vaterlaus stated that they have a mental health… that Councilmember O’Neill started.

Councilmember O’Neill stated that he pulled it up because he wanted to be sure of the name - it is the Special Needs Registry.

Councilmember Vaterlaus agreed it was the Special Needs Registry, which people in the community can voluntarily put members they know that have special needs onto a list so the police have the ability to know what they are facing when they go into a situation which was not present in the past.

Chief Steidle stated that, along those lines, there are preemptive steps. He stated that they have had some discussion regarding our police department and how we would handle a crisis situation and how we have handled them in recent years. There is much focus with the collaborative and the relationships we are building within the mental health community and law enforcement that focuses on how we intervene and how we get to people who need the help before we ever reach that crisis situation. The pilot program with the 4 agencies in San Mateo County for the mental health professionals that are embedded within the department, a pilot program is already underway, they have already called upon the assistance of a South San Francisco person on two occasions and in Pacifica we are going to be signing shortly to a study where Stanford University will be conducting a study on the agencies that don’t have it in place with the idea of hopefully showing that we all have the need for it and how to best distribute those resources and increase those resources available to us in San Mateo County.

Mayor pro Tem Bigstyck reiterated that he has clearly heard that the community is longing to come together and discuss all this and what it means to them. He stated that they are having a meeting coming up about changes that have been made and how they are implementing them.

Chief Steidle stated, if he was talking about their annual report, that is coming up on April 25.

Mayor pro Tem Bigstyck stated that April 25 was a more appropriate time to have a more robust

2.a
Packet Pg. 39
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of April 11, 2022 City Council Meeting (4965 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 22 April 11, 2022
discussion about what policing means in its entirety. He stated that the nature of this policy is so frustrating and they are about to have that more robust conversation and he asks him to find ways to invite the community in to have conversations and have a better understanding of how all of this works for those who don’t go to the police station and see the mobile command trailer.

Mayor Bier thought, by all the calls they have gotten and everyone who was present talking about it, it was clear that our community doesn’t understand this and she thought that was an issue.

She asked how they can get more information to the community so they understand what this means. She stated that, from the information she gathered and from meeting with Chief Steidle, this does not further militarize our police department.

Chief Steidle stated that it was absolutely correct.

Mayor Bier stated that they are not adding weapons and you can’t add weapons unless they come to Council first.

Chief Steidle stated that she was correct.

Mayor Bier thought there was a disconnect between the fear and the words that are in the policy, and she wants to find a way to honor both of those things so that people understand. She referred to someone mentioning a first draft and that there were changes in the first draft.

Chief Steidle stated that there have been no changes. He stated that, what was released publicly was what was released on the website in the Council’s packet that they have and there have been no changes to that.

Mayor Bier didn’t know what her fellow councilmembers think but she asked if they notice the same thing she is noticing, i.e., she doesn’t want that to happen as she wants our community to understand and have the opportunity to learn. She stated that some of that has to do with talking to him, and maybe the community should be talking to him as she knows he is available for the community to speak with.

Chief Steidle stated that he thought they have discussed that.

Mayor Bier agreed that they have. She thought it was a good opportunity for that to happen, although she didn’t know how it can happen unless he does individual one on one, but she thought that was where it was, i.e., how he can exchange information with the community so everyone understands fully. She acknowledged that, if you see it on a piece of paper, it is scary. She felt the same way but after it was explained to her, she knows that they have to do it as it is a requirement. She would like our community to take the opportunity to reach out and meet directly with Chief Steidle, and he is meeting with other groups in our community now and sharing information and learning from each other. She thought there was an opportunity for other groups to do the same and she hopes that it happens.

Councilmember Beckmeyer stated she had one more thing to say. She heard loud and clearly from a number of community members who spoke tonight or called in and requested that they delay the adoption of this because there needs to be that community conversation which the mayor was speaking about, and she agrees that there needs to be a community conversation, she didn’t think it needs to be about this. She stated that this is nothing other than an inventory and a restatement of what we are already doing. She also didn’t know where to fit that in or what the right way is to do it, but she didn’t think they need to delay in approving this and moving on.

2.a
Packet Pg. 40
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of April 11, 2022 City Council Meeting (4965 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 23 April 11, 2022
She stated that it was not saying they disregard the need for a conversation in a community meeting but it could be initiated by community members. She just felt that, for this item, she was ready to make a motion.

Councilmember Beckmeyer moved to waive the First Reading of and introduce by Title an Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Pacifica Adding Chapter 19, “Acquisition and use of Military Equipment” of Title 4 “Public Safety” of the Pacifica Municipal Code, Approving the Pacifica Police Department Military Equipment Policy; and finding the introduction of the Ordinance exempt under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA); seconded by Mayor pro Tem Bigstyck.

City Clerk Coffey announced the vote.

Vote: 5-0
RESULT: ADOPTED [UNANIMOUS]
MOVER: Sue Beckmeyer, Councilmember
SECONDER: Tygarjas Bigstyck, Mayor Pro Tem
AYES: Bier, Bigstyck, O'Neill, Vaterlaus, Beckmeyer

16. City Council Goals and Priorities for FY2022-23
PROPOSED ACTION: Adopt City Council Goals and Priorities for FY2022-23.

City Manager Woodhouse presented the staff report.

Mayor Bier opened public comments.

Christine Boles, Pacifica, referred to items excluded in the previous goal setting presentation, and then she expressed her thoughts on the General Plan update process and other items.

Mayor Bier closed public comments.

Councilmember Beckmeyer stated that she would like to follow up about the General Plan and zoning, but first she asked councilmembers for consideration of two wording changes on goal 12 and goal 13. On goal 12, at the end of the paragraph in the second to last sentence, the scope of work for fiscal years 2022-23 will entail review of ways to streamline special event permitting procedures and she would propose that it be changed to, “… The scope of work for fiscal year 2022-23 will streamline special event permitting procedures, as well as identify other potential business assistance initiatives for further study and implementation…”, adding the word implementation at the end. On goal 13, toward the bottom of the item, third sentence from the bottom, which reads, “… and other committee commissions may be interested in such reviews as well,” and she would like to restructure the sentence to read, “… The Council may wish to review the charters of other committees and commissions as well.” Councilmember O’Neill stated he had no problem, followed with similar agreement from the others.

Councilmember Beckmeyer referred to General Plan and zoning, and she asked the City Manager to address the current work on the General Plan and thinking about the timing of its adoption and where it would fit in the goals for a work year that begins on July 1.

2.a
Packet Pg. 41
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of April 11, 2022 City Council Meeting (4965 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 24 April 11, 2022
City Manager Woodhouse stated that the recommended list of Council priorities for fiscal year 2022-23 doesn’t typically include those goals and priorities that are anticipated to be completed during this fiscal year and the work plan for the General Plan update and Sharp Park Specific Plan is looking at adoption by June. He added that there are always other priorities or unexpected circumstances that can happen with priorities and that work continues. They saw a list of nondiscretionary projects that includes a bunch of multi-year projects or things that were Council priorities in previous years that are still underway. They hope that is not the case with the General Plan update and the Sharp Park Specific Plan which are expected to be done in June. If not, they will continue into the new fiscal year to wrap them up.

Councilmember Beckmeyer asked if they would need to have Council amend the list or would it just automatically roll.

City Manager Woodhouse stated that it would automatically roll. He then asked if she also asked about the zoning.

Councilmember Beckmeyer stated that it was the zoning, as the housing was specifically listed on Item #10, but the zoning updates that flow from the General Plan.

City Manager Woodhouse stated that in terms of mapping out priorities that are limited, planning resources can focus on the Housing Element that takes priority immediately at the beginning of the fiscal year so they can get it done by January. He stated that the zoning ordinance amendments need to happen in the future and that is not identified here because there are lots of other planning priorities that need to occur, such as the Quarry Site Specific Plan, but that is a work they are looking at next spring and goal setting and zoning ordinance updates would most likely pop up at that time.

Councilmember O’Neill called for a time-check and asked if the long-term financial forecast would be done by 11:00 or do they need to extend the meeting.

City Manager Woodhouse stated that they have the forecast and they have the eight budget strategies recommended and he doesn’t know the answer to his question. He stated that their presentation won’t take long.

Councilmember O’Neill thought, if they extend to 11:30, they can make the motion now.

Councilmember Vaterlaus seconded his motion.

City Clerk Coffey announced the vote.

Vote: 5-0 (extend meeting to 11:30 pm)
Councilmember O’Neill stated for the public’s information, they have talked about this for many hours on Saturday and not to have a lot of comments is okay.

Councilmember Beckmeyer moved to adopt City Council Goals and Priorities for FY2022-23 as amended; seconded by Mayor pro Tem Bigstyck.

City Clerk Coffey announced the vote.

Vote: 5-0 (Item #16, as amended)

2.a
Packet Pg. 42
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of April 11, 2022 City Council Meeting (4965 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 25 April 11, 2022
RESULT: ADOPTED AS AMENDED [UNANIMOUS]
MOVER: Sue Beckmeyer, Councilmember
SECONDER: Tygarjas Bigstyck, Mayor Pro Tem
AYES: Bier, Bigstyck, O'Neill, Vaterlaus, Beckmeyer

17. Fiscal Year 2022-23 Budget Planning Process, Timeline, Long-Term Financial Forecast, and Narrative Budget Report
PROPOSED ACTION: Accept the report, consider and discuss budget strategies recommended by the City Manager and provide feedback and additional policy direction for the preparation of the FY 2022-23 Budget.

Chief Finan. Sustainability Officer Carter presented the staff report.

Councilmember O’Neill referred to her mention of service reduction, and assumed service reduction means less Fire, less Police, less Public Works, less Planning, less PB&R, etc.

Chief Finan. Sustainability Officer Carter stated he was correct that it was all the general services provided by the city in line with priorities of the Council. She then turned the presentation over to the City Manager for the budget strategies discussion.

City Manager Woodhouse continued the staff report.

Councilmember O’Neill wanted to be sure he was up to date, and asked if he was correct that the ERAF funding is something that only affects about four or five counties in the state while the VLF is something that affects all 58 counties.

City Manager Woodhouse stated that was correct but the VLF in lieu shortfall only affects those same counties that there is the returned ERAF.

Councilmember O’Neill understood that the 4 or 5 counties that now get ERAF are getting a double whammy on in lieu funding.

City Manager Woodhouse stated that he was correct.

Councilmember O’Neill asked if there has been any outreach to the other counties that are affected by ERAF.

City Manager Woodhouse stated there has, primarily San Mateo County has been communicating with Napa County and he forgets what all the four counties are, but he thought one is Mono County or a less populous county.

Councilmember O’Neill thought there was one in Placer.

City Manager Woodhouse thought they fell out of the picture because they now have no basic aid or no non-basic aid of schools because schools are changing.

Councilmember O’Neill knows there are only two or three school district that are no longer basic aid now.

City Manager Woodhouse stated that is part of the changing scene and the challenge regarding the returned ERAF as it is connected to the VLF in lieu fund.

2.a
Packet Pg. 43
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of April 11, 2022 City Council Meeting (4965 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 26 April 11, 2022
Councilmember O’Neill stated that you have a separate subset because we might have ERAF but they then have the discrepancy of Sequoia of $12,000 per student and Jefferson is around $9,000 per student so there is a whole subset below the ERAF and he asked if the partners city managers are working with are north or south county.

City Manager Woodhouse stated that all the cities are in the same position in San Mateo County, with a significant gap of funding for VLF in lieu and the state’s latest proposal was to use returned ERAF money to fund the VLF in lieu when the cities are due both legally.

Councilmember O’Neill was thinking in terms of building some sort of lobbying or coalition with other counties to lobby their legislatures because some county that isn’t affected by ERAF or VLF, and the richest county in this country don’t need it.

City Manager Woodhouse continued the staff report.

Councilmember O’Neill referred to the OPEB obligations, and asked if he was correct that they don’t have retired medical for their people.

City Manager Woodhouse agreed, not like some other cities have, but we do have some of those liabilities, stating that Ms. Carter might be able to speak more specifically to the amounts.

Chief Finan. Sustainability Officer Carter stated that, even though the plan is closed, the unfunded liabilities still remain on the books and if you don’t pre-fund then they essentially grow. She stated what the city has been doing in terms of OPEB, they have been paying the liabilities as they go rather than funding the actuarially-determined contribution (ADC) level. If they were to fund it at the ADC level, they would be able to reduce the liability but calculate a higher rate of return to this OPEB. She stated that would be one of the strategies that they can address as part of the budget, and they will see the results in the audit and they will see the liabilities still included use.

City Manager Woodhouse continued the staff report.

Chief Finan. Sustainability Officer Carter completed the staff report.

Councilmember Beckmeyer asked her what happened in 2029-30 to 2030-31 where the continually declining revenue or the gap suddenly gets better. She asked what was going on there, such as paying off something.

Chief Finan. Sustainability Officer Carter stated that they were paying off some of the debt service, as listed in the major assumptions in Attachment A.

Mayor pro Tem Bigstyck asked if she would mind putting the zero-based budgeting graph back for a moment. He stated that he didn’t have a question, but just wanted to see the graph and he will wait for public comment.

Mayor Bier opened public comments.

Christine Boles, Pacifica, stated that she had a few questions. She thought the Civic Center project was the only new debt service included and shared her thoughts on costs going up, and asked that they be careful. She then commented on the sewer rate increase process. She commented on future General Plan and affordable housing considerations, suggesting more

2.a
Packet Pg. 44
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of April 11, 2022 City Council Meeting (4965 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 27 April 11, 2022
outreach.

Mayor Bier closed public comments.

Mayor Bier liked the idea of connecting everything to the goal and is an effective way for her to read and understand it. She stated that when she looked at environmental sustainability and there was no specific budget strategy, she thought about what budget strategies are for environmental sustainability. She stated that she didn’t have to answer at this time, but it made her think about values and where they sit which is usually reflected in our budget. She wondered if there were any strategies out there to think about.

Mayor pro Tem Bigstyck liked the strategies being associated with the various goals. He stated that, as they look at the long term structural deficit, he didn’t expect an answer now, but when they again look at that $2.1 million deficit projected for the coming year, he was curious as to what those service level changes might mean and what those service reductions might be. He appreciated that it was a longer and deeper conversation and she might not be able to bring back exactly what it is going to be but he would like to see a menu of what the future will have to discuss in terms of those service reductions if that is where they wind up. He thought it was important for him to start trying to wrap his head around what that conversation will be to reduce services by $2.1 million if we don’t do anything about it soon.

Councilmember Vaterlaus liked the zero-based budgeting and thought it will work really well for Pacifica based on the zero-based budgeting.

Councilmember Beckmeyer asked how long they have been working on that, and was staff already working on the zero-based or modified zero-based process before she came to Pacifica.

City Manager Woodhouse stated that they launched into it last spring when Ms. Carter arrived and looked at establishing what their base budget is for existing services, stating that before it was a little bit more incremental. He digressed and referred to the fiscal sustainability point, Council knows they utilized one-time revenues each year to balance the budget, and they can say they are funding those one-time revenues but they are not as year after year we have those expenses that they often apply those one-time revenues to. He stated that Ms. Carter is really helping in our approach and making things very clear.

Chief Finan. Sustainability Officer Carter added that she would like to use the term modified zerobased budget because in the government environment is not practical to start from zero every year. She stated that they are starting from the current level services and the conversation about the budget will be about service level and they will translate the dollar figures into what it means to the service, whether we are adding positions or adding limited-term positions, what does it mean to the service, what does it do. She stated that if they are cutting services if they cannot meet the objectives because they don’t have the revenue base and what does that do to the service and how it translates to the service. Having this kind of conversation is the goal of this process and they are trying to tie it all together.

Councilmember O’Neill stated that he sent an email to the city manager saying that when they come back next time he wanted to know, when you say a $2 million budget cut, what does it equate to. He stated that, if they decide to go forward with a tax measure, this is their first opportunity to educate the community to say that we have specific amount of police officers, firefighters, etc., and this will be a cut in police, fire, etc. He referred to the standards by which other communities have their police, and asked if there is one policeman for every 6,000 residents,

2.a
Packet Pg. 45
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of April 11, 2022 City Council Meeting (4965 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 28 April 11, 2022
etc., and people can actually see and if they want to get detailed, we have an email from a lady saying that they not give raises and he referred to how underpaid our employees are already when they are facing a retention crisis. He thought this information needs to be shared with everyone, i.e., the rubber is hitting the road, and it is not a tax measure but your lifestyle in your community on the ballot. He stated that he believes in affordable housing and was a proponent for teacher housing, and he would like to see the corporation yard but then the state passes a bill that says there is no property taxes on any of the affordable housing and that immediately reduces your budget projections for property tax revenue down the road. He stated that they are making it a disincentive to do affordable housing. He would like to carry out what Mayor pro Tem Bigstyck said, but he would like to project it out as to what are the standards, such as one firefighter for every 10,000 residents or some standard.

Mayor Bier asked if they have any other directions for Ms. Carter.

Councilmember O’Neill referred to comments about environmental sustainability, and stated that there might not be anything there, but if they look at some of the other things in terms of tree canopy, tree maintenance program, that is environmental sustainability so some of the actual projections could actually be in more than one goal.

Mayor Bier thought that was a good point.

City Manager Woodhouse stated that was something that he and Ms. Carter talked about, and a lot of the environmental sustainability or climate action plans’ funding are built into the CIP, if they are talking about solar installations or EV installations, but not all are built into the CIP as, if you are talking about tree programs and canopy, that can translate to staffing resources necessary to fund those types of efforts. He stated that it is sort of built into the funding for the programs and projects more than an actual budget strategy, specifically a stand-alone budget strategy.

RESULT: NO VOTE REQUIRED

ADJOURN
Mayor Bier adjourned the meeting at 11:15 p.m. in memory of Dr. Mark Acero.

Transcribed by Barbara Medina, Public Meeting Stenographer.

Respectfully Submitted,
Sarah Coffey, City Clerk
__________________________
Mary Bier, Mayor

2.a
Packet Pg. 46
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of April 11, 2022 City Council Meeting (4965 : Approval of Minutes)

CITY OF PACIFICA

COUNCIL AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT
4/25/2022
1 SUBJECT:

Agreement with TPx for Managed Internet Services
RECOMMENDED ACTION:

Move to approve the Amendment to the Agreement for Managed SD-WAN Internet Services between the City of Pacifica and TPx Communications., to extend the term of the agreement by three years to September 10,2025, and to authorize compensation not to exceed $141,228 in Fiscal Year 2022-2023, 2023-2024, and through March 2025 in Fiscal Year 2024-2025, as reflected in the adopted City-wide budget, and to authorize the City Manager to execute the Amendment.

STAFF CONTACT:

Tommy Yu, Information Technology Manager
650-738-7394
[email protected]
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION:

In 2019, TPx Communications was awarded a 3-year contract to provide software-defined wide area network and managed Internet and security services for the City. The 3-year contract is coming to an end, and needs to be renewed. A separate agreement was approved by Council on 10/21/21 for TPx services for the Pacifica Community Center. This agreement is for the remainder of City facilities up for renewal in March 2022.

TPx Communications has managed the City's SD-WAN, Internet, and security services for the past 3 years. They have proven themselves capable and responsive to the City's needs. They provide extensive technical expertise to manage and support the SD-WAN network. The City Manager recommends approval of this amendment to renew for another 3-year term.

ALTERNATIVE ACTION:

Deny the renewal amendment. If the Council denies the requested authorization, the City will need to transition to an alternative provider to manage the SD-WAN network, or hire additional staff with SD-WAN expertise. Both of these alternatives would have the potential to disrupt ongoing network and security operations City-Wide.

RELATION TO CITY COUNCIL GOALS AND WORK PLAN:

Approval of the agreement is consistent with the following Council adopted Goals:
•Stewardship of City Infrastructure: Approving the Professional Services agreement ensures the City is meeting its commitment to improve existing City infrastructure by improving the reliability, security, and speed of network access for City staff in their day to day responsibilities.

FISCAL IMPACT:
3 Packet Pg. 47
Pacifica City Council 2
April 25, 2022
The TPx Communications 3-year agreement will cost $141,228, or $47,076 per year. The cost of internet services is already included in the FY 2021-2022 and will be carried over to the FY2022-23 Base Budget if approved tonight. No additional budget appropriation is necessary.

The future years’ cost of this contract will be included in the base budgets for FY 2022-23 and FY 2023-24.

ORIGINATED BY:

Information Technology
ATTACHMENT LIST:

Quote_ 466068 _ City of Pacifica - Dash (PDF)
First Amendment to Agreement with TPx (DOCX)
3 Packet Pg. 48
3/9/22, 3:59 PM Quote: 466068 / City of Pacifica - Dash https://dash.tpx.com/ribeye/service/file?id=1692885&deleteAfterServing=1&inline=1 1/8 Quote/Order ID: 466068
Service Agreement

CITY OF PACIFICA
TPx Communications will provide Customer with the specified type and amount of Services at the rates, and terms and conditions listed below and on the Rate Schedule(s) that follow, and Customer shall accept and pay for Services under the Terms and Conditions to which Customer agreed on the Telecommunications Account Agreement (TAA)/Master Service Agreement (MSA) and any related Addendums that follow that govern this Service Agreement, including any changes to Total Monthly Recurring Charges up to five percent (5%) and/or Total Non-Recurring Charges up to five percent (5%) for Services and Equipment specified on this Service Agreement. For any Access, MSx, and/or UCx Service listed below that is being added to Services currently provided to Customer at the below referenced Service Location, a new Service Term (as provided in the Term Length below) shall apply to any such Service.

Federal, State and Local Taxes and Other Charges will be applied in accordance with the definitions stated at www.tpx.com/rates.

The term for service(s) being ordered is 36 months. ("Term") Customer Requested Due Date: 2/28/2022
RS ID Title Address Non-Recurring Recurring
872397 1515 K ST, SACRAMENTO CA 1515 K St, Sacramento, CA 95814-4051 $0.00 $410.00 857784 155 MILAGRA DR, PACIFICA CA 155 Milagra Dr, Pacifica, CA 94044-2328 $0.00 $844.00 857787 700 COAST HWY, PACIFICA CA 700 Coast Hwy, Pacifica, CA 94044-3054 $0.00 $1,186.00 857783 1515 K ST STE 360, SACRAMENTO CA 1515 K St Ste 360, Sacramento, CA 95814-4040 $0.00 $820.00 857782 1100 LINDA MAR BLVD, PACIFICA CA 1100 Linda Mar Blvd, Pacifica, CA 94044 $0.00 $663.00 Totals $0.00 $3,923.00
Equipment Addendum - Single Payment Purchase, Rental and/or Customer Provided Equipment set for at www.tpx.com/EquipmentAddendum.pdf MSx Service Addendum set forth at www.tpx.com/MSx-Service.pdf `
Agreed by: Customer Signature Date
Customer Name (Print) Title
Sales Representative Name Phone
Agreed by: Authorized TPx Representative Signature Date v052920

3.a
Packet Pg. 49
Attachment: Quote_ 466068 _ City of Pacifica - Dash (4921 : TPX agreement extension for Managed Internet Services) 3/9/22, 3:59 PM Quote: 466068 / City of Pacifica - Dash https://dash.tpx.com/ribeye/service/file?id=1692885&deleteAfterServing=1&inline=1 2/8 Rate Schedule #872397 Quote ID: 466068
1515 K ST, SACRAMENTO CA 3/9/2022

CITY OF PACIFICA
Good through: 4/8/2022
Address: 1515 K St, Sacramento, CA 95814-4051
The term for Service(s) being ordered is 36 months ("Term").

MSx Datacenters (Install) Description Qty Each Usage Type NRC MRC TPx Internet 1 $0.00 - MSx - $0.00
MSx Datacenters
Bandwidth - 50M 1 $260.00 - xNet - $260.00
Public IPs - Block of 4 (1
usable) 1 $0.00 - MSx - $0.00
MSx Datacenters Service 1 $0.00 - xNet - $0.00
120V/20A 1 $0.00 - MSx - $0.00
1/3 Cabinet 1 $150.00 - xNet - $150.00
$0.00 $410.00

3.a
Packet Pg. 50
Attachment: Quote_ 466068 _ City of Pacifica - Dash (4921 : TPX agreement extension for Managed Internet Services) 3/9/22, 3:59 PM Quote: 466068 / City of Pacifica - Dash https://dash.tpx.com/ribeye/service/file?id=1692885&deleteAfterServing=1&inline=1 3/8 Rate Schedule #857784 Quote ID: 466068
155 MILAGRA DR, PACIFICA CA 3/9/2022

CITY OF PACIFICA
Good through: 4/8/2022
Address: 155 Milagra Dr, Pacifica, CA 94044-2328
The term for Service(s) being ordered is 36 months ("Term"). zz TPx HSIA - High Speed Internet Access zz / 2128954-DAT (Renewal as is) Description Qty Each Usage Type NRC MRC ADI 20 X 20 Mbps 1 $524.00 - xNet - $524.00
$0.00 $524.00
MSx WAN / 2129071-SDWAN (Renewal as is) Description Qty Each Usage Type NRC MRC CPC/ OTT 1 $0.00 - MSx - $0.00
MSx WAN Service 1 $0.00 - MSx - $0.00
MSx WAN Optimum 1 $0.00 - MSx - $0.00
Customer Provided - Related Voice Service 1 $0.00 - MSx - $0.00 HSIA 1 $0.00 - MSx - $0.00
MSx WAN - Optimum 200M 1 $320.00 - MSx - $320.00
$0.00 $320.00

3.a
Packet Pg. 51
Attachment: Quote_ 466068 _ City of Pacifica - Dash (4921 : TPX agreement extension for Managed Internet Services) 3/9/22, 3:59 PM Quote: 466068 / City of Pacifica - Dash https://dash.tpx.com/ribeye/service/file?id=1692885&deleteAfterServing=1&inline=1 4/8 Rate Schedule #857787 Quote ID: 466068
700 COAST HWY, PACIFICA CA 3/9/2022

CITY OF PACIFICA
Good through: 4/8/2022
Address: 700 Coast Hwy, Pacifica, CA 94044-3054
The term for Service(s) being ordered is 36 months ("Term").

MSx WAN / 2144052-SDWAN (Renewal as is) Description Qty Each Usage Type NRC MRC CPC/ OTT 1 $0.00 - MSx - $0.00
MSx WAN Service 1 $0.00 - MSx - $0.00
MSx WAN Optimum 1 $0.00 - MSx - $0.00
Customer Provided - Related Voice Service 1 $0.00 - MSx - $0.00 HSIA 1 $0.00 - MSx - $0.00
MSx WAN - Optimum 200M 1 $320.00 - MSx - $320.00
$0.00 $320.00
zz TPx HSIA - High Speed Internet Access zz / 2164970-DAT (Renewal as is) Description Qty Each Usage Type NRC MRC ADI 100 X 100 Mbps 1 $866.00 - xNet - $866.00
$0.00 $866.00

3.a
Packet Pg. 52
Attachment: Quote_ 466068 _ City of Pacifica - Dash (4921 : TPX agreement extension for Managed Internet Services) 3/9/22, 3:59 PM Quote: 466068 / City of Pacifica - Dash https://dash.tpx.com/ribeye/service/file?id=1692885&deleteAfterServing=1&inline=1 5/8 Rate Schedule #857783 Quote ID: 466068
1515 K ST STE 360, SACRAMENTO CA 3/9/2022

CITY OF PACIFICA
Good through: 4/8/2022
Address: 1515 K St Ste 360, Sacramento, CA 95814-4040
The term for Service(s) being ordered is 36 months ("Term").

MSx WAN / 2127361-SDWAN (Renewal as is) Description Qty Each Usage Type NRC MRC MSx WAN Service 1 $0.00 - MSx - $0.00
MSx WAN Optimum 1 $0.00 - MSx - $0.00
MSx WAN - Optimum 200M 1 $320.00 - MSx - $320.00
None - Related Voice Service 1 $0.00 - MSx - $0.00
TPx Provided DIA 1 $0.00 - MSx - $0.00
$0.00 $320.00
MSx Firewall / 2127490-1SCFW (Renewal as is) Description Qty Each Usage Type NRC MRC MSx Firewall Service 1 $0.00 - MSx - $0.00
MSx Firewalls - Optimum 1 $500.00 - MSx - $500.00
TPx DataCenter - H 1 $0.00 - MSx - $0.00
$0.00 $500.00

3.a
Packet Pg. 53
Attachment: Quote_ 466068 _ City of Pacifica - Dash (4921 : TPX agreement extension for Managed Internet Services) 3/9/22, 3:59 PM Quote: 466068 / City of Pacifica - Dash https://dash.tpx.com/ribeye/service/file?id=1692885&deleteAfterServing=1&inline=1 6/8 Rate Schedule #857782 Quote ID: 466068
1100 LINDA MAR BLVD, PACIFICA CA 3/9/2022

CITY OF PACIFICA
Good through: 4/8/2022
Address: 1100 Linda Mar Blvd, Pacifica, CA 94044
The term for Service(s) being ordered is 36 months ("Term"). zz TPx HSIA - High Speed Internet Access zz / 2128442-DAT (Renewal as is) Description Qty Each Usage Type NRC MRC ADI 10 X 10 Mbps 1 $458.00 - xNet - $458.00
$0.00 $458.00
MSx WAN / 2128559-SDWAN (Renewal as is) Description Qty Each Usage Type NRC MRC CPC/ OTT 1 $0.00 - MSx - $0.00
MSx WAN Service 1 $0.00 - MSx - $0.00
MSx WAN Optimum 1 $0.00 - MSx - $0.00
Customer Provided - Related Voice Service 1 $0.00 - MSx - $0.00 HSIA 1 $0.00 - MSx - $0.00
MSx WAN - Optimum 100M 1 $205.00 - MSx - $205.00
$0.00 $205.00

3.a
Packet Pg. 54
Attachment: Quote_ 466068 _ City of Pacifica - Dash (4921 : TPX agreement extension for Managed Internet Services) 3/9/22, 3:59 PM Quote: 466068 / City of Pacifica - Dash https://dash.tpx.com/ribeye/service/file?id=1692885&deleteAfterServing=1&inline=1 7/8 Master Service Agreement
Must include Service Agreement
This Master Service Agreement (“Master Service Agreement”) is made by and between U.S. TelePacific Corp. d/b/a TPx Communications and/or its affiliated companies (“TPx”), and the Customer described below (“Customer”).

Section 1 Customer Information

CITY OF PACIFICA
Company Legal Name (Individual if Sole Proprietorship)
170 Santa Maria Ave Pacifica, CA
94044
Billing Address
Section 2 Acceptance
The parties have agreed to the Terms and Conditions Attachment and each addendum identified and linked below (each an “Addendum” and collectively the “Addenda”). Each reference to an “Addendum” includes all attachments, exhibits, and schedules incorporated into such Addendum. The Master Service Agreement and all Addenda (whether incorporated herein as of the effective date of this Master Service Agreement or thereafter) are referred to as the “Agreement”.

The Agreement also includes one or more Service Agreements entered into by the Customer and TPx. “Service Agreement” means a service agreement entered into between TPx and Customer that incorporates by reference this Master Service Agreement and specifies services and products to be provided by TPx pursuant to this Master Service Agreement, the Terms and Conditions Attachment and the Addenda applicable to such Services. The Service Agreement will specify the charges to the services and products provided thereunder, the initial term of the Service Agreement, service location(s) and other information applicable only to the Services provided pursuant to such Service Agreement.

BY SIGNING BELOW, YOU ACKNOWLEDGE THAT YOU HAVE REVIEWED AND AGREED TO THE FOLLOWING ON THE DATE ENTERED BY YOU BELOW:

TPx Terms and Conditions set forth at www.tpx.com/terms Service Level Agreements (SLA) set forth at www.tpx.com/sla Equipment Addendum - Single Payment Purchase, Rental and/or Customer Provided Equipment set for at www.tpx.com/EquipmentAddendum.pdf MSx Service Addendum set forth at www.tpx.com/MSx-Service.pdf `
Additionally by signing below, the person signing on behalf of Customer (i) personally represents and warrants to TPx that he or she has the authority and power to sign on behalf of Customer and bind Customer to this Agreement, including the Addenda incorporated by reference below, (ii) consents to receiving electronic communications from TPx via the email address provided in Section 1 of this Agreement and (iii) acknowledges that he or she has reviewed and agreed to each Addendum hereto. THIS

AGREEMENT INCLUDES AN ARBITRATION PROVISION WHICH REQUIRES THE BINDING ARBITRATION OF DISPUTES AND WAIVES RIGHTS TO JURY TRIALS AND CLASS ACTIONS. This Agreement will become a binding contract upon execution by Customer and TPx.

ELECTRONIC CONTRACTING AND SIGNATURE ACKNOWLEDGMENT. To the extent that Customer executes this Agreement electronically, Customer agrees that (i) the Agreement (including all Addenda) is an electronic contract executed by Customer using Customer’s electronic signature, (ii) Customer’s electronic signature signifies Customer’s intent to enter into the Agreement (including all Addenda) and that the Agreement (including all Addenda) be legally valid and enforceable in accordance with its terms to the same extent as if Customer had executed the Agreement using its written signature and (iii) the authoritative copy of the Agreement (“Authoritative Copy”) shall be that electronic copy that resides in a document management system designated by TPx for the storage of authoritative copies of electronic records, which shall be deemed held by TPx in the ordinary course of business. Notwithstanding the foregoing, if the Authoritative Copy is converted by printing a paper copy which is marked by TPx as the original (the “Paper Contract”), then Customer acknowledges and agrees that (1) Customer’s signing of the Agreement with Customer’s electronic signature also constitutes issuance and delivery of such Paper Contract, (2) Customer’s electronic signature associated with the Agreement, when affixed to the Paper Contract, constitutes Customer’s legally valid and binding signature on the Paper Contract and (3) subsequent to such conversion, Customer’s obligations will be evidenced by the Paper Contract alone.

X
Agreed by: Customer Signature Date
Customer Name (Print) Title
Sales Representative Name Phone
v052920

3.a
Packet Pg. 55
Attachment: Quote_ 466068 _ City of Pacifica - Dash (4921 : TPX agreement extension for Managed Internet Services) 3/9/22, 3:59 PM Quote: 466068 / City of Pacifica - Dash https://dash.tpx.com/ribeye/service/file?id=1692885&deleteAfterServing=1&inline=1 8/8 Customer Contact Authority
TPx Communications has an obligation, and Customer has a right, under federal or state law to protect the confidentiality of your Customer Proprietary Network Information (CPNI). CPNI includes information relating to the quantity, technical configuration, type, destination, location and amount of use of the services Customer purchases from TPx. You can help prevent unauthorized access to that information by indicating below the parties authorized to access that information.

Authority Roles
Primary Account Authority / Authorized Signee: This user will have full access to all CPNI data related to network configuration and usage. This user will have full administrative access for the account which includes managing account settings, viewing invoices, making payments, initiating new orders, providing price change approvals, and overseeing trouble reports. Only this user will be authorized to sign any Service Agreements or Equipment Addendums. Only this user will be authorized to add "secondary" users to the authorized list.

Alternate Primary Account Authority: This user will have full access to all CPNI data related to network configuration and usage. This user will have partial administrative access for the account which includes managing account settings, making payments, initiating new orders, providing price change approvals, and overseeing trouble reports.

Agent Contact: This user will have access to CPNI data and for the account in accordance with their Authority Level which is to be determined by the Primary Account Authority / Authorized Signee.

Voice Vendor: This user will have access to CPNI data and for the account in accordance with their Authority Level which is to be determined by the Primary Account Authority / Authorized Signee.

Data Vendor: This user will have access to CPNI data and for the account in accordance with their Authority Level which is to be determined by the Primary Account Authority / Authorized Signee.

Authority Levels
R/W/A (Read/Write/All) Grants full authority to CPNI usage and network configuration data. Permits authority to request account information, view and remit payments, place and oversee orders, and initiate & manage trouble reports.

R/W/B (Read/Write/Bill) Grants authority to CPNI network configuration data in support of resolving billing related issues. Permits authority to view invoices, request invoice related changes on the account such as the billing address, and to view and remit payments.

R/W/O (Read/Write/Orders) Grants authority to CPNI network configuration data in support of order implementation. Permits authority to oversee all open orders against the account and to initiate orders against the account for existing service changes or ancillary service additions
R/W/T (Read/Trouble) Grants authority to CPNI network configuration data in support of resolving trouble on the account. Permits authority to report and look after trouble related to existing services on the account.

Primary Account Authority/ Authorized Signee ¨ Email Opt Out Name Title
Phone Cell Email
Authority Level: RWA
Alternate Primary Account Authority ¨ Email Opt Out
Name Title
Phone Cell Email
Authority Level: RWA
Agent contact Company Name
Name Title
Phone Cell Email
Duration: ¨This installation only ¨ Term of contract
Authority Level: ¨ RWA ¨ RWB ¨¨RWO ¨RWT
Voice Vendor Company Name
Name Title
Phone Cell Email
Duration: ¨ This installation only ¨ Term of contract
Authority Level: ¨RWA ¨ RWB ¨¨RWO ¨RWT
Data Vendor Company Name
Name Title
Phone Cell Email
Duration: ¨This installation only ¨ Term of contract
Authority Level: ¨RWA ¨ RWB ¨¨RWO ¨RWT
“I grant permission to TPx to provide access to CPNI to the authorized account contacts listed above subject to the designated authority level.”

CITY OF PACIFICA
Company Legal Name
Authorized Signature: Date:

Printed Name: Title: v060721

3.a
Packet Pg. 56
Attachment: Quote_ 466068 _ City of Pacifica - Dash (4921 : TPX agreement extension for Managed Internet Services)

Page 1 ends

OAK #4860-2711-6550 v1

FIRST AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT FOR NETWORK AND INTERNET

SERVICES
This First Amendment to the Agreement for Network and Internet Services (the "First Amendment") is made and entered into this 25th day of April, 2022, by and between THE CITY OF PACIFICA, a municipal corporation (hereinafter referred to as "CITY") and U.S. TelePacific Corp., a California corporation, d/b/a, TPx Communications, a Delaware corporation, with an address of 303 Colorado St., Suite 2075, Austin, TX 78701("TPx"). CITY and TPx may be collectively referred to as “Parties”.

RECITALS
WHEREAS, on September 10, 2018 the City Council approved a Master Service Agreement for Network and Internet Services for network and internet services for City operations, which included an Addendum that amended and modified the Master Service Agreement Terms and Conditions between the CITY and TPx (collectively referred to as “Agreement”); and
WHEREAS, the term of the Agreement was specified in the Agreement as thirty-six months (“Term”); and
WHEREAS, the CITY and TPx now desire to enter into this First Amendment to extend the Term of the Agreement an additional thirty-six months.

AGREEMENT
NOW, THEREFORE, for the considerations hereinafter set forth, CONSULTANT and CITY agree as follows:
1) The Term of the Agreement (as specified on page 2 of the Agreement and anywhere else the Term is identified) shall be amended from “thirty-six months” to “seventy-two months”, for a total Agreement term of 6 years (September 10, 2018 to September 10, 2025). 2) Unless specifically set forth in this First Amendment, all other terms and conditions of the Agreement shall remain in full force and effect.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this First Amendment as of the date set forth above.
[SIGNATURES ON NEXT PAGE]

3.b
Packet Pg. 57
Attachment: First Amendment to Agreement with TPx (4921 : TPX agreement extension for Managed Internet Services)

Page 2 ends

OAK #4860-2711-6550 v1

CITY OF PACIFICA
By: _______________________ Date ________
Kevin Woodhouse, City Manager
TPx Communications
By: _______________________ Date ________
Attest:

By: _______________________ Date _______
Sarah Coffey, City Clerk
Approved As To Form:

By: _______________________ Date ________
Michelle Marchetta Kenyon, City Attorney

3.b
Packet Pg. 58
Attachment: First Amendment to Agreement with TPx (4921 : TPX agreement extension for Managed Internet Services)

CITY OF PACIFICA

COUNCIL AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT
4/25/2022
1 SUBJECT:

Approval of Second Amendment with Bartle Wells Associates for the City of Pacifica Sewer Rate Study FY2022-2027
RECOMMENDED ACTION:

Approve the Following Actions for the City of Pacifica Sewer Rate Study FY 2022-2027 (“Study”):

1. Approve Second Amendment (Attachment 1) in an Amount Not to Exceed $27,786 and Increase the Total Compensation to $93,151 to the Consultant Original Agreement for Bartle Wells Associates; and

2. Establish a new Budget Authority of $98,000, which includes 5% contingency, for the Sewer Rate Study FY2022-2027; and

3. Authorize the City Manager to execute all documents related to this project.

STAFF CONTACT:

Maria Aguilar, P.E., Plant Manager
(415) 336-4750
[email protected]
Lisa Petersen, P.E., Public Works Director
(650) 738-3770
[email protected]
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION:

Every five years, the City completes a sewer rate study to determine the rate increases that are necessary to meet the Wastewater Division’s (Wastewater) operating costs, projected Capital Improvement Program (CIP) and expected yearly consumer price index increases. The previous sewer rate adoption occurred in March 2017 for Fiscal Year rate increases between 2017-2022.

A new Sewer Rate Study had to be performed to determine the new sewer service charges for the next five years from Fiscal Years 2022-2027 and the City needed to complete the Capacity Fee Study in order to update the current capacity fees. Capacity fees are the one-time fee property developers pay to connect to the City’s wastewater system and pay a fair share contribution. The City’s current fee was adopted in 1974 and has been escalated annually by inflation.

On February 20, 2020, staff sent out a Request for Proposal (RFP) for consultant services to perform the above studies and to assist staff with their professional expertise during the adoption process of the new sewer service charges for Fiscal Years 2022-2027 and update capacity fees. Five firms responded to the RFP: Bartle Wells Associates, HF&H Consultants, 4 Packet Pg. 59
Pacifica City Council 2
April 25, 2022
LLC, B Consulting, NBS, and Willdan Financial Services. Their submitted proposals were reviewed and evaluated by staff from Public Works and the Finance Department. After careful review of the proposals submitted, staff concluded that Bartle Wells Associates was the best qualified consulting firm to perform the Sewer Rate and Capacity Fee Studies. On April 27, 2020, the City Manager approved the Consultant Original Agreement (Agreement) with Bartle Wells Associates (BWA) for $48,900 and estimated the project completion date for July 2021.

On September 13, 2021, City Council approved the First Amendment to the Agreement in the amount of $16,465 for the additional time spent to analyze variations in changes to the sewer CIP program costs and other budget documents. The requested Second Amendment in the amount of $27,786 is for the extended schedule/additional time spent in finalizing the Sewer Rate Study and Capacity Fee Study after additional revisions due to changes in projected sewer costs and time spent in coordinating and attending meetings leading to the adoption of the resolution stating the intention to consider updating the City’s sewer service charges during the City Council meeting on February 15, 2022. The proposed amount will also include BWA review of changes to the ordinance language for the sewer rates and capacity fees, additional meetings with City staff and additional time spent to respond to questions from the public related to the rates as well as added meeting preparation time for the sewer rate public hearing, which is now scheduled for May 9, 2022. BWA is also working with staff on other miscellaneous matters for the successful adoption of the new sewer service charges for Fiscal Years 2022-27 and the new capacity fees.

The City Manager recommends that the City Council approve the actions listed in association with this Council report including approving the Second Amendment to the BWA Agreement in an amount not to exceed $27,786, which increases the total compensation to the Consultant Original Agreement to $93,151 and establish a new budget authority of $98,000, which includes a 5% contingency.

ALTERNATIVE ACTION:

Council may choose not to approve the Second Amendment and not appropriate additional funding for the Sewer Rate Study FY 2022-2027 project. However, this will result in Sewer Service Charges for Fiscal Years 2022-2027 and Sewer Capacity Fees adoption delays and increased risk of insufficient Sewer Enterprise Fund for Wastewater operations. Therefore, staff does not recommend this alternate action.

RELATION TO CITY COUNCIL GOALS AND WORK PLAN:

Approval of Second Amendment and appropriation of additional funding and subsequent approval of the Sewer Rate Study FY 2022-2027 project is consistent with the following Council adopted Goals:

Stewardship of City Infrastructure and Maintaining a Safe Community: The Sewer Rate Study FY 2022-2027 project will provide sufficient funding to maintain operations and maintenance of sewer collection system, pump stations, and the Calera Creek Water Recycling Plant and the Sewer Capacity Fee Study will allow for developments to pay a fair share contirbution to Wastewater when connecting to the sewer system.

FISCAL IMPACT:

The Sewer Rate Study FY 2022-2027 project was approved in the Wastewater Capital Improvement Budget (Fund 34) for FY 2020-2021 with a Budget Authority of $50,000. On September 13, 2021, the City Council increased the Budget Authority to $72,000. With the addition of the Second Amendment in the amount of $27,786, the total compensation for BWA 4 Packet Pg. 60
Pacifica City Council 3
April 25, 2022
in the amount of $93,151 and the proposed 5% contingency of $4,849, this project will exceed the Budget Authority by $26,000. As there are sufficient funds in the Wastewater Capital Improvement Budget (Fund 34), staff recommends approving the Second Amendment to the BWA Agreement in an amount not to exceed $27,786 to increase the total compensation to the Consultant Original Agreement to $93,151 and establish a new budget authority of $98,000, which includes a 5% contingency.

The proposed budget for the Sewer Rate Study FY 2022-2027 is as follows:

Budget Authority Approved by City Council on 9/13/2021 $ 72,000.00 Original Agreement (Fund 34) $ 48,900.00
First Amendment (Fund 34) $ 16,465.00
Proposed Second Amendment (Fund 34) $ 27,786.00
Total Agreement (Cost Ceiling) $ 93,151.00
Proposed Project Contingency (Approximately 5%) $ 4,849.00 Proposed New Budget Authority $ 98,000.00
Proposed Budget Authority Increase $ 26,000.00
ORIGINATED BY:

Public Works - Wastewater Division
ATTACHMENT LIST:
2nd Amendment to Consultant Services Agreement (BWA) md (PDF) 4 Packet Pg. 61
OAK #4824-2266-5278 v1

SECOND AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT FOR CONSULTANT SERVICES
This Second Amendment to Agreement for Consultant Services (the "First Amendment") is made and entered into this ______ day of __________, 2022, by and between THE CITY OF PACIFICA, a municipal corporation (hereinafter referred to as "CITY") and BARTLE WELLS ASSOCIATES, a California Corporation (hereinafter referred to as "CONSULTANT").

RECITALS
WHEREAS, on April 27, 2020, CITY and CONSULTANT entered into that certain agreement entitled “Agreement for Consultant Services” (“Agreement”) to provide sewer rate study services in connection with the Sewer Rate Study FY2022-2027 project in an amount not to exceed $48,900; and
WHEREAS, on September 13, 2021, CITY and CONSULTANT entered into that first amendment to the agreement entitled “Agreement for Consultant Services” (“Agreement”) to provide sewer rate study services in connection with the Sewer Rate Study FY2022-2027 project in an amount not to exceed $16,465; and
WHEREAS, CITY and CONSULTANT now desire to enter into this Second Amendment to provide for CONSULTANT to provide additional scope of work for sewer rate study services, and increase the Cost Ceiling of the Agreement an additional $27,786 from $65,365 to $93,151; and

AGREEMENT
NOW, THEREFORE, for the considerations hereinafter set forth, the parties hereby amend the Agreement as follows:

1. Exhibit A to the Agreement, describing the Scope of Work, shall be amended as shown in Exhibit A, attached hereto.

2. Section 2.1 of the Agreement, “Compensation” is hereby amended to read as follows:

Compensation. Compensation for the Services shall be in accordance with Exhibit B, Compensation, attached hereto and incorporated herein. It is agreed that the compensation for the Services shall not exceed $93,151 ("Cost Ceiling").

