CITY OF PACIFICA
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA
Zoom Link: https://us06web.zoom.us/j/84059733437
Dial-in: 1-669-900-6833 | WebinarID: 840 5973 3437
Alt 1: https://www.cityofpacifica.org/LiveStream
Alt 2: Cable Channel 26
Mayor Mary Bier
Mayor Pro Tem Tygarjas Bigstyck
Councilmember Mike O'Neill
Councilmember Sue Vaterlaus
Councilmember Sue Beckmeyer
City Council Regular Meeting 1 June 13, 2022
SPECIAL and REGULAR MEETING
June 13, 2022 (MONDAY)
www.cityofpacifica.org
CORONAVIRUS DISEASE (COVID-19) NOTICE
THIS MEETING WILL BE CONDUCTED PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54953 (AS AMENDED BY AB 361) WHICH AUTHORIZES
TELECONFERENCED MEETINGS UNDER THE BROWN ACT DURING CERTAIN PROCLAIMED STATES OF EMERGENCY. THE GOVERNOR OF CALIFORNIA PROCLAIMED A STATE OF EMERGENCY RELATED TO COVID-19 ON MARCH 4, 2020.
THIS TELECONFERENCED MEETING IS NECESSARY SO THAT THE CITY CAN CONDUCT
ESSENTIAL BUSINESS AND IS PERMITTED UNDER GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54953 IN ORDER TO PROTECT PUBLIC HEALTH AND SAFETY OF ATTENDEES.
Consistent with Government Code Section 54953, this City Council Meeting will be held via teleconference only and will not be physically open to the public. City Councilmembers and staff will teleconference into the meeting by audio and/or video. The meeting will be conducted via Zoom.
Below is information on how the public may observe and participate in the meeting.
To Observe the Meeting:
• To access the meeting by computer / smartphone, go to:
https://us06web.zoom.us/j/84059733437
• To dial-in via phone:
Dial: 1-669-900-6833 And enter Webinar ID: 840 5973 3437 To Participate in the Meeting by Providing Public Comment:
• During the Meeting: Live verbal public comments may be made by members of the public joining the meeting via Zoom. Zoom access information is provided above. Use the “raise hand” feature (for those joining by phone, press *9 to “raise hand”) during the public comment period for the agenda item you wish to address. The City Clerk will call on people to speak by name provided or last 4 digits of phone number for dial-in attendees.
Please clearly state your full name for the record at the start of your public comment. • 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 City Council Regular Meeting 2 June 13, 2022
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
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.
Alternative Ways to Watch the Meeting:
The primary method for observing and participating in the meeting is via the zoom link or phone number listed above, however, there are alternative ways to watch 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 Note: The methods of observing the meeting or providing public comments may be altered or the meeting may be cancelled, if needed. You may check on the status of the meeting by visiting the City’s website at www.cityofpacifica.org for any updates or changes, should they occur.
5:00 PM STUDY SESSION
a. Annual Reports to City Council from the Beautification Advisory Committee, Economic Development Committee, Emergency Preparedness & Safety Commission, Open Space and Parkland Advisory Committee, Parks, Beaches & Recreation Commission, and Planning Commission
PROPOSED ACTION: This is an informational item. It is requested that the City Council provide feedback and receive and file the annual report of each commission and committee.
7:00 PM OPEN SESSION
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 Beckmeyer
City Council Regular Meeting 3 June 13, 2022
SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS
A. Proclamation: Pride Month - June 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.
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 4/16/22 through 4/30/22.
PROPOSED ACTION: Move to approve attached lists of disbursements for 4/16/22 through 4/30/22
2. Approval of Minutes
PROPOSED ACTION: Move to approve the minutes of the City Council Meeting held on May 23, 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. Consideration of a Resolution Making Findings as Required by AB 361 to Continue to Permit the City Council and City Commissions and Committees to Conduct Teleconferenced Meetings Due to Health and Safety Concerns Relating to COVID-19 PROPOSED ACTION: Move to adopt a Resolution making findings pursuant to AB 361 to authorize the City Council and City Commissions and Committees to conduct teleconferenced meetings due to health and safety concerns relating to COVID-19.
7. Task Order #2 between the City of Pacifica and The Davey Tree Expert Company for Tree Maintenance Services
PROPOSED ACTION: Approve Task Order #2 between the City of Pacifica and The Davey Tree Expert Company for Tree Maintenance Services in the Public Right-of-Way City Council Regular Meeting 4 June 13, 2022
and on City Owned Properties and Facilities to increase the Budget Authority by $50,000 for Fiscal Year 2021-22; and Authorize City Manager to execute the Task Order.
8. Amendment No. 1 to the Construction Services Agreement dated February 10, 2022 to Chesterwerks
PROPOSED ACTION: Approve Amendment No. 1 to the Construction Services Agreement dated February 10, 2022 to Chesterwerks in the amount of $120,960 for the Civic Center Campus Facilities Project for Project Construction Services.
9. Resolution Authorizing and Designating the City Manager & City Engineer to Accept Interests in Real Property on Behalf of the City
PROPOSED ACTION: Adopt Resolution Authorizing and Designating the City Manager & City Engineer to Accept Interests in Real Property on Behalf of the City
10. Introduction of “An Ordinance Amending Article 1 Within Chapter 1, “City Council” Of Title 2 Of the Pacifica Municipal Code Relating To Rules And Procedures For City Council Meetings“ (Status: CEQA Exempt)
PROPOSED ACTION: Move to Introduce by Title Only and Waive further reading of “An Ordinance Amending Article 1 Within Chapter 1, “City Council” Of Title 2 Of the Pacifica Municipal Code Relating To Rules And Procedures For City Council Meetings” and finding the ordinance exempt under the California Environmental Quality Act.
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.
City Council Regular Meeting 5 June 13, 2022
PUBLIC HEARINGS
11. Public Hearing on Proposed Ordinances adding Sections 7-2.214 (Utility Pavement Cut Recovery Fee) of Title 7 and Chapter 21 (Construction Vehicle Impact Fee) of Title 8 of the Pacifica Municipal Code and adoption of Resolution setting rates for the Utility Pavement Cut Recovery Fee and Construction Vehicle Impact Fee.
PROPOSED ACTION:
1. Move to Waive the First Reading of and Introduce by Title an Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Pacifica Establishing a Utility Pavement Cut Recovery Fee and finding the Ordinance exempt under the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”).
2. Move to Waive the First Reading of and Introduce by Title an Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Pacifica Establishing a Construction Vehicle Impact Fee and finding the Ordinance exempt under the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”).
3. Adopt resolution entitled A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Pacifica Setting Rates for the Utility Pavement Cut Recovery Fee and the Construction Vehicle Impact Fee and Adding both Fees to the City’s Master Fee Schedule.
12. Conduct Public Hearing to consider Adopting a Resolution Confirming the Annual Report from the Pacifica Hotel Business Improvement District, Approving the Program Expenditures, and Assessing the Levy for the Fiscal Year 2022-23 at the same rates as in the Fiscal Year 2021-22.
PROPOSED ACTION: Review and discuss the available options provided in this report for Council's consideration and select an option for proceeding.
CONSIDERATION
13. Consideration of (1) a Resolution Calling and Giving Notice for Holding a General Municipal Election on Tuesday, November 8, 2022 for By-District Elections to Elect One Member of the City Council from Districts 2, 3 and 5 Each, for a Full Four-Year Term; Requesting San Mateo County to Consolidate the City's General Municipal Election with the November 8, 2022 Statewide General Election and to Provide Election Services; Adopting Regulations Pertaining to the Candidates’ Statement of Qualifications; and authorize the City Manager to Execute the Service Agreement for Election Services; and (2) adopt a Resolution of the City Council of the City of Pacifica Calling and Giving Notice for Holding a General Municipal Election on Tuesday, November 8, 2022, for Submission to the Qualified Voters of the City an Advisory Measure Regarding the Sale and Use of State-Approved “Safe and Sane” Fireworks in the City and Requesting San Mateo County to Consolidate the City’s General Municipal Election with the November 8, 2022 Statewide General Election and to Provide Election Services.
PROPOSED ACTION:
(1) Move to adopt a Resolution of the City Council of the City of Pacifica Calling and Giving Notice for Holding a General Municipal Election on Tuesday, November 8, 2022 for By-District Elections to Elect One Member of the City Council from Districts 2, 3 and 5 Each, for a Full Four-Year Term; Requesting San Mateo County to Consolidate the City's General Municipal Election with the November 8, 2022 Statewide General Election and to Provide Election Services"; Adopting Regulations Pertaining to the Candidates’ Statement of Qualifications and authorize the City Manager to Execute the Service Agreement for Election Services; and
(2) Move to adopt a Resolution of the City Council of the City of Pacifica Calling and Giving Notice for Holding a General Municipal Election on Tuesday, November 8, 2022, City Council Regular Meeting 6 June 13, 2022
for Submission to the Qualified Voters of the City an Advisory Measure Regarding the Sale and Use of State-Approved “Safe and Sane” Fireworks in the City and Requesting San Mateo County to Consolidate the City’s General Municipal Election with the November 8, 2022 Statewide General Election and to Provide Election Services.
14. Update on Implementation of the Short-term Rental Program PROPOSED ACTION: Receive update on Short-term Rental Program.
15. FY 2022-2023 Program Options and Proposed Budget
PROPOSED ACTION: Hold public hearing and review and discuss the Fiscal Year 2022-23 Proposed General Fund and Other Funds Budget and provide additional policy direction on the desired budget options and strategies for the upcoming FY 2022-23 Budget.
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
• Assembly Member Kevin Mullin, 1528 South El Camino Real, Suite 302 San Mateo, CA 94402 (650) 349-2200
City Council Regular Meeting 7 June 13, 2022
• 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
6/13/2022
1 SUBJECT:
Annual Reports to City Council from the Beautification Advisory Committee, Economic Development Committee, Emergency Preparedness & Safety Commission, Open Space and Parkland Advisory Committee, Parks, Beaches & Recreation Commission, and Planning Commission
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
This is an informational item. It is requested that the City Council provide feedback and receive and file the annual report of each commission and committee.