3. Section 3.1 of the Agreement, “Effective Date” is hereby amended to read as follows:

Effective Date. This Agreement shall become effective upon execution of the second signature and shall remain in full force and effect until the Services are completed on or before June 30, 2022 (the “Term”).

4. Agreement in Effect. Except as amended by this Second Amendment, the Agreement shall remain in full force and effect.

4.a
Packet Pg. 62
Attachment: 2nd Amendment to Consultant Services Agreement (BWA) md (4964 : Approval of Second Amendment with Bartle Wells for Sewer OAK #4824-2266-5278 v1

5. Counterpart Signatures. This Second Amendment may be signed in multiple counterparts which, when signed by all parties, shall constitute a binding agreement.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Second Amendment as of the date set forth above.

CITY OF PACIFICA
By: Date
Kevin Woodhouse, City Manager
Attest
By: Date
Sarah Coffey, City Clerk
Approved As To Form
By: Date
Michelle Marchetta Kenyon, City Attorney

CONSULTANT

BARTLE WELLS ASSOCIATES
By: Date 4/15/2022

4.a
Packet Pg. 63
Attachment: 2nd Amendment to Consultant Services Agreement (BWA) md (4964 : Approval of Second Amendment with Bartle Wells for Sewer OAK #4824
-2266-5278 v1

EXHIBIT A

SCOPE OF WORK

4.a
Packet Pg. 64
Attachment: 2nd Amendment to Consultant Services Agreement (BWA) md (4964 : Approval of Second Amendment with Bartle Wells for Sewer

April 14, 2022
Lisa Petersen
City of Pacifica
170 Santa Maria Avenue
Pacifica, CA 94044
Subject: Request for Sewer Rate and Capacity Fee Study Contract Amendment Dear Lisa,
We have enjoyed working with City staff in conducting the 2021 sewer rate and capacity fee study. We have been working on the project since August 2020. However, the initial contract and fee was based on project completion by July 1st, 2021. We completed an update of the fee study in October after an initial additional budget request which extended the timeline to December 31st, but due to changes in sewer enterprise operating costs and capital improvement costs, the City requested additional scenarios, updates, and meetings targeting rate adoption by June 30th, 2022.

Due to the extended project scope including: additional meetings with City staff and legal counsel, staff report and presentation edits, and workshops with City Council members, the total cost of the work from December to February amounted to $19,776. We are requesting a contract amendment to cover these additional hours and to assist Pacifica staff on the rate and fee implementation by June 30th, 2022.

In additional to reimbursement from prior work, Bartle Wells Associates will work closely with City staff, the City Council and others as appropriate to perform the following services in connection with the completion of the sewer rate and capacity fee study:
• Review changes in ordinance language for rates and capacity fees • Meet with City staff to develop public hearing presentation • Attend the public hearing on the rates
Therefore, we are requesting a contract amendment to cover $19,776 of hours from December 2021 to February 2022 plus a budget of $8,010 to cover future work to implement the sewer rates and fees through June 30th, 2022. The total budget amendment amounts to $27,786.

We have greatly enjoyed working with you on this project and look forward to completing the tasks in the near future.

Very Truly Yours
Bartle Wells Associates
Douglas R. Dove, President

4.a
Packet Pg. 65
Attachment: 2nd Amendment to Consultant Services Agreement (BWA) md (4964 : Approval of Second Amendment with Bartle Wells for Sewer OAK #4824
-2266-5278 v1

EXHIBIT B

FEE PROPOSAL

4.a
Packet Pg. 66
Attachment: 2nd Amendment to Consultant Services Agreement (BWA) md (4964 : Approval of Second Amendment with Bartle Wells for Sewer Request for Additional Budget
The following table summarizes our request for additional budget:

City of Pacifica
Sewer Rate and Capacity Fee Study
Cost Proposal
Estimated D. Dove M. DeGroot Total
Hours @ $265/hr @ $180/hr Cost
Sewer Rate and Capacity Fee Study Prior Hours (December - February) Developed rate and fee recommendations based on updated City data 36.4 4.4 32 $6,926 Met with City staff and attorney to review rate recommendations and edit presentation 19 8 11 $4,100 Presented recommendations to Council members (4 meetings) 8 4 4 $1,780 Updated draft and final reports and assisted in drafting staff reports 34 10 24 $6,970 Subtotal Bartle Wells Associates 97.4 26.4 71 $19,776
Sewer Rate and Capacity Fee Study Extension
Review changes in ordinance language for rates and capacity fees 16 8 8 $3,560 Meet with City staff to develop public hearing presentation 12 6 6 $2,670 Attend the public hearing on the rates 8 4 4 $1,780
Subtotal Bartle Wells Associates 36 18 18 $8,010
NOT TO EXCEED TOTAL COST 133.4 44.4 89 $27,786
TASK

4.a
Packet Pg. 67
Attachment: 2nd Amendment to Consultant Services Agreement (BWA) md (4964 : Approval of Second Amendment with Bartle Wells for Sewer

STATEMENT OF AVAILABILITY AND FEES

1. During the project development period, we will be available at all reasonable times and on reasonable notice for meetings and for consultation with City staff, attorneys, consulting engineers, and others as necessary.

2. Bartle Wells Associates will perform all work related to the assignment. Doug Dove, a firm principal and President will be assigned as project leader on this assignment. He will serve as the lead contact person for BWA and will be involved with the project a day-to-day basis.

3. The fees for additional services outlined in this proposal will not exceed $8,010. The fee is based on the following assumptions:
a. The project will be completed by June 30, 2022 or other mutually agreeable date preferred by the City. BWA will work to meet all City scheduling requirements and deadlines. b. All necessary information will be provided by the City and/or its other consultants in a timely manner.
c. The fee is based on one City Council meeting and/or presentation.

4. Progress payments and direct expenses are payable monthly on a time and materials basis as the work proceeds as provided in our Billing Rate Schedule 2022, which will remain in effect for the duration of this project.

5. In addition to the services provided under this proposal, the City may authorize Bartle Wells Associates to perform additional services, which may include, but are not limited to:
 Changes in project scope
 Delays in project schedule resulting in additional revisions  Additional meetings and presentations
 Any other services not specified

6. Bartle Wells Associates will maintain in force, during the full term of the assignment, insurance as provided in the Certificate of Insurance attached.

7. Bartle Wells Associates is an independent public finance advisory firm that is registered as a Municipal Advisor with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC Registration No. 867- 00740) and the Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board (MSRB ID K0414).

8. If the project is terminated for any reason, Bartle Wells Associates is to be reimbursed for professional services and direct expenses incurred up to the time notification of such termination is received.

This proposal may be withdrawn or amended if not accepted within 90 days.

4.a
Packet Pg. 68
Attachment: 2nd Amendment to Consultant Services Agreement (BWA) md (4964 : Approval of Second Amendment with Bartle Wells for Sewer

BARTLE WELLS ASSOCIATES
BILLING RATE SCHEDULE 2022
Rates Effective 1/1/2022
Professional Services
Financial Analyst I .................................................................................... $110 per hour Financial Analyst II ................................................................................... $135 per hour Consultant................................................................................................ $165 per hour Project Consultant ................................................................................... $180 per hour Senior Consultant..................................................................................... $195 per hour Senior Project Manager........................................................................... $225 per hour Principal Consultant................................................................................. $265 per hour The hourly rates for professional services include all overhead and indirect expenses. Bartle Wells Associates does not charge for administrative support services. Expert witness, legal testimony, or other special limited assignments will be billed at one and one-half times the consultant’s hourly rate.

The above rates will be in effect through December 31, 2022 at which time they will be subject to change.

Direct Expenses
Subconsultants will be billed at cost plus ten percent. Other reimbursable direct expenses incurred on behalf of the agency will be billed at cost plus ten percent. These reimbursable costs include, but are not limited to:
 Travel, meals, lodging  Automobile mileage
 Printing and photocopying  Messenger services and mailing costs  Special statistical analysis  Graphic design and photography  Outside computer services  Special legal services
 Bond ratings  Legal advertisements
Insurance
Bartle Wells Associates maintains insurance in the amounts and coverage as provided in the attached schedule of insurance. Additional or special insurance, licensing, or permit requirements beyond what is shown on the schedule of insurance are billed in addition to the contract amount.

Payment
Fees are typically billed monthly for the preceding month and will be payable within 30 days of the date of the invoice. A late charge of 1.0 percent per month may be applied to balances unpaid after 60 days.

4.a
Packet Pg. 69
Attachment: 2nd Amendment to Consultant Services Agreement (BWA) md (4964 : Approval of Second Amendment with Bartle Wells for Sewer

SCHEDULE OF INSURANCE
Insured: BARTLE WELLS ASSOCIATES
Bartle Wells Associates will maintain in force, during the full term of the assignment, insurance in the amounts and coverage as provided in this schedule.

If additional insurance is required, and the insurer increases the premium as a result, then the amount of the increase will be added to the contract price.

TYPE OF INSURANCE COMPANY POLICY NUMBER COVERAGES AND LIMITS EXP. DATE Commercial General Hartford Insurance Company  $2,000,000 General Aggregate 6/1/22 Liability Policy #35-SBA PA6857  $2,000,000 Products Comp/Op Aggregate  $2,000,000 Personal & Advertising Injury
 $1,000,000 Each Occurrence
Excess/Umbrella Hartford Insurance Company  $1,000,000 Aggregate 6/1/22 Liability Policy #35-SBA PA6857  $1,000,000 Each Occurrence Automobile Liability Hartford Insurance Company
Policy #35-UEC VU2842
 $1,000,000 Combined Single Limit 6/1/22
Workers Compensation
& Employers' Liability
Hartford Underwriters
Insurance Company
Policy #35-WEC FG7858
Workers' Compensation: Statutory Limits for the State of California. Employers' Liability:
 Bodily Injury by Accident - $1,000,000 each accident
 Bodily Injury by Disease - $1,000,000 each employee
 Bodily Injury by Disease - $1,000,000 policy limit
6/1/22
Professional Liability Chubb & Son, Inc.

BINDO94045
Solely in the performance of services as municipal financing consultants for others for a fee.

Limit: $2,000,000 Per Occurrence & Aggregate (including defense costs, charges, and expenses)
6/1/22

4.a
Packet Pg. 70
Attachment: 2nd Amendment to Consultant Services Agreement (BWA) md (4964 : Approval of Second Amendment with Bartle Wells for Sewer

CITY OF PACIFICA

COUNCIL AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT
4/25/2022
1 SUBJECT:

Adoption of an Ordinance Amending Section 4-7.1901, “Removal or towing of vehicles” of Article 19 within Chapter 7, “Traffic” of Title 4 of the Pacifica Municipal Code Related to the Removal of Vehicles Illegally Parked on City Streets in Spaces Designated for Preferential Parking (Status: CEQA Exempt)
RECOMMENDED ACTION:

Move to Adopt “An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Pacifica Amending Section 4-

7.1901, “Removal or towing of vehicles” of Article 19 within Chapter 7, “Traffic” of Title 4 of the Pacifica Municipal Code Related to the Removal of Vehicles Illegally Parked on City Streets in Spaces Designated for Preferential Parking and finding the ordinance exempt under the California Environmental Quality Act.

STAFF CONTACT:

Daniel Steidle, Chief of Police
(650) 738-7314
[email protected]
Sam Bautista, Deputy Director of Public Works
(650) 738-3771
[email protected]
Ryan Marquez, Associate Civil Engineer
(650) 738-3767
[email protected]
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION:

This ordinance was introduced at the regular meeting of the City Council held on April 11, 2022 and is now in order for adoption.

California Vehicle Code section 22507 authorizes the City to adopt ordinances or resolutions, to prohibit or restrict the stopping, parking, or standing of vehicles and to authorize preferential parking for designated groups. The California Vehicle Code also provides peace officers the authority to tow vehicles under certain circumstances. Vehicle Code section 22651(n) states the following:
“A peace officer, as defined in Chapter 4.5 (commencing with Section 830) of Title 3 of Part 2 of the Penal Code, or a regularly employed and salaried employee, who is engaged in directing traffic or enforcing parking laws and regulations, of a city, county, or jurisdiction of a state agency in which a vehicle is located, may remove a vehicle located within the territorial limits in which the officer or employee may act, under the following circumstances:
5 Packet Pg. 71
Pacifica City Council 2
April 25, 2022
(n) Whenever a vehicle is parked or left standing where local authorities, by resolution or ordinance, have prohibited parking and have authorized the removal of vehicles. Except as provided in subdivisions (v) and (w), a vehicle shall not be removed unless signs are posted giving notice of the removal.”
The City’s Municipal Code designates specific circumstances under which a vehicle may be towed. Pacifica Municipal Code section 4-7.1901 currently provides that a police officer may remove or cause to be removed a vehicle from any public street or public alley within the City limits to the nearest public garage or other place of safety, or to a garage designated or maintained by the City, under certain circumstances. Those circumstances include when a vehicle is illegally parked on a public street or public alley in violation of a City ordinance forbidding standing or parking and the use of the public street or public alley is necessary for the cleaning, repair, or construction, among others.

Staff is proposing that PMC section 4-7.1901 be amended to allow towing for any vehicle that illegally parks in a parking space designated for preferential parking, including but not limited to the Temporary Safe Parking Program as set forth in Section 4-7.1207. These types of preferential parking programs, established by ordinance or resolution in accordance with Vehicle Code 22507, cannot be effective if the parking spaces are not actually available to the program participants. As a result, staff is recommending that PMC section 4-7.1901 be amended to specify that if a vehicle is parked in a space designated as part of a preferential parking program, without clear display of a valid permit, that vehicle can be removed. The proposed amendment would also require that signs be posted indicating that an illegally parked vehicle would be towed.

CEQA:

Adoption of the proposed ordinance is exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), under Section 15061(b)(3) of the CEQA Guidelines (14 Cal.

Code Regs. 15000 et seq.) because it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the adoption of this ordinance may have a significant effect on the environment.

ALTERNATIVE ACTION:

The City Council could choose not to adopt the proposed amendments to the ordinance, and provide staff further direction.

RELATION TO CITY COUNCIL GOALS AND WORK PLAN:
“A Healthy and Compassionate Community” includes addressing health and safety issues created by parking of motorhomes in City streets as well as continuing to work with homeless community members to connect them with services.
“Maintaining a Safe Community” includes addressing health and safety issues created by parking of motorhomes in City streets.

FISCAL IMPACT:

This action will not result in any direct fiscal impact.

ORIGINATED BY:
5 Packet Pg. 72
Pacifica City Council 3
April 25, 2022
City Clerk
Police
ATTACHMENT LIST:

Attachment A - Proposed Ordinance Redline (PDF)
5 Packet Pg. 73
Pacifica City Council 4
April 25, 2022
ORDINANCE NO. (ID # 4967)
ORDINANCE NO. _______

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PACIFICA AMENDING SECTION 4-7.1901, “REMOVAL OR TOWING OF VEHICLES” OF ARTICLE 19 WITHIN CHAPTER 7, “TRAFFIC” OF TITLE 4 OF THE PACIFICA MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO

REMOVAL OF VEHICLES ILLEGALLY PARKED ON CITY STREETS IN SPACES

DESIGNATED FOR PREFERENTIAL PARKING
WHEREAS, California Vehicle Code section 22507 authorizes the City to adopt ordinances or resolutions, to prohibit or restrict the stopping, parking, or standing of vehicles and to authorize preferential parking for designated groups; and WHEREAS, California Vehicle Code also provides peace officers the authority to tow vehicles under certain circumstances and Vehicle Code section 22651(n) provides that a peace officer, who is engaged in directing traffic or enforcing parking laws and regulations, of a city, county, or jurisdiction of a state agency in which a vehicle is located, may remove a vehicle whenever a vehicle is parked or left standing where local authorities, by resolution or ordinance, have prohibited parking and have authorized the removal of vehicles so long as signs are posted; and
WHEREAS, the City’s Municipal Code currently designates specific circumstances under which a vehicle may be towed; and
WHEREAS, Pacifica Municipal Code section 4-7.1901 currently provides that a police officer may remove or cause to be removed a vehicle from any public street or public alley within the City limits to the nearest public garage or other place of safety, or to a garage designated or maintained by the City and specifies the circumstances under which a vehicle may be removed; and
WHEREAS, staff is recommending that Pacifica Municipal Code section 4-7.1901 be amended to allow towing for any vehicle that illegally parks in a parking space designated for a preferential parking program, including but not limited to, the Temporary Safe Parking Program as set forth in Section 4-7.1207 and any other preferential parking program that the City may adopt in the future; and
WHEREAS, in order for the preferential parking programs to be effective the parking spaces must be available to the program participants and thus the City must be able to remove vehicles that are parked without clear display of a valid permit, if necessary.

NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Pacifica does ordain as follows:

Section 1. Recitals. The City Council of the City of Pacifica does hereby find that the above referenced recitals are true and correct and material to the adoption of this Ordinance.

Section 2. Amended. Section 4-7.1901, “Removal or towing of vehicles” of Article 19 within Chapter 7, “Traffic” of Title 4 of the Pacifica Municipal Code is hereby amended by repealing Section 4-7.1901 in its entirety and replacing that Section to read as follows:
“Sec. 4-7.1901. –Removal or towing of vehicles.
5 Packet Pg. 74
Pacifica City Council 5
April 25, 2022
(a) Any police officer may remove or cause to be removed a vehicle from any public street or public alley within the City limits to the nearest public garage or other place of safety, or to a garage designated or maintained by the City, under any of the following circumstances:
(1) When a vehicle is parked or left standing where the City, by resolution or ordinance, has prohibited parking and has authorized the removal of vehicles and has posted signs giving notice of such removal;
(2) When a vehicle is illegally parked on a public street or public alley in violation of a City ordinance forbidding standing or parking and the use of the public street or public alley or portion thereof is necessary for the cleaning, repair, or construction of the public street or public alley, or for the installation of underground utilities, and signs giving notice that the vehicle may be removed are erected or placed at least twenty-four (24) hours prior to the removal by the authorities of the City pursuant to this section;
(3) When a vehicle is parked where the use of the public street or public alley or any portion thereof is authorized by the City for purposes other than the normal flow of traffic; or for the movement of equipment, articles or structures of unusual size, and the parking of such vehicle would interfere with such use or movement and signs giving notice that such vehicle may be removed are erected or placed at least twenty-four (24) hours prior to the removal by the authorities of the City pursuant to this section.
(4) In the event a vehicle is parked or left standing on a public street or parking space that has been designated to be a part of a preferential parking program, including but not limited to the Safe Parking Program as set forth in Section 4-

7.1207, without clear display of a valid permit and where signs have been posted giving notice that unauthorized vehicles may be removed, any member of the Police Department may immediately remove, or cause the immediate removal of, the vehicle in the manner provided in and subject to the requirements of, the Vehicle Code of the State and this Municipal Code.”
Section 3. Compliance with CEQA. The City Council hereby finds that the action to adopt this Ordinance is exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), under Section 15061(b)(3) of the CEQA Guidelines (14 Cal. Code Regs. 15000 et seq.) because it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the adoption of this Ordinance may have a significant effect on the environment.

Section 4. Severability. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this Ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this Ordinance. The City Council hereby declares that it should have adopted the Ordinance and each section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase thereof, irrespective of the fact that any one or more sections, subsections, sentences, clauses or phrases be declared unconstitutional.

Section 5. Publication. The City Clerk is hereby ordered and directed to certify the passage of this Ordinance by the City Council of the City of Pacifica, California, and cause the same to be published in accordance with State law.

Section 6. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall go into effect thirty (30) days after the date of its passage and adoption.
5 Packet Pg. 75
Pacifica City Council 6
April 25, 2022
PASSED AND ADOPTED this ______ day of ___________________, 2022, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSTAIN:

ABSENT:
____________________________
Mary Bier, Mayor
ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
____________________________ ____________________________ Sarah Coffey, City Clerk Michelle Kenyon, City Attorney 5 Packet Pg. 76
Pacifica City Council 7
April 25, 2022
* * * * *
(ID # 4967) at 4/25/2022 5:30 PM City Council Regular Meeting 5 Packet Pg. 77
Created: 2022-02-07 10:50:11 [EST]
(Supp. No. 51)

Page 1 of 1 ends

Sec. 4-7.1901. Removal or towing of vehicles.
(a) Any police officer may remove or cause to be removed a vehicle from any public street or public alley within the City limits to the nearest public garage or other place of safety, or to a garage designated or maintained by the City, under any of the following circumstances:
(1) When a vehicle is parked or left standing where the City, by resolution or ordinance, has prohibited parking and has authorized the removal of vehicles and has posted signs giving notice of such removal; (2) When a vehicle is illegally parked on a public street or public alley in violation of a City ordinance forbidding standing or parking and the use of the public street or public alley or portion thereof is necessary for the cleaning, repair, or construction of the public street or public alley, or for the installation of underground utilities, and signs giving notice that the vehicle may be removed are erected or placed at least twenty-four (24) hours prior to the removal by the authorities of the City pursuant to this section;
(3) When a vehicle is parked where the use of the public street or public alley or any portion thereof is authorized by the City for purposes other than the normal flow of traffic; or for the movement of equipment, articles or structures of unusual size, and the parking of such vehicle would interfere with such use or movement and signs giving notice that such vehicle may be removed are erected or placed at least twenty-four (24) hours prior to the removal by the authorities of the City pursuant to this section.
(4) In the event a vehicle is parked or left standing on a public street or parking space that has been designated to be a part of a preferential parking program, including but not limited to the Safe Parking Program as set forth in Section 4-7.1207, without clear display of a valid permit and where signs have been posted giving notice that unauthorized vehicles may be removed, any member of the Police Department may immediately remove, or cause the immediate removal of, the vehicle in the manner provided in and subject to the requirements of, the Vehicle Code of the State and this Municipal Code. (Ord. No. 768-C.S., § 1, eff. December 23, 2009)

5.a
Packet Pg. 78
Attachment: Attachment A - Proposed Ordinance Redline (4967 : Adoption of an Ordinance Amending Section 4-7.1901, “Removal or towing of

CITY OF PACIFICA

COUNCIL AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT
4/25/2022
1 SUBJECT:

Adoption of an Ordinance Adding Chapter 19, “Acquisition and Use of Military Equipment” of Title 4 “Public Safety” of the Pacifica Municipal Code
RECOMMENDED ACTION:

Move to Adopt an Ordinance of the City Council of the City Of Pacifica Adding Chapter 19, “Acquisition and Use of Military Equipment” of Title 4 “Public Safety” of the Pacifica Municipal Code, Approving the Pacifica Police Department Military Equipment Policy; and finding the Ordinance exempt under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).

STAFF CONTACT:

Daniel Steidle, Chief of Police
650-738-7314
[email protected]
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION:

This ordinance was introduced at the regular meeting of the City Council held on April 11, 2022 and is now in order for adoption. The narrative below provides a summary from the full staff report presented at the introduction of the ordinance; the staff report from the April 11, 2022 is included in its entirety as Attachment B for further detail.

On September 30, 2021, California Assembly Bill 481 (AB 481) was signed into law.

Subsequently, California Government Code Sections 7070, 7071, and 7072 were adopted to codify the requirements set forth in AB 481.

AB 481 requires a law enforcement agency to obtain the approval of its governing body, through the adoption of a Military Equipment Use Policy, by ordinance at a regular meeting held pursuant to specified open meeting laws, prior to taking certain actions relating to the funding, acquisition, or use of military equipment, as defined. The bill allows the governing body to approve the funding, acquisition, or use of military equipment within its jurisdiction only if it determines that the military equipment meets specified standards. AB 481 requires the governing body to annually review the ordinance and to either disapprove a renewal of the authorization for a type of military equipment or amend the military equipment use policy if it determines, based on an Annual Military Equipment Report prepared by the law enforcement agency, that the military equipment does not comply with the above-described standards for approval.

California Government Code Section 7070 provides a list of types of equipment that are to be considered “Military Equipment” for purposes of compliance with AB 481 and the Government Code. It is important to understand that what is defined as “Military Equipment” by the California State Legislature is not related to whether the equipment was acquired through military sources.

The Pacifica Police Department does not possess any equipment specifically designed for military use nor has the department acquired any equipment through a military surplus program, commonly known as the “1033 Program” (10 USC 2576a). While the Pacifica Police Department 6 Packet Pg. 79
Pacifica City Council 2
April 25, 2022
does not possess any equipment that it has obtained from the military, nor does it possess any equipment that was designed specifically for military use, it does possess equipment that is listed in Section 7070 and defined as “Military Equipment.” California Government Code Section 7071(b) requires that the Police Department post to its website the Military Equipment Use Policy that it plans to propose to the City Council at least 30 days prior to any public hearing concerning the policy. The Police Department complied with this requirement by posting the draft policy being proposed, to its public website, on March 4, 2022.

Staff, in collaboration with the City Attorney’s Office, has authored Pacifica Police Department Policy #705, Military Equipment (Attachment A) to comply with AB481. This policy contains the (4) types of “Military Equipment” that the Pacifica Police Department currently possesses, along with the required information describing each item, costs, training, and use.

The policy provides the ability for allied law enforcement agencies to use military equipment in our jurisdiction if they adhere to their own approved Military Equipment Policy. Law enforcement mutual aid may be requested at a local, countywide, or regional level in the event of an incident or sustained incident that requires personnel resources beyond those available within the police department of jurisdiction. Law enforcement mutual aid more frequently occurs on a much lower scale, such as an incident where a low number of additional personnel are needed to assist, and for a relatively short period of time.

Next Steps
Approval of the Pacifica Police Department’s Military Equipment Policy by the City Council through an ordinance is required for the continued use of the listed equipment. Once approved, the Chief of Police is required to seek approval of an amended Military Equipment Use Policy before the purchase or acquisition of additional military equipment as defined by Government Code § 7070. Approval of this policy is required each year.

Each year, the Chief of Police will be required to present a Military Equipment Report to City Council. Within 30 days of submitting and publicly releasing the annual report, the Pacifica Police Department shall hold at least one well-publicized and conveniently located community engagement meeting, at which the Department should discuss the report and respond to public questions regarding the funding, acquisition, or use of military equipment. The report will also be available for viewing on the Department’s website.

ALTERNATIVE ACTION:

Decline to approve the Pacifica Police Department Military Equipment Policy and provide staff further direction.

RELATION TO CITY COUNCIL GOALS AND WORK PLAN:

Adoption of an Ordinance approving the Pacifica Police Department Military Equipment Policy resonates with the City Council Goal of An Engaged Community and Maintaining a Safe Community.

FISCAL IMPACT:
6 Packet Pg. 80
Pacifica City Council 3
April 25, 2022
There is no fiscal impact to adoption of this Ordinance or approving the Pacifica Police Department Military Equipment Policy.

CEQA:

The Ordinance and Policy are exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) because they will not result in a direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment and is not a “project,” as defined in Section 15378 of the CEQA Guidelines.

ORIGINATED BY:

City Clerk
ATTACHMENT LIST:

Attachment A - Military Equipment Policy #705 (PDF)
Attachment B: Staff Report 4-11-2022 (PDF)
6 Packet Pg. 81
Pacifica City Council 4
April 25, 2022
ORDINANCE NO. (ID # 4966)
ORDINANCE NO. ______

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PACIFICA ADDING CHAPTER 19, “AQCUISITION AND USE OF MILITARY EQUIPMENT” OF TITLE 4 “PUBLIC SAFETY” OF THE PACIFICA MUNICIPAL CODE
WHEREAS, on September 30, 2021, Governor Gavin Newsom signed into law Assembly Bill 481, relating to the use of military equipment by law enforcement agencies; and
WHEREAS, Assembly Bill 481, codified at California Government Code sections 7070 through 7075, requires law enforcement agencies to obtain approval of the applicable governing body prior to taking certain actions relating to the funding, acquisition, solicitation, or use of military equipment; and
WHEREAS, Assembly Bill 481, requires that the approval by the governing body be by an ordinance adopting a military equipment use policy, at a regular meeting held pursuant to open meeting laws; and
WHEREAS, Assembly Bill 481 allows the governing body of a city to approve the funding, acquisition, or use of military equipment within its jurisdiction only if it makes specified determinations with respect to a military equipment use policy; and WHEREAS, a draft of the Pacifica Police Department Policy 705 “Military Equipment” was published on the Department’s internet website, and provided to the City Council at least 30 days prior to public hearing in accordance with requirements of Government Code section 7071; and
WHEREAS, the Pacifica Police Department’s Lexipol Policy 705 “Military Equipment” meets the requirements of California Government Code section 7070, subdivision (d); and
WHEREAS, the military equipment identified in Policy 705 “Military Equipment” is necessary, because there are no reasonable alternatives that can achieve the same objectives of officer and civilian safety; and
WHEREAS, Policy 705 “Military Equipment” will safeguard the public’s welfare, safety, civil rights, and civil liberties; and
WHEREAS, the military equipment identified in Policy 705 “Military Equipment” is reasonably cost effective compared to available alternatives that can achieve the same objective of officer and civilian safety; and
WHEREAS, no prior military use policy has existed in the City of Pacifica that was applicable to the use of military equipment, and the adoption of such policy shall serve to secure future compliance;

6 Packet Pg. 82
Pacifica City Council 5
April 25, 2022

NOW THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PACIFICA DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:

Section 1. Recitals. The City Council of the City of Pacifica does hereby find the above referenced recitals are true and correct and material to the adoption of this Ordinance.

Section 2. Policy Approved and Adopted. Pacifica Police Department’s Lexipol Policy 705 “Military Equipment” is hereby approved and adopted as set forth in Exhibit A attached hereto.

Section 4. The City Council finds that this ordinance and the City of Pacifica Police Department’s Lexipol Policy 705 are exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) because they will not result in a direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment and is not a “project,” as defined in Section 15378 of the CEQA Guidelines.

Section 5. Severability. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this Ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this Ordinance. The City Council hereby declares that it should have adopted the Ordinance and each section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase thereof, irrespective of the fact that any one or more sections, subsections, sentence, clauses or phrases be declared unconstitutional.

Section 6. Publication. The City Clerk is hereby ordered and directed to certify to the passage of this Ordinance by the City Council od the City of Pacifica, California, and cause the same to be published in accordance with State Law.

Section 7. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect thirty (30) days after its adoption and shall be published and posted as required by law.

PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Pacifica, California, held on the 25th day of April 2022, by the following vote:

AYES, Councilmembers:

NOES, Councilmembers:

ABSENT, Councilmembers:

ABSTAIN, Councilmembers:
__________________________
Mary Bier, Mayor
ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
________________________________ ___________________________ Sarah Coffey, City Clerk Michelle Kenyon, City Attorney 6 Packet Pg. 83
Pacifica City Council 6
April 25, 2022
* * * * *
(ID # 4966) at 4/25/2022 5:30 PM City Council Regular Meeting 6 Packet Pg. 84
Pacifica Police Department
Pacifica PD Policy Manual
Military Equipment
705.1 PURPOSE AND SCOPE
The purpose of this policy is to provide guidelines for the approval, acquisition, and reporting requirements of military equipment (Government Code § 7070; Government Code § 7071; Government Code § 7072).

The Pacifica Police Department does not possess any tactical equipment that it has obtained from the military, nor does it possess any equipment that was specifically designed for military use.

The Pacifica Police Department also has not acquired any equipment through military surplus programs such as the 1033 Program (10 USC 2576a).
705.1.1 DEFINITIONS
Definitions related to this policy include (Government Code § 7070):

Governing body – The elected or appointed body that oversees the Department.

Military equipment – Includes but is not limited to the following:
• Unmanned, remotely piloted, powered aerial or ground vehicles. • Mine-resistant ambush-protected (MRAP) vehicles or armored personnel carriers. • High mobility multipurpose wheeled vehicles (HMMWV), two-and-one-half-tontrucks, five-ton trucks, or wheeled vehicles that have a breaching or entry apparatus attached. • Tracked armored vehicles that provide ballistic protection to their occupants. • Command and control vehicles that are either built or modified to facilitate the operational control and direction of public safety units. • Weaponized aircraft, vessels, or vehicles of any kind. • Battering rams, slugs, and breaching apparatuses that are explosive in nature. This does not include a handheld, one-person ram.
• Firearms and ammunition of .50 caliber or greater, excluding standard-issue shotguns and standard-issue shotgun ammunition.
• Specialized firearms and ammunition of less than .50 caliber, including firearms and accessories identified as assault weapons in Penal Code § 30510 and Penal Code § 30515, with the exception of standard-issue firearms.
• Any firearm or firearm accessory that is designed to launch explosive projectiles. • Noise-flash diversionary devices and explosive breaching tools. • Munitions containing tear gas or OC, excluding standard, service-issued handheld pepper spray.

Policy
705

6.a
Packet Pg. 85
Attachment: Attachment A - Military Equipment Policy #705 (4966 : Adoption of an Ordinance Adding Chapter 19, “Acquisition and Use of • TASER® Shockwave, microwave weapons, water cannons, and long-range acoustic devices (LRADs).
• Kinetic energy weapons and munitions.
• Any other equipment as determined by a governing body or a state agency to require additional oversight.
705.2 POLICY
It is the policy of the Pacifica Police Department that members of this department comply with the provisions of Government Code § 7071 with respect to military equipment. All members of the Pacifica Police Department will comply with this policy. 705.3 MILITARY EQUIPMENT COORDINATOR
The Chief of Police should designate a member of this department to act as the military equipment coordinator. The responsibilities of the military equipment coordinator include but are not limited to:
(a) Acting as liaison to the governing body for matters related to the requirements of this policy.
(b) Identifying department equipment that qualifies as military equipment in the current possession of the Department, or the equipment the Department intends to acquire that requires approval by the governing body.
(c) Conducting an inventory of all military equipment at least annually. (d) Collaborating with any allied agency that may use military equipment within the jurisdiction of Pacifica Police Department (Government Code § 7071). (e) Preparing for, scheduling, and coordinating the annual community engagement meeting to include:

1. Publicizing the details of the meeting.

2. Preparing for public questions regarding the department’s funding, acquisition, and use of equipment.
(f) Preparing the annual military equipment report for submission to the Chief of Police and ensuring that the report is made available on the department website (Government Code § 7072).
(g) Establishing the procedure for a person to register a complaint or concern, or how that person may submit a question about the use of a type of military equipment, and how the Department will respond in a timely manner.
705.4 MILITARY EQUIPMENT INVENTORY
The following constitutes a list of qualifying equipment for the Department:

1. Less Lethal Shotgun: Less Lethal Shotgun is used to deploy the less lethal 12-gauge Super-Sock Beanbag Round.
a. Description, quantity, capabilities, and purchase cost i. MOSSBERG 590 TACTICAL LESS LETHAL SHOTGUN, cost: approximately $530 each, quantity:11. The Mossberg 590 Tactical Less Lethal Shotgun is used to deploy the less lethal 12-gauge Super-Sock Beanbag Round up to a

6.a
Packet Pg. 86
Attachment: Attachment A - Military Equipment Policy #705 (4966 : Adoption of an Ordinance Adding Chapter 19, “Acquisition and Use of distance of 75 feet. The dedicated 12-gauge shotgun is distinguishable by an orange butt stock and fore grip. The range of the weapon system helps to maintain space between officers and a threat reducing the immediacy of the threat which is a principle of de-escalation.
ii. 12-GAUGE SUPER-SOCK BEANBAG ROUND, cost: approximately $6.45, quantity: 80. A less lethal 2.4-inch 12-gauge shotgun round firing a ballistic fiber bag filled with 40 grams of shot at a velocity of 270 feet per second (FPS). CTS Super-Sock rounds are discharged from a dedicated 12-gauge shotgun that is distinguishable by an orange butt stock and fore grip. This round provides accurate and effective performance when fired from the approximate optimal rages between 5 and 20 yards. The maximum effective range of this munition is up to approximately 75 feet from the target. The Super-Sock is in its deployed state immediately upon exiting the barrel. It does not require a minimum range to “unfold” or “stabilize.” The Super-Sock is an aerodynamic/projectile. However, accuracy is relative to the shotgun, barrel length, environmental conditions, and the operator. The Super-Sock is accurate, however, effectiveness depends on many variables, such as distance, clothing, stature, and the point where the projectile impacts. b. Purpose
To limit the escalation of conflict where employment of lethal force is undesirable. c. Authorized Use
Situations for use of the less lethal weapon systems may include, but are not limited to:
i. The suspect is armed with a weapon and the tactical circumstances allow for the safe application of approved munitions.
ii. The suspect has made credible threats to harm him/herself or others. iii. The suspect is engaged in riotous behavior or is throwing rocks, bottles or other dangerous projectiles at people and/or officers.
iv. There is probable cause to believe that the suspect has already committed a crime of violence and is refusing to comply with lawful orders. v. Training exercises or approved demonstrations.
d. Lifespan
Mossberg 590 Tactical Less Lethal Shotgun- approximately 15-20 years.

Super Sock Round- No listed expiration date.
e. Fiscal Impact of Maintenance
Costs of procurement are listed above. Annual cost of ongoing maintenance is estimated to be approximately $500.
f. Training
Prior to use of the 12 gauge less lethal shotgun, personnel shall attend a 2 hour course instructed by POST certified instructors, followed by proficiency qualification. Personnel will complete annual qualification demonstrating proficient use of the weapon and policy knowledge.

6.a
Packet Pg. 87
Attachment: Attachment A - Military Equipment Policy #705 (4966 : Adoption of an Ordinance Adding Chapter 19, “Acquisition and Use of g. Legal and Procedural Rules
Use is governed under Lexipol Policy 303.9. It is the policy of the Pacifica Police Department to utilize the less lethal shotgun only for official law enforcement purposes, and pursuant to State and Federal law, including those regarding the use of force.

2. Pepperball Launcher: A device that discharges irritant projectiles. a. Description, quantity, capabilities, and purchase cost i. Pepperball FTC LAUNCHER, cost: approximately $591 each, quantity: 2.

The FTC Launcher is a compressed-air powered launcher designed to fire non-lethal Pepperball projectiles. The FTC Launcher features a hopper that can hold up to 180 rounds, a flexible air source configuration and a compact moduler design.
ii. Pepperball LIVE PROJECTILE, cost: approximately $2.78 per projectile, quantity: 90. The basic Pepperball projectile contains PAVA pepper powder, and is designed for direct impact and area saturation, especially in confined, interior spaces. Discharged from a Pepperball Launcher, the projectile has a velocity of 280-350 FPS. The projectile has a direct impact of 30ft and an area of saturation of 150+ft. The projectile contains 0.5% PAVA Powder.
iii. Pepperball LIVE-X PROJECTILE, cost: approximately $3.58 per projectile, quantity: 90. The Live Projectile contains a concentrated amount of PAVA pepper powder. One round of LIVE-X contains the equivalent PAVA irritant chemical agent in 10 Pepperball LIVE rounds. Discharged from a Pepperball launcher, the projectile has a velocity of 280-350 FPS. The projectile has a direct impact of 60ft and an area of saturation of 150+ft. The projectile contains 5% PAVA Powder.
b. Purpose
To limit the escalation of conflict where employment of lethal force is undesirable.

Situations for use of the less lethal weapon systems may include but, are not limited to:
i. The suspect is armed with a weapon and the tactical circumstances allow for the safe application of approved munitions.
ii. The suspect has made credible threats to harm him/herself or others. iii. The suspect is engaged in riotous behavior or is throwing rocks, bottles or other dangerous projectiles at people and/or officers.
iv. There is probable cause to believe that the suspect has already committed a crime of violence and is refusing to comply with lawful orders. v. Training exercises or approved demonstrations.
c. Authorized Use
Only those officers who have been trained in the use of Pepperball launchers are authorized to use the Pepperball launchers.

6.a
Packet Pg. 88
Attachment: Attachment A - Military Equipment Policy #705 (4966 : Adoption of an Ordinance Adding Chapter 19, “Acquisition and Use of d. Training
Prior to use of the Pepperball launcher and projectiles, personnel will complete a 2 hour course instructed by vendor trained instructors, followed by proficiency qualification.

Personnel will complete annual qualification demonstrating proficient use of the Pepperball launcher and policy knowledge.
e. Lifespan
i. Pepperball FTC Launcher- approximately 10 years
ii. Pepperball Live Projectile- approximately 3 years
iii. Pepperball Live-X Projectile- approximately 3 years f. Fiscal impact of Maintenance Costs
Annual and ongoing maintenance cost estimated to be $500. g. Legal and Procedural Rules
Use is established under Lexipol 303.7.2. It is the policy of the PPD to utilize Pepperball only for official law enforcement purposes, and pursuant to State and Federal law, including those regarding the use of force.

3. Rifles: Guns that are fired from shoulder level, having a long spirally grooved barrel intended to make bullets spin and thereby have greater accuracy over a long distance. a. Description, quantity, capabilities, and purchase cost i. SMITH & WESSON M&P15 SPTII PATROL RIFLE 16”, cost: approximately $607.18, quantity: 16. A rifle that fires an intermediate-power cartridge (.223) which is more powerful than a standard pistol. It is a short-barreled rifle which allows a trained officer better control inside of structures with greater accuracy than a handgun, and long range accuracy. Built to perform multiple uses under various conditions, M&P15 rifles are as versatile as they are reliable. M&P15 rifles are lightweight and rugged embodying the best combination of function and form.
.
ii. Colt M4 Commando Semi-Auto Rifle 11.5”, cost: approximately $1,199.00, quantity: 3. A rifle that fires an intermediate-power cartridge (.223) which is more powerful than a standard pistol. It is a short-barreled rifle which allows a trained officer better control inside of structures with greater accuracy, rapid response, maneuverability and enhanced firepower in critical situations. iii. WINCHESTER RANGER.223 55GR BALLISTIC SILVERTIP RIFLE ROUND, cost: approximately $987.00 per case of 1000 rounds, quantity: 3 cases.

The.223 rounds feature 55 Grain Ballistic Silvertip Centerfire Rifle Ammunition with brass cases and boxer primers. This ammunition is non-corrosive. The .223 round offers muzzle velocity of 3240 feet per second and muzzle energy of 1282 ft lbs.
iv. WINCHESTER REMINGTON .223 55GR FULL METAL JACKET RIFLE ROUND, cost: approximately $459 per case of 1000, quantity: 5 cases. The Full Metal Jacket rifle round features 55 Grain full metal jacket bullets, recommended for target and range training.The.223 round offers muzzle velocity of 3240 feet per second and muzzle energy of 1282 ft lbs.

6.a
Packet Pg. 89
Attachment: Attachment A - Military Equipment Policy #705 (4966 : Adoption of an Ordinance Adding Chapter 19, “Acquisition and Use of b. Purpose
To be used as precision weapons to address a threat with more precision and/or greater distances than a handgun, if present and feasible. c. Authorized Use
Members who have received in-house / POST training from certified POST range instructors.
d. Lifespan
i Smith & Wesson M&P15 Patrol Rifle- approximately 15-20 years. ii Colt M4 Comando Semi-Auto Rifle- approximately 15-20 years. iii Winchester Ranger .223 Ballistic Silvertip Rifle Rounds- no expiration. iv Winchester Remington .223 Full Metal Jacket Rifle Rounds- no expiration. e. Fiscal Impact
Annual and ongoing maintenance cost will is estimated to be approximately $1,000- $1,500.
f. Training
Prior to use of the rifle, personnel will complete a 4 hour course presented by a POST approved instructor, followed by proficiency qualification. Personnel will complete annual qualification demonstrating proficient use of the rifle and policy knowledge. As courses are available, the Training Sergeant will send personnel to a supplemental POST approved 16 hour Patrol Rifle Operator course. g. Legal and Procedural Rules
Use is established under Lexipol 306.3.6. It is the policy of the PPD to utilize rifles only for official law enforcement purposes, and pursuant to State and Federal law regarding the use of force.

4. Command Post Trailer: Marked police trailer used to command sustained law enforcement incidents.
a. Description, quantity, capabilities, and purchase cost i. TPD 24’ x 8.5’ tandem 5k Axle Special Ops trailer VIN# 1T9C29028B1090003, purchase price $50,000.
.
b. Purpose
To be used as a command post for sustained law enforcement incidents, including but not limited to DUI checkpoints, major collision scenes, major crime scenes, or other sustained incident where access to law enforcement computers, communication equipment and shelter is required.
c. Authorized Use
All department members upon authorization of the watch commander. d. Lifespan
Estimated 20-25 years.

6.a
Packet Pg. 90
Attachment: Attachment A - Military Equipment Policy #705 (4966 : Adoption of an Ordinance Adding Chapter 19, “Acquisition and Use of e. Fiscal Impact
Annual and ongoing maintenance cost estimated to be $1,500. f. Training
1 hour of in-house training regarding safe deployment and stationing of trailer. g. Legal and Procedural Rules
Deployment of trailer is only allowed upon authorization of the watch commander. 705.5 APPROVAL
The Chief of Police or the authorized designee shall obtain approval from the governing body by way of an ordinance adopting the military equipment policy. As part of the approval process, the Chief of Police or the authorized designee shall ensure the proposed military equipment policy is submitted to the governing body and is available on the department website at least 30 days prior to any public hearing concerning the military equipment at issue (Government Code § 7071). The military equipment policy must be approved by the governing body prior to engaging in any of the following (Government Code § 7071):
(a) Requesting military equipment made available pursuant to 10 USC § 2576a. (b) Seeking funds for military equipment, including but not limited to applying for a grant, soliciting or accepting private, local, state, or federal funds, in-kind donations, or other donations or transfers.
(c) Acquiring military equipment either permanently or temporarily, including by borrowing or leasing.
(d) Collaborating with another law enforcement agency in the deployment or other use of military equipment within the jurisdiction of this department. (e) Using any new or existing military equipment for a purpose, in a manner, or by a person not previously approved by the governing body.
(f) Soliciting or responding to a proposal for, or entering into an agreement with, any other person or entity to seek funds for, apply to receive, acquire, use, or collaborate in the use of military equipment.
(g) Acquiring military equipment through any means not provided above. 705.6 COORDINATION WITH OTHER JURISDICTIONS
Military equipment should not be used by any other law enforcement agency or member in this jurisdiction unless the military equipment is approved for use in accordance with this policy. Law enforcement agencies responding to a call for mutual aid within this jurisdiction shall adhere to their own policies on the use of military equipment.
705.7 ANNUAL REVIEW AND REPORT
Upon approval of a military equipment policy, the Chief of Police or the authorized designee shall submit a military equipment report to the governing body for each type of military equipment approved within one year of approval, and annually thereafter for as long as the military equipment is available for use (Government Code § 7072).

6.a
Packet Pg. 91
Attachment: Attachment A - Military Equipment Policy #705 (4966 : Adoption of an Ordinance Adding Chapter 19, “Acquisition and Use of The Chief of Police or the authorized designee shall also make each annual military equipment report publicly available on the department website for as long as the military equipment is available for use. The report shall include all information required by Government Code § 7072 for the preceding calendar year for each type of military equipment in department inventory.

The Annual Military Equipment Report will include the following information for the immediately preceding calendar year for each type of military equipment:

1. A summary of how the military equipment was used and the purpose of its use.

2. A summary of any complaints or concerns received concerning the military equipment.

3. The results of any internal audits, any information about violations of the military equipment use policy, and any actions taken in response.

4. The total annual cost for each type of military equipment, including acquisition, personnel, training, transportation, maintenance, storage, upgrade, and other ongoing costs, and from what source funds will be provided for the military equipment in the calendar year following submission of the annual military equipment report.

5. The quantity possessed for each type of military equipment.

6. If the law enforcement agency intends to acquire additional military equipment in the next year, the quantity sought for each type of military equipment. 705.8 COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT
Within 30 days of submitting and publicly releasing the annual report, the Department shall hold at least one well-publicized and conveniently located community engagement meeting, at which the Department should discuss the report and respond to public questions regarding thefunding, acquisition, or use of military equipment.
705.9 POLICY COMPLIANCE
Government Code section 7070 requires that this policy specify the mechanisms to be used by the Department to ensure compliance with this policy. Complaints regarding violations of this policy are subject to investigation and discipline in accordance with Policy 1010, and other policies of the Department related to officer discipline.
706.9 PUBLIC COMPLAINTS, QUESTIONS, AND INVESTIGATION
Government Code section 7070 requires that this policy specify the procedures by which members of the public may register complaints, submit questions about the use of each specific type of military equipment subject to this policy, and procedures by which the Department will respond to such matters.

Pursuant to California Government Code §7070(d)(7), members of the public may register complaints or concerns or submit questions about the use of each specific type of Military Equipment in this policy by any of the following means:

6.a
Packet Pg. 92
Attachment: Attachment A - Military Equipment Policy #705 (4966 : Adoption of an Ordinance Adding Chapter 19, “Acquisition and Use of

1. Via email to: [email protected]

2. Via phone call to: (650) 738-7314

3. Via mail sent to: Pacifica Police Department
Attn: Military Equipment Use Coordinator
2075 Coast Highway
Pacifica, CA 94066
The Pacifica Police Department is committed to responding to complaints, concerns and/or questions received through any of the above methods in a timely manner. Complaints regarding violations of this policy are subject to investigation and discipline in accordance with Policy 1010, and other policies of the Department related to officer discipline.

6.a
Packet Pg. 93
Attachment: Attachment A - Military Equipment Policy #705 (4966 : Adoption of an Ordinance Adding Chapter 19, “Acquisition and Use of

CITY OF PACIFICA

COUNCIL AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT
4/11/2022
1 SUBJECT:

Introduction of an Ordinance Adding Chapter 19, “Acquisition and Use of Military Equipment” of Title 4 “Public Safety” of the Pacifica Municipal Code
RECOMMENDED ACTION:

Move to Waive the First Reading of and Introduce by Title an Ordinance of the City Council of the City Of Pacifica Adding Chapter 19, “Acquisition and Use of Military Equipment” of Title 4 “Public Safety” of the Pacifica Municipal Code, Approving the Pacifica Police Department Military Equipment Policy; and finding the introduction of the Ordinance exempt under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).

STAFF CONTACT:

Daniel Steidle, Chief of Police
650-738-7314
[email protected]
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION:

On September 30, 2021, California Assembly Bill 481 (AB 481) was signed into law.

Subsequently, California Government Code Sections 7070, 7071, and 7072 were adopted to codify the requirements set forth in AB 481.

6.b
Packet Pg. 94
Attachment: Attachment B: Staff Report 4-11-2022 (4966 : Adoption of an Ordinance Adding Chapter 19, “Acquisition and Use of Military Pacifica City Council 2
April 11, 2022
Military Equipment Policy Requirements
California Government Code Section 7070(d) defines a Military Equipment Use Policy as:
“Military equipment use policy means a publicly released, written document governing the use of military equipment by a law enforcement agency or a state agency that addresses, at a minimum, all the following:”

1. A description of each type of military equipment, the quantity sought, its capabilities, expected lifespan, and product descriptions from the manufacturer of the military equipment.

2. The purposes and authorized uses for which the law enforcement agency or the state agency proposes to use each type of military equipment.

3. The fiscal impact of each type of military equipment, including the initial costs of obtaining the equipment and estimated annual costs of maintaining the equipment.

4. The legal and procedural rules that govern each authorized use.

5. The training, including any course required by the Commission on Peace Officer Standards and Training, that must be completed before any officer, agent, or employee of the law enforcement agency or the state agency is allowed to use each specific type of military equipment to ensure the full protection of the public's welfare, safety, civil rights, and civil liberties and full adherence to the military equipment use policy.

6. The mechanisms to ensure compliance with the military equipment use policy, including which independent persons or entities have oversight authority, and, if applicable, what legally enforceable sanctions are put in place for violations of the policy.

7. For a law enforcement agency, the procedures by which members of the public may register complaints or concerns or submit questions about the use of each specific type of military equipment, and how the law enforcement agency will ensure that each complaint, concern, or question receives a response in a timely manner.

California Government Code Section 7071(b) requires that the Police Department post to its website the Military Equipment Use Policy that it plans to propose to the City Council at least 30 days prior to any public hearing concerning the policy. The Police Department complied with this requirement by posting the draft policy being proposed, to its public website, on March 4, 2022.

California Government Code Section 7071(d) states that the City Council shall only approve the Military Equipment Use Policy if it determines all the following:

1. The military equipment is necessary because there is no reasonable alternative that can achieve the same objective of officer and civilian safety.

2. The proposed military equipment use policy will safeguard the public's welfare, safety, civil rights, and civil liberties.

3. If purchasing the equipment, the equipment is reasonably cost effective compared to available alternatives that can achieve the same objective of officer and civilian safety.

4. Prior military equipment use complied with the military equipment use policy that was in effect at the time, or if prior uses did not comply with the accompanying military equipment use policy,

6.b
Packet Pg. 95
Attachment: Attachment B: Staff Report 4-11-2022 (4966 : Adoption of an Ordinance Adding Chapter 19, “Acquisition and Use of Military Pacifica City Council 3
April 11, 2022
corrective action has been taken to remedy nonconforming uses and ensure future compliance.

California Government Code Section 7070(e) establishes that the Police Department is responsible for delivering to the City Council an Annual Military Equipment Report, which the City Council can utilize to confirm compliance with the Military Equipment Use Policy and the accompanying Military Equipment Use Ordinance.

California Government Code Section 7070 provides a list of (16) types of equipment that are to be considered “Military Equipment” for the purpose of compliance with AB 481 and the associated California Government Codes, and the Police Department does possess and use some of these listed types of equipment. Of the (16) types of equipment specified, the Police Department possesses only (4) types. These types of equipment will be discussed further in the below proposed Military Equipment Policy section.

Proposed Military Equipment Policy
Staff, in collaboration with the City Attorney’s Office, has authored Pacifica Police Department Policy #705, Military Equipment (Attachment A). The policy contains the following to comply with AB481:
• Designation of a military equipment coordinator, primarily responsible for tracking inventory, collaborating with any agency that may use military equipment within our jurisdiction, coordination of community engagement meeting prior to release of annual Military Equipment Report, ensuring completion of the annual Military Equipment Report and receiving community questions or complaints regarding the use of military equipment.
• Requires the Chief of Police or the authorized designee to obtain approval from the governing body by way of an ordinance adopting the Military Equipment Policy. As part of the approval process, the Chief of Police or the authorized designee shall ensure the proposed military equipment policy is submitted to the governing body and is available on the department website at least 30 days prior to any public hearing concerning the military equipment at issue.
• Requires the Chief of Police or the authorized designee to submit a Military Equipment Report to the governing body for each type of military equipment approved within one year of approval, and annually thereafter for as long as the military equipment is available for use (Government Code § 7072). The Chief of Police or the authorized designee shall also make each annual military equipment report publicly available on the department website for as long as the military equipment is available for use. The report shall include all information required by Government Code § 7072 for the preceding calendar year for each type of military equipment in department inventory. • Requires that within 30 days of submitting and publicly releasing the annual report, the Department shall hold at least one well-publicized and conveniently located community engagement meeting, at which the Department will discuss the report and respond to public questions regarding the funding, acquisition, or use of military equipment. • Specifies the mechanisms to be used by the Department to ensure compliance with the policy. Sustained complaints regarding violations of the policy are subject to investigation and discipline in accordance with Policy 1010, and other policies of the Department related to officer discipline.

6.b
Packet Pg. 96
Attachment: Attachment B: Staff Report 4-11-2022 (4966 : Adoption of an Ordinance Adding Chapter 19, “Acquisition and Use of Military Pacifica City Council 4
April 11, 2022
• Establishes procedures by which members of the public may register complaints, submit questions about the use of each specific type of military equipment subject to the policy, and procedures by which the Department will respond to such matters.

This policy contains the (4) types of “Military Equipment” that the Pacifica Police Department currently possesses, along with the required information describing each item, costs, training, and use. The (4) types of equipment detailed in the policy are:
1) Less Lethal Shotgun: (11) Shotguns, placed in each marked police vehicle, specifically marked for use only with a less-lethal “Super-Sock Beanbag Round.” This item is used to limit the escalation of conflict where employment of lethal force is undesirable. 2) Pepperball Launcher: (2) Launchers, placed in marked supervisor police vehicles, that launch “pepper balls,” which contained a powdered pepper irritant. 3) Rifles: (16) Rifles, placed in marked police vehicles, used as a lethal force option that provides greater accuracy than handgun type firearms, especially at longer distances.

Government Code § 7070 states that assault weapons are military equipment, with the exception of “standard-issued firearms.” As the rifles used by the Pacifica Police department are “standard issue,” staff recognizes that these rifles are not required to be included in the Military Equipment Policy. Staff believes it is likely the public would perceive rifles to be military equipment, and as such, staff has included them in the policy in the essence of transparency.
4) Command Post Trailer: (1) marked trailer, to be used as a command post for sustained law enforcement incidents, including DUI checkpoints, major collisions scenes, major crime scenes, etc.

The Annual Military Equipment Report will include the following information for the immediately

6.b
Packet Pg. 97
Attachment: Attachment B: Staff Report 4-11-2022 (4966 : Adoption of an Ordinance Adding Chapter 19, “Acquisition and Use of Military Pacifica City Council 5
April 11, 2022
preceding calendar year for each type of military equipment:

1. A summary of how the military equipment was used and the purpose of its use.

2. A summary of any complaints or concerns received concerning the military equipment.

3. The results of any internal audits, any information about violations of the military equipment use policy, and any actions taken in response.

5. The quantity possessed for each type of military equipment.

6. If the law enforcement agency intends to acquire additional military equipment in the next year, the quantity sought for each type of military equipment ALTERNATIVE ACTION:

Decline to approve the Pacifica Police Department Military Equipment Policy and provide staff further direction.

RELATION TO CITY COUNCIL GOALS AND WORK PLAN:

Adoption of an Ordinance approving the Pacifica Police Department Military Equipment Policy resonates with the City Council Goal of An Engaged Community and Maintaining a Safe Community.

FISCAL IMPACT:

There is no fiscal impact to introduction of this Ordinance or approving the Pacifica Police Department Military Equipment Policy.

CEQA:

ORIGINATED BY:

Police
ATTACHMENT LIST:

Attachment A - Military Equipment Policy #705 (PDF)

6.b
Packet Pg. 98
Attachment: Attachment B: Staff Report 4-11-2022 (4966 : Adoption of an Ordinance Adding Chapter 19, “Acquisition and Use of Military Pacifica City Council 6
April 11, 2022
ORDINANCE NO. (ID # 4929)
ORDINANCE NO. ______

6.b
Packet Pg. 99
Attachment: Attachment B: Staff Report 4-11-2022 (4966 : Adoption of an Ordinance Adding Chapter 19, “Acquisition and Use of Military Pacifica City Council 7
April 11, 2022

NOW THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PACIFICA DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:

Section 1. Recitals. The City Council of the City of Pacifica does hereby find the above referenced recitals are true and correct and material to the adoption of this Ordinance.

Section 2. Policy Approved and Adopted. Pacifica Police Department’s Lexipol Policy 705 “Military Equipment” is hereby approved and adopted as set forth in Exhibit A attached hereto.

Section 7. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect thirty (30) days after its adoption and shall be published and posted as required by law.

PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Pacifica, California, held on the ______ day of _______ 20_____, by the following vote:

AYES, Councilmembers:

NOES, Councilmembers:

ABSENT, Councilmembers:

6.b
Packet Pg. 100 Attachment: Attachment B: Staff Report 4-11-2022 (4966 : Adoption of an Ordinance Adding Chapter 19, “Acquisition and Use of Military Pacifica City Council 8
April 11, 2022
* * * * *
(ID # 4929) at 4/11/2022 7:00 PM City Council Regular Meeting

6.b
Packet Pg. 101 Attachment: Attachment B: Staff Report 4-11-2022 (4966 : Adoption of an Ordinance Adding Chapter 19, “Acquisition and Use of Military

CITY OF PACIFICA

COUNCIL AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT
4/25/2022
1 SUBJECT:

Update to the Park Development Impact Fee
RECOMMENDED ACTION:

Move to:

1. Adopt resolution to update the Park Facilities Impact Fee and the Quimby Act Parkland In Lieu Fee within the City of Pacifica; and

STAFF CONTACT:

Sam Bautista, P.E., Deputy Director of Public Works
[email protected]
(650) 738-3767
Christian Murdock, AICP, Acting Planning Director
[email protected]
(650) 738-7341
Lisa Petersen, P.E., Director of Public Works
[email protected]
(650) 738-3767
BACKGROUND:

On February 14, 2022, staff brought this item to the City Council for consideration. The City Council asked staff to return with clarification regarding the proposed fees including a discussion regarding applicability of the fees to affordable housing developments along with associated fee reductions and/or exemptions. At the March 28, 2022 Council meeting, staff provided an analysis, based on historical building data, showing the loss of fee revenue if the City provided 25%, 50%, 75% fee reductions and a 100% fee exemption for moderate and below market rate housing units. City Council then directed staff to provide an analysis, based on the Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) numbers, showing the loss of fee revenue if the City provided fee reductions for moderate, low, and very low income units. This item is placed on the April 25th agenda for action.

The City of Pacifica has a park impact fee program to ensure that new development pays the capital costs associated with growth. In the case of parks, these impact fees would apply to the 7 Packet Pg. 102
Pacifica City Council 2
April 25, 2022
most common development type in Pacifica currently - incremental growth associated with additions and new single-family homes. The proposed fee update would also apply to other types of new development including multi-family housing and subdivisions.

Pacifica’s park impact fees were last adopted in 2012 and need to be updated to reflect service demand and incorporate best available information. Currently, park impact fees generate an average of $150,352 per year which is not sufficient to maintain the City’s existing level of service for park facilities and serve future growth.

In California, local governments can impose two types of development impact fees for funding parks and recreational facilities. Under the Quimby Act (Government Code § 66477), local governments may require the dedication of land for parks or the payment of fees in-lieu of land dedication as a condition of subdivision map approval. To fund the construction of new park and recreational facilities, local governments may also impose AB1600 Park Impact Fees by following the guidelines set forth by the Mitigation Fee Act (Government Code § 66000). On March 26, 2012, City Council adopted Resolution No. 09-2012 establishing the need for both types of fees: a Parkland Dedication In-Lieu Fee (Quimby Act) and a Park Facilities Impact Fee, within the City of Pacifica (Attachment “A”) (collectively the “Park Fees Program”). The City prepared a Park Facilities Impact Fee Study to establish the nexus between the imposition of new park fees and the estimated reasonable cost of providing the service for which the fees are charged. The Park Fees Program is designed to ensure that new development pays their fair share of the cost of land acquisition for parks (in order to maintain the City’s existing ratio of parks-to-population) and their fair share of the cost of development of new parks, trails, and open space.

Quimby Act Fee
Local governments in California provide a critical role in the effort to set aside parkland and open space for recreational purposes. Cities and counties have been authorized since the passage of the 1975 Quimby Act to pass ordinances requiring that developers set aside land, donate conservation easements, or pay fees for park improvements. Revenues generated through the Quimby Act cannot be used for the operation of park facilities. The goal of the Quimby Act was to require developers to help mitigate the impacts of growth from new development. The Quimby Act gives authority for passage of land dedication ordinances only to cities and counties. The Quimby Act only applies to residential subdivision developments. The fees must be paid and land conveyed directly to the local public agencies that provide park and recreation services community-wide. The fee is based on the cost of land in the community and the City’s current park service standards, which exceeds five (5) park acres per one thousand (1,000) residents standard.

Park Impact Fee
An impact fee is a fee that is imposed by a local government on a new or proposed development project to pay for all or a portion of the costs of providing public facilities to serve the new development. Impact fees are a charge on new development to help fund and pay for the construction or needed expansion of offsite capital improvements. Projects subject to this fee include new single-family homes and additions, two of the most common development types in Pacifica. A park impact fee is based on maintaining the current level of park service for a community, cost of land, and anticipated population growth.

DISCUSSION:

In order to maintain the City’s existing ratio of parks-to-population, development impact fees are needed to fund new development’s share of the cost of park and recreational facilities. The fees are driven by the cost of parks and the existing ratio of park acreage to population. The goal of this effort is to ensure there is adequate funding to acquire land, build new parks, and improve 7 Packet Pg. 103
Pacifica City Council 3
April 25, 2022
existing parks to meet the demand of the increased population.

Currently, the City imposes the Quimby Act Fee and Mitigation Fee Act Fees depending on the type of development. The Quimby Act Fee in-lieu of land dedication is a fee, which is only paid by residential development occurring in subdivisions. The Mitigation Fee Act Fee has two components:
• A Mitigation Fee Act Fee for land acquisition. This fee is only paid by residential development not occurring in subdivisions.
• A Mitigation Fee Act Fee for parkland improvements. This fee is payable by all residential development.

A development project pays either the Quimby Act Fee in-lieu of land dedication, or the Mitigation Fee Act Fee for land acquisition, not both. The Quimby and Mitigation Fee Act landrelated fees are the exact same amount, and all residential development pays the Mitigation Fee Act improvements fee, therefore, the total fee is the same for everyone. The nuance is that those subject to Quimby can dedicate the land instead of paying the fee, in which case, they would still be responsible for the Mitigation Fee Act improvement fee.

These fees are a funding source for park land acquisition and park improvements in Pacifica.

Recently, the fees have been used to fund a portion of the construction of the Community Center Park and Fairmont Park improvements, in which the footprint of the play structures were increased in both parks. It is anticipated that a portion of funding used to install new expanded play structures at Imperial Park, Skyridge Park, Marvilla Park and Brighton Park will be provided by these fees. Without these fees, there would be no continuing money source for new or major improvements to Pacifica’s parks, athletic fields, and open space.

The City plans to use park facilities fee revenues to purchase parkland or construct improvements to add to the system of park and recreation facilities that serves new development. The City may only use impact fee revenue to acquire parkland, provide facilities, and intensify usage of existing facilities needed to serve new development. Fee revenue collected under the Quimby Act can also be used to rehabilitate park facilities, in addition to acquiring new parkland. Also, as an example, these fees could be used for the construction of new trails to expand the trails system; however, if the new trails are located on non-City-owned parcels, the City must obtain public access easements for the use and maintenance of these trails.

It is good practice to analyze and periodically update impact fees, and with the enactment of AB 602, impact fees now must be updated at least every eight years. To that end, the City contracted with Willdan Financial Services to draft a nexus study setting forth the basis for the fee update (“Fee Report”) (Attachment “B”). These fees are calculated based on cost of parkland (per acre) and cost of park improvement (per acre). In 2012, the costs of parkland and park improvements were $150,000 (per acre) and $411,000 (per acre), respectively. In December 2021, the costs of parkland and park improvements were $1,545,000 (per acre) and $1,356,200 (per acre), respectively. These increased costs result in higher calculated fees.

Based on the total costs of facilities needed to serve new development from the impact fee update study, the total projected fee revenue is $31,652,092 (from 2021 to 2040). The following table shows the current, updated Park Facilities Impact, and remodel/add bedroom fees:

Bedrooms Current Park Facilities
Impact Fee
Updated Park Facilities
Impact Fee
Remodel/Add
Bedroom
0 $0 $20,566
7 Packet Pg. 104
Pacifica City Council 4
April 25, 2022
1 $3,702 $24,118 $3,552
2 $5,181 $36,842 $12,724
3 $6,416 $44,684 $7,842
4 $7,897 $51,047 $6,363
5 $9,130 $59,037 $7,990
Additional
Bedroom
+$1,481 +$7,990 $7,990
Bedroom Calculation and Fee Schedule
All fees are calculated based on the average number of people living in a dwelling unit in Pacifica. Occupant density assumptions ensure a reasonable relationship between the size of a development project, the increase in service population associated with the project, and the amount of the fee. Persons per bedroom assumptions ensure a reasonable relationship between the size of a dwelling unit and the residents, and therefore demand for public facilities.

For residential development, the fee is based on the number of bedrooms in each additional housing unit, so the fee schedule must convert service population estimates to these measures of bedrooms per dwelling unit and number of dwelling units in the project. The conversion is done with average household size factors that vary by bedrooms proposed in the dwelling unit and are established from the 2019 American Housing Survey, which estimates the persons per bedroom. The occupant densities are factors taken into consideration when calculating the fees.

To calculate fees, the investment in park facilities is determined on a per resident basis for both land acquisition and improvements. These cost factors are based on the unit cost estimates and facility standards. The fees scale with the increases in average residents per dwelling unit, by number of bedrooms. The more people that live in a particular sized dwelling unit on average, the higher the fees. The incremental fee per bedroom is the difference between the fee for a particular number of bedrooms and the fee for a unit with one fewer bedroom. The increases in average persons per dwelling unit by number of bedrooms are not linear, so the incremental fee per bedroom is not uniform as the number of bedrooms increases.

The City anticipates that the park fees would be the primary revenue source to fund new development’s investment in park facilities. “Table 9” from the final report shows the maximum justified park facilities fee based on a five acre per 1,000 resident standard. Fees can also be charged incrementally for the addition of net new bedrooms. For example, if a homeowner wants to add a bedroom to their existing three-bedroom home, the homeowner would pay $6,349.

The total fee includes an administrative charge to fund costs that include: (1) legal, accounting, and other administrative support and (2) impact fee program administrative costs including revenue collection, revenue and cost accounting, mandated public reporting, and fee justification analyses. The table below shows the updated, proposed Park Land and Facilities Fees (under Quimby and the Mitigation Fee Act).
7 Packet Pg. 105
Pacifica City Council 5
April 25, 2022
Park Fees Schedule
Number of
Bedrooms
Land
Acquisiton
per Capita
Improvements Cost
per Capita
Total
Cost per
Capita Density1
Base
Fee
Admin
Charge2
Total Fee
per
Dwelling
Unit
Incremental
Fee per
Bedroom
0 $ 7,725 $ 6,781 $14,506 1.39 $20,163 $ 403 $ 20,566
1 7,725 6,781 14,506 1.63 23,645 473 24,118 $ 3,552
2 7,725 6,781 14,506 2.49 36,120 722 36,842 12,724
3 7,725 6,781 14,506 3.02 43,808 876 44,684 7,842
4 7,725 6,781 14,506 3.45 50,046 1,001 51,047 6,363
5 7,725 6,781 14,506 3.99 57,879 1,158 59,037 7,990
Additional Bedroom 7,725 6,781 14,506 0.54 7,833 157 7,990 1 Persons per dw elling unit.
2 Administrative charge of 2.0 percent for (1) legal, accounting, and other administrative support and (2) impact fee program administrative costs including revenue collection, revenue and cost accounting, mandated public reporting, and fee justification analyses.

As a comparison, the following tables shows Park Impact Fees of cities on the Peninsula (based on a four-bedroom single family unit), along with their corresponding standard level of service:

City Park Impact Fee Level of Park Service
(Acre)
Pacifica (existing) $5,887 5.00
Pacifica (max. justified) $50,938 5.00
Belmont $54,160 3.44
Half Moon Bay $7,764 5.00
Millbrae $55,522 2.65
Palo Alto $62,584 5.00
San Mateo $29,598 2.00
South San Francisco $29,124 3.00
Sunnyvale $87,120 5.00
Fee Reductions for Affordable Housing Units and Accessory Dwelling Units (ADU) Many cites have reduced fees for affordable housing. For example, the City of Fremont and the City of San Jose (among others) charge park impact fees for deed-restricted affordable housing at 50% of the max justified rate. Palo Alto exempts all impact fees for 100% affordable housing.

Many cities also exempt the inclusionary units in a project from the impact fees, but still charge fees to the market rate units. For the March 28, 2022 City Council meeting, a preliminary analysis was performed to determine how affordable housing fee reductions/exemptions would affect the projected fee revenue. Based on historical data from 2015 to 2020, approximately

6.25% of the new dwelling units were moderate or below market rate units. The following table shows the calculated loss of fee revenue from 25% fee reduction to 100% fee exemption for Moderate and Below Market Rate Units.
7 Packet Pg. 106
Pacifica City Council 6
April 25, 2022
Affordable Housing Fee Reduction/Exemption Analysis
New Dwelling Units (2015 to 2020)
Moderate and Below 6
Above Moderate 90
Total 96
Share of Moderate and Below Units 6.25%
Total Projected Fee Revenue (2021 - 2040)1$31,652,092
Loss in Fee Revenue Resulting from: 2
100% Exemption for Moderate and Below $ 1,978,256
75% Fee Reduction for Moderate and Below 1,483,692
50% Fee Reduction for Moderate and Below 989,128
25% Fee Reduction for Moderate and Below 494,564
1 Total costs of facilities needed to serve new development from nexus study. 2 Assumes share of moderate and below to above moderate units w ill remain constant.

A 100% fee exemption would result in a loss of approximately $2 million of park impact fees, while 75%, 50%, and 25% fee reductions would result in park impact fee loss of approximately $1.5 million, $1 million, and $500,000, respectively (from 2021 to 2040). It is in the City Council’s discretion to decide whether to adopt fee reductions/exemptions for affordable housing units. However, by not collecting sufficient fees, the City may require commitment of other non-fee revenue to undertake future park projects, otherwise, future park projects could be deferred or delayed due to reduced fee revenue.

The data provided for the fee reduction analysis did not include ADUs, so the analysis did not take ADUs into account. In addition, the fees would be different for each ADU relative to the size of the primary unit, so there is no way to estimate the impact it would have on anticipated fee revenues. The California State Legislature recently amended requirements on local agencies for the imposition of development impact fees on accessory dwelling units (ADU) with Assembly Bill AB 68 in 2021. The amendment to California Government Code §65852.2(f)(2) stipulates that local agencies may not impose any impact fees on ADUs less than 750 square feet. ADUs greater than 750 square feet can be charged impact fees in proportion to the size of the primary dwelling unit. Thus, State law already exempts ADUs under 750 sf from paying impact fees.

Anecdotally, a reasonable assumption is that the smaller ADUs under 750 sf will be “naturally affordable.” The Council may wish to consider requiring ADUs larger than 750 sf to pay the proportional impact fee. If the Council decides to reduce impact fees for affordable units, that fee reduction could be available to ADUs larger than 750 sf if they are restricted units.

City Council provided specific direction to staff to provide an analysis, based on the Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) numbers, showing the loss of fee revenues if the City provided fee reductions for moderate, low, and very low income units. Council asked staff to analyze two fee reduction/exemption scenarios. Scenario 1 would analyze charging 75% of maximum justified to moderate income units, 50% of maximum justified fees to low income units and an exemption of fees for very low income units. Scenario 2 would analyze charging 75% of maximum justified for moderate income units, 25% of maximum justified for low income units and an exemption of fees for very low income units. The following table shows loss of revenue 7 Packet Pg. 107
Pacifica City Council 7
April 25, 2022
for each of the scenarios:

Affordable Housing Fee Reduction/Exemption Analysis
Very Low
Income
Low Income
50% to 80%
Moderate Income
80% to 120%
Above Moderate
Income
Total <50% of AMI of AMI of AMI >120% of AMI
RNHA Projected Units 1,892 538 310 291 753
RHNA Share of Projected Units 100.00% 28.4% 16.4% 15.4% 39.8% Total Projected Fee Revenue (2021 - 2040)1 $ 31,652,092 $ 8,989,194 $ 5,190,943 $ 4,874,422 $ 12,597,533 Loss of Revenue From Scenario 12 $ 12,803,271 $ 8,989,194 $ 2,595,472 $ 1,218,606 $ - Net Fee Revenue $ 18,848,821 $ - $ 2,595,472 $ 3,655,817 $ 12,597,533 Loss of Revenue From Scenario 23 $ 14,101,007 $ 8,989,194 $ 3,893,207 $ 1,218,606 $ - Net Fee Revenue $ 17,551,085 $ - $ 1,297,736 $ 3,655,817 $ 12,597,533 1 Total costs of facilities needed to serve new development from nexus study. 2 Moderate income = 75% of maximum justified; Low Income = 50% of maximum justified; Very Low Income = Exempt. 3 Moderate income = 75% of maximum justified; Low Income = 25% of maximum justified; Very Low Income = Exempt.

Under this analysis, there is a total of 1,892 RNHA Project Units for the City, of which 538 are Very Low Income Units, 310 are Low Income Units, 291 are Moderate Income Units, and 753 are Above Moderate Income Units. Under both scenarios, the loss of fee revenue for the exemption of Very Low Income units is $8,989,194 and a fee revenue loss of $1,218,606 for a 25% reduction of fees for Moderate Income Units. Under Scenario 1, the loss of fee revenue for Low Income Units is $2,595,472, and $3,893,207 for Scenario 2. While the loss in fee revenue under either scenario would be significant should the RHNA projections be achieved, the RHNA projections may not be achievable based on recent trends. Indeed, the Fee Report does rely on projected development, rather than the RHNA projections, to determine the revenues needed to provide parks to future growth. This makes it difficult to project with certainty the loss of fee revenue from implementing either scenario. Depending on the actual amount and affordability mix of housing built, the loss of fee revenue may be minor, or may be significant.

The RNHA projections are very optimistic. Of the total units projected, over 60% are projected to moderate or lower income units. The RHNA projection would be a stark departure from recent history. Between 2015 and 2020, a total of 96 housing units were built in the City. Of the 96 units, 6 units were moderate income units, and none were low income or very low income. If historical trends continue over 93% of future units built in Pacifica would be above moderate income housing units and would not qualify for any reduction in fees.

City Council could recommend either Scenario 1 or Scenario 2. Scenario 2 would create a greater incentive for production of Low Income units. Should the City implement either affordable housing reduction park impact fee policy it should monitor the potential loss of fee revenue and could revise the policy depending on the fee program outcomes. While it is recommended that fee programs be updated every five years, the City could update the program sooner than that if it desires.

Should the City Council update the fees without any fee reductions, staff recommends adopting the attached Resolution. However, if the City Council would like to include fee reductions and/or exemptions to the fee schedule, an alternate resolution is attached, which will accomplish that objective.

As stated earlier in the report, the Mitigation Fee Act, contained in Government Code 66000 et seq., permits the City to impose development impact fees on new development for the purposes 7 Packet Pg. 108
Pacifica City Council 8
April 25, 2022
of funding the public facilities necessary to serve that new development, and California Government Code section 66477 (the “Quimby Act”) allows cities to require the dedication of land or to impose a requirement of the payment of fees in lieu thereof, or a combination of both, for park or recreation purposes as a condition of approval of a tentative or parcel map. The City’s Municipal Code contains outdated provisions regarding the City’s Park Facilities Impact Fee and Quimby Act dedication requirements and in lieu fees. As such, staff is bringing the attached Ordinance (Attachment “C”) to amend the City’s existing Code provisions and bring them into compliance with new state laws. In the future, the Council would be able to update the fees or change the amount of the fees via resolution without needing to adopt another ordinance.

ALTERNATIVE ACTION:

Should the City Council not adopt the resolution updating the Park Development Impact Fee, the acquisition of parkland and/or the design and construction of public park improvements would be unfunded or underfunded.

RELATION TO CITY COUNCIL GOALS AND WORK PLAN:

The updated park in-lieu fee is consistent with the following Council adopted Goal:
· Stewardship of City Infrastructure: The updated park in-lieu fee would assist the City in acquiring parkland and/or fund the design and construction of public park improvements that would promote a healthy environment and activities for residents and visitors.

FISCAL IMPACT:

Park in-lieu fees assist the City in providing adequate park facilities necessitated by new development. Staff’s evaluation does not result in a budgetary impact.

ORIGINATED BY:

Engineering
ATTACHMENT LIST:

Attachment "A" - Resolution No. 09-2012 Establishing Parkland Dedication In-Lieu Fee (PDF) Attachment "B" - Pacifica Park Development Impact Fee Update (PDF) Attachment "C" - Quimby Act and Park Facilities Impact Fee Update Ordinance (DOCX) 7 Packet Pg. 109
Pacifica City Council 9
April 25, 2022
RESOLUTION NO. ___________

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PACIFICA SETTING UPDATED

CHARGES FOR THE PARK FACILITIES IMPACT FEE (PACIFICA MUNICIPAL CODE CHAPTER 19) AND QUIMBY ACT PARKLAND DEDICATION REQUIREMENTS AND IN

LIEU FEES IMPOSED ON NEW DEVELOPMENT IN THE CITY OF PACIFICA (PACIFICA MUNICIPAL CODE SECTION 10-1.803)
WHEREAS, the Pacifica Municipal Code (“PMC”) imposes upon new non-subdivision, residential development the requirement to pay a Park Facilities Impact Fee (PMC Ch. 19); and WHEREAS, Section 10-1.803 of the PMC also imposes a parkland dedication or in-lieu fee requirement on subdivision developments, pursuant to Government Code section 66477 (“the Quimby Act”), to help defray the impact of development on neighborhood and community parklands (“Quimby Act Fee”); and
WHEREAS, the City contracted with Willdan Financial Services to perform studies for a proposed park development fee update to address both the Quimby Act Fee and Park Facilities Impact Fee.

Section 1. Findings. The City Council finds and determines as follows:
a) The above recitals are correct and are material to this Resolution and are incorporated into this Resolution as findings of the City Council.
b) The fees proposed bear a reasonable relationship to the use of the park and recreational facilities by the future inhabitants of the new subdivisions. c) The Quimby Act Fee is calculated to fund acquisition of the same amount of land that would otherwise have been dedicated.
7 Packet Pg. 111
Pacifica City Council 11 April 25, 2022
Section 2. Adoption of Fee Report. The City Council has approved and adopted the Fee Report and determined that it is consistent with the General Plan.

Section 3. Adoption of the Capital Improvement Plan. The City Council has approved and adopted the Capital Improvement Plan along with the Fee Report.

Section 4. Exemption. Pursuant to Government Code section 65852.2(f)(2), the Park Facilities Impact Fee shall not apply to accessory dwelling units of less than 750 square feet.

Section 5. Effective Date. This Resolution shall take effect immediately. In accordance with Government Code section 66017, the updated fees set forth in Exhibit 1, shall be in full force and effect 60 days after the adoption of this resolution and shall be published or posted as required by law.

Section 6. Validity. The above recitations are true and correct, are material to the adoption of this Resolution, and are incorporated herein by reference.

Section 7. Environmental review. The City Council finds that this Resolution is not subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”). This action is not a project within the meaning of the CEQA Guidelines Section 15378 and 15061(b)(3) as it has no potential for physical effects on the environment because it involves an adoption of certain fees and/or charges imposed by the City, does not commit the City to any specific project, and said fees and/or charges are applicable to future development projects and/or activities, each of which future projects and/or activities will be fully evaluated in full compliance with CEQA when sufficient physical details regarding said projects and/or activities are available to permit meaningful CEQA review (see CEQA Guidelines, Section 15004(b)(1)). Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15378(b)(4), the creation of government funding mechanisms which do not involve any commitment to any specific project which may cause significant effect on the environment, is not defined as a “project” under CEQA. Therefore, approval of the fees and/or charges is not a “project” for purposes of CEQA, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines, Section 15378(b)(4); and, even if considered a “project” under CEQA, is exempt from CEQA review pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3) because it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that approval of the fees and/or charges may have a significant effect on the environment.

Section 8. Severability. Should any section, subsection, paragraph, sentence, clause, or phrase of this Resolution be declared unconstitutional or invalid for any reason, such declaration shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this Resolution.

The City Council hereby declares that it would have passed this and each section, subsection, phrase, or clause thereof irrespective of the fact that any one or more sections, subsections, phrase, or clauses be declared unconstitutional on their face or as applied.

Section 9. The City Clerk shall certify the adoption of this Resolution and shall cause a certified Resolution to be filed in the Office of the City Clerk. 7 Packet Pg. 112
Pacifica City Council 12 April 25, 2022
• • • • •
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Pacifica, California, held on the 25th day of April 2022, by the following vote:

AYES, Councilmembers:

NOES, Councilmembers:

ABSENT, Councilmembers:

ABSTAIN, Councilmembers:

Mary Bier, Mayor
ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
______________________________ ______________________________ Sarah Coffey, City Clerk Michelle Kenyon, City Attorney 7 Packet Pg. 113
Pacifica City Council 13 April 25, 2022
EXHIBIT 1

QUIMBY ACT AND PARK FACILITIES IMPACT FEE FEES
Mitigation Fee Act Fee for Parkland Acquisition
Number of
Bedrooms
Land
Acquisiton
per Capita Density1 Base Fee
Admin
Charge2
Total Fee
per
Dwelling
Unit
Incremental
Fee per
Bedroom
0 $ 7,725 1.39 $10,738 $ 215 $ 10,953
1 7,725 1.63 12,592 252 12,844 $ 1,891
2 7,725 2.49 19,235 385 19,620 6,776
3 7,725 3.02 23,330 467 23,796 4,176
4 7,725 3.45 26,651 533 27,184 3,388
5 7,725 3.99 30,823 616 31,439 4,255
Additional Bedroom 7,725 0.54 4,172 83 4,255
1 Persons per dw elling unit.
2 Administrative charge of 2.0 percent for (1) legal, accounting, and other administrative support and (2) impact fee program administrative costs including revenue collection, revenue and cost accounting, mandated public reporting, and fee justification analyses.

Applies to all non-subdivision residential development. May be increased by Council based on Land Cost.

Mitigation Fee Act Fee for Park Improvements
Number of Bedrooms
Improvements
Cost per
Capita Density1 Base Fee
Admin
Charge2
Total
Fee per
Dwelling
Unit
Incremental
Fee per
Bedroom
0 $ 6,781 1.39 $9,426 $ 189 $ 9,614
1 6,781 1.63 11,053 221 11,274 $ 1,660
2 6,781 2.49 16,885 338 17,222 5,948
3 6,781 3.02 20,479 410 20,888 3,666
4 6,781 3.45 23,394 468 23,862 2,974
5 6,781 3.99 27,056 541 27,597 3,735
Additional Bedroom 6,781 0.54 3,662 73 3,735
1 Persons per dw elling unit.
2 Administrative charge of 2.0 percent for (1) legal, accounting, and other administrative support and (2) impact fee program administrative costs including revenue collection, revenue and cost accounting, mandated public reporting, and fee justification analyses.

Applies to all residential development. Increased Annually per CCI. 7 Packet Pg. 114
Pacifica City Council 14 April 25, 2022
Quimby Act Fee for In-Lieu of Parkland Dedication
Number of
Bedrooms
Land
Acquisiton
per Capita Density1 Base Fee
Admin
Charge2
Total Fee
per
Dwelling
Unit
Incremental
Fee per
Bedroom
0 $ 7,725 1.39 $10,738 $ 215 $ 10,953
1 7,725 1.63 12,592 252 12,844 $ 1,891
2 7,725 2.49 19,235 385 19,620 6,776
3 7,725 3.02 23,330 467 23,796 4,176
4 7,725 3.45 26,651 533 27,184 3,388
5 7,725 3.99 30,823 616 31,439 4,255
Additional Bedroom 7,725 0.54 4,172 83 4,255
1 Persons per dw elling unit.
2 Administrative charge of 2.0 percent for (1) legal, accounting, and other administrative support and (2) impact fee program administrative costs including revenue collection, revenue and cost accounting, mandated public reporting, and fee justification analyses.

Increased Annually per CCI.
7 Packet Pg. 115
Pacifica City Council 15 April 25, 2022
ALTERNATE (BASED ON SCENARIO 2)
RESOLUTION NO. _______

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PACIFICA SETTING UPDATED

CHARGES FOR THE PARK FACILITIES IMPACT FEE (PACIFICA MUNICIPAL CODE CHAPTER 19) AND QUIMBY ACT PARKLAND DEDICATION REQUIREMENTS AND IN

WHEREAS, Willdan Financial Services prepared and submitted a Park Development Impact Fee Update, dated April 15, 2022, attached to the staff report accompanying this resolution as Attachment “B” and incorporated by reference (“the Fee Report”); and WHEREAS, the Fee Report (1) establishes a proposed amount and provides an evaluation of the need for an updated Park Facilities Impact Fee and establishes the nexus between the imposition of the new Park Facilities Impact Fee and the estimated reasonable cost of providing the service for which the fee is charged; and (2) establishes a proposed amount for a Quimby Act Fee and establishes the reasonable relationship between the imposition of the Quimby Act Fee and the use of the park and recreational facilities by the future inhabitants of the proposed subdivision; and
WHEREAS, the Fee Report substantiated the need for the update to the Park Facilities Impact Fee and the Quimby Act Fee; and
WHEREAS, the Fee Report identifies the City’s existing level of public parks service, identifies the proposed new level of service, and includes an explanation of why the new level of service is appropriate; and
WHEREAS, the Fee Report includes information that supports the City’s actions, as required by subdivision (a) of Section 66001; and
WHEREAS, the Fee Report reviewed the assumptions of the nexus study supporting the existing Park Facilities Impact Fee and Quimby Fee and evaluated the amount of fees collected under the existing fees; and
7 Packet Pg. 116
Pacifica City Council 16 April 25, 2022
WHEREAS, the City is adopting a Capital Improvement Plan as part of the Fee Report for the construction and improvement of parks; and
WHEREAS, the Capital Improvement Plan indicates the approximate location, size, time of availability, and estimates of cost for all facilities or improvements to be financed with the fees; and
WHEREAS, the Fee Report was presented to the Council along with this resolution, and is hereby adopted by Council; and
WHEREAS, the City Council determined that the Fee Report complies with California Government Code section 66000 et seq.; and
WHEREAS, the City desires to rescind and repeal all prior resolutions setting charges, fees, or dedication requirements for the Park Facilities Impact Fee and the Quimby Act Fee, and replace them with the updated fees provided in Exhibit 1; and WHEREAS, the City’s Housing Element of the General Plan, adopted in 2015, acknowledges that it is in the City’s interest to ensure adequate housing is available for all income levels, including those who are below the median household income for San Mateo County, in which the City is located. It lists many goals aimed at facilitating development of affordable housing, including updating the City’s density bonus regulations (Action Program No. 13), contacting developers of affordable housing to explore affordable housing development opportunities (Action Program No. 17), and encouraging development of housing for all income levels (Action Program No. 18). The City’s Inclusionary Housing Ordinance codified in PMC Title 9, Chapter 4, Article 47 also sets forth the City’s commitment to enhancing the public welfare and assuring that further housing development contributes to the attainment of the housing goals of the City by increasing the production of affordable housing units; and WHEREAS, to support and encourage the development of new affordable housing units at an affordable housing cost, as defined by PMC section 9-4.4701(b), in the City and to help implement the aforementioned Housing Element Policies, the City desires to provide a reduction of 75% of maximum justified fees for units affordable to moderate income households as defined in PMC section 9-4.4701(o), 25% of maximum justified fees for units affordable to lower income households as defined in PMC section 9-4.4701(m), and an exemption from fees for units affordable to very low income households as defined in PMC section 9-4.4701(u), of the Mitigation Fees for affordable housing units in residential development projects; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Government Code sections 66016, 66016.5, 66018, and 6062a and the Pacifica Municipal Code, the City must adopt the updated Park Facilities Impact Fee only after notice and public hearing; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Government Code sections 66002, 66016.5, 66018, and 6062a, a notice of a public hearing on the proposed fee schedule was published on April 13, 2022, and April 20, 2022, in the Pacifica Tribune, a newspaper of general circulation; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Government Code sections 66019 and 66016.5, notice of the 7 Packet Pg. 117
Pacifica City Council 17 April 25, 2022
time and place of the meeting, including a general explanation of the matters to be considered and a statement that required data is available was mailed at least 30 days prior to the meeting to those members of the public who filed a written request with the City; and WHEREAS, at least ten (10) days prior to the public hearing referenced above, the City made available for public inspection information required under government Code section 66000, et. seq.; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT the City Council of the City of Pacifica hereby rescinds and repeals all prior resolutions setting rates for the Park Facilities Impact Fee and the Quimby Act Fee and replaces them with the fees as shown in Exhibit 1, incorporated by this reference.

Section 2. Adoption of Fee Report. The City Council has approved and adopted the Fee Report and determined that it is consistent with the General Plan.

Section 3. Adoption of the Capital Improvement Plan. The City Council has approved and adopted the Capital Improvement Plan along with the Fee Report.

Section 4. Exemption. Pursuant to Government Code section 65852.2(f)(2), the Park Facilities Impact Fee shall not apply to accessory dwelling units of less than 750 square feet.

Section 6. Validity. The above recitations are true and correct, are material to the adoption of this Resolution, and are incorporated herein by reference.

Section 7. Environmental review. The City Council finds that this Resolution is not subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”). This action is not a project within the meaning of the CEQA Guidelines Section 15378 and 15061(b)(3) as it has no potential for physical effects on the environment because it involves an adoption of certain fees and/or charges imposed by the City, does not commit the City to any specific project, and said fees and/or charges are applicable to future development projects and/or activities, each of which future projects and/or activities will be fully evaluated in full compliance with CEQA when sufficient physical details regarding said projects and/or activities are available to permit meaningful CEQA review (see CEQA Guidelines, Section 15004(b)(1)). Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15378(b)(4), the creation of government funding mechanisms which do not involve any commitment to any specific project which may cause significant effect on the 7 Packet Pg. 118
Pacifica City Council 18 April 25, 2022
environment, is not defined as a “project” under CEQA. Therefore, approval of the fees and/or charges is not a “project” for purposes of CEQA, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines, Section 15378(b)(4); and, even if considered a “project” under CEQA, is exempt from CEQA review pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3) because it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that approval of the fees and/or charges may have a significant effect on the environment.

Section 9. The City Clerk shall certify the adoption of this Resolution and shall cause a certified Resolution to be filed in the Office of the City Clerk. • • • • •
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Pacifica, California, held on the 25th day of April 2022, by the following vote:

AYES, Councilmembers:

NOES, Councilmembers:

ABSENT, Councilmembers:

ABSTAIN, Councilmembers:

Mary Bier, Mayor
ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
______________________________ ______________________________ Sarah Coffey, City Clerk Michelle Kenyon, City Attorney 7 Packet Pg. 119
Pacifica City Council 19 April 25, 2022
EXHIBIT 1

Applies to all non-subdivision residential development. May be increased by Council based on Land Cost.

Applies to all residential development. Increased Annually per CCI. 7 Packet Pg. 120
Pacifica City Council 20 April 25, 2022
Quimby Act Fee for In-Lieu of Parkland Dedication
Number of
Bedrooms
Land
Acquisiton
per Capita Density1 Base Fee
Admin
Charge2
Total Fee
per
Dwelling
Unit
Incremental
Fee per
Bedroom
0 $ 7,725 1.39 $10,738 $ 215 $ 10,953
1 7,725 1.63 12,592 252 12,844 $ 1,891
2 7,725 2.49 19,235 385 19,620 6,776
3 7,725 3.02 23,330 467 23,796 4,176
4 7,725 3.45 26,651 533 27,184 3,388
5 7,725 3.99 30,823 616 31,439 4,255
Additional Bedroom 7,725 0.54 4,172 83 4,255
1 Persons per dw elling unit.
2 Administrative charge of 2.0 percent for (1) legal, accounting, and other administrative support and (2) impact fee program administrative costs including revenue collection, revenue and cost accounting, mandated public reporting, and fee justification analyses.