STAFF CONTACT:
Kevin Woodhouse, City Manager
650-738-7409
[email protected]
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION:
The City Council adopted Resolution No. 12-2018 at their April 9, 2018 regular meeting changing the annual reporting requirements of city commissions and committees. The resolution directs commissions and committees to present their annual reports at a designated study session rather than at different times of the year.
Written reports and power point presentations are attached. In accordance with the resolution the City Council will receive the annual reports from each of the commissions and committees in the following order:
1) Planning Commission
2) Parks, Beaches & Recreation Commission
3) Emergency Preparedness & Safety Commission
4) Beautification Advisory Committee
5) Economic Development Committee
6) Open Space & Parkland Advisory Committee
FISCAL IMPACT:
None associated with this item.
ORIGINATED BY:
City Manager's Office
ATTACHMENT LIST:
Packet Pg. 8
Pacifica City Council 2
June 13, 2022
A. Planning Commission Annual Report (PDF)
B. Planning Commission Annual Report Presentation (PDF) C. Parks Beaches & Recreation Commission Annual Report (PDF) D. Parks, Beaches & Recreation Commission Annual Report Presentation(PDF) E. Emergency Preparedness and Safety Commission Annual Report (PDF) F. Emergency Preparedness and Safety Commission Annual Report Presentation (PDF) G. Beautification Advisory Committee Annual Report Presentation (PDF) H. Economic Development Committee Annual Report (PDF)
I. Open Space & Parkland Advisory Committee Annual Report Presentation (PDF) Packet Pg. 9
CITY OF PACIFICA
PLANNING COMMISSION
2021 ANNUAL REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL
The Planning Commission is submitting the following summary of work for 2021.
I. Planning Commission Membership
Commission Members Term Expires
John Nibbelin, Chair* -
Lauren Berman, Vice Chair 2023
George Domurat 2023
Alex Ferguson 2026
James Godwin 2026
Samantha Hauser 2024
David Leal 2024
Greg Wright 2025
* Commissioner Nibbelin ended service on the Planning Commission in March 2022.
II. Planning Commission Activity Report
The Planning Commission held 16 regular meetings in 2021. It also held one joint study session with the Parks, Beaches & Recreation Commission and Beautification Advisory Committee on updates to the City’s Heritage Tree Preservation Ordinance. The Planning Commission heard 12 development proposals and considered recommendations to City Council related to 2 ordinances (excluding study sessions and permit extensions). For comparison, the Planning Commission heard 13 applications in 2017, 24 applications in 2018, 25 applications in 2019, and 15 applications in 2020.
The Planning Division received 25 new discretionary permit applications in 2021. For comparison, the Planning Division received 37 new discretionary permit applications in 2017, 49 in 2018, 27 in 2019, and 16 in 2020. These figures include all types of entitlement applications including new uses in existing structures or modifications to existing structures.
III. Summary of Significant Items Heard by the Commission Recommended amendments to the Zoning Regulations related to accessory dwelling units (ADUs), reasonable accommodations for persons with disabilities, and special use permit standards.
Comprehensive site and building renovations to the Civic Center campus in West Sharp Park. Beach Boulevard plaza art structures
a
Packet Pg. 10
Attachment: A. Planning Commission Annual Report (5012 : Annual Reports to City Council from City Commissions and Committees) Extended operations for the Pacifica Coastside Farmers’ Market. Master use list (i.e., development plan) for Fairmont Shopping Center.
IV. Planning Commission Hearing Summary:
Year
New or
Continued Public
Hearings Held
Speakers on
Topics Not on
Agenda
New Residential
Dwelling Units
Approved
New Commercial
Floor Area
Approved (Sq. Ft.)
2019 36 0 17 1,305
2020 22 9 24 4,684
2021 19 32 1 0
V. Building Permit Activity:
Year Permits Issued Inspections
Residential
Valuation
Commercial
Valuation
2017 1,669 4,953 $15,547,890 $14,381,560
2018 1,530 4,731 $19,013,200 $3,408,096
2019 1,587 5,147 $19,793,920 $5,965,473
2020 1,416 3,419 $16,882,230 $1,308,107
2021 1,591 3,908 $40,720,764 $1,807,197
VI. Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) Building Permit Activity:
Year Permits Issued
2020 24
2021 40
VII. Major Policy Initiatives on City Council Priority Work Plan Directly Involving Planning Commission Continue efforts to evaluate the City Tree Program and update the Heritage Tree Ordinance Continue efforts to address Civic Center facility health and safety issues Prepare a Quarry Site Specific Plan
Complete a Sharp Park Specific Plan
Complete a comprehensive General Plan update
Complete an update to the Wireless Communication Facilities Ordinance a
Packet Pg. 11
Attachment: A. Planning Commission Annual Report (5012 : Annual Reports to City Council from City Commissions and Committees) Prepare an update to the Housing Element of the General Plan VIII. Public Transparency and Participation Initiatives Served as a public comment outlet for community on topics of concern (256% increase in communications on non-agenda items from prior year).
Expanded online posting of plans and other information for active development permit applications.
Joint study session on heritage tree preservation ordinance update with Parks, Beaches, and Recreation Commission and Beautification Advisory Committee. Conducted online and teleconference meeting format to enable public hearings and community engagement to continue during the COVID-19 pandemic.
a
Packet Pg. 12
Attachment: A. Planning Commission Annual Report (5012 : Annual Reports to City Council from City Commissions and Committees) Planning
Commission
Annual Report to
the City Council
June 13, 2022
b
Packet Pg. 13
Attachment: B. Planning Commission Annual Report Presentation (5012 : Annual Reports TOPICS
Purpose of the Planning Commission
Commission Membership
Work Summary
Key Metrics
Major Policy Initiatives
Public Transparency & Participation Initiatives
b
Packet Pg. 14
Attachment: B. Planning Commission Annual Report Presentation (5012 : Annual Reports Purpose of the
Planning
Commission
Established in PMC Title 2, Chapter 2, Article 2
To recommend and advise the Council on matters related to the General Plan, Local Coastal Program, Zoning, and other
development plans for future physical development and
conservation of the City, based upon geographic, social, economic, and environmental characteristics of the community. Also advises the Council on private development plans for the City in accordance with State Planning Law and the City’s established development review standards and processes.
b
Packet Pg. 15
Attachment: B. Planning Commission Annual Report Presentation (5012 : Annual Reports Commission
Membership
Commission Members* Term Expires
John Nibbelin* -
Lauren Berman, Chair 2023
George Domurat 2023
Alex Ferguson 2026
James Godwin 2026
Samantha Hauser, Vice Chair 2024
David Leal 2024
Greg Wright 2025
* Commissioner Nibbelin ended service on the Planning Commission in March 2022. b
Packet Pg. 16
Attachment: B. Planning Commission Annual Report Presentation (5012 : Annual Reports Work
Summary
16 regular meetings 1 joint study session Planning, PB&R, BAC 12 development proposals 2 ordinances ADUs & Reasonable accommodations
Special use permit
standards
2021
b
Packet Pg. 17
Attachment: B. Planning Commission Annual Report Presentation (5012 : Annual Reports Key Metrics
New or
Continued
Public
Hearings
Held
Speakers
on Topics
Not on
Agenda
New
Residential
Dwelling
Units
Approved
New
Commercial
Floor Area
Approved
(Sq. Ft.)
19 3210
b
Packet Pg. 18
Attachment: B. Planning Commission Annual Report Presentation (5012 : Annual Reports Key Metrics
Year Permits
Issued
Inspections
Residential
Valuation
Commercial
Valuation
2017 1,669 4,953 $15,547,890 $14,381,560
2018 1,530 4,731 $19,013,200 $3,408,096
2019 1,587 5,147 $19,793,920 $5,965,473
2020 1,416 3,419 $16,882,230 $1,308,107
2021 1,591 3,908 $40,720,764 $1,807,197
ADUs Permits Issued
2020 24
2021 40
b
Packet Pg. 19
Attachment: B. Planning Commission Annual Report Presentation (5012 : Annual Reports Major Policy
Initiatives
Heritage Tree Ordinance Update Civic Center project Quarry Specific Plan General Plan Update Sharp Park Specific Plan Wireless Communications Facility Ordinance Update Housing Element Update 2021
Council Priority
b
Packet Pg. 20
Attachment: B. Planning Commission Annual Report Presentation (5012 : Annual Reports Public
Transparency
& Participation
Initiatives
Outlet for public comment on community
topics of concern 256% increase from prior year
Expanded online posting of plans and
other project info
Joint study session on Heritage Tree
Ordinance update
Online and teleconference meetings
during COVID pandemic
2021
b
Packet Pg. 21
Attachment: B. Planning Commission Annual Report Presentation (5012 : Annual Reports Questions and Comments
b
Packet Pg. 22
Attachment: B. Planning Commission Annual Report Presentation (5012 : Annual Reports DRAFT
1 CITY OF PACIFICA
PARKS, BEACHES AND RECREATION COMMISSION
CITY COUNCIL COMMITTEES/COMMISSOINS PRESENTATION June 13, 2022 The Parks, Beaches and Recreation (PB&R) Commission is submitting the following as a summary of the Commission work for 2021-2022 period.
Commission Members Term Expires
Cindy Abbott, Chair 2022
Nick Lusson, Chair pro Tem 2023
Kevin Kellogg 2022
James Heywood 2024
Gail Benton Shoemaker 2023
Carl Nicolari 2025
Open 2023
Cindy Abbott, Executive Director, Sanchez Art Center, is an ocean and beach enthusiast, who sees the work of the Commission as addressing issues that are the essence of Pacifica - a small city with a population that values community engagement for all ages and the outdoor environment. She has been a resident of Pacifica since 1996.
Nick Lusson has lived in the Linda Mar neighborhood of Pacifica since moving here with his wife & son in 2018. They've quickly fallen in love with the natural beauty and outdoor features as well as the small-town community lifestyle. After a long history of working at multiple levels of soccer, he is now the Athletic Director at The Olympic Club in San Francisco. He joined the commission out of belief in community service and desire to give back to his family's new home.