Increased Annually per CCI.

The City will provide a reduction of 75% of maximum justified fees for moderate income units, 25% of maximum justified fees for low-income units, and an exemption from fees for very low-income units of the Mitigation Fees for affordable housing units in residential development projects. 7 Packet Pg. 121
Attachment "A"

7.a
Packet Pg. 122
Attachment: Attachment "A" - Resolution No. 09-2012 Establishing Parkland Dedication In-Lieu Fee (4958 : Resolution - Update Park

7.a
Packet Pg. 123
Attachment: Attachment "A" - Resolution No. 09-2012 Establishing Parkland Dedication In-Lieu Fee (4958 : Resolution - Update Park

7.a
Packet Pg. 124
Attachment: Attachment "A" - Resolution No. 09-2012 Establishing Parkland Dedication In-Lieu Fee (4958 : Resolution - Update Park

7.a
Packet Pg. 125
Attachment: Attachment "A" - Resolution No. 09-2012 Establishing Parkland Dedication In-Lieu Fee (4958 : Resolution - Update Park

7.a
Packet Pg. 126
Attachment: Attachment "A" - Resolution No. 09-2012 Establishing Parkland Dedication In-Lieu Fee (4958 : Resolution - Update Park

7.a
Packet Pg. 127
Attachment: Attachment "A" - Resolution No. 09-2012 Establishing Parkland Dedication In-Lieu Fee (4958 : Resolution - Update Park

7.a
Packet Pg. 128
Attachment: Attachment "A" - Resolution No. 09-2012 Establishing Parkland Dedication In-Lieu Fee (4958 : Resolution - Update Park

7.a
Packet Pg. 129
Attachment: Attachment "A" - Resolution No. 09-2012 Establishing Parkland Dedication In-Lieu Fee (4958 : Resolution - Update Park

7.a
Packet Pg. 130
Attachment: Attachment "A" - Resolution No. 09-2012 Establishing Parkland Dedication In-Lieu Fee (4958 : Resolution - Update Park

7.a
Packet Pg. 131
Attachment: Attachment "A" - Resolution No. 09-2012 Establishing Parkland Dedication In-Lieu Fee (4958 : Resolution - Update Park

7.a
Packet Pg. 132
Attachment: Attachment "A" - Resolution No. 09-2012 Establishing Parkland Dedication In-Lieu Fee (4958 : Resolution - Update Park

7.a
Packet Pg. 133
Attachment: Attachment "A" - Resolution No. 09-2012 Establishing Parkland Dedication In-Lieu Fee (4958 : Resolution - Update Park

7.a
Packet Pg. 134
Attachment: Attachment "A" - Resolution No. 09-2012 Establishing Parkland Dedication In-Lieu Fee (4958 : Resolution - Update Park

7.a
Packet Pg. 135
Attachment: Attachment "A" - Resolution No. 09-2012 Establishing Parkland Dedication In-Lieu Fee (4958 : Resolution - Update Park

7.a
Packet Pg. 136
Attachment: Attachment "A" - Resolution No. 09-2012 Establishing Parkland Dedication In-Lieu Fee (4958 : Resolution - Update Park

7.a
Packet Pg. 137
Attachment: Attachment "A" - Resolution No. 09-2012 Establishing Parkland Dedication In-Lieu Fee (4958 : Resolution - Update Park

7.a
Packet Pg. 138
Attachment: Attachment "A" - Resolution No. 09-2012 Establishing Parkland Dedication In-Lieu Fee (4958 : Resolution - Update Park

7.a
Packet Pg. 139
Attachment: Attachment "A" - Resolution No. 09-2012 Establishing Parkland Dedication In-Lieu Fee (4958 : Resolution - Update Park

7.a
Packet Pg. 140
Attachment: Attachment "A" - Resolution No. 09-2012 Establishing Parkland Dedication In-Lieu Fee (4958 : Resolution - Update Park

7.a
Packet Pg. 141
Attachment: Attachment "A" - Resolution No. 09-2012 Establishing Parkland Dedication In-Lieu Fee (4958 : Resolution - Update Park

7.a
Packet Pg. 142
Attachment: Attachment "A" - Resolution No. 09-2012 Establishing Parkland Dedication In-Lieu Fee (4958 : Resolution - Update Park

7.a
Packet Pg. 143
Attachment: Attachment "A" - Resolution No. 09-2012 Establishing Parkland Dedication In-Lieu Fee (4958 : Resolution - Update Park

7.a
Packet Pg. 144
Attachment: Attachment "A" - Resolution No. 09-2012 Establishing Parkland Dedication In-Lieu Fee (4958 : Resolution - Update Park

7.a
Packet Pg. 145
Attachment: Attachment "A" - Resolution No. 09-2012 Establishing Parkland Dedication In-Lieu Fee (4958 : Resolution - Update Park

7.a
Packet Pg. 146
Attachment: Attachment "A" - Resolution No. 09-2012 Establishing Parkland Dedication In-Lieu Fee (4958 : Resolution - Update Park

7.a
Packet Pg. 147
Attachment: Attachment "A" - Resolution No. 09-2012 Establishing Parkland Dedication In-Lieu Fee (4958 : Resolution - Update Park

7.a
Packet Pg. 148
Attachment: Attachment "A" - Resolution No. 09-2012 Establishing Parkland Dedication In-Lieu Fee (4958 : Resolution - Update Park

7.a
Packet Pg. 149
Attachment: Attachment "A" - Resolution No. 09-2012 Establishing Parkland Dedication In-Lieu Fee (4958 : Resolution - Update Park

7.a
Packet Pg. 150
Attachment: Attachment "A" - Resolution No. 09-2012 Establishing Parkland Dedication In-Lieu Fee (4958 : Resolution - Update Park

7.a
Packet Pg. 151
Attachment: Attachment "A" - Resolution No. 09-2012 Establishing Parkland Dedication In-Lieu Fee (4958 : Resolution - Update Park

7.a
Packet Pg. 152
Attachment: Attachment "A" - Resolution No. 09-2012 Establishing Parkland Dedication In-Lieu Fee (4958 : Resolution - Update Park

7.a
Packet Pg. 153
Attachment: Attachment "A" - Resolution No. 09-2012 Establishing Parkland Dedication In-Lieu Fee (4958 : Resolution - Update Park

7.a
Packet Pg. 154
Attachment: Attachment "A" - Resolution No. 09-2012 Establishing Parkland Dedication In-Lieu Fee (4958 : Resolution - Update Park

7.a
Packet Pg. 155
Attachment: Attachment "A" - Resolution No. 09-2012 Establishing Parkland Dedication In-Lieu Fee (4958 : Resolution - Update Park

CITY OF PACIFICA

PARK DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE
UPDATE

FINAL REPORT
APRIL 15, 2022
Oakland Office Corporate Office Other Regional Offices
66 Franklin Street 27368 Via Industria Aurora, CO
Suite 300 Suite 200 Orlando, FL
Oakland, CA 94607 Temecula, CA 92590 Phoenix, AZ
Tel: (510) 832-0899 Tel: (800) 755-6864 Plano, TX
Fax: (888) 326-6864 Seattle, WA
Washington, DC
www.willdan.com
Attachment "B"

7.b
Packet Pg. 156 Attachment: Attachment "B" - Pacifica Park Development Impact Fee Update (4958 : Resolution - Update Park Development Impact Fee and Fee

7.b
Packet Pg. 157 Attachment: Attachment "B" - Pacifica Park Development Impact Fee Update (4958 : Resolution - Update Park Development Impact Fee and Fee i

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. INTRODUCTION ........................................................................... 2 Background and Study Objectives 2
Organization of the Report 2
Facility Standards and Cost Allocation Approach 2

2. LAND USE ASSUMPTIONS ............................................................ 4 Use of Growth Projections for Impact Fees 4
Land Use Types 4
Growth Projections for City of Pacifica 5
Occupant Densities 6

3. PARKS & RECREATION FACILITIES ................................................ 7 Existing Park and Recreation Facilities Inventory 7
Parkland Unit Costs 9
City of Pacifica Park Facilities Standards 9
Facilities Needed to Accommodate New Development 10
Parks Facilities Cost per Capita 11
Use of Fee Revenue 12
Fee Schedule 12
Fee Increases 13

4. IMPLEMENTATION...................................................................... 14 Inflation Adjustment 14
Reporting Requirements 14
Fee Accounting 14
Programming Revenues and Projects with the CIP 14

5. MITIGATION FEE ACT FINDINGS.................................................. 15 Purpose of Fee 15
Use of Fee Revenues 15
Benefit Relationship 15
Burden Relationship 16
Proportionality 16
APPENDIX ......................................................................................... 17

7.b
Packet Pg. 158 Attachment: Attachment "B" - Pacifica Park Development Impact Fee Update (4958 : Resolution - Update Park Development Impact Fee and Fee 2 1. Introduction
This report summarizes an analysis of the need for public facilities and capital improvements to support future development within the City of Pacifica through 2040. It is the City’s intent that the costs representing future development’s share of these facilities and improvements be imposed on that development in the form of a development impact fee, also known as a public facilities fee. The public facilities and improvements included in this analysis of the City’s public facilities fee program all fall into the parks and recreation facilities category.

Background and Study Objectives
The primary policy objective of a park impact fee program is to ensure that new development pays the capital costs associated with growth. To fulfill this objective, public agencies should review and update their fee programs periodically to incorporate the best available information.

The primary purpose of this report is to create fees that incorporate current park acquisition and development costs needed to maintain the City’s parkland standards and serve future growth.

The City imposes public facilities fees under authority granted by the Mitigation Fee Act, contained in California Government Code Sections 66000 et seq. This report provides the necessary findings required by the Act for adoption of the fees presented in the fee schedules contained herein.

Depending on the characteristics of the development project, the City may use the Quimby Act to calculate impact fees. The Quimby Act only applies to residential subdivisions. The Quimby Act allows a city to require developers to dedicate at least three acres and up to five acres per 1,000 residents, if the city’s existing park standard as of the last Census justifies the higher level. In this case, fees charged under the Quimby Act or the Mitigation Fee Act support a standard of five acres of parkland per 1,000 residents.

Organization of the Report
The determination of a public facilities fee begins with the selection of a planning horizon and development of projections for population and employment. These projections are used throughout the analysis of different facility categories and are summarized in Chapter 2.

Chapter 3 is devoted to documenting the maximum justified public facilities fee for parks and recreation facilities.

Chapter 4 describes the fee implementation process. The five statutory findings required for adoption of the proposed public facilities fees in accordance with the Mitigation Fee Act (codified in California Government Code Sections 66000 through 66025) are summarized in Chapter 5.

Facility Standards and Cost Allocation Approach
A facility standard is a policy that indicates the amount of facilities required to accommodate service demand. Examples of facility standards include building square feet per capita and park acres per capita. Standards also may be expressed in monetary terms such as the value of facilities per capita, or the value of improvements per acre or per capita. The adopted facility standard is a critical component in determining development’s need for new facilities and the amount of the fee. Standards determine new development’s fair share of planned facilities and ensure that new development does not fund deficiencies associated with the existing city infrastructure.

The parks and recreation facilities fees calculated in this report use an existing inventory demand standard translated into facility costs per capita to determine new development’s fair share of

7.b
Packet Pg. 159 Attachment: Attachment "B" - Pacifica Park Development Impact Fee Update (4958 : Resolution - Update Park Development Impact Fee and Fee City of Pacifica Parks and Recreation Facilities Fee Study 3 planned facility costs. A cost standard provides a reasonable method for converting disparate types of facilities, in this case parkland and special use recreational facilities, into a single measure of demand (capital cost per capita). The cost standard justified is based on the existing inventory of parks and recreation facilities. New development would fund the expansion of facilities at the same rate that existing development has provided facilities to date, thus by definition, there is no existing deficiency. In this case the City’s existing inventory justifies a standard that exceeds five acres per 1,000 residents. To be consistent with the maximum standard identified in the Quimby Act, this analysis caps the fees at a five acre per 1,000 resident standard.

7.b
Packet Pg. 160 Attachment: Attachment "B" - Pacifica Park Development Impact Fee Update (4958 : Resolution - Update Park Development Impact Fee and Fee 4 2. Land Use Assumptions
This chapter describes the projections of growth used in this study. The existing service population in 2021 is used as the base year of the study and the planning horizon is the year 2040. This chapter also describes the sources of the unit costs for land and buildings used in this study.

Use of Growth Projections for Impact Fees
Estimates of the existing service population and projections of growth are critical assumptions used throughout this report. These estimates are used as follows:
• The estimate of existing service population in 2021 is used as an indicator of existing facility demand and to determine existing facility standards. • Estimates of total service population in 2040 are used to determine the total amount of public facilities required to accommodate the future service population. • Estimates of existing population and new development are used to allocate the fair share of total planned facility costs between existing and new development.

Land Use Types
To ensure a reasonable relationship between each fee and the type of development paying the fee, growth projections distinguish between different land use types. The fees calculated in this report are charged per bedroom for residential dwelling units. Relevant terms are defined below. • Bedroom: A room in a dwelling unit that may be used for sleeping accommodation including such spaces that may be labeled as bedroom, master bedroom, den, library, office, study or the like, when such space conforms to the definition of a “Sleeping Unit” in accordance with the requirements for a sleeping accommodation as provided in the building code.

Note that under recently adopted AB 602, fees adopted after July 1, 2022, must either calculate a fee levied or imposed on a housing development project proportionately to the square footage of the proposed units, or make specified findings explaining why square footage is not an appropriate metric to calculate the fees. In this fee study, the fees are calculated per additional bedroom. The justification for calculating fees using this approach is as follows:

Residential building square footage is not an appropriate metric to calculate fees imposed on housing development project because as square footage increases, a building does not necessarily house more people. Since residents are the drivers of demand for parks, it is important to use a metric that scales with increases in residents. In this case, data from the American Housing Survey, and American Community Survey is used to estimate the number of residents associated with each additional bedroom in Pacifica. Scaling fees with increases in residents provides the reasonable relationship between the development project and the burden posed by that project for new park facilities. Further, using increases in bedrooms to estimate occupancy and subsequently calculate impact fees incentivizes smaller developments, since projects with fewer bedrooms pay lower fees than projects with more bedrooms.

7.b
Packet Pg. 161 Attachment: Attachment "B" - Pacifica Park Development Impact Fee Update (4958 : Resolution - Update Park Development Impact Fee and Fee City of Pacifica Parks and Recreation Facilities Fee Study 5 • Dwelling: A building or structure, or portion thereof, designed for residential occupancy with facilities for cooking, sleeping, and bathing; provided, however, “dwelling” shall not mean any convalescent/nursing home, hospital, hotel/motel, or congregate care facility.
• Residential Use: Residential use is a place of residence wherein housing is the primary land use. Types of residential uses include single-family, multifamily, mobile home/trailer, and secondary unit. For the purposes of the development impact fees, “bedroom,” as defined herein, shall be the residential use characteristic used to determine the appropriate fees required by each residential type. • Unit: One or more rooms in a dwelling designed for occupancy by one person, or one group of people, with a common entry and a common cooking facility.

The City should have the discretion to impose the parks and recreation facilities fee based on the specific aspects of a proposed development regardless of zoning. The guideline to use is the probable occupant density of the development. The fee imposed should be based on the land use type that most closely matches the probable occupant density of the development.

Impact Fees for Accessory Dwelling Units
The California State Legislature recently amended requirements on local agencies for the imposition of development impact fees on accessory dwelling units (ADU) with Assembly Bill AB 68 in 2021. The amendment to California Government Code §65852.2(f)(2) stipulates that local agencies may not impose any impact fees on ADU less than 750 square feet. ADU greater than 750 square feet can be charged impact fees in proportion to the size of the primary dwelling unit.

Calculating Impact Fees for Accessory Dwelling Units
For ADUs greater than 750 square feet, impact fees can be charged as a percentage of the single family impact fee. The formula is:

𝐴𝐷𝑈 𝑆𝑞𝑢𝑎𝑟𝑒 𝐹𝑒𝑒𝑡
𝑃𝑟𝑖𝑚𝑎𝑟𝑦 𝑅𝑒𝑠𝑖𝑑𝑒𝑛𝑐𝑒 𝑆𝑞𝑢𝑎𝑟𝑒 𝐹𝑒𝑒𝑡
× 𝑆𝑖𝑛𝑔𝑙𝑒 𝐹𝑎𝑚𝑖𝑙𝑦 𝐼𝑚𝑝𝑎𝑐𝑡 𝐹𝑒𝑒 = 𝐴𝐷𝑈 𝐼𝑚𝑝𝑎𝑐𝑡 𝐹𝑒𝑒
In the case of an 800 square foot ADU and a 1,600 square foot primary residence, the park fees fees would be 50 percent (800 square feet / 1,600 square feet = 50%) of the primary dwelling unit fee.

Growth Projections for City of Pacifica
Park and recreation facilities in Pacifica primarily serve residents in the City of Pacifica. The City lacks significant private sector employment, and plans for parks to serve its residential population.

Therefore, residents comprise the park and recreation facilities service population.

The base year for this study is the year 2021. The planning horizon is 2040. Resident growth between 2021 and 2040 comprises the growth increment in this analysis. The City’s population in 2020 per the US Census is used to calculate the parkland standard under the Quimby Act. The projection for 2040 is based on population projections provided by the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG).

Table 1 shows estimates of the growth in terms of residents between 2021 and 2040. The table also shows the City’s population in 2020.

7.b
Packet Pg. 162 Attachment: Attachment "B" - Pacifica Park Development Impact Fee Update (4958 : Resolution - Update Park Development Impact Fee and Fee City of Pacifica Parks and Recreation Facilities Fee Study 6 Table 1: Parks Service Population
Residents
Census 2020 38,130
Existing Household Population (2021) 37,708
Growth (2021 - 2040) 2,182
Total (2040) 39,890
Sources: US Census Bureau; CA DOF, Table E-5, 2021; ABAG Projections 2040 by Jurisdiction; Willdan Financial Services.

Occupant Densities
All fees in this report are calculated based on dwelling units. Occupant density assumptions ensure a reasonable relationship between the size of a development project, the increase in service population associated with the project, and the amount of the fee.

Persons per bedroom assumptions ensure a reasonable relationship between the size of a dwelling unit and the residents, and therefore demand for public facilities. For residential development, the fee is based on the number of bedrooms in each additional housing unit, so the fee schedule must convert service population estimates to these measures of bedrooms per dwelling unit and number of dwelling units in the project.

This conversion is done with average household size factors that vary by bedrooms proposed in the dwelling unit, shown in Table 2. The data series that was used to statistically establish these household size factors is from the 2019 American Housing Survey (AHS), the most recent AHS data available. Willdan used AHS data from the Pacific Division to estimate the persons per bedroom for the Pacific Division. The estimate of persons per bedroom for the Pacific Division was then adjusted using based on difference in average dwelling unit density for Pacifica compared to the Pacific Division as calculated from US Census’ American Community Survey (ACS) data. These adjustments were necessary because data for the City of Pacifica is not specifically available from the American Housing Survey, and the American Community Survey does not provide data at the granularity needed to estimate these factors for the City.

Table 2: Occupant Density
Residential - per Dwelling Unit, by Number of Bedrooms
0 1.39 Residents per Dwelling Unit
1 1.63 Residents per Dwelling Unit
2 2.49 Residents per Dwelling Unit
3 3.02 Residents per Dwelling Unit
4 3.45 Residents per Dwelling Unit
5 3.99 Residents per Dwelling Unit
Each Additional Bedroom 0.54 Residents per Bedroom
Sources: American Housing Survey, 2019; U.S. Census Bureau, 2019 5-Year American Community Survey, Tables B25024 and B25033; Willdan Financial Services.

7.b
Packet Pg. 163 Attachment: Attachment "B" - Pacifica Park Development Impact Fee Update (4958 : Resolution - Update Park Development Impact Fee and Fee 7 3. Parks & Recreation Facilities
The following chapter documents the nexus analysis, demonstrating the need for new park and recreation facilities demanded by new development. This analysis documents two separate fees based on the Quimby Act and the Mitigation Fee Act. The City would collect the fee based a standard of 5.0 acres per 1,000 residents if the development was subject to the Quimby Act land dedication requirement. For all other development, the City would collect based on the existing standard through the Mitigation Fee Act. The City would only collect one of the two fees depending on which was appropriate. In this case, because the City’s existing standard exceeds

5.0 acres, both fees are calculated at the 5.0 acre per 1,000 resident standard.

Existing Park and Recreation Facilities Inventory
The City of Pacifica maintains several park and recreation facilities throughout the city. Table 3 summarizes the City’s existing parkland inventory. All facilities are located within the City limits.

The City has revised this inventory from the prior impact fee analysis in 2012, based on the latest information available. The inventory distinguishes between developed and undeveloped parkland.

Developed parkland includes parks that are open for public use with typical park amenities. This includes facilities that are owned by other agencies that the City has joint use agreements for, such as school fields. Undeveloped parkland and open space represents land that the City owns, but does not yet include any improvements or amenities.

7.b
Packet Pg. 164 Attachment: Attachment "B" - Pacifica Park Development Impact Fee Update (4958 : Resolution - Update Park Development Impact Fee and Fee City of Pacifica Parks and Rec
reation Facilities Fee Study8
Table 3: Parkland Inventory
Park Name
Developed
Acreage
District Parks
Frontierland Park 63.00
Neighborhood Parks
Fairmont Park 6.57
Fairmont West Park 5.84
Fairway Park 16.71
Imperial Park 12.68
Oddstad Park 17.95
Saltaire Park 0.40
Sanchez Park 6.35
Subtotal 66.50
Pocket Parks
Edgemar Park 1.20
Brighton Mini-Park 0.10
Horizon Mini-Park 0.10
Palmetto Mini-Park 0.10
Pomo Park 0.80
Portola Mini-Park 0.20
Skyridge Park 1.90
Subtotal 4.40
Joint Use Facilities - School Fields
Terra Nova High School 33.00
Subtotal 33.00
Special Facilities
Calera Creek Multi-purpose Trail 12.40
Skate Park 1.40
Cattle Hill Open Space - Trailhead Parking Lot 0.14
Cattle Hill Open Space - Baquiano Trail 0.63
APN 009-650-270 (Harry Dean Trail spur) 0.81
Grace McCarthy Vista Point 2.60
Pacifica Beach Park 1.86
Rockaway Beach Promenade 0.10
Beach Boulevard Promenade 0.91
Beach parking lot (Highway 1 & Rockaway Beach) 1.33
APN 018-150-040 (Beach Parking Lot) 0.40
APN 022-161-120 (Beach Parking, Restrooms, Beach) 0.77
APN 022-191-270 et. al (Beach Parking, Restrooms, Beach) 2.12 San Pedro Terrace Trail 0.61
Subtotal 26.08
Total 192.98
Source: City of Pacifica.

7.b
Packet Pg. 165 Attachment: Attachment "B" - Pacifica Park Development Impact Fee Update (4958 : Resolution - Update Park Development Impact Fee and Fee City of Pacifica Parks and Recreation Facilities Fee Study 9 Parkland Unit Costs
Table 4 shows the estimated cost per acre for developing parkland, including land acquisition.

The land value of $1.5 million per acre is the average acquisition cost per acre in the City, based on an analysis of land sales comparisons since 2018 in Pacifica and neighboring Half Moon Bay.

The assumed cost of park improvements is based on a recent cost estimate from a neighboring City, South San Francisco, and includes the typical improvements that the City would include in a standard park, but excludes special use facilities such as pools or recreation centers. The improvements in the cost estimate include the following: site preparation, grading, construction of curbs, gutters, play area, electrical, furnishings irrigation and planting. City staff confirmed that the example project cost estimate is like the types of park improvements that the City of Pacifica is planning to construct. In total it costs an estimated $2.9 million to acquire and improve an acre of parkland in Pacifica.

Table 4: Parkland Unit Costs
Item
Cost
Per Acre
Land Acquisition1$1,545,000
Standard Park Improvements2$1,350,000
Vehicles and Equipment 6,200
Total - Improvements $1,356,200
Total Cost per Acre $2,901,200
1 Based on an analysis of sales comparisons in Pacifica and Half Moon Bay since 2018.
2 Improvement costs are estimated at $1.35 million per acre for site improvements (curbs, gutters, w ater, and electrical access), plus basic park and school field amenities such as basketball or tennis court, restroom, parking, tot lot, irrigation, turf, open green space, pedestrian paths, and picnic tables based on recent costs from a neighboring jurisdiction. Excludes special use facilities such as recreation centers and pools.

Sources: Costar; City of Pacifica; Appendix Table A.1, Willdan Financial Services.

City of Pacifica Park Facilities Standards
To calculate new development’s need for new parks, municipalities commonly use a ratio expressed in terms of developed park acres per 1,000 residents. Table 5 shows the existing standard for improved park acreage per 1,000 residents and documents the City’s standard as of the last Census for the Quimby Act standard. Since both standard calculations exceed five acres per 1,000 residents, the fees documented in this report are capped at a five-acre standard, consistent with the maximum Quimby Act standard.

7.b
Packet Pg. 166 Attachment: Attachment "B" - Pacifica Park Development Impact Fee Update (4958 : Resolution - Update Park Development Impact Fee and Fee City of Pacifica Parks and Recreation Facilities Fee Study 10 Table 5: Park Facilities Level of Service Standards
Mitigation Fee
Act Standard
Quimby Act
Standard
Improved Park Acreage 192.98 192.98
Service Population (Residents) 37,708 38,130
Level of Service Standard (Acres per 1,000 Residents) 5.12 5.06 Policy Level of Service (Acres per 1,000 Residents) 5.00 5.00 Sources: Tables 1 and 3.

Facilities Needed to Accommodate New Development
Table 6 shows the park facilities needed to accommodate new development at the policy standard. To maintain this standard through the planning horizon, new development must fund the purchase and improvement of 10.91 acres of parkland, at a total cost of $31.7 million.

Table 6: Park Facilities to Accommodate New Development Calculation Parkland Improvements Total
Parkland (Quimby Act or Mitigation Fee Act), Improvements (Mitigation Fee Act) Facility Standard (acres/1,000 residents) A 5.00 5.00
Resident Growth (2021-2040) B 2,182 2,182
Facility Needs (acres) C = (B / 1,000) x A 10.91 10.91
Average Unit Cost (per acre) D $ 1,545,000 $ 1,356,200
Total Cost of Parkland To Serve New Development E = C x D $16,855,950 $ 14,796,142 $31,652,092 Sources: Tables 1, 4 and 5.

Capital Improvement Plan
California Government Code Section 66016.5. (a) (6) states: “Large jurisdictions shall adopt a capital improvement plan as a part of the nexus study.” Table 7 displays the City’s preliminary parks and recreation facilities capital improvement plan (CIP). Note that the projects shown in the CIP are not necessarily intended to be fully funded with park impact fee revenue; rather, they are capacity expanding projects that are eligible for park impact fee revenue. The exact amount of park impact fee revenue programmed to a given project will be determined annually though the City’s capital planning process.

Also note that the CIP does not drive the fee calculation. The fee calculation is driven by the facility standards and unit costs used to determine the cost per capita below.

7.b
Packet Pg. 167 Attachment: Attachment "B" - Pacifica Park Development Impact Fee Update (4958 : Resolution - Update Park Development Impact Fee and Fee City of Pacifica Parks and Recreation Facilities Fee Study 11 Table 7: Preliminary Capital Improvement Plan
Name
Estimated
Cost
400 Esplanade Coastal Trail $ 1,250,000
500 Esplanade Coastal Trail 800,000
Ahni (Cattle Hill) Trail Improvements 2,000,000
Pedro Point Headlands Trail 8,250,000
Sanchez Field and Park Improvements 2,500,000
Fairmont West Field Improvements 1,500,000
Frontierland Lower Park Expansion 5,000,000
Frontierland Upper Park Renovation/Expansion 2,500,000
Cattle Hill Trailhead Park Construction 5,000,000
Beach Boulevard Promenade Park Improvements 2,500,000
Various City Trail Improvements 2,500,000
TOTAL $33,800,000
Source: City of Pacifica.

Parks Facilities Cost per Capita
Table 8 shows the cost per capita of providing new park facilities at the five acre per 1,000 resident standard. The cost per capita is shown separately for land and improvements. The costs per capita in this table will serve as the basis of three fees:
• A Quimby Act Fee in-lieu of land dedication. This fee is payable by residential development occurring in subdivisions.
• A Mitigation Fee Act Fee for land acquisition. This fee is payable by residential development not occurring in subdivisions.
• A Mitigation Fee Act Fee for parkland improvements. This fee is payable by all residential development.

A development project pays either the Quimby Act Fee in-lieu of land dedication, or the Mitigation Fee Act Fee for land acquisition, not both. All development projects pay the Mitigation Fee Act Fee for park improvements.

Table 8: Park Facilities Cost per Capita
Improvements
Calculation Quimby Fee OR Impact Fee AND Impact Fee
Parkland Investment (per acre) A $ 1,545,000 $ 1,545,000 $ 1,356,200 Level of Service (acres per 1,000 residents) B 5.00 5.00 5.00 Total Cost per 1,000 capita C = A x B $ 7,725,000 $ 7,725,000 $ 6,781,000 Cost per Resident D = C / 1,000 $ 7,725 $ 7,725 $ 6,781 Sources: Tables 4 and 6.

Land

7.b
Packet Pg. 168 Attachment: Attachment "B" - Pacifica Park Development Impact Fee Update (4958 : Resolution - Update Park Development Impact Fee and Fee City of Pacifica Parks and Recreation Facilities Fee Study 12 Use of Fee Revenue
The City plans to use park facilities fee revenue to purchase parkland or construct improvements to add to the system of park and recreation facilities that serves new development. The City may only use impact fee revenue to provide facilities and intensify usage of existing facilities needed to serve new development.

Fee revenue collected under the Quimby Act can also be used to rehabilitate park facilities, in addition to acquiring new parkland.

Fee Schedule
To calculate fees by land use type, the investment in park facilities is determined on a per resident basis for both land acquisition and improvements. These cost factors (shown in Table 8) are based on the unit cost estimates and facility standards. The fees scale with the increases in average residents per dwelling unit, by number of bedrooms as identified in Table 2. The more people that live in a particular sized dwelling unit on average, the higher the fees. The incremental fee per bedroom is difference between the fee for a particular number of bedrooms and the fee for a unit with one fewer bedroom. The increases in average persons per dwelling unit by number of bedrooms are not linear, so the incremental fee per bedroom is not uniform as the number of bedrooms increases.

The City anticipates that the park fees would be the primary revenue source to fund new development’s investment in park facilities. Table 9 shows the maximum justified park facilities fee based on a five acre per 1,000 resident standard. Fees can also be charged incrementally for the addition of net new bedrooms.

Table 9: Park Facilities Impact Fee Schedule
Number of
Bedrooms
Land
Acquisiton
per Capita
Improvements Cost
per Capita
Total
Cost per
Capita Density1
Base
Fee
Admin
Charge2
Total Fee
per
Dwelling
Unit
Incremental
Fee per
Bedroom
0 $ 7,725 $ 6,781 $14,506 1.39 $20,163 $ 403 $ 20,566
1 7,725 6,781 14,506 1.63 23,645 473 24,118 $ 3,552
2 7,725 6,781 14,506 2.49 36,120 722 36,842 12,724
3 7,725 6,781 14,506 3.02 43,808 876 44,684 7,842
4 7,725 6,781 14,506 3.45 50,046 1,001 51,047 6,363
5 7,725 6,781 14,506 3.99 57,879 1,158 59,037 7,990
Additional Bedroom 7,725 6,781 14,506 0.54 7,833 157 7,990 1 Persons per dw elling unit.

Sources: Tables 2 and 8.
2 Administrative charge of 2.0 percent for (1) legal, accounting, and other administrative support and (2) impact fee program administrative costs including revenue collection, revenue and cost accounting, mandated public reporting, and fee justification analyses.

7.b
Packet Pg. 169 Attachment: Attachment "B" - Pacifica Park Development Impact Fee Update (4958 : Resolution - Update Park Development Impact Fee and Fee City of Pacifica Parks and Recreation Facilities Fee Study 13 Fee Increases
Per AB 602 “If a nexus study supports the increase of an existing fee, the local agency shall review the assumptions of the nexus study supporting the original fee and evaluate the amount of fees collected under the original fee.”
The assumptions from the nexus study supporting the original fee have been reviewed and updated as necessary. These updates include adjustments to the City’s existing facility inventories, unit cost assumptions, existing and projected service population and parkland standards.

Table 10 displays and analysis of the fees collected under the current fee program. The table shows the previous five years of park fee revenue collection history. During this time period the City collected an average of $150,352 per year. City staff confirmed that fees collected at this amount are not sufficient to maintain the City’s existing level of service for park facilities.

Table 10: Historic Fee Revenue
Park Impact
Fee/In-Lieu Fee
Revenue
FY 2020-21 133,028
FY 2019-20 160,779
FY 2018-19 180,520
FY 2017-18 134,399
FY 2016-17 143,032
Five Year Average 150,352
Sources: City of Pacifica Mitigation Fee Act Annual Report of Development Fees, FY2016-17 through FY2020-21

7.b
Packet Pg. 170 Attachment: Attachment "B" - Pacifica Park Development Impact Fee Update (4958 : Resolution - Update Park Development Impact Fee and Fee 14 4. Implementation
Inflation Adjustment
The City can keep its impact fee program up to date by periodically adjusting the fees for inflation.

Such adjustments should be completed regularly to ensure that new development will fully fund its share of needed facilities. We recommend that the California Construction Cost Index (https://www.dgs.ca.gov/RESD/Resources/Page-Content/Real-Estate-Services-DivisionResources-List-Folder/DGS-California-Construction-Cost-Index-CCCI) be used for adjusting fees for inflation. The California Construction Cost Index is based on data from the Engineering News Record and is aggregated and made available for free by the State of California.

The fee amounts can be adjusted based on the change in the index compared to the index in the base year of this study (2021).

While fee updates using inflation indices are appropriate for periodic updates to ensure that fee revenues keep up with increases in the costs of public facilities, the City will also need to conduct more extensive updates of the fee documentation and calculation (such as this study) when significant new data on growth forecasts and/or facility plans become available. Note that decreases in index values will result in decreases to fee amounts.

Reporting Requirements
The City should comply with the annual and five-year reporting requirements of the Act. For facilities to be funded by a combination of public fees and other revenues, identification of the source and amount of these non-fee revenues is essential. Identification of the timing of receipt of other revenues to fund the facilities is also important.

Fee Accounting
The City should deposit fee revenues into separate restricted fee accounts for each of the fee categories identified in this report. Fees collected for a given facility category should only be expended on new facilities of that same category.

Programming Revenues and Projects with the CIP
The City should commit all projected fee revenues and fund balances to specific projects in its Capital Improvements Program. These should represent the types of facilities needed to serve growth as described in this report. The use of the CIP in this manner documents a reasonable relationship between new development and the use of those revenues. The CIP also provides the documentation necessary for the City to hold funds in a project account for longer than five years if necessary to collect sufficient monies to complete a project.

The City may decide to alter the scope of the planned projects or to substitute new projects as long as those new projects continue to represent an expansion of the City’s facilities. If the total cost of facilities varies from the total cost used as a basis for the fees, the City should consider revising the fees accordingly.

7.b
Packet Pg. 171 Attachment: Attachment "B" - Pacifica Park Development Impact Fee Update (4958 : Resolution - Update Park Development Impact Fee and Fee 15 5. Mitigation Fee Act Findings
Fees are assessed and typically paid when a building permit is issued and imposed on new development projects by local agencies responsible for regulating land use (cities and counties).

To guide the imposition of facilities fees, the California State Legislature adopted the Mitigation Fee Act with Assembly Bill 1600 in 1987 and subsequent amendments. The Act, contained in California Government Code §§66000 – 66025, establishes requirements on local agencies for the imposition and administration of fees. The Act requires local agencies to document five statutory findings when adopting fees.

The five findings in the Act required for adoption of the maximum justified fees documented in this report are: 1) Purpose of fee, 2) Use of fee Revenues, 3) Benefit Relationship, 4) Burden Relationship, and 5) Proportionality. They are each discussed below and are supported throughout this report.

Purpose of Fee
• Identify the purpose of the fee (§66001(a)(1) of the Act).

We understand that it is the policy of the City that new development will not burden the existing service population with the cost of facilities required to accommodate growth. The purpose of the fees proposed by this report is to implement this policy by providing a funding source from new development for capital improvements to serve that development. The fees advance a legitimate City interest by enabling the City to provide capital facilities to new development.

Use of Fee Revenues
• Identify the use to which the fees will be put. If the use is financing facilities, the facilities shall be identified. That identification may, but need not, be made by reference to a capital improvement plan as specified in §65403 or §66002, may be made in applicable general or specific plan requirements, or may be made in other public documents that identify the facilities for which the fees are charged (§66001(a)(2) of the Act).

Fees proposed in this report, if enacted by the City, would be used to fund expanded facilities to serve new development. Facilities funded by these fees are designated to be located within the City. Fees addressed in this report will be used to fund park and recreation facilities.

Descriptions of the planned facilities such as size and cost estimates are included in Chapter 3 of this report. More thorough descriptions of certain planned facilities, including their specific location, if known at this time, are included in master plans, capital improvement plans, or other City planning documents or are available from City staff. The City may change the list of planned facilities to meet changing needs and circumstances of new development, as it deems necessary.

The fees should be updated if these amendments result in a significant change in the fair share cost allocated to new development.

Planned facilities to be funded by the fees are described in the Existing Park and Recreation Facilities Inventory, City of Pacific Park Facilities Standards, or the Facility Needed to Accommodate New Development sections in Chapter 3 of this report.

Benefit Relationship
• Determine the reasonable relationship between the fees' use and the type of development project on which the fees are imposed (§66001(a)(3) of the Act).

7.b
Packet Pg. 172 Attachment: Attachment "B" - Pacifica Park Development Impact Fee Update (4958 : Resolution - Update Park Development Impact Fee and Fee City of Pacifica Parks and Recreation Facilities Fee Study 16 We expect that the City will restrict fee revenue to the acquisition of land, construction of facilities and buildings, and purchase of related equipment, furnishings, and vehicles used to serve new development as described above under the “Use of Fee Revenues” finding. The City will keep fees in segregated accounts. Facilities funded by the fees are expected to provide a citywide network of facilities accessible to the additional residents and workers associated with new development. Under the Act, fees are not intended to fund planned facilities needed to correct existing deficiencies. Thus, a reasonable relationship can be shown between the use of fee revenue and the new development paying the fees.

Burden Relationship
• Determine the reasonable relationship between the need for the public facilities and the types of development on which the fees are imposed (§66001(a)(4) of the Act).

Facilities need is based on a facility standard that represents the demand generated by new development for those facilities. For park facilities, demand is measured by a single facility standard that can be applied across land use types to ensure a reasonable relationship to the type of development. The demand for parks facilities is based on residential population.

The standards used to identify facility needs are also used to determine if the planned facilities will partially serve the existing service population by correcting existing deficiencies. This approach ensures that new development will only be responsible for its fair share of planned facilities, and that the fees will not unfairly burden new development with the share of facilities associated with serving the existing service population.

Chapter 2, Land Use Assumptions, provides a description of how service population and growth projections are calculated. Facility standards are described in the City of Pacific Park Facilities Standards section of Chapter 3.

Proportionality
• Determine how there is a reasonable relationship between the fees amount and the cost of the facilities or portion of the facilities attributable to the development on which the fee is imposed (§66001(b) of the Act).

The reasonable relationship between each facilities fee for a specific new development project and the cost of the facilities attributable to that project is based on the estimated service population that will be generated by the project. Fees for a specific project are based on the project’s number of dwelling units and the number of bedrooms in each dwelling unit. New development projects with greater numbers of units or more bedrooms per unit can result in a higher service population, resulting in higher fee revenue than projects with fewer units or bedrooms. Thus, the fees ensure a reasonable relationship between a specific new development project and the cost of the facilities attributable to that project.

See Chapter 2, Land Use Assumptions for a description of how facility demand factors are determined for residential uses. See the Fee Schedule section of Chapter 3 for a presentation of the maximum justified facilities fees.

7.b
Packet Pg. 173 Attachment: Attachment "B" - Pacifica Park Development Impact Fee Update (4958 : Resolution - Update Park Development Impact Fee and Fee 17 Appendix
Appendix Table A.1: Park Vehicles and Equipment Inventory Vehicle # Type Units Unit Cost Total Cost
41 Toyota Prius 1 $ 26,858 $ 26,858
56 Ford Escape 1 25,547 25,547
85 Chevy Blazer 1 19,551 19,551
89 Ford Taurus 1 14,265 14,265
200 Ford F250 1 17,450 17,450
201 Chevy 1500 1 21,738 21,738
202 Ford F150 1 24,006 24,006
205 Ford F350 1 21,274 21,274
220/221 Ford F250 2 25,179 50,358
222/223 Ford F350 2 29,832 59,664
216 Ford F250 Utility 1 21,886 21,886
224 Ford F350 Utility 1 32,650 32,650
225 Ford F350 Stakebody 1 36,650 36,650
301 Toyota Tacoma 4X4 1 25,719 25,719
307 Ford Ranger 1 15,407 15,407
505 John Deere Wide Area Mower 1 42,569 42,569
533 John Deere 310sk 1 99,440 99,440
534 Bobcat E50 1 51,091 51,091
535 Bobcat Skidsteer 1 24,232 24,232
536 Cat Skidsteer 1 69,423 69,423
537 John Deere Dozer 1 25,000 25,000
539 Diablo Trailer 1 3,929 3,929
561 Bandit Chipper 1 39,197 39,197
563 John Deere Mower 1 20,539 20,539
600 Ford Tree Bucket Truck 1 166,535 166,535
601 John Deere Front Loader 1 36,461 36,461
626 GMC Dump Truck 1 33,172 33,172
627 GMC Dump Truck 1 32,684 32,684
628 Inernational 4400 Dump Truck 1 64,359 64,359
629 Ford F450 Dump Bed 1 54,018 54,018
660 Ziman Tilt Trailer 1 9,472 9,472
661 Ziman Tilt Trailer(SMALL) 1 1,001 1,001
664 Texas Trailer Small Mower 1 1,774 1,774
669 Longhorn Trailer 1 4,225 4,225
670 525 Gallon Water Trailer 1 4,295 4,295
Total $ 1,196,439
Total Improved Park Acres 192.98
Vehicles Cost per Improved Acre $ 6,200
Sources: City of Pacifica.

7.b
Packet Pg. 174 Attachment: Attachment "B" - Pacifica Park Development Impact Fee Update (4958 : Resolution - Update Park Development Impact Fee and Fee ATTACHMENT “C”
ORDINANCE NO. ____

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PACIFICA, CALIFORNIA REPEALING CHAPTER 19 OF THE PACIFICA MUNICIPAL CODE AND REPLACING IT WITH CHAPTER 19 (PARK FACILITIES IMPACT FEE); REPEALING SECTION 10-1.803 (PARK LAND DEDICATION) OF THE PACIFICA MUNICIPAL CODE AND REPLACING IT WITH SECTION 10-1.803 (PARK LAND DEDICATION) TO ESTABLISH UPDATED IMPACT

FEES AND QUIMBY ACT DEDICATION REQUIREMENTS AND IN LIEU FEES IMPOSED ON NEW DEVELOPMENT IN THE CITY OF PACIFICA.

WHEREAS, the City of Pacifica’s Municipal Code contains outdated provisions regarding the City’s Park Facilities Impact Fee and Quimby Act dedication requirements and in lieu fees; and
WHEREAS, the Mitigation Fee Act, contained in Government Code 66000 et seq., permits the City to impose development impact fees on new development for the purposes of funding the public facilities necessary to serve that new development; and WHEREAS, the City’s current Park Facilities Impact Fee requirements are contained in Chapter 19, “Park Facilities Impact Fee,” of Title 8 “Building Regulations,” of the Pacifica Municipal Code; and
WHEREAS, the City desires to continue to impose a Park Facilities Impact Fee on new non-subdivision, residential development to fund the costs associated with constructing and expanding park and recreation facilities and to update the fee to bring it in line with current City objectives; and
WHEREAS, the City Council desires to amend the City’s existing ordinance regarding the Park Facilities Impact Fee to ensure that the Park Facilities Impact Fee ordinance is consistent with state law; and
WHEREAS California Government Code section 66477 (the “Quimby Act”) allows legislative bodies of cities to require the dedication of land or to impose a requirement of the payment of fees in lieu thereof, or a combination of both, or park or recreation purposes as a condition of approval of a tentative or parcel map; and WHEREAS, the City’s current parkland dedication requirements are contained in Section 10-1.803, “Parkland Dedication,” of Article 8, “Dedication and Reservations,” of Chapter 1, “Subdivisions,” of Title 10 “Subdivisions and Dedications,” of the Pacifica Municipal Code; and WHEREAS, the City Council desires to amend the City’s existing ordinance regarding the dedication of parkland and the payment of in-lieu fees to ensure that the Parkland Dedication ordinance is consistent with state law; and
WHEREAS, at its meeting on April 25, 2022, after duly publishing all required notices, the City Council held a public hearing as part of a regularly scheduled meeting to consider the ordinance.

NOW THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PACIFICA, CALIFORNIA, does hereby ordain as follows:

7.c
Packet Pg. 175 Attachment: Attachment "C" - Quimby Act and Park Facilities Impact Fee Update Ordinance (4958 : Resolution - Update Park Development Section 1. Chapter 19 (Park Facilities Impact Fee) is hereby repealed and replaced as set forth in Attachment 1, attached hereto, and incorporated herein by reference.

Section 2. Section 10-1.803 (Parkland Dedication) is hereby repealed and replaced as set forth in Attachment 2, attached hereto, and incorporated herein by reference.

Section 3. Validity. The above recitations are true and correct.

Section 4. Findings. The City Council finds that the proposed amendments to the Pacifica Municipal Code are necessary and reasonable to implement the goals and objectives of the City’s General Plan and are permitted by California state law.

Section 5. Environmental review. The City Council finds that this Ordinance is not subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”). This action is not a project within the meaning of the CEQA Guidelines Section 15378 and 15061(b)(3) as it has no potential for physical effects on the environment because it involves an adoption of certain fees and/or charges imposed by the City, does not commit the City to any specific project, and said fees and/or charges are applicable to future development projects and/or activities, each of which future projects and/or activities will be fully evaluated in full compliance with CEQA when sufficient physical details regarding said projects and/or activities are available to permit meaningful CEQA review (see CEQA Guidelines, Section 15004(b)(1)). Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15378(b)(4), the creation of government funding mechanisms which do not involve any commitment to any specific project which may cause significant effect on the environment, is not defined as a “project” under CEQA. Therefore, approval of the fees and/or charges is not a “project” for purposes of CEQA, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines, Section 15378(b)(4); and, even if considered a “project” under CEQA, is exempt from CEQA review pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3) because it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that approval of the fees and/or charges may have a significant effect on the environment.

Section 6. Actions to effectuate and codification. The City Manager is hereby authorized and directed to take other actions on behalf of City, which are not expressly and specifically reserved for the City Council, to implement and effectuate this ordinance. The City Clerk is directed to codify this ordinance in a manner which best reflects the legislative intent of the City Council in enacting this ordinance. The City Clerk is directed to resolve any numbering conflicts accordingly.

Section 7. Severability. Should any section, subsection, paragraph, sentence, clause, or phrase of this ordinance be declared unconstitutional or invalid for any reason, such declaration shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this ordinance.

The City Council hereby declares that it would have passed this and each section, subsection, phrase or clause thereof irrespective of the fact that any one or more sections, subsections, phrase or clauses be declared unconstitutional on their face or as applied.

Section 8. Effective date. This ordinance shall be in full force and effective no less than thirty (30) days after its adoption, and shall be published or posted as required by law.

Section 9. Publication. The City Clerk is hereby ordered and directed to certify the passage of this Ordinance by the City Council of the City of Pacifica, California and cause the same to be published in accordance with State law.

7.c
Packet Pg. 176 Attachment: Attachment "C" - Quimby Act and Park Facilities Impact Fee Update Ordinance (4958 : Resolution - Update Park Development PASSED AND ADOPTED this ______ day of ___________________, 2022, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSTAIN:

7.c
Packet Pg. 177 Attachment: Attachment "C" - Quimby Act and Park Facilities Impact Fee Update Ordinance (4958 : Resolution - Update Park Development Attachment 1
Chapter 19
Park Facilities Impact Fee
Chapter 19. – Park Facilities Impact Fee
Sec. 8-19.01. - Authority and purpose.

This chapter is enacted pursuant to Section 66000 et seq. of the California Government Code (“the “Mitigation Fee Act”) and the general police powers of the City. This chapter is enacted for the purpose of providing land and/or funds for such additional parks, recreational facilities, and open space as may be deemed appropriate pursuant to the General Plan, Local Coastal Program, Coastal Land Use Plan, and zoning laws of the City. This chapter is also enacted to require the dedication of such funds and/or lands to offset the impact on the need for parks, recreational facilities, and open space created by new residential development which does not require a tentative subdivision or parcel map pursuant to Title 10 of this Code.

Sec. 8-19.02. - Definitions.

The definitions set forth in this section govern the construction of this chapter:

1. "Manufactured or mobile home" means and includes each manufactured or mobile home located in a mobile home park on a temporary, semi-permanent or permanent basis.

2. "Person" or “Developer” means and includes every person, firm or corporation constructing new single-family residences, manufactured and mobile homes, residential dwelling units directly or through the services of an employee, agent or independent contractor.

3. "Residential dwelling unit" means each unit of an apartment, duplex, multiple-dwelling structure or dwelling group or condominium.

4. "Bedroom" means any room in a residential dwelling unit used for sleeping, for the purposes of this chapter meaning any room added to a residential dwelling unit that includes a bedroom, or has provision for such inclusion.

Sec. 8-19.03. - Fee imposition.

Except as otherwise provided in this chapter, each person developing nonsubdivision residential development projects shall pay a Park Facilities Impact Fee in an amount established by resolution of the city council in accordance with a nexus study that demonstrates the reasonable relationship between the fee’s use and the type of development project on which the fee will be imposed and demonstrates the reasonable relationship between the need for park facilities and the type of development projects on which the fee will be imposed.

Sec. 8-19.04. - Exemptions.

7.c
Packet Pg. 178 Attachment: Attachment "C" - Quimby Act and Park Facilities Impact Fee Update Ordinance (4958 : Resolution - Update Park Development The following types of development shall not be required to pay a Park Facilities Impact Fee:
a) Alterations, renovations or expansion of an existing residential building or structure where no new bedrooms are created.
b) Replacement of existing dwelling units on the same lot resulting in no net increase of bedrooms.
c) The replacement of a destroyed or partially destroyed or damaged building or structure where no additional bedrooms are created.
d) Nonresidential development.

Sec. 8-19.05. - Determination of required fees.
a) Every person constructing any new single-family residence, residential dwelling unit or manufactured mobile home within the City, or any addition or modification to such that includes the addition of one or more bedrooms, shall pay the Park Facilities Impact Fee established by resolution of the City Council, unless the development of such residence, unit, home, addition or modification requires a tentative subdivision or parcel map pursuant to Title 10 of this Code, in which case Section 10-1.803 shall be applicable. b) The Park Facilities Impact Fee may be modified automatically on an annual basis in accordance with the change in the Engineering News Record (“ENR”) construction cost index for the San Francisco area.

Sec. 8-19.06. – Payment of fees
a) The fees required by this chapter shall be paid at the time the city issues a building permit for each development project, unless the developer of a nonsubdivision residential development enters into an agreement with the city to pay the fees at the time the certificate of occupancy is issued, pursuant to Government Code Section 66007(c). An agreement to defer payment until the issuance of a certificate of occupancy must be executed and recorded before the city will issue a building permit for the development project.
b) If new development changes or intensifies the existing use on the project site, thereby requiring the payment of a new or additional Park Facilities Impact Fee, the fee amount associated with the existing use on the project site shall be credited against the new total fee due, as determined by the public works director; provided, however, that in no event shall the city refund the fees previously paid.

Sec. 8-19.07. - Park Facilities Impact fee fund and accounting. a) All of the funds collected pursuant to this chapter shall be deposited in the Park Development Fund currently being maintained by the City and shall be used solely for the acquisition, improvement and expansion of public parks, playground and recreational facilities in accordance with the provisions of the open space and recreation element of the General Plan of the City. Any interest accrued by the account shall be used solely for the purpose of funding park facilities.
b) Park Facilities Impact Fee Accounting. The city shall maintain accounts and prepare reports in accordance with California Government Code Section 66001 et seq.

7.c
Packet Pg. 179 Attachment: Attachment "C" - Quimby Act and Park Facilities Impact Fee Update Ordinance (4958 : Resolution - Update Park Development Sec. 8-19.08. – In Lieu of Fees
In lieu of fees the City may accept, in its sole discretion, the donation of land or the development of parks to satisfy all or part of the development fees established by this chapter.

Sec. 8.19.09. – Fee adjustments.

Any person subject to a fee required by this chapter may apply to the public works director for a reduction, adjustment or waiver of that fee based upon the absence of a reasonable relationship between the impact of that applicant’s residential development project on park facilities in the city and the amount of the fee charged.
a) Application. An applicant shall file a written request to adjust fees with the public works director not later than 10 days after the city notifies the developer of the amount of the fee to be charged. Additional time, as determined by the public works director, will be allowed when significant additional information is required of the developer. The application shall provide evidence illustrating that the payment of the fee authorized by this chapter and imposed by implementing resolution bears no reasonable relationship or nexus with the impact of the development on the need for park facilities within the city and shall state in detail the factual basis for the request for reduction, adjustment or waiver. If an applicant desires to receive a building permit prior to the completion of the appeal process, the applicant shall deposit the fee being appealed with the application.

Such fee or portion thereof will be refunded if the appeal is successful. b) Decision of the Public Works Director. The public works director shall issue a decision on the application within 30 days after the application is filed with the public works department. The public works director’s decision shall state his or her determination regarding the amount of the Park Facilities Impact Fee that may reasonably be imposed on the new development and include a brief description of the basis for the director’s decision.
c) Appeal of the Decision of the Public Works Director. Decisions of the public works director may be appealed to the city manager. Appeals must be filed within 10 days of the public works director’s decision. The city manager shall review the application and evidence presented to the public works director and issue a decision within 15 days. The decision of the city manager is final and may be appealed or protested pursuant to Government Code Section 66020.

Sec. 8-19.09. – Fee refunds.

Upon application, fees collected by the city pursuant to this chapter shall be refunded under the following circumstances:
a) Fees collected pursuant to this chapter are erroneously or illegally collected. b) The building permit expires, and no extension has been granted, for the development project upon which fees were imposed pursuant to this chapter. An application for refund pursuant to this subsection (B) shall be filed with the community development director no later than 90 days after expiration of the building permit. The amount of refund shall be reduced by an amount to cover the cost to the city for processing the refund.

7.c
Packet Pg. 180 Attachment: Attachment "C" - Quimby Act and Park Facilities Impact Fee Update Ordinance (4958 : Resolution - Update Park Development Attachment 2
Sec.10-1.803
Park land Dedications
Sec.10-1.803. – Park land Dedications
a) General. This section is enacted pursuant to the authority granted by the Subdivision Map Act and the general police powers of the City and is for the purpose of providing such additional park and recreational facilities and open space as appropriate pursuant to the General Plan of the City. The park and recreational facilities for which the dedication of land and/or payment of a fee is required by this article are in accordance with the policies, principles, and standards for park and recreation facilities contained in the General Plan and Local Coastal Plan. b) Requirements. As a condition of the approval of a final subdivision map or parcel map, the subdivider shall dedicate land, pay a fee in lieu thereof, or both, at the option of the City, for park or recreational purposes at the time and according to the standards and formula contained in this article. The land dedicated or the fees paid, or both, shall be used for community and neighborhood parks and facilities in such a manner that the locations of such parks and facilities bear a reasonable relationship to the use of the park and recreational facilities by the future inhabitants of the development generating such dedication or fees, or both.
c) Standards and formula for the dedication of land. Where a park or recreational facility has been designated in the General Plan, and is to be located in whole or in part within the proposed subdivision, and is reasonably related to serving the present and future needs of the residents of the subdivision, the subdivider shall dedicate land for park and recreation facilities sufficient in size and topography to meet such purpose. The amount of land to be provided shall be determined pursuant to the following standards and formula: the formula for determining the amount of acreage to be dedicated is based on the General Plan standards and shall be two (2) acres per 100 dwelling units (two hundredths (.02) acre per unit). The dedication of land shall not exceed the proportionate amount necessary to provide three acres of park area per 1,000 persons residing in the subdivision, unless the amount of existing neighborhood and community park area exceeds that limit, in which case, the city council may adopt a higher amount, not to exceed five acres per 1,000 persons residing in the subdivision. This acreage shall be in net acres and shall not include any public rights-ofway within or adjacent to the proposed park site pursuant to Government Code Section 66477(a)(2).
d) Formula for fees in lieu of land dedication.

1. General formula. If there is no park or recreational facility designated in the General Plan to be located in whole or in part within the proposed subdivision to serve the immediate and future needs of the residents of the subdivision, the subdivider, in the City's discretion, shall either dedicate land in the amount provided in subsection (d) of this section or pay a fee in lieu of dedication equal to the value of the land prescribed for dedication in said subsection (d) and in an amount determined in accordance with the provisions of subsection (g) of this section.

2. Fees in lieu of land: Fifty parcels or less. If the proposed subdivision contains fifty (50) parcels or less and has no park facility, the subdivider shall pay a fee equal to the land value of the portion of the park or recreational facilities required to serve the

7.c
Packet Pg. 181 Attachment: Attachment "C" - Quimby Act and Park Facilities Impact Fee Update Ordinance (4958 : Resolution - Update Park Development needs of the residents of the proposed subdivision as prescribed in subsection (d) of this section and in an amount determined in accordance with the provisions of subsection (g) of this section.

3. Use of money. The money collected shall be used for the purpose of developing new or rehabilitating existing neighborhood or community parks or recreational facilities reasonably related to serving the subdivision, including the purchase of necessary land or the improvement of such land for park and recreational purposes. The money shall be committed within five (5) years after payment or the issuance of building permits on one-half (½) of the lots created by the subdivision, whichever occurs later.

If the money is not committed, it shall be distributed and paid to the then record owners of the subdivision in the same proportion the size of their lots bears to the total area of all lots in the subdivision.
e) Criteria for requiring both dedications and fees. In subdivisions of over fifty (50) lots, the subdivider shall both dedicate land and pay a fee in lieu of dedication in accordance with the following:

1. When only a portion of the land to be subdivided is proposed in the General Plan as the site for a local park or recreational facility, such portion shall be dedicated for local park purposes, and a fee computed pursuant to the provisions of subsection (g) of this section shall be paid for any additional land which would have been required to be dedicated pursuant to subsection (d) of this section.

2. When a major part of the local park or recreational site has already been acquired by the City, and only a small portion of land is needed from the subdivision to complete the site, the remaining portion shall be dedicated, and a fee, computed according to subsection (g) of this section, shall be paid in an amount equal to the value of the land which would otherwise have been required to be dedicated according to subsection (d) of this section. The fee shall be used for the improvement of the existing park and recreational facility or for the improvement of other neighborhood or community parks and recreational facilities reasonably related to serving the subdivision. f) Amount of fees in lieu of park land dedications. When a fee is required to be paid in lieu of park land dedication, the amount of the fee shall be as set forth in a resolution adopted by the City Council.
g) Determination of land or fee. Whether the City accepts the land dedication, or elects to require the payment of a fee in lieu of, or a combination of both, shall be determined by the consideration of the following:

1. The policies, standards, and principles for park and recreation facilities in the General Plan and Local Coastal Plan;

2. The topography, geology, access, and location of land in the subdivision available for dedication;

3. The size and shape of the subdivision and the land available for dedication;

4. The feasibility of dedication;

5. The compatibility of dedication with the General Plan and Local Coastal Plan; and

6. The availability of previously acquired park property.

The determination by the City as to whether land shall be dedicated or whether a fee shall be charged, or a combination, shall be final and conclusive. h) Credit for Park Improvements. If the subdivider provides park and recreational improvements to the dedicated land, the value of the improvements together with any equipment located

7.c
Packet Pg. 182 Attachment: Attachment "C" - Quimby Act and Park Facilities Impact Fee Update Ordinance (4958 : Resolution - Update Park Development thereon shall be a credit against the payment of fees or dedication of land required by this section pursuant to Government Code Section 66477(a)(9). i) Credit for private recreation or open space. Common interest developments, as defined in Section 4100 of the Civil Code, shall be eligible to receive a credit, as determined by the city council, against the amount of land required to be dedicated or the amount of the fee imposed for the value of private open space within the development which is usable for recreational purposes. All other residential, subdivision developments may apply for a credit for private recreation or open space, which shall be provided in the City’s sole discretion. j) Procedure.

1. At the time of the approval of the tentative subdivision map or parcel map, the Planning Commission shall determine, after a report and recommendation from the Parks, Beaches, and Recreation Commission, whether land is to be dedicated or inlieu fees are to be paid by the subdivider or any combination of land and fees.

2. The Planning Commission may approve, modify, or disapprove the recommendation of the Parks, Beaches, and Recreation Commission; provided, however, any modification of the proposed recommended condition not previously considered by the Parks, Beaches, and Recreation Commission shall first be referred back to the Parks, Beaches, and Recreation Commission for a report and further recommendation. The Parks, Beaches, and Recreation Commission shall report back to the Planning Commission within thirty (30) days. After the receipt of the report, or after thirty (30) days have passed, the Planning Commission may adopt the condition.

3. The recommendation of the Parks, Beaches, and Recreation Commission shall include the following:
i. The amount of land required; or
ii. That a fee be charged in lieu of land; or
iii. That a combination of land and a fee be required; and/or iv. That a stated amount of credit be given for private recreation facilities or unique natural and special features and the like; and
v. The location of the park land and, where appropriate, the siting and conceptual design of the park facilities appurtenant thereto to be dedicated or used in lieu of fees; and
vi. The approximate time when the development of the park or recreation facility shall commence.

4. At the time of the recording of the final subdivision map, the subdivider shall dedicate the land and/or pay the fees as determined by the City. At the discretion of the City, fees may be paid prior to the issuance of any building permit for any structure in the subdivision.

5. Open space covenants for private park or recreational facilities shall be submitted to the City prior to the approval of the final subdivision map and, if approved, shall be recorded concurrently with the final subdivision map.

7.c
Packet Pg. 183 Attachment: Attachment "C" - Quimby Act and Park Facilities Impact Fee Update Ordinance (4958 : Resolution - Update Park Development k) Parkland Dedication in Lieu Fee Fund. The revenues from fees collected by the city in lieu of land dedication shall be deposited in a segregated land in lieu fee fund for park or recreational purposes, pursuant to Government Code Section 66477(a)(3). l) Commencement of development. At the time of the approval of the final subdivision or parcel map, the City shall specify when the development of the park or recreational facilities shall be commenced.
m) Not Applicable to Certain Subdivisions. The provisions of this section do not apply to:

1. Subdivisions containing less than five parcels and not used for residential purposes.

However, the city shall place the following condition on the parcel map:

If, within four years, a building permit is requested for construction of a residential structure on one or more of the parcels, the owner of each such parcel is required to pay a parkland dedication in lieu fee in the amount set forth by City Council resolution before the permit is issued.

2. Commercial or industrial subdivisions or condominium projects or stock cooperatives that consist of the subdivision of airspace in an existing apartment building which is more than five years old when no new dwelling units are added.

7.c
Packet Pg. 184 Attachment: Attachment "C" - Quimby Act and Park Facilities Impact Fee Update Ordinance (4958 : Resolution - Update Park Development

CITY OF PACIFICA

COUNCIL AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT
4/25/2022
1 SUBJECT:

Vision 2025 & Beyond – Economic Opportunities Study – Award Contract, Appropriate Funds, Appoint Council Ad Hoc Committee on Public Engagement

RECOMMENDED ACTION

1. Authorize the City Manager to Award a Contract to Kosmont Companies to conduct an Economic Opportunities Study for the City of Pacifica as part of the Vision 2025 & Beyond Strategic Financial Sustainability Study;

2. Appropriate an additional $50,000 for the study; and

3. Appoint a two-member City Council Ad Hoc Subcommittee on Public Engagement for the Economic Opportunities Study.

STAFF CONTACT
Kevin Woodhouse, City Manager
(650) 738-7409
[email protected]
Yulia Carter, Chief Financial Sustainability Officer
(650) 501-6004
[email protected]

BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION
On December 13, 2021 the City Council held a Study Session to discuss the Vision 2025 and Beyond Strategic Financial Sustainability Study. Part of that discussion was a review of the proposed Economic Opportunities Study of Pacifica.

The Economic Opportunities Study will analyze the current and future economic opportunities in each of the City’s 5 business zones (Pacific Manor, Sharp Park, Rockaway Beach, Linda Mar and Pedro Point), explore key economic opportunity sites in Pacifica (including the Beach Boulevard Hotel Site, the Quarry Site, and the potential for a Pacifica Downtown in the Palmetto/Sharp Park area), provide recommendations on potential updates to the City’s Economic Development Strategic Plan and related opportunities. The study will also include a robust public engagement process.

REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL PROCESS
After discussion and direction from the City Council on the scope of work for the Economic Opportunities Study in December, 2021, the Request for Proposal (RFP) for the Economic Opportunities Study was updated with the Council’s input and released. This process included issuing the Economic Opportunities Study through the City’s Open Gov Procurement System (which reached firms throughout the nation as well as firms that have signed up to receive RFPs 8 Packet Pg. 185
Pacifica City Council 2
April 25, 2022
from the City of Pacifica) as well as publicizing it through the California Association for Economic Development (CALED), the statewide association of Economic Development Professionals and Experts.

During the RFP process, 16 economic development firms expressed interest in the project by downloading the RFP, submitting questions, and following the process on the Open Gov Procurement system. Of these firms, half were from California with the balance coming from firms located in Arizona, Colorado, New Hampshire, New York, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Texas, and Virginia.

Two firms based in California - Alex Greenwood Group and Kosmont Companies - submitted proposals to the City for the Economic Opportunities Study. A summary of the RFP process is included in this report in Attachment 1.

SELECTION PROCESS
Both of the firms that submitted proposals for the Economic Opportunities Study were interviewed by a selection panel that included City Manager Kevin Woodhouse, former Assistant City Manager and Planning Director Tina Wehrmeister, Chief Fiscal Sustainability Officer Yulia Carter, Acting Planning Director Christian Murdock and RGS Senior Advisor Brian Moura.

References for both firms were also checked, including phone calls with cities that have employed both firms for similar assignments.

After interviews, background checks and discussion, the selection panel recommended that the City move ahead with the proposal from Kosmont Companies. Kosmont Companies has over 35 years of experience in the Economic Development and land economics fields. That experience includes working with more than 20 Northern California client agencies in recent years and 10 Northern California client agencies during 2021. Their projects include a number of projects that are similar to the Economic Opportunities Study in Pacifica (See Attachment 2).

Kosmont Companies has a number of technology tools and data sources available to use in studies of this type, including real estate and shopping pattern analytic tools (See Attachment 3).

ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITES STUDY
The proposal from Kosmont Companies will provide a study conducted by a three-member team.

The team will be led by the President of the company (Ken Hira) along with a Senior Advisor providing opportunity site development feasibility, fiscal and economic development analysis (Thomas Jirovsky) and a Vice President providing market and economic analyses, research, and analytical support (Robert Valenti).

The Economic Opportunities Study is projected to start in May and would take place over a 22- week period (just over 5 months). It will include assessment of current retail conditions, stakeholder and community outreach, economic analysis and market potential, tourism case studies, land inventory, permits and regulatory tools and policies, assess opportunity sites, community workshop on preliminary findings, draft report, and final presentation to the City Council.

The project cost with reimbursable expenses is estimated at 300 hours of work at a cost of $91,900. A copy of the Kosmont Company proposal and task list with costs is attached (See Attachments 4 and 5).
8 Packet Pg. 186
Pacifica City Council 3
April 25, 2022

COMMUNITY & STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT & COUNCIL AD HOC SUBCOMMITTEE During the discussion of Vision 2025 and Beyond and the Economic Opportunities Study on December 13, 2021, Council members expressed interest in a robust community and stakeholder outreach process as part of the project. There was also some discussion about the appointment of a two-member Council Ad Hoc Subcommittee to work with the City Staff and the selected firm on the Community Outreach phases of the Economic Opportunities Study. A similar ad hoc subcommittee model was used recently on the Beach Boulevard Infrastructure Resiliency Project Phase 1.

The Ad Hoc Committee would be involved in discussions on the format and content of the Community and Stakeholder Engagement processes envisioned at the beginning and end of the project as outlined in the proposal from Kosmont Companies. It is also envisioned that the Ad Hoc Subcommittee would be a valuable resource in identifying key stakeholders to be interviewed during these phases of the project.

As part of tonight’s action on this item, the City Manager is recommending the Council appoint a two-member Ad Hoc Subcommittee on Community and Stakeholder Engagement for this project.

RELATION TO CITY COUNCIL GOALS AND WORK PLAN
The Economic Opportunities Study will advance the Vision 2025 & Beyond City Council Priority and also supports the City Council’s Strategic Goal of Fiscal Sustainability.

FISCAL IMPACT
The original FY 2021-22 Budget included a $100,000 allocation for the Vision 2025 & Beyond Strategic Financial Sustainability Study. As the project unfolded, the City engaged in a number of small contracts under the City Manager’s authority to help launch the Vision 2025 & Beyond project and achieve its objectives, such as RGS for overall project management, and FM3 and Lew Edwards Group for ballot measure analysis and communication services, strategy development, and public education. City Council recently identified full funding of the Vision 2025 & Beyond study as one of the budget strategies for the upcoming budget. The proposed cost of this Economic Opportunities Study, including the robust public engagement process, is $91,000, which would exceed the initial budget allocation when combined with the other project cost components. If the City Council approves the contract with Kosmont Companies, staff will add the additional cost needed for this project and the other project components as part of the FY 2022-23 Base budget, as this work will likely cross fiscal years. The additional amount is estimated to be $50,000.

ORIGINATED BY:

City Manager's Office
ATTACHMENT LIST:

Attachment 1 - Economic Development Firms in RFP Process (PDF) Attachment 2 - Kosmont Recent Experience and Projects (PDF) 8 Packet Pg. 187
Pacifica City Council 4
April 25, 2022
Attachment 3 - Technology Tools & Data Sources Used by Kosmont Companies (PDF) Attachment 4 - Kosmont Proposal to Pacifica - Economic Opportunities Study (PDF) Attachment 5 - Kosmont COST Proposal to Pacifica - Economic Opportunities Study (PDF) 8 Packet Pg. 188
Economic Opportunities Study
Firms Participating in RFP Process
Attachment 1
Economic Development Firm Location Downloaded Followed Submitted SUBMITTED PROPOSAL (2)
Alex Greenwood Group Pleasant Hill, CA X X x
Kosmont Companies Manhattan Beach, CA X X X
DOWNLOADED & FOLLOWED (8)
BAE Urban Economics San Francisco, CA X X
BBC Research & Consulting Denver, CO X X
Darrene Hackler Consulting Arlington, VA X X
ECONorthwest Portland, OR X X
Jeffrey Donohoe Associates Contoocook, NH X X
RSG Irvine, CA X X
Rogers Economic Development Consulting Stevenson Ranch, CA X X Wahlstrom & Associates Berkeley, CA X X
DOWNLOADED ONLY (6)
BJH Advisors New York, NY X
ESI Corporation Scottsdale, AZ X
Ethos Collaborative Pittsburgh, PA X
Tetra Tech Pasadena, CA X
The Retail Coach Austin, TX X
Westwood Economics Los Angeles, CA X
LOCATION OF 16 FIRMS California 8
Arizona 1
Colorado 1
New Hampshire 1
New York 1
Oregon 1
Pennsylvania 1
Texas 1
Virginia 1

8.a
Packet Pg. 189 Attachment: Attachment 1 - Economic Development Firms in RFP Process (4969 : Staff Report-Economic Opportunities Study) Attachment 2

8.b
Packet Pg. 190 Attachment: Attachment 2 - Kosmont Recent Experience and Projects (4969 : Staff Report-Economic Opportunities Study) Attachment 3
Technology Tools & Data Sources Used by Kosmont Companies

8.c
Packet Pg. 191 Attachment: Attachment 3 - Technology Tools & Data Sources Used by Kosmont Companies (4969 : Staff Report-Economic Opportunities Prepared For

CITY OF PACIFICA
Updated April 8, 2022

PROPOSAL FOR
Professional Brokerage Services
RFP# CC18-085
Prepared By
Kosmont Companies
1601 N. Sepulveda Blvd. #382
Manhattan Beach, CA 90266
(424) 297-1070

PROPOSAL FOR

ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITIES
STUDY
Photo Credit: www.facebook.com./cityofpacifica

8.d
Packet Pg. 192 Attachment: Attachment 4 - Kosmont Proposal to Pacifica - Economic Opportunities Study (4969 : Staff Report-Economic Opportunities Study) April 8, 2022
Ms. Yulia Carter
Chief Fiscal Sustainability Officer
City of Pacifica
540 Crespi Drive
Pacifica, CA 94044
Delivered using the City’s Open Gov Procurement portal
Re: City of Pacifica Request for Proposals (“RFP”) for Economic Opportunities Study Dear Ms. Carter and City Staff:

Kosmont & Associates, Inc., doing business as Kosmont Companies (“Kosmont” or “Consultant”) is pleased to present this updated proposal to the City of Pacifica (“City” or “Client”) to provide an Economic Opportunities Study for the five main business districts: Pacific Manor, Sharp Park, Rockaway Beach, Linda Mar, and Pedro Point. The goal is to identify long term commercial opportunities that are supported by market forces and enhanced by recommended strategies the City and the business community can pursue. The City also wants specific recommendations for the City-owned Beach Boulevard Hotel Site, Quarry property and assessment of Palmetto Avenue and connected streets in Sharp Park to become a downtown shopping area.

Kosmont Companies, a certified Minority Business Enterprise (“MBE”) and Small Business Enterprise (“SBE”), is a full-service local government, economics and real estate advisory firm with a 35+-year track record of working with cities and public agencies on economic development, downtown retail market analyses, and guidance on more than 1,000 public private projects and strategies. Kosmont Companies prides itself on working closely with City staff on economic development projects and asset strategies.

Our public and private sector experience, and in-depth expertise in multiple areas, make us the ideal firm to provide the City with an Economic Opportunities Study that addresses demographic, tourism and market analysis, economic development strategies, business retention and attraction, and how land use and regulatory policies impacts economic development.

Kosmont was founded in 1986 by Larry J. Kosmont, our current active Chairman and CEO. Leadership includes International Council of Shopping Centers (“ICSC”) U.S. P3 Retail Advisory Board member Mr. Ken K. Hira, who oversees retail market studies, retail retention and recruitment, public-private partnerships, and related tasks through our Kosmont Retail NOW!® platform. Further, our highly experienced team comprises former City Managers, Directors of Economic Development/Redevelopment, Community Development, and Financial Services.

Kosmont Companies
Mailing Address: 1601 N. Sepulveda Blvd., #382 (424) 297-1070 Physical Address: 1230 Rosecrans Ave., #630 Manhattan Beach, CA 90266 www.kosmont.com Manhattan Beach, CA 90266 Section A. Transmittal Letter
i

8.d
Packet Pg. 193 Attachment: Attachment 4 - Kosmont Proposal to Pacifica - Economic Opportunities Study (4969 : Staff Report-Economic Opportunities Study) Follow Kosmont: @KosmontTweets ii Kosmont Companies
(424) 297-1070
www.kosmont.com
SUBMITTED BY: KOSMONT AND ASSOCIATES, INC. DBA KOSMONT COMPANIES Physical/Headquarters: 1230 Rosecrans Ave, # 630, Manhattan Beach, CA 90266 Mailing Address: 1601 N. Sepulveda Blvd. #382, Manhattan Beach, CA 90266 Main Office: (424) 297-1070 / Website: www.kosmont.com
Kosmont provides services to Clients virtually, in-person, from satellite locations, & from the Manhattan Beach headquarters across the Western U.S. This project is assigned to the Manhattan Beach headquarters office.

LEAD CONSULTANT AND PRIMARY CONTACT
Mr. Ken K. Hira, President / Cell: (949) 226-0288 / Email: [email protected] What sets Kosmont apart is our hands-on experience, practical perspective, and understanding of how current land use/retail trends (e.g., Omnichanneling and Social Media platforms) affect the real estate landscape (tenant mix and land use) and investment in a community. Kosmont also has expertise in analyzing the local/regional lodging market supply; determining future demand for hotel rooms; assessing City’s opportunity sites and examining the financial feasibility of a new hotel. We are aware of no other firm that possesses the combination of credentials and experience that can be delivered by Kosmont.

The Kosmont team fully understands the range of products and services required for this analysis. Our approach included herein will detail how we plan to provide a comprehensive market analysis and commercial strategy as part of the Economic Opportunities Study.

As requested, no officer or employee of Kosmont Companies is directly or indirectly a party to or in any other manner interested financially or otherwise in the corresponding City RFP.

We believe that our proposal will support the conclusion that Kosmont is very qualified to deliver the requested services. We look forward to the opportunity to assist the City of Pacifica and are available to discuss further at your convenience.

Sincerely,
Larry J. Kosmont, CRE® Ken K. Hira
Chairman and CEO President

CITY OF PACIFICA
Economic Opportunities Study

8.d
Packet Pg. 194 Attachment: Attachment 4 - Kosmont Proposal to Pacifica - Economic Opportunities Study (4969 : Staff Report-Economic Opportunities Study)

KOSMONT COMPANIES
1601 N. Sepulveda Blvd., #382 I Manhattan Beach, CA 90266 I 424.297.1070 www.kosmont.com
SECTION B.

UNDERSTANDING / APPROACH
Kosmont understands the challenges facing the City and hundreds of other cities in the rapidly evolving retail market.

The City wants an Economic Opportunities Study to assist in preparation of an Updated Economic Development Strategic Plan, updated zoning and land use policies for future Specific Plans.

Kosmont understands that the City faces some upcoming financial challenges, with General Fund deficits expected following the end of ARPA funding. The RFP for Economic Opportunities Study is designed to help the City identify opportunities within the various districts to spur economic development and increase revenues.

Today’s consumers are using online websites for purchasing commodities and a broad array of goods. Current economic forces require approaches to land use that explore diversification in uses and densities, and concepts for public amenities and private attractions that help cities capture trips and thus “sales”. Younger consumers, with their increased use of media and digital communication, seek gathering places with restaurants, entertainment venues and experiential retail, rather than simply a collection of traditional store fronts. Another important group is the creative class of professionals (artists, designers, scientists, musicians) who are an important force in economic development.

This dynamic workforce s attracted to communities with clustered centers, which provide a sense of vitality, diversity, convenience and a mix of work, entertainment, services, arts and culture.

The City is seeking a consultant to provide focused recommendations to enhance the economic vitality of the five City districts. Kosmont is dedicated to assisting the City in achieving this objective by conducting a retail market analysis and strategy for each area and believes our retail expertise and experience/understanding of retail markets makes us an ideal candidate to advise the City. It is our in-depth understanding and expertise in retail trends and relationships that sets Kosmont apart. Kosmont’s approach is to not only analyze, but also strategize, and most importantly, implement our findings (as desired) to help the City achieve the desired results. The goal is to create a compelling experience for commercial uses and foster a sense of community to which people are drawn based on an inspiring downtown environment.

SCOPE OF SERVICES
The following scope of work details Kosmont’s suggested approach for the analysis. The elapsed time required for each task is included herein and in total is estimated to take 5 months to complete and present to City Council.

Task 1: Kick off Meeting and Assessment of Current Retail Conditions (2 weeks) Kosmont will commence its assessment by meeting with City staff to discuss Client objectives, review scope of work and establish communication protocols. We will tour the five commercial areas and review the following documents:
• City General Plan
• CDA Marketing Plan
• Business Tax Data by Geo Zone
• 2013 Economic Development Strategic Plan
• Vision 2025 & Beyond Financial Sustainability Study
1 CITY OF PACIFICA
Economic Opportunities Study
B. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AND UNDERSTANDING OF REQUIRED SERVICES

8.d
Packet Pg. 195 Attachment: Attachment 4 - Kosmont Proposal to Pacifica - Economic Opportunities Study (4969 : Staff Report-Economic Opportunities Study)

KOSMONT COMPANIES
1601 N. Sepulveda Blvd., #382 I Manhattan Beach, CA 90266 I 424.297.1070 www.kosmont.com
Kosmont will learn from this review the many ideas that have been recommended by the community and will prepare a strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats (SWOT) analysis to help prioritize the ideas.

Task 2: Stakeholder/Community Outreach (2-3 weeks)
Kosmont will work with City staff to coordinate meetings with stakeholders/the community, such as City staff, local business owners, and other organizations to understand goals and objectives (e.g., increase tax revenues, provide better services for residents, etc.) and identify target businesses best suited to achieve those objectives (to be conducted either in-person or via Zoom). Kosmont will lead one in-person public workshop to present summary of existing conditions, gather community opinions, and will conduct online survey(s) to solicit feedback from other community members. (View Sample Workshop Agenda)
Task 3: Economic Trends & Market Potential (3 Weeks)
Kosmont will outline the current national and regional retail trends relevant to the retail environment (e.g., increasing emphasis on destination and experience). Consultant will identify commercial retail and hospitality market trends, best practices and incentives used by other communities to retain local businesses.

To better understand the local retail market, Kosmont will prepare an Economic and Demographic Profile, illustrating social and economic characteristics, including population, household incomes, race/ethnicity, housing preferences, educational attainment, commute patterns, resident/employee concentrations, tourist population, tapestry segments (a psychographic analysis profiling lifestyles, purchasing behaviors, and media readings of area households and individuals), and other metrics such as artificial intelligence / location data analytics within specific geographic boundaries as deemed relevant by Consultant.

Additionally, Kosmont will evaluate market potential within the areas for major retail subcategories (e.g., restaurants, grocery, general merchandise, etc.). This evaluation will include an analysis of household spending potential by retail category. Kosmont will also examine variables such as retail sales per square foot, sales tax revenue, retail inventory, vacancy and lease rates, absorption rates, and other relevant real estate data for comparable communities. From this analysis and findings, Kosmont will make recommendations for the City to potentially gradually expand retail service offerings toward the needs of residents and visitors. Kosmont will prepare an interim draft report summarizing the results of the initial analysis.

Task 4: Tourism Case Studies (2-3 Weeks)
Kosmont will outline retail trends and case study research relevant to support a vibrant mix of blended uses (retail, hospitality and housing). With the tremendous physical beauty and open space activities located so close to a major metropolitan area, the City should be able to capture a share of the thousands of visitors each week traveling down the coast to Half Moon Bay and beyond. Kosmont suggests researching how similar ocean front communities are able to attract significant tourists:
• Half Moon Bay
• Cambria
• Carpinteria
• Del Mar
SECTION B. CITY OF PACIFICA
Economic Opportunities Study
2 8.d
Packet Pg. 196 Attachment: Attachment 4 - Kosmont Proposal to Pacifica - Economic Opportunities Study (4969 : Staff Report-Economic Opportunities Study)

KOSMONT COMPANIES
1601 N. Sepulveda Blvd., #382 I Manhattan Beach, CA 90266 I 424.297.1070 www.kosmont.com
Task 5. Land Inventory (1-2 weeks)
To assess development opportunities within the City’s five districts, Kosmont will importantly identify vacant or underutilized parcels. Kosmont will also importantly research commercial land values. Kosmont understands that the City owns over 50% of the land area in the City limits, but the vast majority is dedicated open space.

Task 6: Permits, Regulatory Tools & Policies (1 Week)
In Kosmont’s experience, the ability to take advantage of economic opportunities depends on effectiveness of government procedures. To address this, Kosmont will:
• Review City zoning restrictions such as F.A.R., height limit, parking requirements, building setbacks, to assess impact on new development feasibility
• Conditional Use Permit Process
• Building permit approval process
• Incentive programs (if any)
Kosmont will interview key stakeholders (list to be provided by City and agreed upon by Consultant) to identify needs and challenges faced by businesses, property owners, commercial brokers, lenders, business associations and government officials. Kosmont will review City regulations that affect local businesses, including permitting rules and implementation procedures, signage, outdoor dining and special events. This information will be used by Kosmont to identify potential revisions to regulations, policies and procedures to improve new business startup and existing business growth.

Task 7: Opportunity Assessment for Districts and Specific Sites (3-4 weeks) The City appears to have commercial businesses scattered along Highway 1 with no substantial commercial core (e.g., downtown). Annual retail sales have been approximately $200 million in recent years. With 14,500 households and average HH incomes of $125,000, the City should be able to capture more retail sales, excluding visitor spending.

Kosmont will assess the development potential for the key parcels in each district (including hotel site, West Sharp Park, and the Quarry), identifying the strengths and weaknesses of each, as well as the opportunities and threats facing development within the City.

Task 8: Community Workshop (1-2 weeks)
With help of City staff, Kosmont will hold a community workshop to present an executive summary of the research effort, discussing findings, preliminary recommendations and priorities to the community, and solicit feedback on the top priorities.

SECTION B. CITY OF PACIFICA
Economic Opportunities Study
3 8.d
Packet Pg. 197 Attachment: Attachment 4 - Kosmont Proposal to Pacifica - Economic Opportunities Study (4969 : Staff Report-Economic Opportunities Study)

KOSMONT COMPANIES
1601 N. Sepulveda Blvd., #382 I Manhattan Beach, CA 90266 I 424.297.1070 www.kosmont.com
Task 9: Draft Report / Final Presentation (3-4 Weeks)
Based on our findings and results of community workshops, Kosmont will discuss with the City staff strategies for each of the City’s five districts.. The goal is to help transform daytime and nighttime uses, and prioritize sites for new development. Consultant will provide near term and long-term recommendations for both public and private sectors to help the City in its effort for a realistic, results-oriented plan to take advantage of economic opportunities.

Kosmont will compile a PowerPoint presentation including the relevant data sources and key findings, and specific strategies for staff review and comment. Kosmont will then prepare a final presentation with executive summary including graphics and visuals as relevant, which Kosmont Lead Consultant will use to present the findings to the City Council.

C. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSER
KOSMONT AND ASSOCIATES, INC. DBA KOSMONT COMPANIES - www.kosmont.com California Corporation - Established 1986 – 35+ years in Business - 20 Staff Members Physical/Headquarters: 1230 Rosecrans Ave, # 630, Manhattan Beach, CA 90266 Mailing Address: 1601 N. Sepulveda Blvd. #382, Manhattan Beach, CA 90266 Kosmont provides services to Clients virtually, in-person, from satellite locations and from the Manhattan Beach headquarters across the Western U.S.

This project will be assigned to the Manhattan Beach headquarters office.

Kosmont Companies, a certified Minority Business Enterprise (“MBE”) and certified Small Business Enterprise (“SBE”), is a real estate and economic development services firm offering a full range of real estate and financial advisory, retail and hotel strategies, project finance, transaction structuring, negotiations, market analysis, feasibility studies, special district analysis, and project implementation services for both the public and private sectors. Kosmont Companies was founded in 1986 and is nationally recognized. With decades of advisory services, Kosmont has assisted hundreds of public agencies in their quest for services and successful public private projects. What sets Kosmont apart is our understanding of how economics relates to future project planning, as well as our understanding of both the public and private sectors.

Our staff includes economic consultants, real estate brokers and public finance professionals along with former real estate developers and city and community development officials that provide an in-depth understanding of the California economy, its local real estate markets to more effectively respond to our Clients advisory needs.

SECTION B. & C. CITY OF PACIFICA
Economic Opportunities Study
4 Note on Kosmont’s general approach: The prospective assignment and consulting services that Kosmont will provide will be of a relatively limited scope and duration, and advisory in nature. Kosmont will be making recommendations only, which advise the Client and jurisdictions, including their elected officials, appointed officials, and staff, which they can accept or reject. None of Kosmont's staff will act in a capacity as an elected official, nor appointed official, nor as staff, nor as serving in a "designated" position.

8.d
Packet Pg. 198 Attachment: Attachment 4 - Kosmont Proposal to Pacifica - Economic Opportunities Study (4969 : Staff Report-Economic Opportunities Study) A brief highlight of our services is as follows:

Economic Development Consulting Services
• Economic Development Strategies (EDSP/CEDS)
• Kosmont Retail NOW!® Platform
• Special Districts (EIFD, CRIA, CFD)
• OppSites (economic dev online marketplace)
• Downtown Revitalization
• Asset Management Plans
• Developer Selection RFQ/RFP & DDA/ENA
• Sustainable Economic Development
Land Use/Zoning and Community Planning Services
• Development Opportunity Reserve (D.O.R.)®
• Sales Tax Assessment Revenue (STAR*)®
In addition to our scope of services, Kosmont is a full-service firm which also provides various other services through Kosmont Realty (“KR”) and Kosmont Transactions Services (“KTS”). If real estate brokerage and/or public finance transactional services may be needed, Kosmont Companies can call upon the expertise of KR or KTS as appropriate.

KR is a full service and licensed real estate brokerage firm and KTS is a public finance firm providing financial advisory services, and is registered with the SEC.

Planning and Development Services
• Project Evaluation (Blended Use, Hotel, etc.)
• Project Financials & Pro-Forma Assessment
• Property Negotiations
• Due Diligence Report
Real Estate Economics & Financial Advisory Services
• Fiscal & Economic Impacts (Prop. & Sales Tax, TOT)
• Project Economics, Highest & Best Use (HBU) &
Market Studies
• Public & Private Financing Structures
• Affordable Housing (Pro Forma, Housing Element,
Negotiations, Feasibility)
• California City Management Foundation (CCMF) - Kosmont Companies is the proud recipient of the “2022 CCMF Corporate Sponsor of the Year Award” • Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) Sustainability Award “5/2019 – City of Placentia“
• California Association for Local Economic Development (CALED) Awards of Excellence Program “2017 Award of Excellence for Economic Development Partnerships – Redondo Beach Marine Ave Hotels Project ”
• Mr. Larry J. Kosmont, CRE® is a recipient of the
“2016 California Business Properties Association (CBPA) Champion of the Industry Award” ( for his service in real estate and economic development ) • L.A. Business Journal Latino Business of the Year Awards “2015 Small Private Latino Business of the Year Award”
• California Association for Local Economic Development (CALED) Awards of Excellence Program “2014 Award of Excellence in Economic Development Partnerships - South Gate azalea Project” • Mr. Larry J. Kosmont, City of Seal Beach (1980) is a recipient of the John H. Nail Memorial Award
( Awarded annually by the City Managers Department of the League of California Cities ) KOSMONT COMPANIES AND LARRY KOSMONT ARE THE PROUD RECIPIENTS OF THE FOLLOWING AWARDS:

SECTION C. CITY OF PACIFICA
Economic Opportunities Study
5 8.d
Packet Pg. 199 Attachment: Attachment 4 - Kosmont Proposal to Pacifica - Economic Opportunities Study (4969 : Staff Report-Economic Opportunities Study)

KOSMONT COMPANIES
1601 N. Sepulveda Blvd., #382 I Manhattan Beach, CA 90266 I 424.297.1070 www.kosmont.com
This is a high-level explanation of the Kosmont Retail NOW!® platform which is a tool kit for both public and private sectors to attract the right type and amount of retail. It is a comprehensive and proactive retail attraction initiative which identifies existing conditions, sets a path, targets retailers and produces economic development results in today’s omnichannel environment.

From our many years as public sector real estate advisors and hands-on private sector experience, Kosmont understands the need for successful trip generation and incentive programs. The Kosmont Companies Team offers the in-depth research (including national mobility data provided by Placer.ai), real world expertise, and long-term relationships needed to bring viable retail to projects and communities. Today’s trends in the evolution of retail include experience, food, place, omnichanneling, blended use and innovation.

Kosmont Retail NOW!® Platform
Our Approach
Analyze
ü Demographics and Economics
ü Employment Inflow and Outflow
ü Retail Trade Area Definition
ü Market Supply and Demand Assessment
ü Trip Generation
Strategize
ü Retail Surplus / Leakage
ü Supportable Retail Space by Category
ü Retailer Voids / Artificial Intelligence
ü Retailer / Developer Targeting
ü Opportunity Site Assessment
Implement
ü Public Private Partnerships and Financing Tools
ü Citywide and Opportunity Site Marketing Material
ü Leverage ICSC Leadership and Relationships
ü Hands-On Retail Recruitment and Deal Making
ü Project-Specific Transaction Structuring
Ongoing Economic Development and
Retail Recruitment Advisory Services
SECTION C. CITY OF PACIFICA
Economic Opportunities Study
6 8.d
Packet Pg. 200 Attachment: Attachment 4 - Kosmont Proposal to Pacifica - Economic Opportunities Study (4969 : Staff Report-Economic Opportunities Study)

KOSMONT COMPANIES
1601 N. Sepulveda Blvd., #382 I Manhattan Beach, CA 90266 I 424.297.1070 www.kosmont.com
Kosmont brings a well-rounded professional team with the required expertise and exemplary skillsets to provide the requested services. The Kosmont team is well acquainted with the local and regional economic context. We have extensive experience, a proven track record, and the qualifications to provide the knowledge, guidance, and execution of those services necessary to assist the City in making informed decisions moving forward. Our team is enthusiastic, ready, and will be available to provide those services.

If selected, the Lead Consultant, primary contact, and “key person” listed in the agreement with the City will be Mr. Ken K. Hira. Mr. Hira is President of Kosmont Companies and an expert in real estate and economic development. He brings over 30 years of varied experience in virtually every aspect of acquisition, entitlement, development, financing, asset management, disposition, downtown revitalization, and strategic plans. His strengths include a keen understanding of retail trends, business retention/attraction, negotiating public-private transactions and implementing blended-use projects that revitalize communities and assist in economic development/tax generation programs. Mr. Hira will provide project oversight, strategic advisory, and make public presentations. Mr.

Hira will also be responsible for day-to-day management of the engagement with the City, and coordination of the Kosmont team.

Mr. Hira will be supported by the following key team members:
• Mr. Thomas Jirovsky is a Senior Advisor with Kosmont Companies providing real estate development feasibility, fiscal and economic impact, and economic development and asset management strategies to public agencies, landowners and developers. Through his +30-year career he specialized in, urban and suburban mixed-use development, land secured financing strategies, asset management, and public/private partnerships (“P3”) for small urban infill projects to large residential/commercial projects. He has assisted a wide range public agencies throughout California in evaluating recreational, commercial, and residential development projects, tax increment and infrastructure financing and in the negotiation of development agreements on residential and mixed-use projects. Mr. Jirovsky will work directly with Mr. Hira and will provide economic development expertise. • Mr. Robert Valenti is a Vice President with Kosmont Companies, supporting public and private sector clients with market and economic analyses, strategic planning, and real estate development advisory. Prior to joining Kosmont Companies, Mr. Valenti served as a principal economic and policy analyst for Rhode Island’s Office of Management and Budget. While with OMB, Mr. Valenti was responsible for conducting economic and regulatory impact analyses, managing analytic projects that cut across multiple agencies, and providing strategic support for complex and sensitive policy issues. Mr. Valenti will provide research and analytical support to the team.