Kevin Kellogg moved to Pacifica in 2010 with his wife Alicia to pursue a career as a forensic scientist with Santa Clara County. They have two children, ages seven and four. Kevin wanted to join the Parks, Beaches and Recreation Commission because of his enthusiasm for the outdoors and community.
Gail Benton Shoemaker has lived in Pacifica for 32 years. She has been a Producer for Public Television, Executive Director of Pacifica School Volunteers, and a Program Officer for AmeriCorps overseeing grants to nonprofits working with children and Seniors. Currently, she serves on the PB&R Commission, the board of a San Francisco nonprofit, and with the community organization Tree City Pacifica which organizes Arbor Day. Gail is an avid walker and greatly appreciates Pacifica’s parks and beaches.
c
Packet Pg. 23
Attachment: C. Parks Beaches & Recreation Commission Annual Report (5012 : Annual Reports to City Council from City Commissions and DRAFT
2 James Heywood works as a Film Technician and Stagehand with IATSE locals 16/San Francisco and 80/Hollywood. He has 3 school age children and is a lifelong skateboarder, surfer, and swimmer.
Carl Nicolari is a San Francisco native who grew up exploring the coast side. He's a member of Rockaway Beach Conservation Stewards and one of the leaders of Bay Area Hiking and Camping, which organizes many group hikes in the area. He also served on the Bicycle and Pedestrian Safety Committee in San Bruno. Carl works as a Senior Program Manager at GoPro and enjoys photography and mountaineering.
Highlights from the past year
Work Plan
The Commission spent two meetings over the past year creating and confirming a work plan for the coming year. Some of these items are a continuation of Commission work from this year, as highlighted below. The 2022 Work Plan will include:
• Surf Camp/School Policy
• Poet Laureate Nominations and Appointment
• Bike Park
• Heritage Tree Processes and Appeals
• Beach Safety
• Playground Improvement Program
• Liaison Assignments
• Additional items for future discussion included: protection of marine life and sensitive environments, all abilities playground in Pacifica, park visit/field trip by commissioner and skatepark improvements.
Bike Park
In October and November of 2021, PB&R Commission gave feedback to staff and the Pacifica Bike Park Committee (PBPC), a 501(c)3 nonprofit for the development of a survey using the City-wide FlashVote system for Pacifica residents. At the February 23, 2022, PB&R Commission meeting, the PBPC shared the results of the survey and presented an overview of their progress. Their presentation included information on considered locations as well as their discussions with another non-profit organization with experience in developing, designing, maintaining, and fundraising to build a bike park.
The Commission recommended to approve the concept of a bike park at the lower Frontierland Park site. City Council agreed and made the same recommending at their March 28, 2022 meeting. The PBPC will now be focusing efforts, among other things, on fundraising, environmental reports, maintenance, and design.
Heritage Tree Appeals
While the PB&R Commission heard only one tree appeal over the last year, they also participated in a Heritage Tree Ordinance update joint study session with the Planning c
Packet Pg. 24
Attachment: C. Parks Beaches & Recreation Commission Annual Report (5012 : Annual Reports to City Council from City Commissions and DRAFT
3 Commission and the Beautification Committee. Commission/committee members were presented with an informational report regarding the Heritage Tree Ordinance update and were able to provide input/comments to City staff and Davey Resource Group (DRG) Surf Camp/School Policy Recommendations
On June 22, 2020, following public comment, City Council referred to the PBR Commission an opportunity to review the historic permitting processes for surf camps/schools through an equity lens. The Commission held several meetings and study sessions from summer to fall of 2020 and eventually approved the creation of a task force to consider and make recommendations regarding the policy to increase access to nonprofit organizations serving communities that have had limited access to surfing and the healing benefit of the ocean. After meeting monthly from February to October of 2021, the Task Force presented their recommendations to formalize a “Community Access Permit Program” (CAPP) for nonprofit organizations and an RFP process for commercial camps to the Commission on October 27, 2021. The Commission approved the recommendations, which were adopted by the City Council on January 10, 2022.
Staff is currenting involved in the application process with the Coastal Commission for a Coastal Development Permit (CDP) for the program. The Commission will provide ongoing review of the program as well as acting as the reviewing body for commercial applicants.
Poet Laureate
In 2013 Council directed the PB&R Commission to create a process for the selection of the City’s Poet Laureate. Since then, we have had two poets serving in this position. Commissioner Benton Shoemaker and Chair Abbott are serving on the Poet Laureate ad hoc committee with Supervisor Beth Phipps acting as staff liaison. It is expected that approval of the next Poet Laureate will come to the Commission in July/August of this year.
Special Presentations
As part of department quarterly (4x/year) updates, staff members attend Commission meetings to present highlights for each division and their programs. Many of the staff presentations included information on how department programs were dealing with the many and ever changing/evolving guidelines, protocols, and procedures for COVID-19. In addition to these staff presentations, Paul Totah gave a comprehensive overview of Tree City Pacifica’s work.
Meeting Summaries – include June 2021 – May 2022
6/23/21
Commissioners heard a Heritage Tree Appeal for 223 Roberts Road. Public Works Superintendent Ray Kurttila presented the staff report, and commission heard testimony from the appellant as well as the applicant. The Commission voted 5-0 to deny the appeal and approve the removal of the tree due to infection with pitch canker disease, and to the replacement of two 15-gallon trees on the property.
c
Packet Pg. 25
Attachment: C. Parks Beaches & Recreation Commission Annual Report (5012 : Annual Reports to City Council from City Commissions and DRAFT
4 7/28/22
Recreation Coordinator in charge of Aquatics, Anthony Schriver, provided a presentation covering spring and summer programs at Jean E. Brink Pool, while operating during a pandemic.
Department quarterly reports were also submitted and highlighted. 8/25/21
Paul Total attended the meeting and provided a detailed overview of Tree City Pacifica presentation, which included information about the formation, requirements, help with the ordinance update, as well as outreach and collaborative efforts. 9/22/21
Acting Senior Services Supervisor Beth Phipps gave a detailed update and overview of all the Senior Services program activities. This included a report on Grab & Go drive-through meals, Meals on Wheels, COVID activities, CaR Program, outdoor activities, and special events. In addition, she highlighted the grand re-opening of the Senior Center earlier in the month.
Coordinator Schriver gave an update on the Bike Park Survey process. Commissioners then discussed the survey and gave staff direction on suggested edits.
Staff gave a report regarding a proposal to place telescopes at Linda Mar Beach from View Telescopes owner Gary Wahrhaftig, who was present to answer questions. Commissioners asked staff to move forward with pursuing the possibility of putting them at Pacifica State Beach, Linda Mar as well as at Rockaway Beach and the pier.
9/28/21
A Heritage Tree Ordinance Update joint study session was held between the Planning Commission, PB&R Commission, and the Beautification Committee. The purpose of the meeting was for committee and commission members to receive an informational report regarding the Heritage Tree Ordinance update and to provide input/comments to City staff.
Planning Commission Chairman John Nibbelin acted as presiding chair of the joint study session. The City’s consultant, Davey Resources Group, Inc. (DRG) gave a PowerPoint presentation of preliminary comments received from stakeholder interviews regarding the Heritage Tree Ordinance. Following the presentation, Chair Nibbelin, with assistance from PB&R Commission Chair Abbott and BAC Chair Moses, led the joint session to receive questions/comments from commission/committee members. This was followed by public comment and final comments from commission/committee members. 10/27/21
The Pacifica Surf Camp/School Policy Advisory Task Force presented their recommendations to expand access for nonprofit organizations through the formation of a “Community Access Permit Program” and new RFP process for commercial permittees to the Commission. The Task Force had been meeting monthly from February through October after the approved formation by the Commission in December of 2020. Task Force members Johnny Irwin and Cliff Hodges along with c
Packet Pg. 26
Attachment: C. Parks Beaches & Recreation Commission Annual Report (5012 : Annual Reports to City Council from City Commissions and DRAFT
5 Director Perez answered questions following the presentation. The Commission voted 6-0 to approve the recommendations, which were then approved by the City Council in January 2022.
The Commission also had a discussion regarding the return to in-person meetings. This information was shared with City Council. Quarterly reports were submitted and highlighted. 11/17/21
The Commission Work Plan for 2021-2022 was discussed. Items included on this list were Surf Camp/School Policy, Liaison Assignments, Poet Laureate, Bike Park, Heritage Tree Process and Appeals, the Playground Improvement Program and Beach Safety. Commission asked staff to come back with an update of the plan reflecting their comments and suggestions. New Commissioner Carl Nicolari was introduced and seated.
1/26/22
Commissioners continued their discussion of the 2020-2021 Work Plan and approved the items, which included Surf Camp/School Policy, Liaison Assignments, Poet Laureate, Bike Park, Heritage Tree Process and Appeals, Playground Improvement Program, Beach Safety and an additional item for “future discussions” to include discussion on the department plans/roadmap for the future (5, 10, 20 years), protection of marine life and sensitive environments, all abilities playground in Pacifica, park filed trip by commissioners and Skatepark improvements.
Child Care Site Coordinator Eva Tong gave an overview of the Child Care program including information and changes made for adaptation to COVID-19 protocols. She also highlighted information on recent special events and field trips as well. 2/23/22
Following a staff report and presentation, the Commission voted to recommend staff move forward and work with the Sea Valor Organization and Arunay Foundation to install Life Ring Buoy Stations at City of Pacifica Beaches.
Pacifica Bike Park Committee member Amir Mendel presented an overview of their progress, which included: site selection, initial consultation with the Mountain Bikers of Santa Cruz regarding assessment, design, construction and maintenance and the results of the Bike Park FlashVote survey. The Commission voted to recommend the concept of the Bike Park at lower Frontierland Park.
3/23/22
Commission held a study session to discuss a Parks Overview, which was the first in-person meeting since February of 2020. Director Perez gave a presentation that provided information about all of Pacifica’s parks that included the location, amenities, recent work completed, and any future improvements scheduled. Deputy Director of Public Works Sam Bautista and Parks Division staff Michael Pham attended and provided additional information. 4/27/22
New Recreation Coordinator Sophia Mahoney-Rohrl introduced herself and gave an update on here first two months working for PB&R, which included highlights on the J-Teen After School c
Packet Pg. 27
Attachment: C. Parks Beaches & Recreation Commission Annual Report (5012 : Annual Reports to City Council from City Commissions and DRAFT
6 program at Vallemar, the Reverse Egg Hunt, the YAC Attack conference as well as upcoming summer programming.
The Commission Annual Report to Council was discussed. Department quarterly reports were also submitted and highlighted.
5/25/22
NCE, the landscape architect consultants gave a presentation on the progress of the conceptual plans for the Priority Parks Project. Commissioners also discussed and gave final input on the Annual Report to Council, to be presented June 13, 2022 c
Packet Pg. 28
Attachment: C. Parks Beaches & Recreation Commission Annual Report (5012 : Annual Reports to City Council from City Commissions and Annual Report to City Council
June 13, 2022
d
Packet Pg. 29
Attachment: D. Parks, Beaches & Recreation Commission Annual Report Presentation PB&R Commission Members
Name Term
Cindy Abbott, Chair 2026
Nick Lusson, Chair pro Tem 2023
Kevin Kellogg 2022
James Heywood 2024
Gail Benton Shoemaker 2023
Carl Nicolari 2025
Open/Vacant Position 2023
d
Packet Pg. 30
Attachment: D. Parks, Beaches & Recreation Commission Annual Report Presentation Purpose
To recommend and advise the Council in the
acquisition, development and maintenance of parks,
beaches and other recreational areas, and to encourage
the planning and implementation of a comprehensive
recreation and human service program which will
serve the needs of all age groups in the City.
d
Packet Pg. 31
Attachment: D. Parks, Beaches & Recreation Commission Annual Report Presentation Duties
To assist in the preparation and adoption of, and
review annually and revise as may be necessary, a
long-range plan for parks, beaches, and recreation.
To act in an advisory capacity to the Council, the City Manager, and the Director of Parks, Beaches, and
Recreation Department in all matters pertaining to
public recreation.
CITY OF PACIFICA
CHILD CARE
d
Packet Pg. 32
Attachment: D. Parks, Beaches & Recreation Commission Annual Report Presentation Additional Duties and Responsibilities Include:
To make recommendations concerning the beautification, development and improvement of parks, beaches and recreation services
To focus public attention upon the need for adequate parks and beaches and healthful year-round supervised recreation for all To assist in promoting public recreation
To engage with City and partner organizations through Liaison/Committee Assignments
To gather stakeholder input and provide direction and guidance on beach usage – monitoring special events and surf camps. To hear and make determinations regarding Heritage Tree Appeals To select the Poet Laureate
d
Packet Pg. 33
Attachment: D. Parks, Beaches & Recreation Commission Annual Report Presentation Surf Camp/School Policy Advisory Task Force
Council referred to Commission June 2020 following
public comment regarding surf equity
Task Force created – met Feb.-Oct. 2021
Commission approved recommendations Oct. 2021
Council adopted recommendations Jan. 2022
Review body for commercial applicants
Ongoing review/update of program – tentative 2023 start d
Packet Pg. 34
Attachment: D. Parks, Beaches & Recreation Commission Annual Report Presentation Heritage Tree
Processes & Appeals
1 tree appeal over the past year Heritage Tree Ordinance Update joint study session. d
Packet Pg. 35
Attachment: D. Parks, Beaches & Recreation Commission Annual Report Presentation Presentations
Quarterly Staff Reports Aquatics Child Care Recreation Seniors d
Packet Pg. 36
Attachment: D. Parks, Beaches & Recreation Commission Annual Report Presentation Items for Consideration
Tree City Pacifica
Telescopes
Heritage Tree Ordinance Update
Bike Park
Lifesaving Buoy Stations
d
Packet Pg. 37
Attachment: D. Parks, Beaches & Recreation Commission Annual Report Presentation What’s Next?
Surf Camp/School Policy Implementation Poet Laureate Nomination/Appointment Bike Park Beach Safety Heritage Tree Process and Appeals Playground Improvement Process d
Packet Pg. 38
Attachment: D. Parks, Beaches & Recreation Commission Annual Report Presentation Thank you!
Questions?
d
Packet Pg. 39
Attachment: D. Parks, Beaches & Recreation Commission Annual Report Presentation
City of Pacifica
Emergency Preparedness and Safety Commission
Annual Report 2022
May 2021 – May 2022
e
Packet Pg. 40
Attachment: E. Emergency Preparedness and Safety Commission Annual Report (5012 : Annual Reports to City Council from City Members of the Emergency Preparedness and Safety Commission Commissioners:
Jeanne Salisbury, Chair
Dough Hladky, Vice Chair
Frank Erbacher
Debra Johnson
Gregor Blackburn
Evelyn Taverna
Feliks Gasanyan
Jay Crawford
Peter Balestreri
Past Commissioners
• Breck Hitz (term ended October 2021)
• Charlie Lotridge (resigned February 2022)
Ex-Officio members:
Jorge Machado, Pacifica School District
Marcus Peppers, Jefferson Union High School District
Betty Fleming, American Red Cross
City Council Liaison:
Tygarjas Bigstyck, Pacifica City Council
City of Pacifica staff representatives:
Pacifica Police Captain Chris Clements
Pacifica Police Sergeant Tom Cumming
The Role of the Commission
The Emergency Preparedness & Safety Commission advises and makes recommendations to City Council on activities and programs related to emergency preparedness. The powers and duties of the Commission are advisory only and include; To assist in the preparation and review and make recommendations to Council on disaster preparedness plans;
To increase community awareness of the possibility of future disasters and the need for disaster preparedness;
To develop and distribute disaster preparedness information in the City; e
Packet Pg. 41
Attachment: E. Emergency Preparedness and Safety Commission Annual Report (5012 : Annual Reports to City Council from City To develop, implement and promote, with Council approval, disaster preparedness programs and activities in the City;
To promote and develop resources, volunteer and self-help groups to be utilized in the event of a local disaster;
To assist in the coordinating of disaster preparedness with other governmental agencies
The commission is also the appellate body for appeals relating to abandoned/ inoperable vehicle abatement, vehicles parked 72 hours or more, specific sections of the Building Code, and appeals of staff decisions relating to traffic safety issues.
The Pacifica Emergency Preparedness & Safety Commission meets on the third Wednesday of each month at 6:30 pm. Due to restrictions on in person public meetings due to public health safety concerns during the COVID-19 pandemic, meetings were conducted using an online virtual format via Zoom. Commission meetings are open to the public, and community members participate in meetings through email messages or using Zoom to participate by telephone or video.
Year in Review
This report will include Commission activities from May 2021 through May 2022. In response to the public health threat posed by COVID-19, in March 2020 orders issued by the Health Officer of San Mateo County prohibited all public gatherings. This resulted in the cancellation of in person commission meetings until they could resume using a virtual format pursuant to Executive Orders issued by the Governor. These meetings using a virtual format continued until March 2022. The Commission was able to resume in person meetings at the Pacifica Police Department in the City’s Emergency Operations Center.
Guest Presentations at Commission meetings In support of the Commission’s goal to raise awareness about potential hazards in our community, encouraging preparedness, and coordinating disaster preparedness with other governmental agencies, commissioners identified topics of interest and organizations to invite to present at scheduled Commission meetings. With increased concerns surrounding the statewide threat from wildfire, the Commission focused on this topic.
In June 2021, Supervisor Fernandes from the North Coast County Water District spoke to the Commission about the water system serving Pacifica during normal operation and during an emergency situation. He spoke about the redundant systems in place to provide water to the City in the event of a disaster, and ongoing infrastructure maintenance projects throughout the District. He also spoke about recent improvements to the management systems to protect against cyberattacks. e
Packet Pg. 42
Attachment: E. Emergency Preparedness and Safety Commission Annual Report (5012 : Annual Reports to City Council from City In July 2021, the presentation by Parks Director Calderon for the County of San Mateo included their department’s comprehensive 5 year plan for wildfire fuels management.
This plan included 32 distinct projects countywide. Of local interest he spoke about the two projects in San Pedro Valley Park. One project included the creation and maintenance of a fuel break along the park boundary and private residences. This project was already underway. The second project is the creation and maintenance of a fuel break along the Hazelnut Trail. A funding source for that project is being sought, and the project is anticipated to be completed in the coming years.
In August 2021, Deputy Chief Kavanaugh and Inspector Adams from the North County Fire Authority (NCFA) presented on grant opportunities and applications they had submitted to mitigate wildfire hazards in Pacifica. The NCFA applied for more than $1,000,000 in grants through CalFire, the Coastal Conservancy and the California Fire Foundation to support a local vegetation reduction community chipping program, roadside vegetation management, public education on fire prevention, fuel reduction projects, and emergency ‘go bags’ for use in the event of evacuations.
In January 2022, Inspector Adams from the NCFA provided the Commission with an update on the wildfire mitigation grants. The Coastal Conservancy Grant awarded $130,000 to the City to fund a vegetation chipping program. The grant provided 20 days of chipping for neighborhoods in the designated areas identified by the Coastal Conservancy, targeting lands adjacent to open space areas. These areas were located in neighborhoods in Linda Mar, Pedro Point, Park Pacifica, Vallemar and Rockaway Beach. NCFA reported 2,500 eligible residences were identified in these areas. The program disposed of more than 28 tons of vegetation helping create defensible space around homes in these areas. NCFA also used social media and created an updated webpage to promote creating defensible space around homes, and this grand funded chipper program.
e
Packet Pg. 43
Attachment: E. Emergency Preparedness and Safety Commission Annual Report (5012 : Annual Reports to City Council from City In March 2022, Captain Clements from the police department presented on tsunami preparedness as March 21-25 was recognized as Tsunami Preparedness Week. He reviewed tsunami hazards in the City, as well as the City response to the Tsunami Advisory issued in January 2022 following the volcanic eruption off the coast of the Tonga Islands. Captain Clements reviewed exercises City staff were participating in to be better prepared in the event of a catastrophic tsunami, and discussed the social media campaign planned to help raise awareness about tsunami hazards in our community.