Kosmont staff will be assigned as appropriate based on their skills and qualifications in order to adequately provide services to the City and stay within budget. If needed, additional team members (not shown here) such as a Project Analyst may be utilized to provide additional research and project administrative support. Key team member resumes and qualifications may be found in the Appendix of this proposal.

D. PROPOSER’S TEAM
SECTION D. CITY OF PACIFICA
Economic Opportunities Study
7 8.d
Packet Pg. 201 Attachment: Attachment 4 - Kosmont Proposal to Pacifica - Economic Opportunities Study (4969 : Staff Report-Economic Opportunities Study)

KOSMONT COMPANIES
1601 N. Sepulveda Blvd., #382 I Manhattan Beach, CA 90266 I 424.297.1070 www.kosmont.com
As requested on the City’s Open Gov Procurement portal, this portion of the proposal has been uploaded separately.

Kosmont Companies takes no exception to the RFP.

E. EXCEPTIONS TO THE RFP
SECTIONS E., F., G., & H.

F. PROJECT COST, FEES AND CHARGES [ COST PROPOSAL ]

CITY OF PACIFICA
Economic Opportunities Study
8 G. PROJECT TIMELINE / KEY MILESTONES
• Kick off Meeting/Document review- 2 weeks
• Stakeholder/Community Outreach – 2-3 weeks
• Economic Trends & Market Potential - 3 weeks
• Land Use Planning / Case Studies – 2-3 weeks
• Land Inventory 1-2 weeks
• Permits, Regulations & Policies - 1 week
• Opportunity Assessment 3-4 weeks
• Community Workshop 1-2 weeks
• Draft Report / Final Presentation - 3-4 weeks
Total elapsed timeline for the Study is 20-22 weeks reflecting some moderate overlap of the tasks itemized below CITY OF DALY CITY, 333 90TH STREET, DALY CITY, CA 94015 Tatum Mothershead, Director of Economic and Community Development (650) 991-8159 / [email protected]
[ See following letter of recommendation. ]
CITY OF ST. HELENA, 1480 MAIN STREET, ST. HELENA, CA 94574 Mark Prestwich, former St. Helena City Manager, Current Rancho Palos Verdes Estates City Manger (916) 248-1192 / [email protected]
CITY OF SANTA BARBARA, 735 ANACAPA STREET, SANTA BARBARA, CA 93101 Nina Johnson, Senior Assistant City Administrator / (805) 564-5305 / [email protected] H. REFERENCES
CITY OF SAUSALITO, 420 LITHO STREET, SAUSALITO, CA 94965 Brian Moura, RGS, former Advisor to City / (650) 995-6249 / [email protected]

8.d
Packet Pg. 202 Attachment: Attachment 4 - Kosmont Proposal to Pacifica - Economic Opportunities Study (4969 : Staff Report-Economic Opportunities Study)

LETTER OF RECOMMENDATION
SECTION H. CITY OF PACIFICA
Economic Opportunities Study 9

8.d
Packet Pg. 203 Attachment: Attachment 4 - Kosmont Proposal to Pacifica - Economic Opportunities Study (4969 : Staff Report-Economic Opportunities Study) In 2019 the City hired Kosmont to do a Land Economics Study focusing on three major business districts to identify how they were likely to evolve based on market forces and success of potential development strategies. • The Downtown District - a popular visitor destination, but has seen declining visitor traffic and sales in recent years, while tenants face high rents
• Caledonia Street - well-loved by the community as a Main street destination, but has seen retailers struggling with high rents, vacancies, and attracting sustainable levels of patrons • Marinship - home to a diverse mix of businesses that include Architects, Creative Agencies, Business Services, Fine Arts, Industrial, Marine, Restaurants and Other Uses

KOSMONT COMPANIES
1601 N. Sepulveda Blvd., #382 I Manhattan Beach, CA 90266 I 424.297.1070 www.kosmont.com
SECTION I. CITY OF PACIFICA
Economic Opportunities Study
Kosmont has 35+ years of public and private sector experience and in-depth expertise in economic development plans, real estate market studies, project development, economic and fiscal impact, and public municipal finance services to support our client needs. Kosmont is well acquainted with the local and regional economic context with numerous clients in the Bay Area and will utilize our experience in order to achieve the desired results. The project descriptions and completed reports provided herein are only an abbreviated sample of our Team’s extensive experience, knowledge, and capabilities highlighting the various types of services we offer as it relates to the City of Pacifica.

I. COMPLETED REPORTS
CITY OF SAUSALITO: Land Economics Study
10 The Study helped guide the City
on shaping of key districts to
Marin ship assure long term
economic health of the
community. It was also used to
evaluate zoning designations and
land use regulations.

SAMPLE WORK PRODUCT:

Kosmont Sausalito Land
Economics Study - Final Report
March 2020

8.d
Packet Pg. 204 Attachment: Attachment 4 - Kosmont Proposal to Pacifica - Economic Opportunities Study (4969 : Staff Report-Economic Opportunities Study) Kosmont respectfully requests that in the City of Pacifica’s standard contract, that Section 5.1 be clarified to read:
“The obligations contained in this Section 5.1 shall survive the termination of this Agreement for whatever cause related to Consultant’s services for the full period of time allowed by law not to exceed 4 years after Agreement termination or expiration, and shall not in any way be limited by the insurance requirements of this Agreement.”
Consultant will be providing robust insurance to City including an additional $3 million umbrella policy.

State Street in downtown Santa Barbara had seen declining sales for the past five years in 2019. The City issued an RFP and Kosmont was selected / hired to analyze local and regional economic and real estate market conditions, do case study research on successful downtown revitalization, do extensive community outreach with local government, business and community leaders to understand critical issues. Kosmont also analyzed City planning and permit procedures and land use designations to evaluate potential for blended use redevelopment. Kosmont presented its final report to City Council in July 2019 outlining an extensive series of short term and long-term action items to restore State Street to a more vibrant community gathering place and commercial district.

CITY OF SANTA BARBARA: Retail Market Study / Recommendations for Downtown Revitalization SAMPLE WORK PRODUCT: Santa Barbara Recommendations for Downtown Revitalization SECTION I. & J. CITY OF PACIFICA
Economic Opportunities Study
Kosmont was retained by the City of St. Helena in response to a Request for Proposals for Market, Economic and Financing Analysis in support of an ongoing Asset Management Plan. Kosmont also did a focused retail market analysis and strategy to identify opportunities, leverage the strengths and overcome the threats and weaknesses impacting the downtown district. Other services included assistance in recruitment of targeted retailers/developers for identified opportunity sites within the City. Kosmont interviewed City officials, property owners and business owners to understand current conditions. From these interviews, Kosmont identified several key themes:
• Local market conditions/competition
• Review of City zoning/permit process
On July 25, 2018 the St. Helena Star published an article on Kosmont's study for the City, titled "Study analyzes sluggish sales at St. Helena stores.”
Kosmont followed the report with a series of workshops for downtown retail business owners focused on improving customer outreach using Omnichannel marketing and various Social Media platforms. Kosmont also prepared a hotel market analysis for a key opportunity site in the City.

SAMPLE WORK PRODUCT: St. Helena Downtown Retail Market Analysis CITY OF ST. HELENA: Economic Dev. Services / Market Analysis / Kosmont Retail NOW!® J. MODIFICATIONS TO AGREEMENT
• Impact of national retail trends
• Public investment needs
11 8.d
Packet Pg. 205 Attachment: Attachment 4 - Kosmont Proposal to Pacifica - Economic Opportunities Study (4969 : Staff Report-Economic Opportunities Study)

REIMAGINING RETAIL IS PRIMARY

LAND USE OPPORTUNITY FOR CITIES
Kosmont has provided advisory services for many Mall Reimagination Projects, Downtown Retail Districts, and Financing Districts across California.

Sausalito
Commercial
District
Analysis
Buellton / Solvang
Economic Development
Strategy & Advisory
Santa Barbara
State Street Retail Study
& Econ. Dev. Strategy
St Helena
Retail District
Strategies
Capitola
Mall Reimagination Advisory
Baldwin Hills (Capri Capital)
Mall Reimagination Advisory
Laguna Hills
Mall Reimagination Advisory
Union City
Retail Advisory
Santa Monica
DTSM Third Street Promenade
Community Workshops
Buena Park
Mall & Retail
District Advisory
La Verne
EIFD Advisory
Placentia
EIFD Advisory
Mountain House CSD
Retail / Land Use Advisory
Pittsburg
EIFD & Econ.

Dev. Advisory
Napa
EIFD Advisory
Brentwood
EIFD Advisory
12 8.d
Packet Pg. 206 Attachment: Attachment 4 - Kosmont Proposal to Pacifica - Economic Opportunities Study (4969 : Staff Report-Economic Opportunities Study) Mr. Ken K. Hira serves as President for Kosmont Companies. An expert in real estate and economic development, Mr. Hira brings over 30 years of varied experience in virtually every aspect of acquisition, entitlement, development, financing, asset management, disposition, downtown revitalization, and strategic plans. His strengths include a keen understanding of retail trends, business retention/attraction, negotiating public-private transactions and implementing blended-use projects that revitalize communities and assist in economic development/tax generation programs.

A former Executive Vice President and mixed-use developer, Mr. Hira managed a portfolio of over $100 million of retail sites, while operating the commercial division of the company. Prior to this, as Managing Director of Acquisitions for a development company and Vice President of Development at a development firm, he evaluated and underwrote hundreds of acres of land, successfully captured and negotiated anchor tenant commitments creating $60 million of value in ground-up development and redevelopment and was responsible for 800,000 square feet of retail entitlement, design and development. As Vice President of a shopping center company based in San Diego (6 years), Mr. Hira entitled one million square feet of retail development projects, as well as led the acquisition of 24 neighborhood and community shopping centers, totaling 3.3 million square feet and valued at $375 million, and organized a $287 million recapitalization.

LICENSES/AFFILIATIONS:

Mr. Hira is an active volunteer leader of the Innovating Commerce Serving Communities (ICSC) (formerly International Council of Shopping Centers). He was nominated and serves as the Co-Chair of the ICSC P3 Retail Advisory Board, nationally advocating public-private partnerships, while previously serving as the ICSC Western Division P3 Retail Co-Chair, Southern California State Director, Program Committee Chair and Alliance Co-Chair.

Project Role:

Lead Consultant
Years with Firm: 13+
Years of Experience: 30+
Education:

Bachelor of Economics
and Business, UCLA
Project Assigned to this
Satellite Office:

Coto de Caza (Orange
County)
Ken K. Hira President
RELEVANT EXPERIENCE:

Throughout his career, Mr. Hira has managed hundreds of public & private sector consulting assignments. A few of his more recent projects are summarized below:
• City of Santa Barbara Downtown Revitalization
• City of Sausalito Land Economics Study
• City of St. Helena (Highest & Best Use Analysis / Asset Strategy/ Downtown Retail Analysis)
• City of Capitola (Mall Redevelopment Feasibility)
• Union City Power Center Tenanting Strategy
• City of Buellton (Market & Economic Analysis / Specific Plan with Development Opportunity Reserve D.O.R.)® • City of Daly City (Economic Development Strategy and Opportunity Site Developer Negotiations) • City of Banning (CEDS)
• City of Anaheim (Strategic Site Analysis)
• City of Agoura Hills (Agoura Village Specific Plan Feasibility Analysis)

APPENDIX CITY OF PACIFICA
Economic Opportunities Study
A-1

8.d
Packet Pg. 207 Attachment: Attachment 4 - Kosmont Proposal to Pacifica - Economic Opportunities Study (4969 : Staff Report-Economic Opportunities Study)

KOSMONT COMPANIES
1601 N. Sepulveda Blvd., #382 I Manhattan Beach, CA 90266 I 424.297.1070 www.kosmont.com
Mr. Thomas Jirovsky is a Senior Advisor with Kosmont Companies. Mr. Jirovsky provides services related to real estate pro formas, development feasibility and financial incentives, economic development strategies, fiscal and economic impact, and asset management to public agencies and developers.

He is a former Senior Managing Director with CBRE and headed their national land use and economic consulting practice. Prior to joining CBRE in 2000, he was CFO and a principal with Kotin, Regan & Mouchly, Inc.

Throughout his 35-year career he has managed over 1,000 consulting assignments specializing in the areas of feasibility analysis, with particular emphasis on analysis of residential and commercial development, downtown revitalization strategies, land secured financing strategies, asset management plans, and public/private joint ventures for development projects of all sizes.

He also has extensive experience in evaluating transit-oriented development opportunities for public and private property owners, as well as transit agencies throughout California and the western U.S..

LICENSES/AFFILIATIONS:

Mr. Jirovsky is a LEED Accredited Professional and a member of the Innovating Commerce Serving Communities (ICSC) (formerly International Council of Shopping Centers) and Urban Land Institute (ULI).

Project Role:

Economic Development
Feasibility
Years with Firm: 10+
Years of Experience: 35+
Education:
- B.S. in Architecture,
University of Southern
California with honors
- MBA in Finance,
University of Southern CA
Thomas Jirovsky Senior Advisor
RELEVANT EXPERIENCE:

A few of his more recent projects are summarized below:
• City of Santa Barbara (Downtown Revitalization)
• City of Sausalito (Land Economics Study)
• City of St. Helena (Highest & Best Use Analysis / Asset Strategy/ Downtown Retail Analysis) • City of Agoura Hills (Specific Plan Feasibility Study) • City of Capitola (Mall Redevelopment Feasibility)
• Union City Power Center (Tenanting Strategy)
• City of Banning (CEDS)
• San Luis Obispo (Palm Nipomo parking structure P3)
• City of Gardena (Artesia Corridor Specific Plan Feasibility) • Gateway to LA (Retail Strategy)
• Downtown City of Placentia (Fiscal & Economic Impact) • City of Thousand Oaks (Economic Development Strategic Plan) • City of Indian Wells (Hotel Feasibility Analysis)

APPENDIX CITY OF PACIFICA
Economic Opportunities Study
A-2

8.d
Packet Pg. 208 Attachment: Attachment 4 - Kosmont Proposal to Pacifica - Economic Opportunities Study (4969 : Staff Report-Economic Opportunities Study) RELEVANT EXPERIENCE:

A few recent samples of relevant projects are summarized below. • City of Sausalito – Land Economics Study
• Mountain House CSD – Commercial Land Use Analysis
• City of Anaheim, CA – Opportunity Site Advisory Services • City of Corona – Downtown Revitalization Plan
• City of Laguna Hills – Fiscal Impact Analysis, Economic Research • Private Sector Clients (Fiscal Impact Analysis, Highest and Best Use Analysis and Real Estate Advisory)
Kosmont: Econ Development Strategies (Market/Demographic Analyses & Land Use Strategies) • City of Santa Ana – Opportunity Zone Strategy
• City of El Cajon – Opportunity Zone Strategy and Advisory Services • City of Santa Barbara – Downtown Revitalization
• City of Los Angeles, CA – Downtown – EIFD Evaluation
• City of Fresno – Downtown / Blackstone Bus Rapid Transit Corridor EIFD Formation • City of Indian Wells – EIFD Evaluation
Numerous cities and private sector clients in cities throughout California • Enhanced Infrastructure Financing District (EIFD) Feasibility Analysis - Palmdale, Azusa, El Segundo, Los Angeles State of Rhode Island, Office of Management and Budget
• Econometric modeling and forecasting of state revenues and correctional populations. • Creation, review, and evaluation of economic analyses for state policy issues and significant rulemaking actions Project Role:

Project Analysis,
Research and Support
Years with Firm: 3+
Years of Experience: 6
Education:
- Master of Public Policy,
Brown University
- Bachelor of Arts in
political science, College
of the Holy Cross in
Worcester, MA
Satellite Office:

Los Angeles

KOSMONT COMPANIES
1601 N. Sepulveda Blvd., #382 I Manhattan Beach, CA 90266 I 424.297.1070 www.kosmont.com
Robert Valenti Vice President
Mr. Robert Valenti is a Vice President with Kosmont Companies, supporting public and private sector clients with market and economic analysis, land use analysis, fiscal impact analysis, strategic planning, and real estate development advisory. He also assists with geospatial analysis of boundaries and funding and financing feasibility studies of tax increment financing districts.

Prior to joining Kosmont Companies, Mr. Valenti served as a principal economic and policy analyst for Rhode Island’s Office of Management and Budget. While with OMB, Mr. Valenti was responsible for conducting economic and regulatory impact analyses, managing analytic projects that cut across multiple agencies, and providing strategic support for complex and sensitive policy issues. He also has a background in urban policy and experience with housing program development with community development organizations.

APPENDIX CITY OF PACIFICA
Economic Opportunities Study
A-3

8.d
Packet Pg. 209 Attachment: Attachment 4 - Kosmont Proposal to Pacifica - Economic Opportunities Study (4969 : Staff Report-Economic Opportunities Study)

KOSMONT COMPANIES
1601 N. Sepulveda Blvd., #382 I Manhattan Beach, CA 90266 I 424.297.1070 www.kosmont.com
The following table summarizes Kosmont’s estimated project budget for the proposed scope of work. /1 Includes airfare, car rental. and lodging for kickoff meetings and presentation to City for 1-2 professionals.

Duties may be allocated between tasks and team members as deemed appropriate by Kosmont’s Lead Consultant in order to adequately provide services to the Client and stay within budget. If needed, additional team members such as a Project Analyst may be assigned to work on this project in a support or research role.

KOSMONT COMPANIES
Cost Proposal
F. PROJECT COST, FEES AND CHARGES

CITY OF PACIFICA
Economic Opportunities Study
1 President SVP/Senior
Advisor
Vice
President
$365 $325 $225
Task 1: Kick off Meeting and Assessment of Current
Retail Conditions $9,120 32 8 8 16
Task 2: Stakeholder/Community Outreach 10,980 36 12 12 12 Task 3: Economic Trends & Market Potential 12,560 48 4 12 32 Task 4: Tourism Case Studies 8,230 30 2 12 16
Task 5: Land Inventory 5,860 20 4 8 8
Task 6: Permits, Regulatory Tools & Policies 6,760 24 4 8 12 Task 7: Opportunity Assessment for Districts and
Specific Sites 16,280 56 12 20 24
Task 8: Community Workshop 8,330 26 12 8 6
Task 9: Draft Report / Final Presentations 8,780 28 12 8 8 TOTAL ESTIMATED BUDGET $86,900 300 70 96 134
Reimbursable Expenses /1 $5,000
TOTAL $91,900

CITY OF PACIFICA
Economic Opportunities Study
TASKS Cost/Task Hours /
Task

8.e
Packet Pg. 210 Attachment: Attachment 5 - Kosmont COST Proposal to Pacifica - Economic Opportunities Study (4969 : Staff Report-Economic Opportunities

KOSMONT COMPANIES
1601 N. Sepulveda Blvd., #382 I Manhattan Beach, CA 90266 I 424.297.1070 www.kosmont.com
KOSMONT COMPANIES 2022 HOURLY FEE SCHEDULE
Professional Services
Chairman & CEO $395.00/hour
President $365.00/hour
Senior Vice President/Senior Advisor $325.00/hour
Vice President $225.00/hour
Senior Project Analyst $195.00/hour
Project Analyst/Project Research $165.00/hour
Assistant Project Analyst/Assistant Project Manager $125.00/hour GIS Mapping/Graphics Service $ 95.00/hour
Clerical Support $ 70.00/hour
Additional Expenses
In addition to professional services (labor fees):
1) An administrative fee for in-house copy, fax, phone, postage costs, digital/technological support and related administrative expenses will be charged, which will be computed at four percent (4.0 %) of monthly Kosmont Companies professional service fees incurred; plus 2) Out-of-pocket expenditures, such as travel and mileage, professional printing, and delivery charges for messenger and overnight packages will be charged at cost. 3) Project/Market data sources for support of evaluation and analysis e.g., ESRI, Placer.ai, CoStar/STR, IMPLAN and other based on quoted project cost.
• Charges for Court/Deposition/Expert Witness-Related Appearances Court-related (non-preparation) activities, such as court appearances, depositions, mediation, arbitration, dispute resolution and other expert witness activities, will be charged at a court rate of 1.5 times scheduled rates, with a 4-hour minimum.

Rates shall remain in effect until December 31, 2022.

CITY OF PACIFICA
Economic Opportunities Study
2 F. PROJECT COST, FEES AND CHARGES CONTINUED:

KOSMONT COMPANIES
Cost Proposal

8.e
Packet Pg. 211 Attachment: Attachment 5 - Kosmont COST Proposal to Pacifica - Economic Opportunities Study (4969 : Staff Report-Economic Opportunities

CITY OF PACIFICA

COUNCIL AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT
4/25/2022
1 SUBJECT:

Award Civic Center Campus Facilities Project Construction Services Agreement SUBJECT:

Award of Civic Center Campus Facilities Improvement Project Construction Services Agreement RECOMMENDED ACTION:

Approve the following actions for Civic Center Campus Facilities Improvement Project (Project Number PW#2021-23):

STAFF CONTACT:

Sam Bautista, P.E., Deputy Director of Public Works
(650) 738-3771
[email protected]
Lisa Petersen, P.E., Director of Public Works
(650) 738-3770
[email protected]
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION:

The ongoing Civic Center Campus Facilities Improvement project builds on and continues the work established in the 2020 Pacifica Civic Center Facilities Study and subsequent Pacifica Civic Center Conceptual Design project. Conceptual design began in October 2020 and culminated in a presentation to the City Council on April 26, 2021, at which time Council accepted the conceptual design and funding strategy. City Council approved funding and allowed the project to proceed to the schematic design/design development phase on June 28, 2021, as part of budget adoption for Fiscal Year 2021-22. The Schematic/Design Development phase began in July 2021 and was completed on October 25, 2021; pre-qualification of potential contractors was completed in November/December 2021, and the project was released to bid on February 25, 2022.
9 Packet Pg. 212
Pacifica City Council 2
April 25, 2022
Bid Results
The Project was advertised on March 2, 2022, and March 9, 2022, in accordance with the formal bid process. Ten (10) construction companies pre-qualified and a total of 4 bids were received on March 31, 2022, which ranged in cost for the Basis of Award (described later in the report) from $9,222,972.00 to $11,955,000.00, with two bidders within 2% (+/-) of the estimate, the third and fourth bidders at +7% and + 28% respectively. W.E. Lyons Construction had the low bid of $9,222,972 which is -1.3% lower than the Design Teams Estimate of Probable Construction Cost for the Basis of Award. The following table is a summary of bids received:

Company Basis of Award
W.E. Lyons Construction Co. $ 9,222,972.00
D.L. Falk Construction Inc. $ 9,424,092.00
Zovich & Sons Construction Inc. $ 10,030,000.00
Gonsalves & Stronk Construction Co. $ 11,955,000.00
The construction proposals received are reflective of competitive bids from qualified contractors that are consistent with the most recent January 2022 estimate of Probable Construction Cost prepared by the Design Team. TBD Consultants, the project cost estimator, reports escalation is currently being projected at 5% for 2022, but there are indications that it could go as high as 6%, or 7% for the next year or two making award of the contract at this time most cost effective for the City, as delaying the project will likely result in higher bids.

Project Cost Estimate Adjustments
The updated project budget presented to Council in October 2021 had the estimated total construction cost of $9,020,000 which included the buildings construction cost, FF+E (furniture, fixtures, and equipment) allowance, a project contingency, for a total estimated project budget, including soft costs, of $11.73M. As discussed with Council at the October meeting, the project estimate of $11.73M was consistent with the April estimate, reflecting a 2% increase due to inflation. The project team (City Staff and the Design Team) worked diligently to refine, value engineer, and include bid alternates that would provide flexibility to the City so that the project could be awarded based on priorities and available budget. Staff also noted that the team would continue to refine project soft costs (costs other than contractor costs) as an opportunity for cost savings. Cost saving strategies employed by the team included 1) continued value engineering, 2) refinement of soft costs, and 3) strategically defining add alternates to strive to bring the project budget within a $10M funding range.

Unfortunately, during this unprecedented time of uncertain bid conditions caused by higherthan-expected escalation, labor shortage, pricing volatility (due to rising material and fuel costs), and the impact of high demands on the supply chain - the continued value engineering efforts did not result in a reduced project budget. However, these efforts did help the project team maintain the overall bottom line from the October 2021 construction estimate against these surging market forces.

Bid Add Alternates
To provide flexibility in the project award, the bid package was designed with a Base Bid plus Add Alternates. More specifically, and refined further between completion of the Schematic/Design development phase and release of the bids, a “Basis of Award” option was created consisting of the Base Bid plus Add Alternates A2, A4 and A5A. These three basic add alternates, based on construction efficiency, are considered integral to the project. They 9 Packet Pg. 213
Pacifica City Council 3
April 25, 2022
include:

A2: Exterior site improvements to the west and north;
A4: Exterior accents on the P&P building - wood-look phenolic and metal rain screen accents;
A5A: City Hall Exterior, historic redwood siding rehabilitation.

Although the City has the choice of not awarding the Basis of Award Add Alternates (A2, A4, A5a), it should be noted that there will be a significant impact to the overall project, including an incomplete site and limited improvements to the exterior of City Hall, and the P+P building.

Add Alternate A2 will add usable public green space to the site; Add Alternate A4 would modernize the exterior of the P+P building by adding the wood-look phenolic and metal rainscreen accent materials to the building; and Add Alternate A5a would expose the historic redwood siding to revert the building to its original look. Additionally, delay in completing the Basis of Award Alternates (A2, A4, and A5a) scope would likely result in an increased cost due to future escalation, redundant soft and hard overhead costs, and because it will be more difficult to complete the work as independent elements rather than as part of a larger project.

Therefore, the City Manager recommends including the Basis of Award Alternates in the contract award. This recommendation, as shown in the table below, brings the total construction budget to $9,960,810. It also brings the total project budget, including design and other soft costs, to $11,651,397. As discussed in the Fiscal Impact section of this report, the City Manager is recommending a combination of one-time funding sources to cover the additional $1.65 million in funding above the approved $10 million to achieve the Basis of Award Add Alternates for the project. Appendix A provides more information on all Add Alternates that were included in the project Bid Documents.

Green Sustainable Project Features
The project is fully compliant with current CalGreen mandatory measures that are part of California’s Green Building Standards Code as well as industry best-practices for sustainability.

In particular, the project includes the following sustainable features for the building and site:

BUILDING:
• Reuse of existing building elements for both the City Hall and P+P building • Reuse of existing redwood in City Hall exterior (also rehabilitating historic architecture)
• Use of natural daylighting and daylight harvesting
• Low-flow plumbing fixtures
• Energy-efficient building systems, including LED lighting • Responsibly-sourced and low VOC building interior and exterior materials • Photovoltaic infrastructure ready
SITE:
• Native, drought tolerant, and climate-appropriate plantings • High efficiency irrigation system
• On-site stormwater treatment
• Preservation of healthy, mature trees
• Bicycle racks and pedestrian path through site to promote alternate means of transportation and connectivity to the neighborhood
• Reduced night sky light pollution with site lighting
• Infrastructure for electric vehicle charging stations Recommendation for Contract Award
With the award of a contract to W.E. Lyons Construction, the low bid contractor, for the Base 9 Packet Pg. 214
Pacifica City Council 4
April 25, 2022
Bid and Add Alternates A2, A4 and A5a (Basis of Award), the updated project budget is as follows:

PACIFICA CIVIC CENTER PROJECT BUDGET
April 25, 2022
W. E . Lyons Bid Proposal Budget
Line
Item
SCOPE OF WORK- Construction Contract
1-7 Base Bid, including mobilization,
demolition, general conditions, general
requirements, site preparation, site
improvements, City Hall renovation, and
P+P building renovation
$8,475,307.00
A2 Add Alternate Site Improvements $68,145.00
A4 Exterior Accents at P+ P Building $346,060.00
A5A City Hall Exterior refinishing, and new
doors/ windows
$333,460.00
Subtotal Construction Contract $9,222,972.00
Project Construction Contingency $737,838.00
Total Construction Budget $9,960,810
SCOPE OF WORK- FF+E
FF+ E Allowance (w/contingency) $40,000 $40,000
SCOPE OF WORK- Soft Cost
Design + Engineering Fees (SD- CA) $1,160,587
Construction Management (allowance) $300,000
City Fees + Testing (allowance) $190,000
Subtotal Soft Cost $1,650,587 $1,650,587
TOTAL PROJECT BUDGET $11,651,397
Project soft costs are costs not related to payments to the project contractor, such as costs above for design, construction management, and testing. The soft cost allowances from the October 2021 budget have been refined in the above project budget and are reflective of current projected costs for these fees.

The City Manager recommends awarding the construction of the Base Bid plus Add Alternates A2, A4, and A5a to W.E. Lyons Construction Co. as it will renovate the City Hall to a historic look, provide the P+P building with modern architectural accents and add green space.

As stated earlier in the report, Appendix A lists all the Add Alternatives and their cost. Should the Council wish to choose an item or items on the Add Alternatives list beyond the Add Alternatives included in the total project budget shown above, additional funding would be required. For example, should the City Council choose to add Alternate A3 (Split Cooling System for P+P Conference Rooms) and Alternate A8 (PV Infrastructure), staff would need to increase the project budget by $147,193 plus an 8% construction contingency factor.

Staff recommends Council to authorize the City Manager to award and execute an agreement with W.E. Lyons Construction Company in an amount not to exceed $9,222,972.00 and authorize a budget authority for construction in the amount of $9,960,810.00, which includes 9 Packet Pg. 215
Pacifica City Council 5
April 25, 2022
contingencies in an amount not to exceed eight percent (8%) of the Construction Contract amount.

Civic Center Financing
In November of 2021, Council adopted a resolution approving a lease financing agreement in the amount of $4M to finance a portion of the construction of the Civic Center Improvement Project with Sterling National Bank (SNB). The loan rate offered for the $4M was 1.97% for a 15-year loan. In addition to the $4M, SNB committed to providing the City with an additional $1M within a 24-month period, if the City decides to increase the borrowing amount. Based on recent discussions with SNB, should the City choose to exercise this option, interest rates would most likely be in the range of 2.95% to 4.5%, depending on when the rate is locked in. Based on these rates, annual debt service for the additional $1M would be approximately $93,000 to $102,000, respectively. As discussed further under the Fiscal Impact section of this report, the City Manager does not recommend increased borrowing for this project, but rather use of available one-time funding.

ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:

Several alternative actions the Council may choose are as follows:

Contract Award/Add Alternate Alternatives:

1. Award only the Base Bid - Council may choose to only award the Base Bid in the amount of $8,475,307 and not award Add Alternates A2, A4 and A5a, which would provide a cost savings of approximately $807,500. This action is not recommended for reasons noted in the report and because completing these Add Alternatives with the base bid will allow for cost efficiencies.

2. Award the Base Bid with Add Alternates A2, A4 and A5a, plus additional Add Alternates - Council could include any combination of A1, A3, A6, A7, A8, A9 listed in Appendix A, to be funded by undesignated fund reserves.

3. Do not award the Civic Center Facilities Project Construction Services Agreement to W.E. Lyons Construction Co. or Reject all bids and/or rebid the project - This is not recommended as the renovations are needed for the Civic Center facilities and this would result in a delay of that work and would likely increase construction costs due to increasing inflation.

Funding Alternatives:

4. Provide alternative recommendation(s) for the use of one-time funding for the Basis of Award - For example, the Council may choose to use the General Fund (GF) Unassigned Fund balance for the entire additional allocation of $1,580,000 needed for the project budget, rather than using any Returned ERAF funds.

5. Exercise right to increase the City’s lease financing by $1M - Use the additional $1M financing option, which would significantly reduce the use of one-time Returned ERAF and/or the General Fund Unassigned Fund balance. This alternative is viable, however adding an ongoing General Fund expense of approximately $100,000 per year for the next 15 years would contribute to the City’s projected ongoing structural deficit and cost more in interest payments.

RELATION TO CITY COUNCIL GOALS AND WORK PLAN:

The renovation of the Civic Center Campus to construct safe working conditions for City employees and a safe public facility for the public relates to fulfilling all the City Council's goals and priorities.

FISCAL IMPACT:
9 Packet Pg. 216
Pacifica City Council 6
April 25, 2022
On April 26, 2021, the City Council approved the recommended $10M funding strategy, which identified six sources of one-time funds that total approximately $6 million, leaving $4 million to borrow. The six sources of the original project budget are listed below:

1. General Fund Unassigned Balance: $3,000,000

2. Returned (formerly called “Excess”) ERAF: $1,500,000

3. American Rescue Plan Act for COVID-related safety systems (e.g., HVAC): $525,000

4. Insurance Reimbursement: $350,000 (minimum)

5. Roy Davies Trust Fund for park amenities: $325,000

6. Wastewater Fund for wastewater employee/FTE office space: $318,184 The remaining $4 million is in the form of a lease financing with a competitive interest rate. The bank has also authorized an additional $1 million borrowing to augment the project budget, if needed.

During the mid-year budget discussion with Council in March, staff noted a one-time increase to the City’s General Fund Unassigned balance which included $1M in staff salary savings due to vacancies. Additionally, staff recorded additional Returned ERAF revenues of $900,000 received above the original budget added to the Disaster Accounting Fund at midyear. To fund the additional costs required to cover the Civic Center project “Basis of Award” construction costs and soft costs, the City Manager is recommending Council adopt the attached resolution approving a Budget Amendment to authorize allocation of the additional Returned ERAF revenues of $900,000 from the Disaster Accounting Fund to the project budget. Also, the City Manager is recommending authorizing a one-time use of the General Fund Unassigned Fund Balance (Fund 1) of $751,397 to add to the project budget. The new recommended project Source and Use of Funds is shown below:

Total Project Source and Use of Funds (SUF)
Capital Improvement Fund 22 (Design & Construction) $ 10,000,000 Additional Returned ERAF - Disaster Recovery Fund
(Fund 38)
$ 900,000
General Fund Unassigned Fund Balance (Fund 1) $ 751,397 Total Source of Funds $ 11,651,397
Design Cost $ (1,160,587)
Construction Services Agreement $ (9,222,972)
Construction Contingency (8%) $ (737,838)
Furniture, Technology, & Signage and Soft Costs $ (490,000) Total Use of Funds $ (11,651,397)
Estimated Project End Balance $0
9 Packet Pg. 217
Pacifica City Council 7
April 25, 2022
APPENDIX “A” - COST OF ADD ALTERNATES

ALTERNATE ITEM SCOPE LOW BIDDER
COST
A1 EV Charging Stations Install 4 charging stations $88,070.00 A2* Site Improvements West side and North of City Hall site improvements
$68,145.00
A3 Split Cooling System for
P+P Conference Rooms
Split Heat Pump Units - Indoor units
and associated outdoor units
$78,905.00
A4* Exterior Accents @ P+P
Building
Wood-look phenolic and metal
rainscreen accent material
$346,060.00
A5a* City Hall Exterior - Reuse
Redwood Siding
Remove existing cement plaster and
lath, rehabilitate redwood siding,
and repair underlayment from
interior side, install cavity
insulation, install plywood on
interior.  Rehabilitate areas
identified.
$333,460.00
A5b City Hall Exterior - New
Redwood Siding
If it is determined that the redwood is
infeasible to repair due to the existing
condition of the wood, Alternate 5b
may be employed where necessary in
lieu of Alternate 5a. Alternate 5b may
not commence without review by the
Architect and written consent from the
Owner. Alternate 5b: remove cement
plaster and lath, remove redwood
siding (to studs). Install plywood
sheathing, underlayment, new siding,
matching original siding pattern, and
paint.
$310,659.00
A6 A/V
Equipment/Technology
A/V equipment/technology for meeting
and conference rooms
$35,230.00
A7 Window Coverings Manual window coverings for interior and exterior windows; motorized
window coverings at rooms P+P Conf
Rms.
$84,600.00
A8 PV Infrastructure PV infrastructure and stanchions for PVs on P+P roof
$68,290.00
A9 Generator New generator to replace existing
and new shed for new generator.
$171,915.00
Total: $1,585,334
*Alternates recommended to be
funded with the Base Bid
($747,665)
Remaining Unfunded Alternates $837,669
ORIGINATED BY:

Engineering
ATTACHMENT LIST:

Exhibit 1 - Amended Capital Budget for Fiscal Year 2021-2022 (PDF) 9 Packet Pg. 218
Pacifica City Council 8
April 25, 2022
Attachment A - Construction Agreement with W.E. Lyons Construction Co. (PDF) 9 Packet Pg. 219
Pacifica City Council 9
April 25, 2022
RESOLUTION NO. __-_____

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PACIFICA ADOPTING A BUDGET ADJUSTMENT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2021-22
WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed the Construction Services Agreement to W.E.

Lyons Construction Company for the Civic Center Campus Facilities Project (Project #2021-23); and
WHEREAS, the 2021-22 Adopted Budget appropriated $10,000,000 from Fund 1 (General Fund), Fund 27 (Roy Davies), Fund 34 (WWTP), a bank loan, and various fund sources for expenditures associated with the Civic Center Campus Facilities Project; and WHEREAS, the Civic Center Campus Facilities Project expenditures supported by the various funds are $1,651,397 higher than originally anticipated.

NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, the City Council of the City of Pacifica hereby

1. Incorporates changes into the City’s FY 2021-2022 Adopted Capital Budget as set forth in Exhibit 1 attached to this Resolution; and

2. Authorizes the City Manager to award and execute a Construction Services Agreement with W.E. Lyons Construction Company (Attachment "A") in an amount not to exceed $9,222,972.00, authorizes budget authority for construction in the amount of $9,960,810.00, which includes alternates A2, A4, A5a ($747,665), and contingencies in an amount not to exceed eight percent (8%) of the Construction Contract amount; and, authorizes the City Manager to execute future Change Orders not to exceed the contingency amount; and

3. Authorizes the City Manager to amend the FY2021-22 Budget to appropriate additional funds to the total Project Budget as shown in Exhibit 1 to $11,651,397, from the following sources:
a. A budget transfer of additional Returned ERAF revenues of $900,000 from the Disaster Accounting Fund to the Project Budget;
b. Additional appropriation of $751,397 from the General Fund Unassigned Fund Balance to the Project Budget.
• • • • •
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Pacifica, California, held on the 25th day of April 2022, by the following vote:

AYES, Councilmembers:

NOES, Councilmembers:

ABSENT, Councilmembers:
9 Packet Pg. 220
Pacifica City Council 10 April 25, 2022
ABSTAIN, Councilmembers:

Mary Bier, Mayor
ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
______________________________ ______________________________ Sarah Coffey, City Clerk Michelle Kenyon, City Attorney 9 Packet Pg. 221
Exhibit 1
City of Pacifica
Capital Projects 2021-22 - Public Works
(Amended 4/25/22 - In Red Text)
Project
GF
Need
Grade
(1-6)
FY 2021-22
Allocation
CIP Appendix
Page
Estimated
Completion
Year
Source(s) Notes Fund
Reserves
Fund 1 -
GF
Fund 9 -
Street
Construct.

Fund 16 -
NPDES
Fund 19 -
Drainage
Fund 26 -
Park InLieu
Fund 27-
Roy Davies
Fund 34 -
WWTP
Fund 38 -
Disaster
Acct.

ARPA
Funding
Measure
A
Grants,
Revenues, and
Insurance
Reimb
FY 20-21
Rollover Funds
Tree Removal and Maintenance 4 $ - 1 - 1 Ongoing GF. Cash Bal. $ 90 Beach Boulevard Public Plaza Project 3 $ 30 22 - 2 2021 GF. Cash Bal. & Roy Davies 30 $ 100 Civic Center Evaluation & Remediation (Formerly PB&R/Planning Building Improvements) 1 $ 11,652 22 - 4 2023 Various $ 3,752 $ 325 $ 320 $ 7,255 Urban Forest, Land, and Vegetation Management Plans 3 $ 50 22 - 5 2022 GF. Cash Bal. $ 50 $ 150 Community Center HVAC Upgrade 1 $ 155 22 - 6 2022 ARPA Funds $ 155 $ 75 Public Works Department Office Improvements $ 150 22 - 6 2022 GF. Cash Bal. $ 150 $ 50 Sidewalk Repair Program $ - 9 - 2 Ongoing GF. Cash Bal. $ 25 FY 2020-21 & 2021-22 Pavement Resurfacing Project $ 1,100 9 - 3 2022 SB 1, Measure W & A $ 1,100 The Sharp Park Priority Development Area (PDA) Access Resurfacing Project $ 1,200 9 - 5 2022 Measure A & Grant $ 200 $ 1,000 Manor Drive O/P Improvements $ 770 14 - 1 2025 Pursue Grant $ 770 Milagra - Highway 1 On-ramp $ 70 14 - 1 2025 Pursue Grant $ 70 Long-Term Trash Load Reduction $ 40 16 - 1 Ongoing NPDES $ 40 San Pedro Creek and Pacifica State Beach Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL), Monitoring Plan and Best Management Plan $ 40 16 - 1 Ongoing NPDES & WW $ 20 $ 20 Storm Drainage Master Plan Update $ 100 19 - 1 2022 Drainage $ 100 $ 100 Serra Outfall Repair $ 410 19 - 5 2022 Drainage & Insurance $ 410 Financial / HR Software 4 $ 368 22 - 1 Ongoing GF. Cash Bal. $ 368 Beach Boulevard Infrastructure Resiliency Project (formerly Seawall Reconstruction Project) 3 $ 1,000 22 - 6 2025 Grant & Puruse Grant $ 1,000 $ 350 Station 72 Deck Replacement 3 $ 30 22 - 7 2022 GF. NCFA Budget $ 30 $ 100 Beach Parking Resurfacing Project (formerly Rockaway Beach Parking Slurry and Restripe) 4 $ 200 22 - 8 2022 GF. Cash Bal. & WW $ 200 $ 50 Corp Yard Vehicle Storage Project 3 $ 50 22 - 11 2025 GF Cash Bal. $ 50 New Pacifica Library $ 30 31 - 11 TBD Measure A $ 30
Police Department Radio Infrastructure Improvement $ 175 22 - 12 2023 GF Cash Bal. $ 175 Fire Station 72 Emergency Signal Restoration 1 $ 65 22 - 12 2022 GF. NCFA Budget $ 65 Adobe Bridge Rip Rap Repair 1 $ 100 22 - 13 2023 GF. Cash Bal. $ 100 Pacifica Municipal Pier Repair Project 2 $ 500 22 - 15 2022 GF. Cash Bal. & Grant $ 50 $ 450 North Pacifica Pedestrian Improvement Project $ 274 22 - 15 2022 Streets & Grant $ 25 $ 249 Frontierland Walkway & Drainage $ - 23 - 1 2022 Frontierland $ 315 recommended additional funding $ 200 26-1 2023 Park In-Lieu $ 100 $ 100 Playground Equipment Improvement (formerly Parks & Recreation Projects) $ 600 27 - 1 Ongoing Roy Davies $ 600 Parks, Beaches and Trail Signage Improvements $ 5 27 - 3 2022 Roy Davies $ 5 Edgemar Park Upgrade $ 65 27 - 3 2023 Roy Davies $ 65
310-330 Esplanade Infrastructure Preservation $ 240 38 - 1 2024 Disaster Acct. Fund & Grant $ 60 $ 180 400 Esplanade Infrastructure Preservation $ 535 38 - 2 2024 Disaster Acct. Fund & Grant $ 133 $ 402 Beach Blvd. Seawall Breach Repair $ 150 38 - 2 Ongoing Disaster Acct. Fund $ 150 Linda Mar Pump Station Upgrade C004B $ 1,475 34 - 1 2023 WW $ 1,475 Collection System Projects $ 100 34 - 2 Ongoing WW $ 100 Rockaway Pump Station Upgrade $ 100 34 - 2 2022 WW $ 100 Sewer System Master Plan Update Phase 2 $ 20 34 - 3 2022 WW $ 20 Sharp Park Pump Station Facility Improvements Project $ 1,300 34 - 4 2022 WW $ 1,300 Lateral Grant Assistance $ 100 34 - 4 Ongoing WW $ 100
540 Crespi Drive Tree Replacement (Per Planning) $ 10 34 - 20 Ongoing WW $ 10 Digesters - AT AD Modification Phase 3 $ 175 34 - 5 2022 WW $ 175 CCWRP Pump Replacement $ 50 34 - 6 Ongoing WW $ 50
CCWRP Centrifuges Replacement $ 25 34 - 6 2023 WW $ 25
CCWRP SCADA and PLC Upgrade $ 245 34 - 7 2023 WW $ 245
Calera Creek and Wetlands Maintenance $ 75 34 - 7 2022 WW $ 75 CCWRP Laboratory Room Improvement $ 25 34 - 9 2022 WW $ 25 CCWRP Security & Gate System $ 70 34 - 9 2021 WW $ 70
CCWRP Blower Replacement $ 30 34 - 10 Ongoing WW $ 30
CCWRP Vehicle Storage and Office Facility $ 200 34 - 11 2025 WW $ 200 CCWRP Arc Flash Hazard Analysis $ 65 34 - 11 2022 WW $ 65 CCWRP REPAIR & REPLACE $ 360 34 - 12 2026 WW $ 360
Ultraviolet Disinfection System Upgrade $ 150 34 - 14 2026 WW $ 150 CCWRP Photovoltaic System Improvement Project $ 500 34 - 14 2024 WW $ 500 CCWRP Process Optimization Projects $ 50 34 - 15 2026 WW $ 50 Anza Pump Station Emergency Repair $ 2,000 34 - 16 2021 WW $ 2,000 CCWRP Electrical Condition Assessment and Improvements $ 100 34 - 18 2023 WW $ 100 CCWRP Environmental Compliance Project $ 80 34 - 18 2026 WW $ 80 CCWRP Building Elevator Assessment $ 40 34 - 19 2021 WW $ 40 CCWRP Headworks Feasibility and Improvements $ 50 34 - 19 2025 WW $ 50 Total $ 27,749 $ 1,218 $ 3,752 $ 25 $ 60 $ 100 $ 100 $ 995 $ 7,885 $ 343 $ 155 $ 230 $ 12,886 $ 1,405 New Projects
Additional Reccomended Funding for Prev. Approved Projec Previously Approved Projects

9.a
Packet Pg. 222 Attachment: Exhibit 1 - Amended Capital Budget for Fiscal Year 2021-2022 [Revision 1] (4963 : Award Rev. 0
Bid Set - February 25, 2022
Agreement 00 5200 - 1 Civic Center Campus Facilities Project OAK #4865-8320-3589 v2
DOCUMENT 00 5200

AGREEMENT
THIS AGREEMENT, dated this 25th day of April, 2022, by and between W.E. Lyons Construction Co. whose place of business is located at 1301 Ygnacio Valley Road, Walnut Creek, CA 94598 (Contractor), and CITY OF PACIFICA, a political subdivision of the State of California (Owner), acting under and by virtue of the authority vested in Owner by the laws of the State of California.

WHEREAS, the City Council of the CITY OF PACIFICA (Owner), on the 25th day of April, 2022 awarded to Contractor the following Contract:

CIVIC CENTER CAMPUS FACILITIES PROJECT
at 170 SANTA MARIA AVENUE AND 1810 FRANCISCO BOULEVARD, PACIFICA, CA 94044 PROJECT NUMBER PW #2021-023
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants hereinafter set forth, Contractor and Owner agree as follows:

ARTICLE 1 SCOPE OF WORK OF THE CONTRACT

1.01 Work of the Contract
A. Contractor shall complete all Work specified in the Contract Documents, in accordance with the Specifications, Drawings, and all other terms and conditions of the Contract Documents (Work).

1.02 Price for Completion of the Work
A. Owner shall pay Contractor the following Contract Sum (Contract Sum) for completion of Work in accordance with Contract Documents as set forth in Contractor’s Bid, attached hereto.

B. The Contract Sum includes all allowances (if any).

Refer to Document 01 2100 (Allowances).

C. The Contract Sum is all inclusive and includes all Work; all federal, state, and local taxes on materials and equipment, and labor furnished by Contractor, its subcontractors, subconsultants, architects, engineers, and" vendors or otherwise arising out of Contractor's performance of the Work, including any increases in any such taxes during the term of this Agreement; and any duties, fees, and royalties imposed with respect to any materials and equipment, labor or services. The taxes covered hereby include (but are not limited' to) occupational, sales, use, excise, unemployment, FICA, and income taxes, customs, duties, and any and all other taxes on any item or service that is part of the Work, whether such taxes are normally included in the price of such item or service or are normally stated separately. Notwithstanding the foregoing, each party shall bear such state or local inventory, real property, personal property or fixtures taxes as may be properly assessed against it by applicable taxing authorities.

COMMENCEMENT AND COMPLETION OF WORK

1.03 Commencement of Work
A. Contractor shall commence Work on the date established in the Notice to Proceed (Commencement Date).

B. Owner reserves the right to modify or alter the Commencement Date.

ATTACHMENT "A" 9.b
Packet Pg. 223 Attachment: Attachment A - Construction Agreement with W.E. Lyons Construction Co. (4963 : Award Civic Center Campus Facilities Project Rev. 0
Bid Set - February 25, 2022
Agreement 00 5200 - 2 Civic Center Campus Facilities Project OAK #4865-8320-3589 v2

1.04 Completion of Work
A. Contractor shall achieve Substantial Completion of the entire Work within 326 Calendar Days from the Commencement Date.

B. Contractor shall achieve Final Completion of the entire Work within 366 Calendar Days from the Commencement Date.

ARTICLE 2 PROJECT REPRESENTATIVES

2.01 Owner’s Project Manager
A. Owner has designated Sam Bautista, P.E., City Engineer, as its Project Manager to act as Owner’s Representative in all matters relating to the Contract Documents. If Project Manager is an employee of Owner, Project Manager is the beneficiary of all Contractor obligations to Owner including, without limitation, all releases and indemnities.

B. Project Manager shall have final authority over all matters pertaining to the Contract Documents and shall have sole authority to modify the Contract Documents on behalf of Owner, to accept work, and to make decisions or actions binding on Owner, and shall have sole signature authority on behalf of Owner.

C. Owner may assign all or part of the Project Manager’s rights, responsibilities and duties to a Construction Manager, or other Owner Representative.

2.02 Contractor’s Project Manager and Other Key Personnel A. Contractor has designated Siddhesh (Sid) Maniyar ([email protected], 408-695-2240) as its Project Manager to act as Contractor’s Representative in all matters relating to the Contract Documents.

B. Contractor has designated the following other Key Personnel for the Project:

Name Position
Nicholas (Nick) Gooding Project Engineer ([email protected], 925-708-0134) Vinson Heine Project Executive ([email protected], 415-748-1628)

ARTICLE 3 LIQUIDATED DAMAGES FOR DELAY IN COMPLETION OF WORK

3.01 Liquidated Damage Amounts
A. As liquidated damages for delay Contractor shall pay Owner Nine Hundred and Fifty dollars ($950.00) for each Day that expires after the time specified herein for Contractor to achieve Final Completion of the entire Work, until achieved.

3.02 Scope of Liquidated Damages
A. Measures of liquidated damages shall apply cumulatively.

B. Limitations and stipulations regarding liquidated damages are set forth in Document 00 7200 (General Conditions).

ARTICLE 4 LIQUIDATED DAMAGES FOR UNAUTHORIZED CHANGES OF KEY PERSONNEL

4.01 Liquidated Damage Amounts
A. See Document 00 7200 (General Conditions) Paragraph 11.07.D for liquidated damages provisions pertaining to Key Personnel.

ARTICLE 5 CONTRACT DOCUMENTS

5.01 Contract Documents consist of the following documents, including all changes, Addenda, and Modifications thereto:

9.b
Packet Pg. 224 Attachment: Attachment A - Construction Agreement with W.E. Lyons Construction Co. (4963 : Award Civic Center Campus Facilities Project Rev. 0
Bid Set - February 25, 2022
Agreement 00 5200 - 3 Civic Center Campus Facilities Project OAK #4865-8320-3589 v2
Document 00 5100 Notice of Award
Document 00 5200 Agreement
Document 00 5500 Notice to Proceed
Document 00 6113.13 Construction Performance Bond
Document 00 6113.16 Construction Labor and Material Payment Bond Document 00 6290 Escrow Agreement for Security Deposits Document 00 6325 Substitution Request Form
Document 00 6530 Release of Claims
Document 00 6536 Guaranty
Document 00 7200 General Conditions
Document 00 7301 Supplemental General Conditions
Document 00 7316 Supplemental Conditions – Insurance and Indemnification
Document 00 7320 COVID Requirements
Document 00 7380 Apprenticeship Program
Document 00 9113 Addenda
Document 00 0115 Drawings, Table, Schedules, and Tech. Specifications

5.02 There are no Contract Documents other than those listed above. The Contract Documents may only be amended, modified or supplemented as provided in Document 00 7200 (General Conditions).

ARTICLE 6 MISCELLANEOUS

6.01 Terms and abbreviations used in this Agreement are defined in Document 00 7200 (General Conditions) and Section 01 4200 (References and Definitions) and will have the meaning indicated therein.

6.02 Contractor and Owner understand and agree that in no instance are the persons signing this Agreement for or on behalf of Owner or acting as an employee, agent, or representative of Owner, liable on this Agreement or any of the Contract Documents, or upon any warranty of authority, or otherwise. Contractor and Owner further understand and agree that liability of Owner is limited and confined to such liability as authorized or imposed by the Contract Documents or applicable law.

6.03 Pursuant to Labor Code Section 1771(a), Contractor represents that it and all of its Subcontractors are currently registered and qualified to perform public work pursuant to Labor Code Section 1725.5. Contractor covenants that any additional or substitute Subcontractors will be similarly registered and qualified.

6.04 In entering into a public works contract or a subcontract to supply goods, services or materials pursuant to a public works contract, Contractor or Subcontractor offers and agrees to assign to the awarding body all rights, title and interest in and to all causes of action it may have under Section 4 of the Clayton Act (15 U.S.C. § 15) or under the Cartwright Act (Chapter 2 (commencing with § 16700) of Part 2 of Division 7 of the Business and Professions Code), arising from purchases of goods, services or materials pursuant to the public works contract or the subcontract. This assignment shall be made and become effective at the time Owner tenders final payment to Contractor, without further acknowledgment by the parties.

6.05 Copies of the general prevailing rates of per diem wages for each craft, classification, or type of worker needed to execute the Contract, as determined by Director of the State of California Department of Industrial Relations, are on file at the Owner’s Office of the City Engineer, may be obtained from the California Department of Industrial Relations website [http://www.dir.ca.gov/OPRL/DPreWageDetermination.htm] and are deemed included in the Contract Documents, and shall be made available to any interested party on request. Pursuant to Labor Code Sections 1860 and 1861, in accordance with Labor Code Section 3700, every contractor will be required to secure the payment of compensation to Contractor’s employees.

Contractor represents that it is aware of the provisions of Labor Code Section 3700 that require every employer to be insured against liability for workers’ compensation or to undertake self9.b Packet Pg. 225 Attachment: Attachment A - Construction Agreement with W.E. Lyons Construction Co. (4963 : Award Civic Center Campus Facilities Project

9.b
Packet Pg. 226 Attachment: Attachment A - Construction Agreement with W.E. Lyons Construction Co. (4963 : Award Civic Center Campus Facilities Project

9.b
Packet Pg. 227 Attachment: Attachment A - Construction Agreement with W.E. Lyons Construction Co. (4963 : Award Civic Center Campus Facilities Project

9.b
Packet Pg. 228 Attachment: Attachment A - Construction Agreement with W.E. Lyons Construction Co. (4963 : Award Civic Center Campus Facilities Project

9.b
Packet Pg. 229 Attachment: Attachment A - Construction Agreement with W.E. Lyons Construction Co. (4963 : Award Civic Center Campus Facilities Project

9.b
Packet Pg. 230 Attachment: Attachment A - Construction Agreement with W.E. Lyons Construction Co. (4963 : Award Civic Center Campus Facilities Project

9.b
Packet Pg. 231 Attachment: Attachment A - Construction Agreement with W.E. Lyons Construction Co. (4963 : Award Civic Center Campus Facilities Project

9.b
Packet Pg. 232 Attachment: Attachment A - Construction Agreement with W.E. Lyons Construction Co. (4963 : Award Civic Center Campus Facilities Project

9.b
Packet Pg. 233 Attachment: Attachment A - Construction Agreement with W.E. Lyons Construction Co. (4963 : Award Civic Center Campus Facilities Project

9.b
Packet Pg. 234 Attachment: Attachment A - Construction Agreement with W.E. Lyons Construction Co. (4963 : Award Civic Center Campus Facilities Project

9.b
Packet Pg. 235 Attachment: Attachment A - Construction Agreement with W.E. Lyons Construction Co. (4963 : Award Civic Center Campus Facilities Project

9.b
Packet Pg. 236 Attachment: Attachment A - Construction Agreement with W.E. Lyons Construction Co. (4963 : Award Civic Center Campus Facilities Project

9.b
Packet Pg. 237 Attachment: Attachment A - Construction Agreement with W.E. Lyons Construction Co. (4963 : Award Civic Center Campus Facilities Project

9.b
Packet Pg. 238 Attachment: Attachment A - Construction Agreement with W.E. Lyons Construction Co. (4963 : Award Civic Center Campus Facilities Project

9.b
Packet Pg. 239 Attachment: Attachment A - Construction Agreement with W.E. Lyons Construction Co. (4963 : Award Civic Center Campus Facilities Project

9.b
Packet Pg. 240 Attachment: Attachment A - Construction Agreement with W.E. Lyons Construction Co. (4963 : Award Civic Center Campus Facilities Project

9.b
Packet Pg. 241 Attachment: Attachment A - Construction Agreement with W.E. Lyons Construction Co. (4963 : Award Civic Center Campus Facilities Project

9.b
Packet Pg. 242 Attachment: Attachment A - Construction Agreement with W.E. Lyons Construction Co. (4963 : Award Civic Center Campus Facilities Project

9.b
Packet Pg. 243 Attachment: Attachment A - Construction Agreement with W.E. Lyons Construction Co. (4963 : Award Civic Center Campus Facilities Project

9.b
Packet Pg. 244 Attachment: Attachment A - Construction Agreement with W.E. Lyons Construction Co. (4963 : Award Civic Center Campus Facilities Project

9.b
Packet Pg. 245 Attachment: Attachment A - Construction Agreement with W.E. Lyons Construction Co. (4963 : Award Civic Center Campus Facilities Project

9.b
Packet Pg. 246 Attachment: Attachment A - Construction Agreement with W.E. Lyons Construction Co. (4963 : Award Civic Center Campus Facilities Project

9.b
Packet Pg. 247 Attachment: Attachment A - Construction Agreement with W.E. Lyons Construction Co. (4963 : Award Civic Center Campus Facilities Project

9.b
Packet Pg. 248 Attachment: Attachment A - Construction Agreement with W.E. Lyons Construction Co. (4963 : Award Civic Center Campus Facilities Project

9.b
Packet Pg. 249 Attachment: Attachment A - Construction Agreement with W.E. Lyons Construction Co. (4963 : Award Civic Center Campus Facilities Project

9.b
Packet Pg. 250 Attachment: Attachment A - Construction Agreement with W.E. Lyons Construction Co. (4963 : Award Civic Center Campus Facilities Project

9.b
Packet Pg. 251 Attachment: Attachment A - Construction Agreement with W.E. Lyons Construction Co. (4963 : Award Civic Center Campus Facilities Project Rev. 0
Bid Set - February 25, 2022
Notice to Proceed – Phase I 00 5500 - 1 Civic Center Campus Facilities Project OAK #4862-1744-7173 v2
DOCUMENT 00 5500

NOTICE TO PROCEED
Dated: May 16, 2022
To: W.E. Lyons Construction
Address: 1301 Ygnacio Valley Road. Walnut Creek, CA 94598 CONTRACT FOR: CIVIC CENTER CAMPUS FACILITIES PROJECT
AT 170 SANTA MARIA AVENUE AND 1810 FRANCISCO BOULEVARD, PACIFICA, CA 94044
You are notified that the Contract Time under the above Contract will commence to run on June 6, 2022. On that date, you are to start performing your obligations with respect to Work at the Site under the Contract Documents. In accordance with Article 2 of Document 00 5200 (Agreement), the dates of Substantial Completion and Final Completion for the entire Work are April 28, 2023 and June 7, 2023, respectively.

Before you may start any Work at the Site, you must:

1. Submit certified Safety Program and related information

2. Submit copies of applicable permits

3. Schedule
OWNER: CITY OF PACIFICA
By: _______________________________________________
Sam Bautista, P.E., Dep. Dir. of Public Works/City Engineer

END OF DOCUMENT

9.b
Packet Pg. 252 Attachment: Attachment A - Construction Agreement with W.E. Lyons Construction Co. (4963 : Award Civic Center Campus Facilities Project Rev. 0
Bid Set - February 25, 2022
Notice to Proceed – Phase I 00 5500 - 2 Civic Center Campus Facilities Project OAK #4862-1744-7173 v2
(This page intentionally left blank)

9.b
Packet Pg. 253 Attachment: Attachment A - Construction Agreement with W.E. Lyons Construction Co. (4963 : Award Civic Center Campus Facilities Project Rev. 0
Bid Set - February 25, 2022
Construction Performance Bond 00 6113.13 - 1 Civic Center Campus Facilities Project OAK #4875-7889-2037 v2
DOCUMENT 00 6113.13

CONSTRUCTION LABOR AND MATERIAL PAYMENT BOND
THIS CONSTRUCTION PERFORMANCE BOND (Bond) is dated [Month, Day], 202_ is in the amount of Nine Million Two Hundred Twenty Two Nine Hundred Seventy Two Dollars ($9,222,972.00) (Penal Sum), which is 100% of the Contract Sum and is entered into by and between the parties listed below to ensure the faithful performance of the Contract identified below. This Bond consists of this page and the Bond Terms and Conditions, Paragraphs 1 through 14 attached to this page. Any singular reference to W.E. Lyons Construction Co. (Contractor), ______________________ (Surety), CITY OF PACIFICA (Owner), or other party shall be considered plural where applicable.

CONTRACTOR: SURETY:

W.E. Lyons Construction Co. ________________________________ Name of Surety
1301 Ygnacio Valley Rd.

Address Principal Place of Business
Walnut Creek, CA 94598
City/State/Zip City/State/Zip
CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT: Agreement for the City of Pacifica, Civic Center Campus Facilities Project, located at 170 Santa Maria Avenue and 1810 Francisco Boulevard, Pacifica, CA 94044, dated April 25, 2022, in the amount of $9,222,972.00.

CONTRACTOR AS PRINCIPAL SURETY
Company: (Corp. Seal) Company: (Corp. Seal)
Signature: Signature:

Name: Name:

Title: Title:

9.b
Packet Pg. 254 Attachment: Attachment A - Construction Agreement with W.E. Lyons Construction Co. (4963 : Award Civic Center Campus Facilities Project Rev. 0
Bid Set - February 25, 2022
Construction Performance Bond 00 6113.13 - 2 Civic Center Campus Facilities Project OAK #4875-7889-2037 v2

BOND TERMS AND CONDITIONS

1. Contractor and Surety, jointly and severally, bind themselves, their heirs, executors, administrators, successors and assigns to Owner and the State of California for the complete and proper performance of the Construction Contract, which is incorporated herein by reference.

2. If Contractor completely and properly performs all of its obligations under the Construction Contract, Surety and Contractor shall have no obligation under this Bond.

3. If there is no Owner Default, Surety’s obligation under this Bond shall arise after:

3.1 Owner provides Surety with written notice that Owner has declared a Contractor Default under the Construction Contract pursuant to the terms of the Construction Contract; and

3.2 Owner has agreed to pay the Balance of Contract Sum:

3.2.1 To Surety in accordance with the terms of this Bond and the Construction Contract; or

3.2.2 To a Contractor selected to perform the Construction Contract in accordance with the terms of this Bond and the Construction Contract.

4. When Owner has satisfied the conditions of Paragraph 3 above, Surety shall promptly (within 40 Days) and at Surety’s expense elect to take one of the following actions:

4.1 Arrange for Contractor, with consent of Owner, to perform and complete the Construction Contract (but Owner may withhold consent, in which case the Surety must elect an option described in Paragraphs 4.2, 4.3 or 4.4 below); or

4.2 Undertake to perform and complete the Construction Contract itself, through its agents or through independent contractors or Construction entities; provided, that Surety may not select Contractor as its agent or independent contractor or Contractor without Owner’s consent; or

4.3 Undertake to perform and complete the Construction Contract by obtaining bids from qualified contractors or Construction entities acceptable to Owner for a contract for performance and completion of the Construction Contract and, upon determination by Owner of the lowest responsive and responsible Bidder, arrange for a contract to be prepared for execution by Owner and the contractor or Contractor selected with Owner’s concurrence, to be secured with performance and payment bonds executed by a qualified surety equivalent to the bonds issued on the Construction Contract; and, if Surety’s obligations defined in Paragraph 6 below, exceed the Balance of Contract Sum, then Surety shall pay to Owner the amount of such excess; or

4.4 Waive its right to perform and complete, arrange for completion, or obtain a new contractor or Contractor, and with reasonable promptness under the circumstances and, after investigation and consultation with Owner, determine in good faith its monetary obligation to Owner under Paragraph 6 below, for the performance and completion of the Construction Contract and, as soon as practicable after the amount is determined, tender payment therefor to Owner with full explanation of the payment’s calculation. If Owner accepts Surety’s tender under this Paragraph 4.4, Owner may still hold Surety liable for future damages then unknown or unliquidated resulting from the Contractor Default, as agreed by Owner and Surety at the time of tender. If Owner disputes the amount of

9.b
Packet Pg. 255 Attachment: Attachment A - Construction Agreement with W.E. Lyons Construction Co. (4963 : Award Civic Center Campus Facilities Project Rev. 0
Bid Set - February 25, 2022
Construction Performance Bond 00 6113.13 - 3 Civic Center Campus Facilities Project OAK #4875-7889-2037 v2
Surety’s tender under this Paragraph 4.4, Owner may exercise all remedies available to it at law to enforce Surety’s liability under Paragraphs 6 and 7 below.

5. At all times Owner shall be entitled to enforce any remedy available to Owner at law or under the Construction Contract including, without limitation, and by way of example only, rights to perform work, protect Work, mitigate damages, advance critical Work to mitigate schedule delay, and coordinate Work with other consultants or contractors.

6. If Surety elects to act under Paragraphs 4.1, 4.2 or 4.3 above, within the time period provided in Paragraph 4, above, and complies with its obligations under this Bond, Surety’s obligations under this Bond are commensurate with Contractor’s Construction Contract obligations. Surety’s obligations include, but are not limited to:

6.1 Contractor’s obligations to complete the Construction Contract and correct Defective Work;

6.2 Contractor’s obligations to pay liquidated damages; and

6.3 To the extent otherwise required of Contractor under the Construction Contract, Contractor’s obligations to pay additional legal, design professional, and other costs not included within liquidated damages resulting from Contractor Default (but excluding attorney’s fees incurred to enforce this Bond).

7. If Surety does not elect to act under Paragraphs 4.1, 4.2, 4.3, or 4.4, above, within the time period provided in Paragraph 4, above, or comply with its obligations under this Bond, then Surety shall be deemed to be in default on this Bond ten Days after receipt of an additional written notice from Owner to Surety demanding that Surety perform its obligations under this Bond. Such Surety default shall be independent of the Contractor Default. To the extent Surety’s independent default causes Owner to suffer damages including, but not limited to, delay damages, which are different from, or in addition to (but not duplicative of) damages which Owner is entitled to receive under the Construction Contract, Surety shall also be liable for such damages. In the event any Surety obligation following its independent default is inconsistent or conflicts with California Civil Code Section 2809, or any other law which either prohibits, restricts, limits or modifies in any way any obligation of a surety which is larger in amount or in any other respect more burdensome than that of the principal, Surety hereby waives the provisions of such laws to that extent.

8. If Surety elects to act under Paragraphs 4.1, 4.3 or 4.4 above, within the time period provided in Paragraph 4, above, and complies with all obligations under this Bond, Surety’s monetary obligation under this Bond is limited to the Penal Sum.

9. No right of action shall accrue on this Bond to any person or entity other than Owner or its successors or assigns.

10. Surety hereby waives notice of any change, alteration or addition to the Construction Contract or to related subcontracts, design agreements, purchase orders and other obligations, including changes of time, and of any Owner action in accordance with Paragraph 5 above. Surety consents to all terms of the Construction Contract, including provisions on changes to the Contract. No extension of time, change, alteration, Modification, deletion, or addition to the Contract Documents, or of the Work (including services) required thereunder, or any Owner action in accordance with Paragraph 5 above shall release or exonerate Surety on this Bond or in any way affect the obligations of Surety on this Bond, unless such action is an Owner Default.

11. Any proceeding, legal or equitable, under this Bond shall be instituted in any court of competent jurisdiction where a proceeding is pending between Owner and Contractor regarding the Construction Contract, or in the Superior Court of the County of San Mateo, California, or in a

9.b
Packet Pg. 256 Attachment: Attachment A - Construction Agreement with W.E. Lyons Construction Co. (4963 : Award Civic Center Campus Facilities Project Rev. 0
Bid Set - February 25, 2022
Construction Performance Bond 00 6113.13 - 4 Civic Center Campus Facilities Project OAK #4875-7889-2037 v2
court of competent jurisdiction in the location in which the Work is located. Communications from Owner to Surety under Paragraph 3.1 above shall be deemed to include the necessary agreements under Paragraph 3.2 above unless expressly stated otherwise.

12. All notices to Surety or Contractor shall be mailed or delivered (at the address set forth on the signature page of this Bond), and all notices to Owner shall be mailed or delivered as provided in Document 00 5200 (Agreement). Actual receipt of notice by Surety, Owner or Contractor, however accomplished, shall be sufficient compliance as of the date received at the foregoing addresses.

13. Any provision in this Bond conflicting with any statutory or regulatory requirement shall be deemed deleted herefrom and provisions conforming to such statutory requirement shall be deemed incorporated herein.

14. Definitions

14.1 Balance of Contract Sum: The total amount payable by Owner to Contractor pursuant to the terms of the Construction Contract after all proper adjustments have been made under the Construction Contract, for example, deductions for progress payments made, and increases/decreases for approved Modifications to the Construction Contract.

14.2 Construction Contract: The agreement between Owner and Contractor identified on the signature page of this Bond, including all Contract Documents and changes thereto.

14.3 Contractor Default: Material failure of Contractor, which has neither been remedied nor waived, to perform or otherwise to comply with the terms of the Construction Contract, limited to “default” or any other condition allowing a termination for cause as provided in Document 00 7200 (General Conditions).

14.4 Owner Default: Material failure of Owner, which has neither been remedied nor waived, to pay Contractor progress payments due under the Construction Contract or to perform other material terms of the Construction Contract, if such failure is the cause of the asserted Contractor Default and is sufficient to justify Contractor termination of the Construction Contract.

END OF DOCUMENT

9.b
Packet Pg. 257 Attachment: Attachment A - Construction Agreement with W.E. Lyons Construction Co. (4963 : Award Civic Center Campus Facilities Project Rev. 0
Bid Set - February 25, 2022
Construction Labor and Material 00 6113.16 - 1 Civic Center Campus Facilities Project Payment Bond
OAK #4860-8748-9541 v2
DOCUMENT 00 6113.16

CONSTRUCTION LABOR AND MATERIAL PAYMENT BOND
KNOW ALL PERSONS BY THESE PRESENTS:

1.01 THAT WHEREAS, CITY OF PACIFICA (Owner) has awarded to W.E. Lyons Construction Co. as Principal, Contract Number PW2021-23 dated the 25th day of April, 2022 (the Contract), titled the City of Pacifica Civic Center Campus Facilities Project in the amount of $9,222,972, which Contract is by this reference made a part hereof, for the work of the following Contract:

Project Number PW #2021-23 to construct the Civic Center Campus Facilities Project located at 170 Santa Maria Avenue and 1810 Francisco Boulevard, Pacifica, CA 94044.

1.02 AND WHEREAS, Principal is required to furnish a bond in connection with the Contract to secure the payment of claims of laborers, mechanics, material suppliers, and other persons as provided by law;

1.03 NOW, THEREFORE, we, the undersigned Principal and
, as Surety, are held and firmly bound unto Owner in the sum of 100% OF THE CONTRACT PRICE ($9,222,972), for which payment well and truly to be made we bind ourselves, our heirs, executors, administrators, successors, and assigns, jointly and severally, firmly by these presents.

1.04 THE CONDITION OF THIS OBLIGATION IS SUCH, that if Principal, or its executors, administrators, successors, or assigns approved by Owner, or its subcontractors shall fail to pay any of the persons named in California Civil Code Section 9100, or amounts due under the State of California Unemployment Insurance Code with respect to work or labor performed under the Contract, or for any amounts required to be deducted, withheld, and paid over to the State of California Employment Development Department from the wages of employees of Principal and subcontractors pursuant to Section 13020 of the State of California Unemployment Insurance Code with respect to such work and labor, that Surety will pay for the same in an amount not exceeding the sum specified in this bond, plus reasonable attorneys’ fees, otherwise the above obligation shall become and be null and void.

1.05 This bond shall inure to the benefit of any of the persons named in California Civil Code Section 9100, as to give a right of action to such persons or their assigns in any suit brought upon this bond. The intent of this bond is to comply with the California Mechanic’s Lien Law.

1.06 Surety, for value received, hereby expressly agrees that no extension of time, change, modification, alteration, or addition to the undertakings, covenants, terms, conditions, and agreements of the Contract, or to the work to be performed thereunder, shall in any way affect the obligation of this bond; and it does hereby waive notice of any such extension of time, change, modification, alteration, or addition to the undertakings, covenants, terms, conditions, and agreements of the Contract, or to the work to be performed thereunder.

1.07 Surety’s obligations hereunder are independent of the obligations of any other surety for the payment of claims of laborers, mechanics, material suppliers, and other persons in connection with Contract; and suit may be brought against Surety and such other sureties, jointly and severally, or against any one or more of them, or against less than all of them without impairing Owner’s rights against the other.

9.b
Packet Pg. 258 Attachment: Attachment A - Construction Agreement with W.E. Lyons Construction Co. (4963 : Award Civic Center Campus Facilities Project Rev. 0
Bid Set - February 25, 2022
Construction Labor and Material 00 6113.16 - 2 Civic Center Campus Facilities Project Payment Bond
OAK #4860-8748-9541 v2

1.08 Correspondence or claims relating to this bond shall be sent to Surety at the address set forth below.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, we have hereunto set our hands this day of , 20___.

CONTRACTOR AS PRINCIPAL SURETY
Company: (Corp. Seal) Company: (Corp. Seal)

Signature Signature

Name Name

Title Title

Street Address Street Address

City, State, Zip Code City, State, Zip Code

END OF DOCUMENT

9.b
Packet Pg. 259 Attachment: Attachment A - Construction Agreement with W.E. Lyons Construction Co. (4963 : Award Civic Center Campus Facilities Project Rev. 0
Bid Set - February 25, 2022
Escrow Agreement for Security 00 6290 - 1 Civic Center Campus Facilities Project Deposits in Lieu of Retention
OAK #4887-9012-8901 v2
DOCUMENT 00 6290

ESCROW AGREEMENT FOR SECURITY DEPOSIT IN LIEU OF RETENTION Public Contract Code Section 22300
THIS ESCROW AGREEMENT (“Escrow Agreement”) is made and entered into this day of ________________, 202_, by and between City of Pacifica (“Owner”), whose address is 170 Santa Maria Avenue, Pacifica, CA 94044, W.E. Lyons Construction Co. (“Contractor”), whose principal place of business is located at 1301 Ygnacio Valley Rd. Walnut Creek, CA 94598, and Owner, as escrow agent ____________________________ a state or federally chartered bank in the State of California, whose place of business is located at ____________________________. (“Escrow Agent”).

For the consideration hereinafter set forth, Owner, Contractor and Escrow Agent agree as follows:

1. Pursuant to Public Contract Code Section 22300, Contractor has the option to deposit securities with Escrow Agent as a substitute for retention earnings required to be withheld by Owner pursuant to Contract Number PW2021-23 entered into between Owner and Contractor for the Civic Center Campus Facilities Project in the amount of $9,222,972 dated April 25, 2022 (the “Contract”). Alternatively, on written request of Contractor, Owner shall make payments of the retention earnings directly to Escrow Agent. When Contractor deposits the securities as a substitute for Contract earnings, Escrow Agent shall notify Owner within ten Days of the deposit.

The market value of the securities at the time of substitution shall be at least equal to the cash amount then required to be withheld as retention under terms of Contract between Owner and Contractor. Securities shall be held in name of , and shall designate Contractor as the beneficial owner.

2. Owner shall make progress payments to Contractor for those funds which otherwise would be withheld from progress payments pursuant to Contract provisions, provided that Escrow Agent holds securities in form and amount specified in Paragraph 1 of this Document 00 6290.

3. When Owner makes payment(s) of retention earned directly to Escrow Agent, Escrow Agent shall hold said payment(s) for the benefit of Contractor until the time that the escrow created under this Escrow Agreement is terminated. Contractor may direct the investment of the payments into securities. All terms and conditions of this Escrow Agreement and the rights and responsibilities of the parties shall be equally applicable and binding when Owner pays Escrow Agent directly.

4. Contractor shall be responsible for paying all fees for the expenses incurred by Escrow Agent in administering the Escrow Account, and all expenses of Owner. Such expenses and payment terms shall be determined by Owner, Contractor, and Escrow Agent.

5. Interest earned on securities or money market accounts held in escrow and all interest earned on that interest shall be for sole account of Contractor and shall be subject to withdrawal by Contractor at any time and from time to time without notice to Owner.

6. Contractor shall have the right to withdraw all or any part of the principal in the Escrow Account only by written notice to Escrow Agent accompanied by written authorization from Owner to Escrow Agent that Owner consents to withdrawal of amount sought to be withdrawn by Contractor.

7. Owner shall have the right to draw upon the securities in event of default by Contractor. Upon seven Days written notice to Escrow Agent from Owner of the default, Escrow Agent shall immediately convert the securities to cash and shall distribute the cash as instructed by Owner.

8. Upon receipt of written notification from Owner certifying that the Contract is final and complete, and that Contractor has complied with all requirements and procedures applicable to the Contract, Escrow Agent shall release to Contractor all securities and interest on deposit less escrow fees and charges of the Escrow Account. The escrow shall be closed immediately upon disbursement of all moneys and securities on deposit and payments of fees and charges.

9.b
Packet Pg. 260 Attachment: Attachment A - Construction Agreement with W.E. Lyons Construction Co. (4963 : Award Civic Center Campus Facilities Project Rev. 0
Bid Set - February 25, 2022
Escrow Agreement for Security 00 6290 - 2 Civic Center Campus Facilities Project Deposits in Lieu of Retention
OAK #4887-9012-8901 v2

9. Escrow Agent shall rely on written notifications from Owner and Contractor pursuant to Paragraphs 5 through 8, inclusive, of this Document 00 6290 and Owner and Contractor shall hold Escrow Agent harmless from Escrow Agent’s release and disbursement of securities and interest as set forth.

10. Names of persons who are authorized to give written notice or to receive written notice on behalf of Owner and on behalf of Contractor in connection with the foregoing, and exemplars of their respective signatures are as follows:

ON BEHALF OF OWNER: ON BEHALF OF CONTRACTOR:
____________________________________ ___________________________________ Title Title
____________________________________ ___________________________________ Name Name
____________________________________ ___________________________________ Signature Signature
____________________________________ ___________________________________ Address Address
____________________________________ ___________________________________ City/State/Zip Code City/State/Zip Code
ON BEHALF OF ESCROW AGENT:
____________________________________
Title
____________________________________
Name
____________________________________
Signature
____________________________________
Address
____________________________________
City/State/Zip Code
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Escrow Agreement by their proper officers on the date first set forth above.

OWNER: CONTRACTOR
CITY OF PACIFICA W.E. Lyons Construction Co.
________________________________ _____________________________________ Title Title
________________________________ _____________________________________ Name Name
________________________________ _____________________________________ Signature Signature

9.b
Packet Pg. 261 Attachment: Attachment A - Construction Agreement with W.E. Lyons Construction Co. (4963 : Award Civic Center Campus Facilities Project Rev. 0
Bid Set - February 25, 2022
Escrow Agreement for Security 00 6290 - 3 Civic Center Campus Facilities Project Deposits in Lieu of Retention
OAK #4887-9012-8901 v2
ATTEST
_____________________________________
Signature
_____________________________________
Print Name
Secretary

ESCROW AGENT
_____________________________________
_____________________________________
Title
_____________________________________
Print Name
_____________________________________
Signature
[IF REQUIRED] REVIEWED AS TO FORM:
_____________________________________
Counsel for Owner
_____________________________________
Print Name
_____________________________________
Date
At the time the Escrow Account is opened, Owner and Contractor shall deliver to Escrow Agent a fully executed counterpart of this Document 00 6290.

END OF DOCUMENT

9.b
Packet Pg. 262 Attachment: Attachment A - Construction Agreement with W.E. Lyons Construction Co. (4963 : Award Civic Center Campus Facilities Project Rev. 0
Bid Set - February 25, 2022
Escrow Agreement for Security 00 6290 - 4 Civic Center Campus Facilities Project Deposits in Lieu of Retention
OAK #4887-9012-8901 v2
(This page intentionally left blank)

9.b
Packet Pg. 263 Attachment: Attachment A - Construction Agreement with W.E. Lyons Construction Co. (4963 : Award Civic Center Campus Facilities Project Rev. 0
Bid Set - February 25, 2022
Substitution Request Form 00 6325 - 1 Civic Center Campus Facilities Project OAK #4893-9666-4581 v2
DOCUMENT 00 6325

SUBSTITUTION REQUEST FORM
To: CITY OF PACIFICA, Owner
PROJECT: CITY OF PACIFICA, CIVIC CENTER

CAMPUS FACILITIES PROJECT
Owner Project No: PW #2021-23
Contractor:

W.E. Lyons Construction Co.

Substitution
Request By:

Firm:

Transmittal Record Attn: Firm: Date Sent: Date
Rec’d:

Date
Due:

Contractor to Owner
Contractor to Architect
Owner / Architect to Consultant
Architect to Owner Representative
Owner Representative to Contractor
We hereby submit for your consideration the following product instead of the specified item for the Project:

Section / Drawing Article Specified Item
Proposed Substitution:

We have (a) attached manufacturer’s literature, including complete technical data and laboratory test results, if applicable, (b) attached an explanation of why proposed substitution is a true equivalent to specified item, (c) included complete information on changes to Contract Documents that the proposed substitution will require for its proper installation, and (d) filled in the blanks below:

9.b
Packet Pg. 264 Attachment: Attachment A - Construction Agreement with W.E. Lyons Construction Co. (4963 : Award Civic Center Campus Facilities Project Rev. 0
Bid Set - February 25, 2022
Substitution Request Form 00 6325 - 2 Civic Center Campus Facilities Project OAK #4893-9666-4581 v2
Contractor to complete questions that follow and certify to the accuracy of all answers:

A. Does the substitution affect dimensions shown on Drawings? Yes __ / No __. If No, please explain proposed mitigation and why substitution is equivalent to originally specified item:

B. Will the undersigned pay for changes to the building design, including engineering and detailing costs caused by the requested substitution? Yes __ / No __. If No, please state reasons explain why substitution is equivalent to originally specified item:

C. What effect does the substitution have on other trades? No effect: __ / Some effect__. If substitution will affect other trades, please explain the effect and why substitution is equivalent to originally specified item:

D. Will substitution cause change to Project Schedule, or to critical delivery dates? Add? Shorten? If the substitution will add to schedule dates or affect critical activities, please explain why substitution is equivalent to originally specified item:

E. Please describe differences between proposed substitution and specified item? Please explain and identify any and all differences, and please explain why substitution is equivalent to originally specified item:

F. What is the Cost Differential to Contractor in original specified item and proposed substitution including all mark-ups? [If substitution requested during bid period, skip this question.] G. Are Manufacturer's guarantees for the proposed item the same as for item specified? Yes ____; No____. If No, please explain why substitution is equivalent to originally specified item:

9.b
Packet Pg. 265 Attachment: Attachment A - Construction Agreement with W.E. Lyons Construction Co. (4963 : Award Civic Center Campus Facilities Project Rev. 0
Bid Set - February 25, 2022
Substitution Request Form 00 6325 - 3 Civic Center Campus Facilities Project OAK #4893-9666-4581 v2
H. Contractor accepts full responsibility for delays caused by redesign of other items of the Work necessitated by substitution? Yes __ / No __. If No, please state reasons and explain why substitution is equivalent to originally specified item:

I. Contractor states that the function, appearance and quality are equivalent or superior to the specified item? Yes __ / No __. If No, please explain why substitution is equivalent to originally specified item:

We certify that the function, appearance, and quality of the proposed substitution are equivalent or superior to those of the specified item, except as we may specifically state otherwise in this request.

Submitted by: __________________________
Firm: _________________________________
Address: ______________________________
Signature: __________________________
Date: _________________________________
Phone / Fax: ______________________________
Remarks:

Consultant Response
__Accepted
__ Not Accepted
__ Accepted As Noted
__ Received Too Late
Owner Representative Response
__Accepted
__ Not Accepted
__ Accepted As Noted
__ Received Too Late
Remarks: ______________________
______________________________
______________________________
By: ___________________________
Remarks: ______________________
______________________________
______________________________
By: ___________________________

END OF DOCUMENT

9.b
Packet Pg. 266 Attachment: Attachment A - Construction Agreement with W.E. Lyons Construction Co. (4963 : Award Civic Center Campus Facilities Project Rev. 0
Bid Set - February 25, 2022
Substitution Request Form 00 6325 - 4 Civic Center Campus Facilities Project OAK #4893-9666-4581 v2
(This page intentionally left blank)

9.b
Packet Pg. 267 Attachment: Attachment A - Construction Agreement with W.E. Lyons Construction Co. (4963 : Award Civic Center Campus Facilities Project Rev. 0
Bid Set - February 25, 2022
Agreement and Release of All Claims 00 6530 - 1 Civic Center Campus Facilities Project OAK #4884-7503-1813 v2
DOCUMENT 00 6530

AGREEMENT AND RELEASE OF ANY AND ALL CLAIMS
[Public Contract Code Section 7100]
THIS AGREEMENT AND RELEASE OF ANY AND ALL CLAIMS (Agreement and Release), made and entered into this day of , 202__, by and between CITY OF PACIFICA (Owner), and W.E. Lyons Construction Co. (Contractor), whose place of business is at 1301 Ygnacio Valley Rd. Walnut Creek, CA 94598.

RECITALS
A. Owner and Contractor entered into Contract (the “Contract”) for construction of Civic Center Campus Facilities Project, located at 170 Santa Maria Avenue and 1810 Francisco Boulevard, Pacifica, CA 94044.

B. The Work under the Contract has been completed.

AGREEMENT
NOW THEREFORE, it is mutually agreed between Owner and Contractor as follows:

1. Contractor will not be assessed liquidated damages except as detailed below:

Original Contract Sum $ ___________________________________ Modified Contract Sum $ ___________________________________ Payment to Date $ ___________________________________
Liquidated Damages $ ___________________________________ Payment Due Contractor $ ___________________________________

2. Subject to the provisions of this Agreement and Release, Owner will forthwith pay to Contractor the sum of [________________________________________________________ Dollars and ____________ Cents ($_____________________)] under the Contract, less any amounts withheld under the Contract or represented by any Notice to Withhold Funds on file with Owner as of the date of such payment.

3. Contractor acknowledges and hereby agrees that there are no unresolved or outstanding claims in dispute against Owner arising from the Contract, except for the claims described in Paragraph 4 of this Document 00 6530. It is the intention of the parties in executing this Agreement and Release that this Agreement and Release shall be effective as a full, final and general release of all claims, demands, actions, causes of action, obligations, costs, expenses, damages, losses and liabilities of Contractor against Owner, and all if its agents, employees, consultants, inspectors, representatives, assignees and transferees, except for the Disputed Claims set forth in Paragraph 4 of this Document 00 6530. Nothing in this Agreement and Release shall limit or modify Contractor’s continuing obligations described in Paragraph 6 of this Document 00 6530.

4. The following claims submitted under Document 00 7200 (General Conditions), Article 12, are disputed (Disputed Claims) and are specifically excluded from the operation of this Agreement and Release.

9.b
Packet Pg. 268 Attachment: Attachment A - Construction Agreement with W.E. Lyons Construction Co. (4963 : Award Civic Center Campus Facilities Project Rev. 0
Bid Set - February 25, 2022
Agreement and Release of All Claims 00 6530 - 2 Civic Center Campus Facilities Project OAK #4884-7503-1813 v2
CLAIM NO. DATE

SUBMITTED

DESCRIPTION OF CLAIM AMOUNT OF
CLAIM

5. Consistent with California Public Contract Code Section 7100, Contractor hereby agrees that, in consideration of the payment set forth in Paragraph 2 of this Document 00 6530, Contractor hereby releases and forever discharges Owner, and all of its agents, employees, consultants, inspectors, assignees and transferees from any and all liability, claims, demands, actions or causes of action of whatever kind or nature arising out of or in any way concerned with the Work under the Contract.

6. Guarantees and warranties for the Work, and any other continuing obligation of Contractor, shall remain in full force and effect as specified in the Contract Documents.

7. Contractor shall immediately defend, indemnify and hold harmless Owner, any of the Owner’s Representatives, Project Manager, and all of their agents, employees, consultants, inspectors, assignees and transferees, from any and all claims, demands, actions, causes of action, obligations, costs, expenses, damages, losses and liabilities that may be asserted against them by any of Contractor’s suppliers and/or Subcontractors of any tier and/or any suppliers to them for any and all labor, materials, supplies and equipment used, or contemplated to be used in the performance of the Contract, except for the Disputed Claims set forth in Paragraph 4 of this Document 00 6530.

8. Contractor hereby waives the provisions of California Civil Code Section 1542, which provide as follows:

A GENERAL RELEASE DOES NOT EXTEND TO CLAIMS THAT THE

CREDITOR OR RELEASING PARTY DOES NOT KNOW OR SUSPECT

TO EXIST IN HIS OR HER FAVOR AT THE TIME OF EXECUTING THE

RELEASE AND THAT, IF KNOWN BY HIM OR HER, WOULD HAVE

MATERIALLY AFFECTED HIS OR HER SETTLEMENT WITH THE
DEBTOR OR RELEASED PARTY.

9. The provisions of this Agreement and Release are contractual in nature and not mere recitals and shall be considered independent and severable, and if any such provision or any part thereof shall be at any time held invalid in whole or in part under any federal, state, county, municipal or other law, ruling, or regulation, then such provision, or part thereof shall remain in force and effect only to the extent permitted by law, and the remaining provisions of this Agreement and Release shall also remain in full force and effect, and shall be enforceable.

10. Contractor represents and warrants that it is the true and lawful owner of all claims and other matters released pursuant to this Agreement and Release, and that it has full right, title and authority to enter into this instrument. Each party represents and warrants that it has been represented by counsel of its own choosing in connection with this Agreement and Release.

9.b
Packet Pg. 269 Attachment: Attachment A - Construction Agreement with W.E. Lyons Construction Co. (4963 : Award Civic Center Campus Facilities Project Rev. 0
Bid Set - February 25, 2022
Agreement and Release of All Claims 00 6530 - 3 Civic Center Campus Facilities Project OAK #4884-7503-1813 v2

11. All rights of Owner shall survive completion of the Work or termination of the Contract, and execution of this Agreement and Release.
* * * CAUTION: THIS IS A RELEASE - READ BEFORE EXECUTING * * * OWNER: CITY OF PACIFICA
By: ___________________________________________________ Signature
Name: ________________________________________________
Print
Its: ___________________________________________________ Title
[W.E. Lyons Construction Co.]
By: ___________________________________________________ Signature
Name: ________________________________________________
Print
Its: ___________________________________________________ Title
[W.E. Lyons Construction Co.]
By: ___________________________________________________ Signature
Name: ________________________________________________
Print
Its: ___________________________________________________ Title
REVIEWED AS TO FORM:

Dated: ___________________________, [20__]
By: ______________________________________________________ Counsel for Owner
Name: __________________________________________________ Print

END OF DOCUMENT

9.b
Packet Pg. 270 Attachment: Attachment A - Construction Agreement with W.E. Lyons Construction Co. (4963 : Award Civic Center Campus Facilities Project Rev. 0
Bid Set - February 25, 2022
Agreement and Release of All Claims 00 6530 - 4 Civic Center Campus Facilities Project OAK #4884-7503-1813 v2
(This page intentionally left blank)

9.b
Packet Pg. 271 Attachment: Attachment A - Construction Agreement with W.E. Lyons Construction Co. (4963 : Award Civic Center Campus Facilities Project Rev. 0
Bid Set - February 25, 2022
Guaranty 00 6536 - 1 Civic Center Campus Facilities Project OAK #4875-3832-5765 v2
DOCUMENT 00 6536

GUARANTY
TO: The CITY OF PACIFICA (Owner), for construction of the Civic Center Campus Facilities Project, located at 170 Santa Maria Avenue and 1810 Francisco Boulevard, Pacifica, CA 94044.

The undersigned guarantees all construction performed on this Project and also guarantees all material and equipment incorporated therein.

1.01 Contractor hereby grants to Owner for a period of one year following the date of Final Acceptance of the Work completed, or such longer period specified in the Contract Documents, its unconditional warranty of the quality and adequacy of all of the Work including, without limitation, all labor, materials and equipment provided by Contractor and its Subcontractors of all tiers in connection with the Work.

1.02 Neither final payment nor use nor occupancy of the Work performed by the Contractor shall constitute an acceptance of Work not done in accordance with this Guaranty or relieve Contractor of liability in respect to any express warranties or responsibilities for faulty materials or workmanship. Contractor shall remedy any defects in the Work and pay for any damage resulting therefrom, which shall appear within one year, or longer if specified, from the date of Final Acceptance of the Work completed.

1.03 If within one year after the date of Final Acceptance, or such other period of time as may be prescribed by laws or regulations, or by the terms of Contract Documents or any extended warranty or guaranty, any Work is found to be Defective, Contractor shall promptly, without cost to Owner and in accordance with Owner’s written instructions, correct such Defective Work. Contractor shall remove any Defective Work rejected by Owner and replace it with Work that is not Defective, and satisfactorily correct or remove and replace any damage to other Work or the work of others resulting therefrom. If Contractor fails to comply promptly with the terms of such instructions, or in an emergency where delay would cause serious risk of loss or damage, Owner may have the Defective Work corrected or the rejected Work removed and replaced. Contractor shall pay for all claims, costs, losses and damages caused by or resulting from such removal and replacement.