In April 2022, Inspector Adams from NCFA delivered a presentation to the commission about wildfire preparedness. The month of May is recognized as Wildfire Awareness Month. His presentation included fire prevention and preparedness strategies, and the Zonehaven evacuation management platform. He also promoted the NCFA “Ready, Set, Go” wildfire preparedness and evacuation program. The “Ready, Set, Go” program identifies strategies to be better prepared for an evacuation during wildfire season.
As Commission members become better acquainted with existing preparedness and mitigation efforts, they are able to help develop strategies and make recommendations to improve City and community preparedness.
Local Hazard Mitigation Plan Update
One of the Commission’s goals is to develop, implement and promote, with Council approval, disaster preparedness programs and activities, and to coordinate disaster preparedness with other governmental agencies. In 2021 the City updated their volume of the Multijurisdictional Local Hazard Mitigation Plan, a large regional and crossjurisdictional plan for the reduction of risk from natural and man-made disasters. The Local Hazard Mitigation Plan (LHMP) assesses hazard vulnerabilities and identifies mitigation actions to reduce the level of injury, property damage, and community e
Packet Pg. 44
Attachment: E. Emergency Preparedness and Safety Commission Annual Report (5012 : Annual Reports to City Council from City disruption that might otherwise result from such events. Adoption of the LHMP helps the City and participating jurisdictions remain eligible for various types of pre- and postdisaster community assistance, such as grants, from the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) and the State government. Disasters do not know jurisdictional boundaries. The City partnered with the County of San Mateo and 36 local governments and regional special districts for this process. The LHMP update was informed by a steering committee and robust public engagement which was promoted using social media platforms. The Commission received updates from staff throughout this process. Our volume of the LHMP was adopted by City Council in November 2021.
Community Outreach and Education
One of the Commission’s primary goals is educating our community about local hazards and promoting personal disaster preparedness. Commissioners worked with city staff to promote preparedness through use of social media this past year. Disaster preparedness courses and events were presented in a virtual format due to COVID-19 restrictions on in person gatherings. While concerns about the spread of COVID-19 significantly impacted the ability to engage with the community this past year, the Commission is already planning to participate in a number of in person events in 2022.
Wildfire Preparedness was the focus of the Commission’s efforts in 2020 and again in 2021. The Commission recognized community concerns about the wildfire risk, and heard several presentations this past year from the North County Fire Authority (NCFA) and the San Mateo County Director of Parks about local wildfire mitigation efforts and wildfire preparedness.
In 2020, the Commission proposed increasing community outreach about wildfire mitigation; creating defensible space, preparedness, planning for evacuation and promoting the Zonehaven Evacuation platform, and promoting enrollment in alert notification systems (such as SMCAlert). Both NCFA and the police department have continued to use social media platforms to promote wildfire preparedness. In June 2021 the NCFA and Pacifica Police Department hosted a virtual Wildfire Awareness Event via Zoom. A similar in-person event is already scheduled for June 11, 2022. This event is being promoted through social media platforms Nextdoor, Facebook, and Twitter, as well as the City ebulletin Connect With Pacifica.
COVID-19 Response was another focus this past year. Again, social media platforms were used extensively to promote COVID-19 information such as access to vaccinations and testing. Connect With Pacifica, and the City website also promoted up to date information to help prevent the spread of COVID-19 in our community. COVID-19 mobile testing is currently available three days a week at the City lot on Francisco Boulevard.
e
Packet Pg. 45
Attachment: E. Emergency Preparedness and Safety Commission Annual Report (5012 : Annual Reports to City Council from City Earthquake Preparedness Course This 90 minute course was created and first presented by our CERT (Community Emergency Response Team) program in 2016. Community members learn how to prepare for an earthquake and tsunami; create a family plan, create an emergency kit, and identify supplies to keep at home, at the office and in their vehicle. This class also promotes the CERT basic course to improve personal preparedness. During the COVID-19 pandemic, this class was presented virtually for the first time, and a number of times in 2021. It is presented in conjunction with Tsunami Preparedness Week in March.
The Community Emergency Response Team (CERT) program is a nationwide effort intended to educate people about disaster preparedness for hazards that may impact their area and trains them in basic disaster response skills Two commissioners serve as instructors in our CERT Basic Course. Over 350 Pacifica residents are graduates of the CERT basic training program. Prior to the COVID-19 pandemic, the CERT Basic Course was offered twice a year and conducted at the Pacifica Police Department. CERT instructors include a mix of CERT volunteer coordinators and City staff from our police and fire departments.
COVID-19 impacted our ability to present these courses. Plans are underway to resume classes again in 2022. This past year, our CERT volunteers remained engaged through events presented virtually using Zoom. Topics included the Zonehaven evacuation management platform, and Resilience and Psychological First Aid.
e
Packet Pg. 46
Attachment: E. Emergency Preparedness and Safety Commission Annual Report (5012 : Annual Reports to City Council from City Looking Ahead
Wildfire Awareness In the coming year, the Commission will continue to monitor local efforts to mitigate the hazard posed by wildfire. Ongoing community outreach and education through social media and other events will continue to be a priority for the Commission.
Community Outreach One of the Commission’s goals is to increase community awareness and the need for disaster preparedness, and to distribute disaster preparedness information. The Commission is looking forward to the return of several in person events that have been cancelled in recent years due to COVID-19 restrictions.
This includes the Wildfire Awareness Event at the Community Center on June 11, the San Mateo County Disaster Preparedness Day at the San Mateo Event Center on July 30, and the Pacific Coast Fog Fest on September 24 and 25.
Outreach Through the Internet/ Social Media In the absence of in person events in recent years, the Commission has learned to utilize social media for community outreach and awareness. The staff liaisons from the police department used their platforms on Nextdoor, Facebook and Twitter to promote a wide range of preparedness topics; such as the Zonehaven evacuation platform, SMCAlert notification system, the MyShake earthquake early warning mobile app, and the City’s dedicated Wildfire Preparedness webpage. Looking ahead to the coming year, the Commission continue to find ways to use these platforms to raise awareness and share information with our community. They will also see the Commission’s webpage and the City’s Natural Disasters webpage are regularly reviewed and updated with the most current resources and information for our community members.
Printed Materials The Commission has developed and adapted a variety of brochures for public education about local hazards and disaster preparedness. In the coming year the Commission will update these materials with current information and consider adding additional online resources. These materials include:
Tsunami Preparedness
72 Hours- Are You Prepared?
SMCAlert- San Mateo County’s alert notification System e
Packet Pg. 47
Attachment: E. Emergency Preparedness and Safety Commission Annual Report (5012 : Annual Reports to City Council from City Emergency Preparedness and
Safety Commission
City of Pacifica 1
Annual Report to
City Council
June 13, 2022
May 2021 through
May 2022
f
Packet Pg. 48
Attachment: F. Emergency Preparedness and Safety Commission Annual Report Commissioners
Doug Hladky, Chair Debra Johnson, Vice Chair Frank Erbacher Jeanne Salisbury Gregor Blackburn Evelyn Taverna Feliks Gasanyan Jay Crawford Peter Balestreri City of Pacifica
2 f
Packet Pg. 49
Attachment: F. Emergency Preparedness and Safety Commission Annual Report Past Commissioners
Breck Hitz (term ended October 2021)
Charlie Lotridge (resigned February 2022)
City of Pacifica 3
f
Packet Pg. 50
Attachment: F. Emergency Preparedness and Safety Commission Annual Report The Role of the Commission
The purpose of the Emergency Preparedness &
Safety Commission shall be to recommend and
advise the City Council on City programs,
activities, plans and other related actions that
assist the City in preparing for possible future
disasters.
City of Pacifica 4
f
Packet Pg. 51
Attachment: F. Emergency Preparedness and Safety Commission Annual Report Commission Members
The Commission consists of nine (9) members
appointed by the City Council, to a four year term.
The commission membership should, where
possible, be representative of the City's
neighborhood areas. In addition to the nine
regular members, there shall be three (3) ex
officio members who shall be representatives from
the high school and elementary school districts,
and from the American Red Cross.
City of Pacifica 5
f
Packet Pg. 52
Attachment: F. Emergency Preparedness and Safety Commission Annual Report Commission Membership
City of Pacifica 6
Ex-Officio Members
Jorge Machado, Pacifica School District
Marcus Peppers, Jefferson Union High School District
Betty Fleming, American Red Cross
Council Liaison
Mayor Pro Tem Tygarjas Bigstyck
Staff Liaisons
Captain Chris Clements
Sergeant Tom Cumming
f
Packet Pg. 53
Attachment: F. Emergency Preparedness and Safety Commission Annual Report The Role of the Commission
The powers and duties of the Commission shall
be advisory only and include
To assist in the preparation and review and
make recommendations to Council on disaster
preparedness plans;
To increase community awareness of the
possibility of future disasters and the need for
disaster preparedness;
To develop and distribute disaster
preparedness information in the City;
City of Pacifica 7
f
Packet Pg. 54
Attachment: F. Emergency Preparedness and Safety Commission Annual Report The Role of the Commission
To develop, implement and promote, with
Council approval, disaster preparedness
programs and activities in the City;
To promote and develop resources, volunteer
and self-help groups to be utilized in the event
of a local disaster;
To assist in the coordinating of disaster
preparedness with other governmental
agencies.
City of Pacifica 8
f
Packet Pg. 55
Attachment: F. Emergency Preparedness and Safety Commission Annual Report The Role of the Commission
Additionally, the commission sits as the appellate
body for appeals relating to abandoned/
inoperable vehicle abatement, vehicles parked 72
hours or more and appeals of staff decisions
relating to traffic safety issues.
City of Pacifica 9
f
Packet Pg. 56
Attachment: F. Emergency Preparedness and Safety Commission Annual Report Year in Review
COVID-19 safety measures in 2021 continued to
prevent the Commission from conducting in person
meetings. Commissioners held virtual meetings via
Zoom, were kept apprised of the City’s COVID-19
response and efforts to keep the community
informed about the availability of testing and
vaccinations. Social media was utilized extensively
to promote COVID resources. In March 2022, when
COVID-19 mandates were relaxed, in person
commission meetings resumed.
City of Pacifica 10
f
Packet Pg. 57
Attachment: F. Emergency Preparedness and Safety Commission Annual Report Year in Review
COVID 19 Response
City of Pacifica 11
f
Packet Pg. 58
Attachment: F. Emergency Preparedness and Safety Commission Annual Report Year in Review
Special Presentations
Following another historic wildfire season across
the state, the Commission continued to focus
efforts on the City’s wildfire preparedness.
Several presentations in 2021 focused on these
topics, including a presentation from the Director
of San Mateo County Parks about their new 5
year plan for vegetation management, and
specifically wildfire mitigation efforts at our
San Pedro County Park
City of Pacifica 12
f
Packet Pg. 59
Attachment: F. Emergency Preparedness and Safety Commission Annual Report Year in Review
Special Presentations
The North County Fire Authority pursued several
wildfire mitigation and vegetation management
grants. NCFA made a number of presentations to
the Commission over the past year providing
updates on the grant application process and
subsequent grant programs. These programs
were promoted on City social media. NCFA also
coordinated a virtual wildfire preparedness event
in 2021, and will host a similar in person event on
June 11 this year.
City of Pacifica 13
f
Packet Pg. 60
Attachment: F. Emergency Preparedness and Safety Commission Annual Report Year in Review
Disaster Preparedness
City of Pacifica 14
f
Packet Pg. 61
Attachment: F. Emergency Preparedness and Safety Commission Annual Report Year in Review
LHMP Update
City of Pacifica 15
In 2021 the City updated their volume of the
Multijurisdictional Local Hazard Mitigation Plan,
a large regional and cross-jurisdictional plan for
the reduction of risk from natural and manmade disasters.
The Local Hazard Mitigation Plan (LHMP)
assesses hazard vulnerabilities and identifies
mitigation actions to reduce the level of injury,
property damage, and community disruption
f
Packet Pg. 62
Attachment: F. Emergency Preparedness and Safety Commission Annual Report Year in Review
LHMP Update
City of Pacifica 16
that might otherwise result from such events.
Adoption of the LHMP helps the City and
participating jurisdictions remain eligible for
various types of pre- and post-disaster
community assistance, such as grants, from the
Federal Emergency Management Agency
(FEMA) and the State government. Disasters
do not know jurisdictional boundaries. The City
partnered with the County of San Mateo
f
Packet Pg. 63
Attachment: F. Emergency Preparedness and Safety Commission Annual Report Year in Review
LHMP Update
City of Pacifica 17
and 36 local governments and regional special
districts for this process. The LHMP update
was informed by a steering committee and
robust public engagement. This process was
lead by City staff from the Planning,
Engineering and Police Departments. The
Commission received updates from staff
throughout this process. Our volume of the
LHMP was adopted by City Council in
November 2021.
f
Packet Pg. 64
Attachment: F. Emergency Preparedness and Safety Commission Annual Report Year in Review
LHMP Update
City of Pacifica 18
f
Packet Pg. 65
Attachment: F. Emergency Preparedness and Safety Commission Annual Report Year in Review
Promoting Preparedness
City of Pacifica 19
The Commission encouraged expanded use of
social media and virtual events to promote
emergency preparedness during COVID. The
topics often coincided with state and nationwide
events and campaigns. The City promoted
disaster preparedness, earthquake readiness,
tsunami preparedness, the state earthquake
early warning system, alert notification systems
(SMCAlert), public safety power shut offs, and
fire weather alerts.
f
Packet Pg. 66
Attachment: F. Emergency Preparedness and Safety Commission Annual Report Year in Review
Social Media
City of Pacifica 20
f
Packet Pg. 67
Attachment: F. Emergency Preparedness and Safety Commission Annual Report Year in Review
Virtual Presentations
City of Pacifica 21
This also included presenting the CERT
Earthquake and Tsunami Preparedness
Classes using a virtual format on Zoom
f
Packet Pg. 68
Attachment: F. Emergency Preparedness and Safety Commission Annual Report Year in Review
Virtual Presentations
City of Pacifica 22
In 2021 the North County Fire Authority hosted
a virtual Wildfire Awareness Event
using Zoom
f
Packet Pg. 69
Attachment: F. Emergency Preparedness and Safety Commission Annual Report Year in Review
Special Presentations
The Commission received special
presentations on a number of topics and from
a variety of organizations this past year
City of Pacifica 23
f
Packet Pg. 70
Attachment: F. Emergency Preparedness and Safety Commission Annual Report Year in Review
North County Fire Authority
Vegetation Management Grants Application
Process
2021 Wildfire Preparedness Virtual Event
Vegetation Management Grants Program
Update
Wildfire Awareness Month “Ready, Set, Go!”
Wildfire Preparedness Event June 11
City of Pacifica 24
f
Packet Pg. 71
Attachment: F. Emergency Preparedness and Safety Commission Annual Report Year in Review
North County Fire Authority
City of Pacifica 25
f
Packet Pg. 72
Attachment: F. Emergency Preparedness and Safety Commission Annual Report Year in Review
Disaster Preparedness
City of Pacifica 26
Pre-pandemic, the Commission engaged in
community outreach through events such as
the Pacific Coast Fog Fest and San Mateo
County Disaster Preparedness Day at the
Fair Grounds. This promoted awareness,
preparedness and programs such as the
Pacifica CERT Program (Community
Emergency Response Team).
f
Packet Pg. 73
Attachment: F. Emergency Preparedness and Safety Commission Annual Report Looking Ahead
The Commission looks forward to a return to
in person community events and opportunities
for outreach. Upcoming events include:
Wildfire Preparedness Event, June 11
San Mateo County Disaster
Preparedness Day, July 30
Pacific Coast Fog Fest, September 24, 25
City of Pacifica 27
f
Packet Pg. 74
Attachment: F. Emergency Preparedness and Safety Commission Annual Report Looking Ahead to 2022
Wildfire Preparedness- Continued promotion
In person events for community outreach
Return of the CERT Basic Course
Expand use of electronic and social media
Updating of printed materials
City of Pacifica 28
f
Packet Pg. 75
Attachment: F. Emergency Preparedness and Safety Commission Annual Report City of Pacifica
Emergency Preparedness and
Safety Commission
City of Pacifica 29
Questions?
f
Packet Pg. 76
Attachment: F. Emergency Preparedness and Safety Commission Annual Report Pacifica Beautification
Advisory Committee
Presentation 2022
g
Packet Pg. 77
Attachment: G. Beautification Advisory Committee Annual Report Presentation (5012 :
Beautification Advisory Committee
2022
Melinda Moses, Chair
Ryann Hoffman, Vice Chair
Gail Bennett
Linda Jonas
Dan Wells
Julie Gossage
Hernan Muirragui
Public Works Liaison: Lisa Petersen,
Paul Lavorini, and Michelle Trayer
City Council Liaison Sue Beckmeyer
g
Packet Pg. 78
Attachment: G. Beautification Advisory Committee Annual Report Presentation (5012 :
BAC/ Keep Pacifica Beautiful (KPB) Mission
To identify City-owned sites which, through sponsored
plantings and the creation of public art, will contribute to Community interest and pride
• Along main thoroughfares
• In parks and around the beaches
Implemented by means of safe work plans, sustainable
gardening practices and collaborative funding sources
g
Packet Pg. 79
Attachment: G. Beautification Advisory Committee Annual Report Presentation (5012 :
Utilize environmental-friendly landscape practices
• Mulch, Mulch, Mulch.
• Use of drought-tolerant, low maintenance and
native landscape materials.
• Incorporate drip irrigation or water efficient systems in landscaped areas.
Adopted BAC Drought Policy in 2015: Sites are prepped in spring and summer for planting in autumn months to
maximize rainy season.
Keep Pacifica Beautiful (KPB) Practices:
g
Packet Pg. 80
Attachment: G. Beautification Advisory Committee Annual Report Presentation (5012 :
Sponsorship Program:
Sponsoring organizations/individuals will:
• work with the BAC to design, prepare, plant and
install irrigation in accordance with the KPB plan
• cover the cost of landscape and irrigation materials
• agree to maintain the site for two years
BAC:
• assists with design of the site and site development
• assists with training of volunteers
• assists in purchasing materials
• Installs sponsorship sign
g
Packet Pg. 81
Attachment: G. Beautification Advisory Committee Annual Report Presentation (5012 :
Grace McCarthy Vista Point
Upcoming
Makeover
!
g
Packet Pg. 82
Attachment: G. Beautification Advisory Committee Annual Report Presentation (5012 :
Community Center planter boxes
g
Packet Pg. 83
Attachment: G. Beautification Advisory Committee Annual Report Presentation (5012 :
Wanted! Community Center Planter
Sponsors
g
Packet Pg. 84
Attachment: G. Beautification Advisory Committee Annual Report Presentation (5012 :
Crespi Bioswales
g
Packet Pg. 85
Attachment: G. Beautification Advisory Committee Annual Report Presentation (5012 :
Crespi Bioswales – wayside exhibit
g
Packet Pg. 86
Attachment: G. Beautification Advisory Committee Annual Report Presentation (5012 :
Crespi Bioswale – Work Day March 6
g
Packet Pg. 87
Attachment: G. Beautification Advisory Committee Annual Report Presentation (5012 :
Crespi Bioswales
– Work Day
g
Packet Pg. 88
Attachment: G. Beautification Advisory Committee Annual Report Presentation (5012 :
Bioswale
– sponsorship!