Where Contractor fails to correct Defective Work, or defects are discovered outside the correction period, Owner shall have all rights and remedies granted by law.

1.04 Contractor shall respond within 72 hours to any claim made by Owner pursuant to this guaranty.

1.05 Observation and inspection of the Work shall not relieve Contractor of any of its obligations under the Contract Documents. Even though equipment, materials, or Work required to be provided under the Contract Documents have been inspected, accepted, and estimated for payment, Contractor shall, at its own expense, replace or repair any such equipment, material, or Work found to be Defective or otherwise not to comply with the requirements of the Contract Documents up to the end of the guaranty period.

1.06 This Guaranty is in addition to any other Contractor warranties contained in the Contract Documents, and not in lieu of, any and all other Contractor liability imposed under the Contract Documents or at law. In the event of any conflict or inconsistency between the terms of this Guaranty and any Contractor warranty or obligation Contractor under the Contract Documents or at law, such inconsistency or conflict shall be resolved in favor of the greater protection to Owner. (Signature line on next page)

9.b
Packet Pg. 272 Attachment: Attachment A - Construction Agreement with W.E. Lyons Construction Co. (4963 : Award Civic Center Campus Facilities Project Rev. 0
Bid Set - February 25, 2022
Guaranty 00 6536 - 2 Civic Center Campus Facilities Project OAK #4875-3832-5765 v2
Date: _______________________________, 20___ W.E. Lyons Construction Co.

Contractor's Name
By:

Signature
Print Name
Title
Street Address
City, State, Zip code

END OF DOCUMENT

9.b
Packet Pg. 273 Attachment: Attachment A - Construction Agreement with W.E. Lyons Construction Co. (4963 : Award Civic Center Campus Facilities Project Rev. 0
Bid Set - February 25, 2022
DOCUMENT 00 7200

GENERAL CONDITIONS
Page
General Conditions 00 7200 - i Civic Center Campus Facilities Project OAK #4895-3651-8405 v3
INTERPRETATION OF CONTRACT DOCUMENTS.............................................................. 1 Interpretation of Documents................................................................................................ 1 Order of Precedence of Documents ................................................................................... 1 PRE-BID INVESTIGATIONS................................................................................................... 1 Pre-Bid Investigations Required ......................................................................................... 1 Limited Reliance Permitted On Owner’s Existing Conditions Data .................................... 2 Pre-Bid Investigation Requirements For Excavation and Utilities Relocation Projects ............................................................................................................................................ 2 SUBCONTRACTORS ............................................................................................................. 3 Subcontractor Listing Law................................................................................................... 3 Subcontracts ....................................................................................................................... 3 DRAWINGS AND SPECIFICATIONS..................................................................................... 3 Intent of Drawings and Specifications................................................................................. 3 Checking of Drawings and Specifications........................................................................... 3 Interpretation of Drawings and Specifications .................................................................... 4 Use of Drawings and Specifications. .................................................................................. 4 COMMENCEMENT OF THE WORK....................................................................................... 4 Submission of Required Schedules .................................................................................... 4 Commencement Date of Contract Time ............................................................................. 5 CONTRACTOR’S ORGANIZATION AND EQUIPMENT ........................................................ 5 Contractor’s Legal Address................................................................................................. 5 Contractor’s Superintendents or Forepersons.................................................................... 5 Proficiency In English.......................................................................................................... 5 Contractor’s and Subcontractors’ Employees..................................................................... 5 Contractor’s Use of The Site............................................................................................... 5 Contractor’s Site Office ....................................................................................................... 6 OWNER’S ADMINISTRATION OF WORK ............................................................................. 6 Owner’s Representative(s) ................................................................................................. 6 Owner’s Observation of The Work...................................................................................... 6 Consultant’s Observation of Work ...................................................................................... 6 Owner’s and Consultant’s Exercise of Contract Responsibilities ....................................... 7 Owner’s Right of Access to The Work ................................................................................ 7

9.b
Packet Pg. 274 Attachment: Attachment A - Construction Agreement with W.E. Lyons Construction Co. (4963 : Award Civic Center Campus Facilities Project Rev. 0
Bid Set - February 25, 2022
DOCUMENT 00 7200

GENERAL CONDITIONS
Page
General Conditions 00 7200 - ii Civic Center Campus Facilities Project OAK #4895-3651-8405 v3
Owner’s Right of Separate Construction ............................................................................ 7 CONTRACTOR’S PROSECUTION AND PROGRESS OF THE WORK................................ 7 Contractor to Supervise The Work...................................................................................... 7 Contractor to Maintain Cost Data........................................................................................ 8 Contractor to Supply Sufficient Workers and Materials ...................................................... 8 Contractor to Maintain Project Record Documents ............................................................ 9 Contractor to Not Disrupt Owner Operation........................................................................ 9 Contractor to Provide Temporary Facilities and Controls ................................................... 9 WARRANTY, GUARANTY, AND INSPECTION OF WORK................................................... 9 Warranty and Guaranty....................................................................................................... 9 Inspection of Work ............................................................................................................ 10 Correction of Defective Work ............................................................................................ 11 Acceptance of Defective Work.......................................................................................... 12 Rights upon Inspection, Correction or Acceptance........................................................... 12 Proof of Compliance of Contract Provisions ..................................................................... 12 Correction Period and Project Warranty Period:............................................................... 13 No Waiver ......................................................................................................................... 13 MODIFICATIONS OF CONTRACT DOCUMENTS.............................................................13 Owner’s Right to Direct Changed Work............................................................................ 13 Required Documentation for Changed Work.................................................................... 14 Procedures and Pricing of Changed Work ....................................................................... 14 TIME ALLOWANCES..........................................................................................................14 Time Allowances ............................................................................................................... 14 Excusable Delay and Inexcusable Delay Defined. ........................................................... 14 Notice of Delay.................................................................................................................. 15 Compensable Time Extensions ........................................................................................ 15 Non-Compensable Time Extensions ................................................................................ 15 Adverse Weather .............................................................................................................. 15 Liquidated Damages ......................................................................................................... 16 CLAIMS BY CONTRACTOR...............................................................................................17 Obligation to File Claims for Disputed Work ..................................................................... 17 Form and Contents of Claim ............................................................................................. 17

9.b
Packet Pg. 275 Attachment: Attachment A - Construction Agreement with W.E. Lyons Construction Co. (4963 : Award Civic Center Campus Facilities Project Rev. 0
Bid Set - February 25, 2022
DOCUMENT 00 7200

GENERAL CONDITIONS
Page
General Conditions 00 7200 - iii Civic Center Campus Facilities Project OAK #4895-3651-8405 v3
Administration During/After Claim Submission ................................................................. 18 Compliance ....................................................................................................................... 18 Mediation........................................................................................................................... 18 UNDERGROUND CONDITIONS ........................................................................................19 Contractor to Locate Underground Facilities. ................................................................... 19 Contractor to Protect Underground Facilities.................................................................... 19 Concealed or Unknown Conditions................................................................................... 20 Notice of Hazardous Waste or Materials Conditions ........................................................ 21 LEGAL AND MISCELLANEOUS.........................................................................................22 Laws and Regulations....................................................................................................... 22 Permits and Taxes ............................................................................................................ 22 Communications and Information Distribution .................................................................. 23 Suspension of Work .......................................................................................................... 23 Termination of Contract for Cause.................................................................................... 23 Termination of Contract for Convenience ......................................................................... 24 Contingent Assignment of Subcontracts........................................................................... 24 Remedies and Contract Integration .................................................................................. 25 Interpretation. .................................................................................................................... 25

14.10 Patents .............................................................................................................................. 26

14.11 Substitution for Patented and Specified Articles............................................................... 26

14.12 Interest of Public Officers.................................................................................................. 26

14.13 Limit of Liability.................................................................................................................. 26 WORKING CONDITIONS AND PREVAILING WAGES......................................................26 Use of Site/Sanitary Rules ................................................................................................ 26 Protection of Work, Persons, and Property ...................................................................... 27 Responsibility For Safety and Health................................................................................ 28 Emergencies ..................................................................................................................... 28 Use of Roadways and Walkways...................................................................................... 28 Nondiscrimination.............................................................................................................. 28 Prevailing Wages and Working Hours .............................................................................. 28 Environmental Controls..................................................................................................... 30 Shoring Safety Plan .......................................................................................................... 30

9.b
Packet Pg. 276 Attachment: Attachment A - Construction Agreement with W.E. Lyons Construction Co. (4963 : Award Civic Center Campus Facilities Project Rev. 0
Bid Set - February 25, 2021
General Conditions 00 7200 - 1 Civic Center Campus Facilities Project OAK #4895-3651-8405 v3

GENERAL CONDITIONS

INTERPRETATION OF CONTRACT DOCUMENTS
Interpretation of Documents
Contract Documents are complementary; what is called for by one is as binding as if called for by all.

Individual Contract Documents subdivide at first level into Articles, and then into paragraphs.

Order of Precedence of Documents
In the case of discrepancy or ambiguity in the Contract Documents, the following order of precedence shall prevail:

Modifications in inverse chronological order (i.e., most recent first), and in the same order as specific portions they are modifying;
Contract Forms (Document 00 5200 and other 5000 and 6000 series Documents), and terms and conditions referenced therein;
Supplemental General Conditions (Document 00 7301 and other 7300 series Documents), if included;
General Conditions (Document 00 7200);
Division 01 General Requirements, if included;
Drawings and Technical Specifications (Division 02 and above); Written words over figures, unless obviously incorrect; Figured dimensions over scaled dimensions;
Large-scale Drawings over small-scale Drawings.

Any conflict between Drawings and Technical Specifications (Division 2 and above) will be resolved in favor of the document of the latest date (i.e., the most recent document), and if the dates are the same or not determinable, then in favor of Specifications.

Any conflict between a bill or list of materials shown in the Contract Documents and the actual quantities required to complete Work required by Contract Documents, will be resolved in favor of the actual quantities.

All Technical Specifications included in the Project manual shall be included within the Contract Documents unless identified otherwise.

PRE-BID INVESTIGATIONS
Pre-Bid Investigations Required
Prior to and as a condition of submitting a Bid and executing Document 00 5200 (Agreement), Contractor shall make reasonable efforts to investigate fully the Work of the Contract. Contractor shall visit the Site, examine thoroughly and understand fully the nature and extent of the Contract Documents, Work, Site, locality, actual conditions and as-built conditions.

Contractor’s investigation shall include, without limitation, requesting and thoroughly examining of all reports of exploration and tests of subsurface conditions, as-built drawings, drawings, product specification(s) or reports, made available by Owner for pre-bidding or contracting purposes or during Contractor’s pre-bid investigations, of existing above ground and (to the extent applicable) below ground conditions (together, Existing Conditions Data), including, as applicable, Underground Facilities, geotechnical data, as-built data, utility surveys, record documents of all types, hazardous materials surveys, or similar materials which may appear or be referenced in the Project Manual or the in the Contract Documents, and all local conditions, and federal, state and local laws and regulations that in any manner may affect cost, progress, performance or furnishing of Work or which relate to any aspect of the means, methods, techniques, sequences or procedures of construction to be employed by Contractor and safety precautions and programs incident thereto.

Contractor’s investigations shall consider fully the fact that Existing Conditions Data is in many cases based on information furnished to Owner by others (e.g., the prior owner or builders), and that due to their age or their chain of custody since preparation, may not meet current industry

9.b
Packet Pg. 277 Attachment: Attachment A - Construction Agreement with W.E. Lyons Construction Co. (4963 : Award Civic Center Campus Facilities Project Rev. 0
Bid Set - February 25, 2021
General Conditions 00 7200 - 2 Civic Center Campus Facilities Project OAK #4895-3651-8405 v3
standards for accuracy. Contractor shall also: (i.) provide Owner with prompt written notice of all conflicts, errors, ambiguities, or discrepancies of any type, that it discovered in or among the Contract Documents and the Existing Conditions Data, and (ii.) subject to Owner’s approval, conduct any such additional or supplementary examinations, investigations, explorations, tests, studies and data compilations, concerning conditions (surface, subsurface, and Underground Facilities) at or contiguous to the Site or otherwise, which Contractor may deem necessary in order to perform and furnish the Work in accordance with the terms and conditions of Contract Documents.

During performance of the Contract, Contractor will be charged with knowledge of all information that it should have learned in performing these pre-bid investigations and other obligations, and shall not be entitled to Change Orders (time or compensation) due to any information, error, inconsistency, omission, or conditions that Contractor should have known as a part of this Work.

Contractor shall be responsible for the resultant losses, including, without limitation, the cost of correcting Defective Work.

Limited Reliance Permitted On Owner’s Existing Conditions Data Regarding aboveground and as-built conditions shown on the Contract Documents or supplied by Owner, such information has been compiled in good faith, however, Owner does not expressly or impliedly warrant or represent that such information is correctly shown or indicated, or otherwise complete for construction purposes. Contractor must independently verify such information as part of its pre-bid investigations, and where conditions are not reasonably verifiable or discrepancies are identified, bring such matters to Owner’s attention through written question issued during the bid period. In executing Document 00 5200 (Agreement), Contractor shall rely on the results of its own independent investigation and shall not rely on Owner-supplied information regarding aboveground conditions and as-built conditions, and Contractor shall accept full responsibility for its verification work sufficient to complete the Work as intended.

Regarding subsurface conditions other than Underground Facilities shown on the Contract Documents or otherwise supplied by Owner, Contractor may rely only upon the general accuracy of actual reported depths, actual reported character of materials, actual reported soil types, actual reported water conditions, or actual obstructions shown or indicated in the Contract Documents.

Owner is not responsible for the completeness of any subsurface condition information, Contractor’s conclusions or opinions drawn from any subsurface condition information, or subsurface conditions that are not specifically shown. (For example, Owner is not responsible for soil conditions in areas contiguous to areas where a subsurface condition is shown.) Pre-Bid Investigation Requirements For Excavation and Utilities Relocation Projects As part of its pre-bid investigations for Projects involving excavation and/or relocation of existing utilities, Contractor shall make reasonable efforts to verify information regarding Underground Facilities including, without limitation, requesting additional information or verification of information as necessary.

Because of the nature and location of Owner and the Project, the existence of Underground Facilities is deemed inherent in the Work of the Contract, as is the fact that Underground Facilities are not always accurately shown or completely shown on as-built records, both as to their depth and location. Contractor shall, therefore, take care to note the existence and potential existence of Underground Facilities, in particular, above and below grade structures, drainage lines, storm drains, sewers, water, gas, electrical, chemical, hot water, and other similar items and utilities. Contractor shall carefully consider all supplied information, request additional information Contractor may deem necessary, and visually inspect the Site for above ground indications of Underground Facilities (such as, for example not by way of limitation, the existence of existing service laterals, appurtenances or other types of utilities, indicated by the presence of an underground transmission main or other visible facilities, such as buildings, manholes, new asphalt, meters and junction boxes, on or adjacent to the Site). Contractor shall also consider local underground conditions and typical practices for Underground Facilities, either through its own direct knowledge or through its subcontractors, and fully consider this knowledge in assessing the existing information and the reasonableness of its reliance.

9.b
Packet Pg. 278 Attachment: Attachment A - Construction Agreement with W.E. Lyons Construction Co. (4963 : Award Civic Center Campus Facilities Project Rev. 0
Bid Set - February 25, 2021
General Conditions 00 7200 - 3 Civic Center Campus Facilities Project OAK #4895-3651-8405 v3

SUBCONTRACTORS
Subcontractor Listing Law
Contractor shall comply with the Subcontractor Listing law, Public Contract Code Sections 4101, et seq. Contractor shall not substitute any other person or firm in place of any Subcontractor listed in the Bid except as may be allowed by law.

Subcontractors shall not assign or transfer their subcontracts or permit them to be performed by any other contractor without Owner’s written approval. At Owner’s request, Contractor shall provide Owner with a complete copy of all executed subcontracts or final commercial agreements with Subcontractors and/or suppliers.

Subcontracts
Subcontract agreements shall preserve and protect the rights of Owner under the Contract Documents so that subcontracting will not prejudice such rights. To the extent of the Work to be performed by a Subcontractor, Contractor shall require the Subcontractor’s written agreement (i) to be bound to the terms of Contract Documents and (ii) to assume vis-à-vis Contractor all the obligations and responsibilities that Contractor assumes toward Owner under the Contract Documents. (These agreements include, without limitation, all warranties, claims procedures and rules governing submittals of all types to which Contractor is subject under the Contract Documents.)
Contractor shall provide for the assignment to Owner of all rights any Subcontractor (of any tier) may have against any manufacturer, supplier, or distributor for breach of warranties and guarantees relating to the Work performed by the Subcontractor under the Contract Documents.

Subcontracts shall provide and acknowledge Owner as an intended third-party beneficiary of each subcontract and supply contract (of any tier).

DRAWINGS AND SPECIFICATIONS
Intent of Drawings and Specifications
Contractor shall interpret words or phrases used to describe Work (including services), materials, or equipment that have well-known technical or construction industry or trade meaning in accordance with that meaning. Drawings’ intent specifically includes the intent to depict construction that complies with all applicable laws, codes and standards.

As part of the Work, Contractor shall provide all labor, materials, equipment, machinery, tools, facilities, services, employee training and testing, hoisting facilities, Shop Drawings, storage, testing, security, transportation, disposal, the securing of all necessary or required field dimensions, the cutting or patching of existing materials, notices, permits, documents, reports, agreements and any other items required or necessary to timely and fully complete Work described and the results intended by Contract Documents and, in particular, Drawings and Specifications. Divisions and Specification Sections and the identification on any Drawings shall not control Contractor in dividing Work among Subcontractors or suppliers or delineating the Work to be performed by any specific trade.

Contractor shall perform reasonably implied parts of Work as incidental work although absent from Drawings and Specifications. Incidental work includes any work not shown on Drawings or described in Specifications that is necessary or normally or customarily required as a part of the Work shown on Drawings or described in Specifications. Incidental work includes any work necessary or required to make each installation satisfactory, legally operable, functional, and consistent with the intent of Drawings and Specifications or the requirements of Contract Documents. Contractor shall perform incidental work without extra cost to Owner. Incidental work shall be treated as if fully described in Specifications and shown on Drawings, and the expense of incidental work shall be included in price Bid and Contract Sum.

Checking of Drawings and Specifications
Before undertaking each part of Work, Contractor shall carefully study and compare Contract Documents and check and verify pertinent figures shown in the Contract Documents and all applicable field measurements. Contractor shall be responsible for any errors that might have

9.b
Packet Pg. 279 Attachment: Attachment A - Construction Agreement with W.E. Lyons Construction Co. (4963 : Award Civic Center Campus Facilities Project Rev. 0
Bid Set - February 25, 2021
General Conditions 00 7200 - 4 Civic Center Campus Facilities Project OAK #4895-3651-8405 v3
been avoided by such comparison. Figures shown on Drawings shall be followed; Contractor shall not scale measurements. Contractor shall promptly report to Owner, in writing, any conflict, error, ambiguity or discrepancy that Contractor may discover. Contractor shall obtain a written interpretation or clarification from Owner before proceeding with any Work affected thereby.

Contractor shall provide Owner with a follow-up correspondence every ten Days until it receives a satisfactory interpretation or clarification.

Interpretation of Drawings and Specifications
A typical or representative detail on Drawings shall constitute the standard for workmanship and material throughout corresponding parts of Work. Where necessary, and where reasonably inferable from Drawings, Contractor shall adapt such representative detail for application to such corresponding parts of Work. The details of such adaptation shall be subject to prior approval by Owner. Repetitive features shown in outline on Drawings shall be in exact accordance with corresponding features completely shown.

Should any discrepancy appear or any misunderstanding arise as to the import of anything contained in Drawings and Specifications, or should Contractor have any questions or requests relating to Drawings or Specifications, Contractor shall refer the matter to Owner, in writing, with a copy to the Architect/Engineer. Owner will issue (or cause to be issued) with reasonable promptness written responses, clarifications or interpretations as Owner may determine necessary. All written responses, clarifications and interpretations under this Paragraph shall be consistent with the intent of and be reasonably inferable from Contract Documents, and binding upon Contractor. If Contractor believes that a written response, clarification or interpretation justifies an adjustment in the Contract Sum or Contract Time, Contractor shall give Owner prompt written notice. If the parties are unable to agree to the amount or extent of the adjustment, if any, then Contractor shall perform the Work in conformance with Owner’s response, clarification, or interpretation and may make a written claim for the adjustment as provided in Article 12.

The following general specifications shall apply wherever in the Specifications, or in any directions given by Owner in accordance with or supplementing Specifications, it is provided that Contractor shall furnish materials or manufactured articles or shall do Work for which no detailed specifications are shown. Materials or manufactured articles shall be of the best grade, in quality and workmanship, obtainable in the market from firms of established good reputation. If not ordinarily carried in stock, the materials or manufactured articles shall conform to industry standards for first class materials or articles of the kind required, with due consideration of the use to which they are to be put. Work shall conform to the usual standards or codes, such as those cited herein, for first class work of the kind required. Contractor shall specify in writing to Owner, at least 10 Business Days prior to furnishing such materials or performing such Work, the materials to be used or Work to be performed under this Paragraph.

Use of Drawings and Specifications
Drawings, Specifications and other Contract Documents were prepared for use for Work of Contract Documents only. No part of Contract Documents shall be used for any other construction or for any other purpose except with the written consent of Owner. Any unauthorized use of Contract Documents is prohibited and at the sole liability of the user.

COMMENCEMENT OF THE WORK
Submission of Required Schedules
Unless otherwise indicated in Contract Documents, Contractor shall submit to Owner in draft for review and discussion at the Preconstruction Conference, and in final prior to the first payment application, the following schedules:

Schedule of Values;
Progress Schedule, and
Schedule of Submittals.

No progress payment shall be due or owing to Contractor until such schedules are submitted to and acceptable to Owner and/or Architect/Engineer as meeting the requirements of the Contract

9.b
Packet Pg. 280 Attachment: Attachment A - Construction Agreement with W.E. Lyons Construction Co. (4963 : Award Civic Center Campus Facilities Project Rev. 0
Bid Set - February 25, 2021
General Conditions 00 7200 - 5 Civic Center Campus Facilities Project OAK #4895-3651-8405 v3
Documents. In Owner’s sole discretion, Owner may elect to instead withhold a portion of any progress payment for unacceptable compliance with contract requirements for such schedules.

Owner’s acceptance of Contractor’s schedules will not create any duty of care or impose on Owner any responsibility for the sequencing, scheduling or progress of Work, nor will it interfere with or relieve Contractor from Contractor’s full responsibility therefore.

Commencement Date of Contract Time
The Contract Time will commence to run on the 30th Day after the issuance of the Notice of Award or, if a Notice to Proceed is given, on the date indicated in the Notice to Proceed.

Owner may give a Notice to Proceed at any time within 30 Days after the Notice of Award.

Contractor shall not do any Work at the Site prior to the date on which the Contract Time commences to run.

CONTRACTOR’S ORGANIZATION AND EQUIPMENT
Contractor’s Legal Address
Address and facsimile number given in Contractor’s Bid are hereby designated as Contractor’s legal address and facsimile number. Contractor may change its legal address and facsimile number by notice in writing, delivered to Owner, which in conspicuous language advises Owner of a change in legal address or facsimile number, and which Owner accepts in writing. Delivery to Contractor’s legal address or depositing in any post office or post office box regularly maintained by the United States Postal Service, in a wrapper with postage affixed, directed to Contractor at Contractor’s legal address, or of any drawings, notice, letter or other communication, shall be deemed legal and sufficient service thereof upon Contractor. Facsimile to Contractor’s designated facsimile number of any letter, memorandum, or other communication on standard or legal sized paper, with proof of facsimile transmission, shall be deemed legal and sufficient service thereof upon Contractor.

Contractor’s Superintendents or Forepersons
Contractor shall at all times be represented on Site by one or more superintendents or forepersons authorized and competent to receive and carry out any instructions that Owner may give, and shall be liable for faithful observance of instructions delivered to Contractor or to authorized representative or representatives on Site.

Proficiency In English
Supervisors, security guards, safety personnel and employees who have unescorted access to the Site shall possess proficiency in the English language in order to understand, receive and carry out oral and written communications or instructions relating to their job functions, including safety and security requirements.

Contractor’s and Subcontractors’ Employees
Contractor shall employ, and shall permit its Subcontractors to employ, only competent and skillful personnel to do Work. If Owner notifies Contractor that any of its employees, or any of its Subcontractors’ employees on Work is incompetent, unfaithful, disorderly or profane, or fails to observe customary standards of conduct or refuses to carry out any provision of the Contract Documents, or uses threatening or abusive language to any person on Work representing Owner, or violates sanitary rules, or is otherwise unsatisfactory, and if Owner requests that such person be discharged from Work, then Contractor or its Subcontractor shall immediately discharge such person from Work and the discharged person shall not be re-employed on the Work except with consent of Owner.

Contractor’s Use of The Site
Contractor shall not make any arrangements with any person to permit occupancy or use of any land, structure or building within the limits of the Work, for any purpose whatsoever, either with or without compensation, in conflict with any agreement between Owner and any Owner, former Owner or tenant of such land, structure or buildings. Contractor may not occupy Owner-owned

9.b
Packet Pg. 281 Attachment: Attachment A - Construction Agreement with W.E. Lyons Construction Co. (4963 : Award Civic Center Campus Facilities Project Rev. 0
Bid Set - February 25, 2021
General Conditions 00 7200 - 6 Civic Center Campus Facilities Project OAK #4895-3651-8405 v3
property outside the limit of the Work as indicated on the Drawings unless it obtains prior approval from Owner.

Contractor’s Site Office
Unless expressly provided otherwise in the Contract Documents, Contractor shall provide a site office staffed by a resident project manager or job superintendent.

OWNER’S ADMINISTRATION OF WORK
Owner’s Representative(s)
Owner’s Representative(s) will have limited authority to act on behalf of Owner as set forth in the Contract Documents.

Except as otherwise provided in these Contract Documents or subsequently identified in writing by Owner, Owner will issue all communications to Contractor through Owner’s Representative, and Contractor shall issue all communications to Owner through Owner’s Representative in a written document delivered to Owner.

Should any direct communications between Contractor and Owner’s consultants, architects or engineers not identified in Article 2 of Document 00 5200 (Agreement) occur during field visits or by telephone, Contractor shall immediately confirm them in a written document copied to Owner.

Owner’s Observation of The Work
Work shall be performed under Owner’s general observation and administration. Contractor shall comply with Owner’s directions and instructions in accordance with the terms of Contract Documents, but nothing contained in these General Conditions shall be taken to relieve Contractor of any obligations or liabilities under the Contract Documents. Owner’s failure to review or, upon review, failure to object to any aspect of Work reviewed, shall not be deemed a waiver or approval of any non-conforming aspect of Work.

Subject to those rights specifically reserved in the Contract Documents, Owner will not supervise, or direct, or have control over, or be responsible for, Contractor’s means, methods, techniques, sequences or procedures of construction, or the safety precautions and programs incident thereto, or Contractor’s failure to comply with laws and regulations applicable to the furnishing or performance of Work. Owner will not be responsible for Contractor’s failure to perform or furnish the Work in accordance with Contract Documents.

Consultant’s Observation of Work
Owner may engage one or more of the following to assist in administering the Work: an Architect/Engineer, Project Manager, Construction Manager, or any other independent consultant (collectively for purposes of this Article 7, Consultant). If so engaged, Consultant will advise and consult with Owner, but will have authority to act on behalf of Owner only to extent provided in the Contract Documents or as set forth in writing by Owner. Consultant will not be responsible for and will not have control or charge of construction means, methods, techniques, sequences or procedures, or for safety precautions and programs in connection with Work. Consultant will not be responsible for or have control over the acts or omissions of Contractor, Subcontractors or their agents or employees, or any other persons performing Work.

Consultant may review Contractor’s Submittals, such as Shop Drawings, Product Data, and Samples, but only for conformance with design concept of Work and with information given in the Contract Documents.

Consultant may visit the Site at intervals appropriate to stage of construction to become familiar generally with the progress and quality of Work and to determine in general if Work is proceeding in accordance with Contract Documents. Based on its observations, Consultant may recommend to Owner that it disapproves or rejects Work that Consultant believes to be Defective or will not produce a complete Project that conforms to Contract Documents, or will prejudice the integrity of the design concept of the completed Project as a functioning whole as indicated by Contract Documents. Consultant may also recommend to Owner special inspection or testing of Work, whether or not the Work is fabricated, installed, or completed.

9.b
Packet Pg. 282 Attachment: Attachment A - Construction Agreement with W.E. Lyons Construction Co. (4963 : Award Civic Center Campus Facilities Project Rev. 0
Bid Set - February 25, 2021
General Conditions 00 7200 - 7 Civic Center Campus Facilities Project OAK #4895-3651-8405 v3
Consultant may conduct observations or inspections to recommend to Owner the dates that Contractor has achieved Substantial Completion and Final Completion, and will receive and forward to Owner for review written warranties and related documents required by Contract Documents.

Owner’s and Consultant’s Exercise of Contract Responsibilities Owner, Consultant, and all Owner’s representatives, in performing their duties and responsibilities under the Contract Documents, accept no duties, responsibilities or duty of care, nor may the same be implied or inferred, towards Contractor, any Subcontractor, sub-Subcontractor or supplier, except those set forth expressly in the Contract Documents.

Owner’s Right of Access to The Work
During performance of Work, Owner, Consultant, and all Owner’s representatives may at any time enter upon Work, shops or studios where any part of the Work may be in preparation, or factories where any materials for use in Work are being or are to be manufactured, and Contractor shall provide proper and safe facilities for this purpose, and shall make arrangements with manufacturers to facilitate inspection of their processes and products to such extent as Owner’s interests may require. Other contractors performing work for Owner may also enter upon Work for all purposes required by their respective contracts. Subject to the rights reserved in the Contract Documents, Contractor shall have sole care, custody, and control of the Site and its Work areas.

Owner’s Right of Separate Construction
Owner may perform with its own forces, construction or operations related to the Project, or the Site during Contractor’s operations. Owner may also award separate contracts in connection with other portions of the Project or other construction or operations, on the Site or areas contiguous to the Site, under conditions similar to these Contract Documents, or may have utility Owners perform other work.

Contractor shall adjust its schedule and fully coordinate with and shall afford all other contractors, utility districts and Owner (if Owner is performing work with its own forces), proper and safe access to the Site, and reasonable opportunity for the installation and storage of their materials.

Contractor shall ensure that the execution of its Work properly connects and coordinates with others’ work, do all cutting, fitting and patching of the Work that may be required to make its several parts come together properly and integrate with such other work, and shall cooperate with them to facilitate the progress of the Work.

To the extent that any part of Contractor’s Work is to interface with work performed or installed by other contractors or utility owners, Contractor shall inspect and measure the in-place work.

Contractor shall promptly report to Owner in writing any defect in in-place work that will impede or increase the cost of Contractor’s interface unless corrected.

CONTRACTOR’S PROSECUTION AND PROGRESS OF THE WORK
Contractor to Supervise The Work
Subject to those rights specifically reserved in the Contract Documents, Contractor shall supervise, direct, have control over, and be responsible for, Contractor’s means, methods, techniques, sequences or procedures of construction, safety precautions and programs incident thereto, and compliance with laws and regulations applicable to the furnishing or performance of Work.

Contractor shall keep on the Site at all times during Work progress a competent resident Superintendent, who shall not be replaced without Owner’s express written consent and, if applicable, payment of liquidated damages as required by Document 00 5200 (Agreement). The Superintendent shall be Contractor’s representative at the Site and shall have complete authority to act on behalf of Contractor. All communications to and from the Superintendent shall be as binding as if given to or by Contractor.

Contractor shall supervise, inspect, and direct Work competently and efficiently, devoting the attention and applying such personal skills and expertise as may be required and necessary to

9.b
Packet Pg. 283 Attachment: Attachment A - Construction Agreement with W.E. Lyons Construction Co. (4963 : Award Civic Center Campus Facilities Project Rev. 0
Bid Set - February 25, 2021
General Conditions 00 7200 - 8 Civic Center Campus Facilities Project OAK #4895-3651-8405 v3
perform Work in accordance with Contract Documents. Contractor shall be solely responsible for and have control and charge of construction means, methods, techniques, sequences and procedures, safety precautions and programs in connection with the Work. Contractor shall be responsible to see that the completed Work complies accurately with Contract Documents.

Contractor is fully responsible for Contractor’s own acts and omissions. Contractor is responsible for all acts and omissions of its Subcontractors, suppliers, and other persons and organizations performing or furnishing any of the Work, labor, materials, or equipment under a direct or indirect contract with Contractor.

Contractor shall conduct monthly Contractor Safety Committee meetings, and weekly toolbox safety talks.

Contractor to Maintain Cost Data
Contractor shall maintain full and correct information as to the number of workers employed in connection with each subdivision of Work, the classification and rate of pay of each worker in form of certified payrolls, the cost to Contractor of each class of materials, tools and appliances used by Contractor in Work, and the amount of each class of materials used in each subdivision of Work. Contractor shall provide Owner with monthly summaries of this information. If Contractor maintains or is capable of generating summaries or reports comparing actual Project costs with Bid estimates or budgets, Contractor shall provide Owner with a copy of such report upon Owner’s request.

Contractor shall maintain daily job reports recording all significant activity on the job, including the number of workers on Site, Work activities, problems encountered and delays. Contractor shall provide Owner with copies for each Day Contractor works on the Project, to be delivered to Owner either the same Day or the following morning before starting work at the Site. Contractor shall take pre-construction and monthly progress photographs of all areas of the Work.

Contractor shall maintain copies of all correspondence with Subcontractors and records of meetings with Subcontractors.

Owner shall have the right to audit and copy Contractor’s books and records of any type, nature or description relating to the Project (including, without limitation, financial records reflecting in any way costs claimed on the Project), and to inspect the Site, including Contractor’s trailer, or other job Site office, and this requirement shall be contained in the subcontracts of Subcontractors working on Site. By way of example, Owner shall have the right to inspect and obtain copies of all Contract Documents, planning and design documents, Bid proposal and negotiation documents, cost records and job cost variance reports, design modification proposals, value engineering or other cost reduction proposals, revisions made to the original design, job progress reports, photographs, and as-built drawings maintained by Contractor. Owner and any other applicable governmental entity shall have the right to inspect all information and documents maintained hereunder at any time during the Project and for a period of five years following Final Completion, in accordance with the provisions of Government Code Section 8546.7. This right of inspection shall not relieve Contractor of its duties and obligations under the Contract Documents.

This right of inspection shall be specifically enforceable in a court of law, either independently or in conjunction with enforcement of any other rights in the Contract Documents.

Contractor to Supply Sufficient Workers and Materials
Unless otherwise required by Owner under the terms of Contract Documents, Contractor shall at all times keep on the Site materials and employ qualified workers sufficient to prosecute Work at a rate and in a sequence and manner necessary to complete Work within the Contract Time.

This obligation shall remain in full force and effect notwithstanding disputes or claims of any type.

At any time during progress of Work should Contractor directly or indirectly (through Subcontractors) refuse, neglect, or be unable to supply sufficient materials or employ qualified workers to prosecute the Work as required, then Owner may require Contractor to accelerate the Work and/or furnish additional qualified workers or materials as Owner may consider necessary, at no cost to Owner. If Contractor does not comply with the notice within three Business Days of date of service thereof, Owner shall have the right (but not a duty) to provide materials and qualified workers to finish the Work or any affected portion of Work, as Owner may elect. Owner may, at its discretion, exclude Contractor from the Site, or portions of the Site or separate work

9.b
Packet Pg. 284 Attachment: Attachment A - Construction Agreement with W.E. Lyons Construction Co. (4963 : Award Civic Center Campus Facilities Project Rev. 0
Bid Set - February 25, 2021
General Conditions 00 7200 - 9 Civic Center Campus Facilities Project OAK #4895-3651-8405 v3
elements during the time period that Owner exercises this right. Owner will deduct from moneys due or which may thereafter become due under the Contract Documents, the sums necessary to meet expenses thereby incurred and paid to persons supplying materials and doing Work.

Owner will deduct from funds or appropriations set aside for purposes of Contract Documents the amount of such payments and charge them to Contractor as if paid to Contractor. Contractor shall remain liable for resulting delay, including liquidated damages and indemnification of Owner from claims of others.

Exercise by Owner of the rights conferred upon Owner in this subparagraph is entirely discretionary on the part of Owner. Owner shall have no duty or obligation to exercise the rights referred to in this subparagraph and its failure to exercise such rights shall not be deemed an approval of existing Work progress or a waiver or limitation of Owner’s right to exercise such rights in other concurrent or future similar circumstances. (The rights conferred upon Owner under this subparagraph are, like all other such rights, cumulative to Owner’s other rights under any provision of the Contract Documents.)
Contractor to Maintain Project Record Documents
As more specifically described in Section 01 7839, Contractor shall maintain in a safe place at the Site one record copy of all Drawings, Specifications, Addenda, Contract Modifications, Change Orders, Work Directives, Force Account orders, and written interpretations and clarifications in good order and annotated to show all as-built changes made during construction. These Project Record Documents, together with all approved Samples and a counterpart of all approved Shop Drawings, shall be maintained and available to Owner for reference. Upon completion of the Work, Contractor shall deliver to Owner, the Project Record Documents, Samples and Shop Drawings and as-built drawings.

Throughout Contractor’s performance of the Work of the Project, Contractor shall maintain construction records to include: shop drawings; product data/material data sheets; samples; submittal; purchases; materials; equipment; inspections; applicable handbooks; applicable codes and standards; maintenance and operating manuals and instructions; RFI Log; Submittal Log; other related documents and revisions which arise out of the Construction Contracts. Contractor shall maintain records of principal building layout lines, elevations for the bottom of footings, floor levels, and key site elevations (certified by a qualified surveyor or professional engineer).

Contractor shall make all records available to Owner. At the completion of the Project, Contractor shall deliver all such records to the Owner to have a complete set of record as-built drawings.

Contractor to Not Disrupt Owner Operation
Contractor shall schedule and execute all Work in a manner that does not interfere with or disrupt Owner operations including, without limitation, parking, utilities (electricity, gas, water), noise, access by employees and administration, access by vendors, physicians, patients and any other person or entity using Owner facilities or doing business with Owner. Contractor shall produce and supply coordination plans and requests to Owner, following Owner procedures, for all necessary interference of construction with Owner, which Owner will reasonably cooperate with.

Contractor to Provide Temporary Facilities and Controls Unless expressly provided otherwise in the Contract Documents, Contractor shall provide all temporary utilities (including without limitation electricity, water, natural gas), lighting, heating, cooling and ventilating devices, telephone, sanitary facilities, barriers, fences and enclosures, tree and plant protection, fire protection, pollution, erosion, Storm Water Pollution Prevention controls, noise and traffic control, and any other necessary services required for construction, testing or completion of the Work.

WARRANTY, GUARANTY, AND INSPECTION OF WORK
Warranty and Guaranty
General Representations and Warranties: Contractor represents and warrants that it is and will be at all times fully qualified and capable of performing every Phase of the Work and to complete Work in accordance with the terms of Contract Documents. Contractor warrants that all

9.b
Packet Pg. 285 Attachment: Attachment A - Construction Agreement with W.E. Lyons Construction Co. (4963 : Award Civic Center Campus Facilities Project Rev. 0
Bid Set - February 25, 2021
General Conditions 00 7200 - 10 Civic Center Campus Facilities Project OAK #4895-3651-8405 v3
construction services shall be performed in accordance with generally accepted professional standards of good and sound construction practices and all requirements of Contract Documents.

Contractor warrants that Work including, without limitation, each item of materials and equipment incorporated therein, shall be new, of suitable grade of its respective kind for its intended use, and free from defects in design, engineering, materials, construction and workmanship.

Contractor warrants that Work shall conform in all respects with all applicable requirements of federal, state and local laws, applicable construction codes and standards, licenses, and permits, Drawings and Specifications and all descriptions set forth therein, and all other requirements of Contract Documents. Contractor shall not be responsible, however, for the negligence of others in the specification of specific equipment, materials, design parameters and means or methods of construction where that is specifically shown and expressly required by Contract Documents.

Extended Warranties: Any warranty exceeding one year provided by the supplier or manufacturer of any equipment or materials used in the Project shall be extended for such term. Contractor expressly agrees to act as co-guarantor of such equipment and materials and shall supply Owner with all warranty and guarantee documents relative to equipment and materials incorporated in the Project and guaranteed by their suppliers or manufacturers.

Environmental and Toxics Warranty: The covenants, warranties and representations contained in this Paragraph are effective continuously during Contractor’s Work on the Project and following cessation of labor for any reason including, without limitation, Project completion. Contractor covenants, warrants and represents to Owner that:

To Contractor’s knowledge after due inquiry, no lead or Asbestos-containing materials were installed or discovered in the Project at any time during Contractor’s construction thereof. If any lead or Asbestos-containing materials were discovered, Contractor made immediate written disclosure to Owner.

To Contractor’s knowledge after due inquiry, no electrical transformers, light fixtures with ballasts or other equipment containing PCBs are or were located on the Project at any time during Contractor’s construction thereof.

To Contractor’s knowledge after due inquiry, no storage tanks for gasoline or any other toxic substance are or were located on the Project at any time during Contractor’s construction thereof. If any such materials were discovered, Contractor made immediate written disclosure to Owner.

Contractor’s operations concerning the Project are and were not in violation of any applicable environmental federal, state, or local statute, law or regulation dealing with hazardous materials substances or toxic substances and no notice from any governmental body has been served upon Contractor claiming any violation of any such law, ordinance, code or regulation, or requiring or calling attention to the need for any Work, repairs, construction, alteration, or installation on or in connection with the Project in order to comply with any such laws, ordinances, codes, or regulations, with which Contractor has not complied. If there are any such notices with which Contractor has complied, Contractor shall provide Owner with copies thereof.

Inspection of Work
Work and materials, and manufacture and preparation of materials, from beginning of construction until Final Completion and acceptance of Work, shall be subject to inspection and rejection by Owner, its agents, representatives or independent contractors retained by Owner to perform inspection services, or governmental agencies with jurisdictional interests. Contractor shall provide them proper and safe conditions for such access and advise them of Contractor’s Site safety procedures and program so that they may comply therewith as applicable. Upon request or where specified, Owner shall be afforded access for inspection at the source of supply, manufacture or assembly of any item of material or equipment, with reasonable accommodations supplied for making such inspections.

Contractor shall furnish, in such quantities and sizes as may be required for proper examination and tests, Samples or test specimens of all materials to be used or offered for use in connection with Work. Contractor shall prepare Samples or test specimens at its expense and furnish them to Owner. Contractor shall submit all Samples in ample time to enable Owner to make any

9.b
Packet Pg. 286 Attachment: Attachment A - Construction Agreement with W.E. Lyons Construction Co. (4963 : Award Civic Center Campus Facilities Project Rev. 0
Bid Set - February 25, 2021
General Conditions 00 7200 - 11 Civic Center Campus Facilities Project OAK #4895-3651-8405 v3
necessary tests, examinations, or analyses before the time it is desired to incorporate the material into the Work.

Contractor shall give Owner timely notice of readiness of Work for all required inspections, tests or approvals, and shall cooperate with inspection and testing personnel to facilitate required inspections or tests.

Upon advance notice as set forth above, Owner will endeavor to schedule required inspections, but if resources are not available, Contractor may need to reschedule the Work at no additional cost to the Owner.

If applicable laws or regulations of any public body having jurisdiction require any Work (or part thereof) specifically to be inspected, tested or approved by an employee or other representative of such public body, Contractor shall assume full responsibility for arranging and obtaining such inspections, tests or approvals, and furnish Owner with the required certificates of inspection, or approval. Owner will pay the cost of initial testing and Contractor shall pay all costs in connection with any follow-up or additional testing. Contractor shall also be responsible for arranging and obtaining and shall pay all costs in connection with any inspections, tests or approvals required for the acceptance of materials or equipment to be incorporated in the Work, or of materials, mix designs, or equipment submitted for approval prior to Contractor’s purchase thereof for incorporation in the Work.

If Contractor covers any Work, or the work of others, prior to any required inspection, test or approval without written approval of Owner, Contractor shall uncover the Work at Owner’s request. Contractor shall bear the expense of uncovering Work and replacing Work. In any case where Contractor covers Work contrary to Owner’s request, Contractor shall uncover Work for Owner’s observation or inspection at Owner’s request. Contractor shall bear the cost of uncovering Work.

Whenever required by Owner, Contractor shall furnish tools, labor and materials necessary to make examination of Work that may be completed or in progress, even to extent of uncovering or taking down portions of finished Work. Should Work be found unsatisfactory, cost of making examination and of reconstruction shall be borne by Contractor. If Work is found to be satisfactory, Owner, in manner herein prescribed for paying for alterations, Modifications, and extra Work, except as otherwise herein specified, will pay for examination.

Inspection of the Work by or on behalf of Owner, or Owner’s failure to do so, shall not under any circumstances be deemed a waiver or approval of any non-conforming aspect of the Work.

Contractor shall have an absolute duty, in the absence of a written Change Order signed by Owner, to perform Work in conformance with the Contract Documents and to immediately correct Defective Work immediately upon Contractor’s knowledge.

Any inspection, evaluation, or test performed by or on behalf of Owner relating to the Work is solely for the benefit of Owner, and shall not be relied upon by Contractor. Contractor shall not be relieved of the obligation to perform Work in accordance with the Contract Documents, nor relieved of any guaranty, warranty, or other obligation, as a result of any inspections, evaluations, or tests performed by Owner, whether or not such inspections, evaluations, or tests are permitted or required under the Contract Documents. Contractor shall be solely responsible for testing and inspecting Work already performed to determine whether such Work is in proper condition to receive later Work.

Correction of Defective Work
Owner may direct Contractor to correct any Defective Work or remove it from the Site and replace it with Work that is not Defective and satisfactorily correct or remove and replace any damage to other Work or the work of others resulting from the correction or removal. Also, if Contractor fails to supply sufficient skilled workers, suitable materials or equipment, or to furnish or perform the Work in such a way that the completed Work will conform to Contract Documents, Owner may direct Contractor to perform the Work in accordance with the Contract Documents, correct or replace any such Defective Work, or stop any portion of Work.

Owner may correct and remedy the Defective Work or perform any other work, corrective or otherwise, if, after five Days’ written notice to Contractor, Contractor fails to correct Defective Work or to remove and replace rejected Work; or provide a plan for correction of Defective Work acceptable to Owner; or perform Work in accordance with Contract Documents. In connection

9.b
Packet Pg. 287 Attachment: Attachment A - Construction Agreement with W.E. Lyons Construction Co. (4963 : Award Civic Center Campus Facilities Project Rev. 0
Bid Set - February 25, 2021
General Conditions 00 7200 - 12 Civic Center Campus Facilities Project OAK #4895-3651-8405 v3
with such corrective and remedial action, Owner may exclude Contractor from all or part of the Site; take possession of all or part of Work and suspend Contractor’s Work related thereto; take possession of all or part of Contractor’s tools, appliances, construction equipment and machinery at the Site; and incorporate in Work any materials and equipment stored at the Site or for which Owner has paid Contractor but which are stored elsewhere. Contractor shall allow Owner, its representatives, agents, employees, and other contractors and consultants’ access to the Site to enable Owner to exercise the rights and remedies under this Paragraph.

Pacifica City CouncilApril 25, 2022

Pacifica City Council
April 25, 2022