g
Packet Pg. 89
Attachment: G. Beautification Advisory Committee Annual Report Presentation (5012 :
Linda Mar Median at Hwy 1 – Sponsor:
North Coast County Water District
g
Packet Pg. 90
Attachment: G. Beautification Advisory Committee Annual Report Presentation (5012 :
Palmetto Ave. Streetscape Project
g
Packet Pg. 91
Attachment: G. Beautification Advisory Committee Annual Report Presentation (5012 :
Palmetto Ave. sponsored sites
g
Packet Pg. 92
Attachment: G. Beautification Advisory Committee Annual Report Presentation (5012 :
Palmetto Sponsored bump-outs
g
Packet Pg. 93
Attachment: G. Beautification Advisory Committee Annual Report Presentation (5012 :
Palmetto at Clarendon: Rotary Club of
Pacifica
g
Packet Pg. 94
Attachment: G. Beautification Advisory Committee Annual Report Presentation (5012 :
Palmetto Work Day February 26
g
Packet Pg. 95
Attachment: G. Beautification Advisory Committee Annual Report Presentation (5012 :
Pacifica Beautification Awards
To recognize “Pride” in
Pacifica and encourage
the efforts of community
members in beautifying
and improving residential
and commercial
properties located within
Pacifica
g
Packet Pg. 96
Attachment: G. Beautification Advisory Committee Annual Report Presentation (5012 :
Pacifica Beautification Awards
g
Packet Pg. 97
Attachment: G. Beautification Advisory Committee Annual Report Presentation (5012 :
PBA
– State Farm office Manor at Oceana
g
Packet Pg. 98
Attachment: G. Beautification Advisory Committee Annual Report Presentation (5012 :
Public Art /Mural Sub Committee
Linda Jonas Melinda Moses Ginny Jaquith Cindy Abbott g
Packet Pg. 99
Attachment: G. Beautification Advisory Committee Annual Report Presentation (5012 :
Linda Mar beach – Anza pump station
g
Packet Pg. 100 Attachment: G. Beautification Advisory Committee Annual Report Presentation (5012 :
Anza Pump station
south wall – Jason Budowski
g
Packet Pg. 101 Attachment: G. Beautification Advisory Committee Annual Report Presentation (5012 :
Anza Pump Station
west wall – Robert Louthan
g
Packet Pg. 102 Attachment: G. Beautification Advisory Committee Annual Report Presentation (5012 :
Anza Pump Station
north wall – Jeffrey Wong
g
Packet Pg. 103 Attachment: G. Beautification Advisory Committee Annual Report Presentation (5012 :
Anza Pump Station
east wall (work in progress)– Danielle
Gustavson
g
Packet Pg. 104 Attachment: G. Beautification Advisory Committee Annual Report Presentation (5012 :
1298 Oceana Blvd – Splash of Color
Lauren Wu/Annaliese Phillips
g
Packet Pg. 105 Attachment: G. Beautification Advisory Committee Annual Report Presentation (5012 :
Splash of Color mural
g
Packet Pg. 106 Attachment: G. Beautification Advisory Committee Annual Report Presentation (5012 :
Splash of Color
Protect What You Love
g
Packet Pg. 107 Attachment: G. Beautification Advisory Committee Annual Report Presentation (5012 :
Special Thanks to:
BAC Sponsor's and Volunteers.
Lisa Petersen, Paul Lavorini, and
Michelle Trayer
Council Member Sue Beckmeyer
g
Packet Pg. 108 Attachment: G. Beautification Advisory Committee Annual Report Presentation (5012 :
Economic Development Committee
FY21-22 Annual Report
City Council Meeting
June 13, 2022
h
Packet Pg. 109 Attachment: H. Economic Development Committee Annual Report (5012 : Annual Reports to City Council from City Commissions and 2021-2022
Economic
Development
Committee
Members
FY20-21 Appointed
Members
§ Daisy Fong, Chair
§ Sean Thompson, Vice
Chair
§ Debi Hirshlag*,
Secretary
§ Archie Judan, Chamber
Rep
§ Matthew Dougherty
§ Robert Foster*
§ Nicholas Humann*
§ Beth Lemke
§ Greta Sieglock*
*New Members
Council Liaisons
§ Mary Bier, Mayor
§ Sue Beckmeyer
Staff Liaisons
§ Yulia Carter, CFSO
§ Alyssa Barranti, Analyst
h
Packet Pg. 110 Attachment: H. Economic Development Committee Annual Report (5012 : Annual Reports to City Council from City Commissions and Economic
Development
Committee
Work Plan
Strategic Goals
2021-2022
§ Promote and market Pacifica to out-of-town
visitors to drive tourism revenue.
§ Provide assistance and support to local
businesses and the City of Pacifica.
§ Promote local businesses to the residents of
Pacifica to encourage residents to spend
locally and stop retail leakage.
h
Packet Pg. 111 Attachment: H. Economic Development Committee Annual Report (5012 : Annual Reports to City Council from City Commissions and FY 21
-22 EDC Key
Accomplishments
Launched Shop Pacifica eGift Community Card
Program to boost revenue for local businesses
Organized the hugely successful Small Business
Job Fair to assist and support business growth
Conducted interviews of 11 business owners to
understand and address businesses needs
Engaged and connected with organizations to
identify opportunities for potential partnerships
h
Packet Pg. 112 Attachment: H. Economic Development Committee Annual Report (5012 : Annual Reports to City Council from City Commissions and FY 21-22 EDC Key Highlights
Participated in The SF Peninsula members (formerly SMCCVB) to a tour of event/meeting spaces to promote Pacifica as a corporate/business event destination
Increased exposure to Pacifica and participating Pacifica restaurants by sponsoring and promoting Peninsula Restaurant Week
Continued to promote Pacifica as destination to outside visitors on Discover Pacifica Instagram
h
Packet Pg. 113 Attachment: H. Economic Development Committee Annual Report (5012 : Annual Reports to City Council from City Commissions and Officially Launched on 12/17/2021 w/ 12 Businesses
h
Packet Pg. 114 Attachment: H. Economic Development Committee Annual Report (5012 : Annual Reports to City Council from City Commissions and • Currently 24 participating businesses
• 132 gift cards sold totaling $5,350/avg GC amt $41
Ø 28 gift cards or $951 redeemed
Ø Represents a 21% card redemption rate or 18% of total GC totals
• 67 bonus cards issued, totaling $1,675
Ø 26 cards redeemed (39% redemption rate)
• Restaurants, Food and Retail were top redeeming
businesses
*Data as of 5/29/2022
h
Packet Pg. 115 Attachment: H. Economic Development Committee Annual Report (5012 : Annual Reports to City Council from City Commissions and Promotions & Marketing targeted
both residents and local businesses
• Focused on local media & channels:
§ Newsletters/Emails: Connect w/Pacifica, Chamber Wave, Pacifica Education Foundation
§ Local Print Publication: Pacifica Anchor
§ Local Social Media: Facebook, Instagram, Nextdoor, etc § Business Outreach: Physically visiting businesses to get them involved and participate in the program
§ Word of Mouth
• Created a Shop Pacifica Instagram account to drive
awareness and boost engagement of the program
h
Packet Pg. 116 Attachment: H. Economic Development Committee Annual Report (5012 : Annual Reports to City Council from City Commissions and Shop Pacifica Instagram
Snapshot
• Nearly 200 followers (194)
• Average 5.4% engagement rate
(likes, comments) across 11 posts -
average across all industries is
0.98%
• Posting average of less than 1 post
/week - 11 posts, 16 weeks active.
• With more consistent posting we'll likely
result in higher engagement and more
followers
• Working with CDA to ramp this up
h
Packet Pg. 117 Attachment: H. Economic Development Committee Annual Report (5012 : Annual Reports to City Council from City Commissions and BOGO & Marketing were Effective in Increasing GC Sales
h
Packet Pg. 118 Attachment: H. Economic Development Committee Annual Report (5012 : Annual Reports to City Council from City Commissions and Valentine’s Day BOGO Promo • 26 cards purchased for a total $1,450 Ø 11 Cards totaling $465 redeemed (42%, 32% redemption rate, respectively)
• Averaged GC amount increased by 51% from
$37 to $56
• 29 bonus cards issued for a total $725 Ø 18 cards totaling $402 redeemed (62%, 55% redemption rate, respectively)
Ø 11 cards worth $275 expired
• Realized 21% ROI Ø $402 invested in BOGO vs. incremental increase of $494 purchased in GC
h
Packet Pg. 119 Attachment: H. Economic Development Committee Annual Report (5012 : Annual Reports to City Council from City Commissions and Teacher’s Appreciation Promo • Spend $50, Get $25 in Bonus GC (expires 7/1/22) • Dates: 4/26 to 5/6 • 67 cards purchased for a total $2,345 Ø 6 Cards totaling $400 redeemed • Averaged GC amount $35 due to multiple lower card value
• 38 bonus cards issued for a total of $950 Ø 8 Cards totaling $195 redeemed • Pacifica Education Foundation email drop resulted in a boost in GC sales
Graduation Promo • Waive Fee Offer • 5/16 to 6/10 • 8 cards purchased for a total $205 h
Packet Pg. 120 Attachment: H. Economic Development Committee Annual Report (5012 : Annual Reports to City Council from City Commissions and Challenges
• Getting more businesses to
participate
• Low redemption rate • Limited promotional levers offered by vendor
• Marketing has been ad hoc and not
consistent
h
Packet Pg. 121 Attachment: H. Economic Development Committee Annual Report (5012 : Annual Reports to City Council from City Commissions and Next Steps
• Review and advise CDA on their marketing Plan
for Shop Pacifica GC program.
• Campaign to increase redemption rate of
current gift cards
• Provide a Shop Pacifica Promotional Calendar
(Done)
• Recruitment of more businesses to participate • Explore gift card giveaway with hotels h
Packet Pg. 122 Attachment: H. Economic Development Committee Annual Report (5012 : Annual Reports to City Council from City Commissions and h
Packet Pg. 123 Attachment: H. Economic Development Committee Annual Report (5012 : Annual Reports to City Council from City Commissions and Pacifica Job
Fair At a
Glance
• Surveyed over 1,213 businesses with revenue $500,000
or under (to focus on “small” businesses)
• Ultimately 14 businesses signed up (and we invited
COP)
Ø Small number but just right for a first attempt
• From first survey to event was about a month (phew!!) Ø 15 Employers
Ø 60+ positions : Wide variety of skill sets – barista to cabinet maker to Director of Dance
Ø 75+ attended
Ø Total cost $331 (excluding manpower)
• # of hires: TBD
• Good support from Renaissance Center and JobTrain
• Best “advertising” sources were Pacifica Tribune, The Patch, emails to parents, flyers, Farmers Market and
Connect with Pacifica
• Employers appreciated stop-by from a few City officials h
Packet Pg. 124 Attachment: H. Economic Development Committee Annual Report (5012 : Annual Reports to City Council from City Commissions and Learnings for Next Time
(and there should be a next time)
• Need a better registration and information website (not free Google forms – created administrative work and didn’t allow enough information sharing with candidates) • Be bi-lingual from the start (Spanish)
• Improve check-in process, but keep pre-registration process • More resources lined up to call candidates day of/day before event • Summer Jobs needs to be a separate Job Fair
Ø Almost everyone was looking for indefinite hires; needed more adults! • Much more time and direct contact needed for candidate sourcing, especially those with specialized skills (teachers, cosmetologists, etc.); cannot just email and assume outreach is happening
• More outreach needed outside of Pacifica
• Ensure date doesn’t coincide with big event (like a Warriors game J) h
Packet Pg. 125 Attachment: H. Economic Development Committee Annual Report (5012 : Annual Reports to City Council from City Commissions and Small Business
Survey
h
Packet Pg. 126 Attachment: H. Economic Development Committee Annual Report (5012 : Annual Reports to City Council from City Commissions and New Business
Interviews
Overviews
• Freshest recollection of the process to set up a
business
• Database difficult and not entirely accurate so
manual work to cull the list
Pulled businesses who got licenses
since 2020
• Choice of Pacifica, target customers, marketing
approach
• Ease of starting a business in Pacifica
• Support they’d like going forward
Survey not allowed so did interviews
instead, focused on three areas
h
Packet Pg. 127 Attachment: H. Economic Development Committee Annual Report (5012 : Annual Reports to City Council from City Commissions and New Business Interviews Themes: The
Good
•Many owners are Pacifica residents; feel loyalty to
the community they serve
Ø Work with Renaissance Center to encourage more
local entrepreneurs
•Community friendly and embracing of new
businesses
•SMC resources easy to work with; consultative
•Transferring license for existing business easy
•Open to being featured in Pacifica Social Media –
just reach out
h
Packet Pg. 128 Attachment: H. Economic Development Committee Annual Report (5012 : Annual Reports to City Council from City Commissions and New Business Interviews Themes: Next
Steps to Improve/Ideas
• Building permits slow and cumbersome; sign permits confusing and slow Ø Suggest serious relook at process requirements and dedicated commercial planner to FACILITATE new business openings
• KIMCO a “challenging” landlord; not helpful
•More City support/push for multi-employer, cross-Pacifica events Ø One end of town doesn’t know what’s going on at the other end • Coastal Commission approvals slow and expensive
• Feel like we lost the chance to make Palmetto a family-friendly destination with so many cannabis shops
• Shop Pacifica cumbersome; competes with own gift card program • Communicate real estate openings to existing businesses in case they want to expand/move • Little interest in a newsletter; prefer networking events (roundtables, mixers) • Publish a Pacifica-only Value-Pak
h
Packet Pg. 129 Attachment: H. Economic Development Committee Annual Report (5012 : Annual Reports to City Council from City Commissions and New Business Interviews: Spoken To
• GOOD LUCK LIVE BAIT AND
TACKLE
• ROCKAWAY BEACH GIFTS &
SWEETS
• THE PAC BARBERSHOP
• ELEVATE HEALING IV HYDRATION
• PALMETTO & SANTA ROSA
INVESTMENT, LLC
• HUMBLE SEA
• NANCYLAND KIDS AND BAB
• INTERWINE CAFE
• DAVID’S BAGEL
• IVY ROW
• EPICENTER CYCLING
h
Packet Pg. 130 Attachment: H. Economic Development Committee Annual Report (5012 : Annual Reports to City Council from City Commissions and Other
Highlights
h
Packet Pg. 131 Attachment: H. Economic Development Committee Annual Report (5012 : Annual Reports to City Council from City Commissions and Exploring Opportunities For
Engagement & Partnerships
Pacifica Age Friendly
Community Coalition
h
Packet Pg. 132 Attachment: H. Economic Development Committee Annual Report (5012 : Annual Reports to City Council from City Commissions and The SF Peninsula “Grand
Tour of Pacifica's Group
Conference Places” • Councilmember O’Neill hosted members of The SF Peninsula (formerly SMCCVB) to
a tour of event/meeting spaces
• Promote Pacifica to businesses as a
meeting, conference, team building,
training, event destination
• 9 venues were showcased
h
Packet Pg. 133 Attachment: H. Economic Development Committee Annual Report (5012 : Annual Reports to City Council from City Commissions and Venues Highlighted
Sanchez Adobe
Sanchez Art
Center
Sharp Park
Golf Course
San Pedro
County Park
Little Brown Terra Nova HS Theater
Church
Ingrid B. Lacy
Middle School
Pedro Point
Firehouse
h
Packet Pg. 134 Attachment: H. Economic Development Committee Annual Report (5012 : Annual Reports to City Council from City Commissions and Provided visibility and foot traffic to Pacifica and
Peninsula Restaurants
• 127 Total Participating Restaurants
• 7 Pacifica Restaurants participated
• 24 Sponsors
• Advertised on The Six Fifty, The Peninsula Foodist,
Palo Alto Online, Palo Alto Weekly, The Almanac,
Redwood City Pulse, and Mountain View Voice,
San Mateo Daily Journal
• Rosalind Bakery gained additional exposure as part
of Instagram Giveaway
• Local promotion on Connect w/Pacifica, Next
Door, Chamber Newsletter
h
Packet Pg. 135 Attachment: H. Economic Development Committee Annual Report (5012 : Annual Reports to City Council from City Commissions and FY22-23 EDC
Priorities
(WIP)
Review feedback from survey results and select which
areas to focus on. This will inform which future initiatives EDC will prioritize on.
Review and if necessary, update workplan to ensure
alignment with City initiatives and Business survey
feedback results.
Partner with Chamber on hosting a Pacifica Blues &
Brews event that will attract visitors to Pacifica. (Still in early stages)
Continue to assist and advise CDA & City on
implementation of Workcation program, Shop Pacifica
Campaign.
Explore hosting business seminars, networking events,
roundtables, etc that will add value back to the businesses and help them grow
Update EDC & City Website
Continue to strengthen relationships with Key Partners i.e.
Renaissance Center, SF Peninsula,Chamber, Pacifica
Anchor, FogFest…
h
Packet Pg. 136 Attachment: H. Economic Development Committee Annual Report (5012 : Annual Reports to City Council from City Commissions and Thank You
Economic Development
Committee
h
Packet Pg. 137 Attachment: H. Economic Development Committee Annual Report (5012 : Annual Reports to City Council from City Commissions and Appendix
h
Packet Pg. 138 Attachment: H. Economic Development Committee Annual Report (5012 : Annual Reports to City Council from City Commissions and Shop Pacifica Data
h
Packet Pg. 139 Attachment: H. Economic Development Committee Annual Report (5012 : Annual Reports to City Council from City Commissions and Shop Pacifica Promo Data
12/8 to 2/4
GC Sale
Valentine Promo 2/5
to 2/20 16 days
1/20 to 2/4
GC Sale
Incr Inc In Avg
GC Amt
Bonus
Redeemed ROI
Avg GC Amt 37 56 13 488 402 21%
# of GC Sold 26 264
h
Packet Pg. 140 Attachment: H. Economic Development Committee Annual Report (5012 : Annual Reports to City Council from City Commissions and New Business Interviews: Questions
• When did you officially open (or when do you hope to open?) • Why did you choose Pacifica?
• What did you hear about Pacifica’s business climate prior to getting started? In reality, was it harder // about the same // or easier than you expected? What resources did you use to get started?
• Who do you see as your ideal customer? Has that come to fruition? Is there a demographic you still wish to capture?
• What have you done so far to market your business – ads, social media, online, other? • What support, if any, would be useful to you going forward? • We’re thinking of a Pacifica business-facing newsletter. Do you receive other business-related newsletters? What topics might be of interest to you on a, for example, monthly basis? • Would you be interested in multi-business events?
• Would you be interested in being featured in City social media? • Have you heard about the Shop Pacifica gift card?
• Is there anything else you would like me to know?
h
Packet Pg. 141 Attachment: H. Economic Development Committee Annual Report (5012 : Annual Reports to City Council from City Commissions and Open Space and
Parkland Advisory
Com m ittee
2021 -2022 Annual Report to the Pacifica City
Council
June 13, 2022
i
Packet Pg. 142 Attachment: I. Open Space & Parkland Advisory Committee Annual Report Presentation Pacifica
currently has 6.5 acres of
city parks
and play
fields, and
2,927 acres
of regional
parks and
beaches
i
Packet Pg. 143 Attachment: I. Open Space & Parkland Advisory Committee Annual Report Presentation Benefits of Open Space
Healthy com m unities
Tourism and econom ic growth
Natural beauty
Boosts property values
Buffers and m itigates im pacts of clim ate
change
i
Packet Pg. 144 Attachment: I. Open Space & Parkland Advisory Committee Annual Report Presentation OSPAC Purpose
(Resolution 4 4 -2015)
The Open Space and Parkland Advisory Com m ittee
(OSPAC) has been established to consider issues related to:
Natural areas that are proposed to be dedicated to the Golden Gate National Recreation Area (GGNRA),
Lands that are proposed to be dedicated open space,
Parklands that are under the jurisdiction of the
GGNRA, Areas operated by the San Mateo County
Parks Departm ent,
Ways in which these areas can contribute to the
econom y of the City.
i
Packet Pg. 145 Attachment: I. Open Space & Parkland Advisory Committee Annual Report Presentation Open Space Task Force Report
(Second Edition, 2000)
Analyzed 34 properties within Pacifica
Led to preservation of open spaces such as
Mori Point, Pedro Point Headlands, Mila gra and
others
Led to new trail developm ents
Led to establishm ent of Pacifica Land Trust
Rem ains the basic reference for OSPAC
Finds that the City should investigate m ethods
of funding open space acquisition, including
bonds
OSPAC m ay advise applicants on properties
listed in the Open Space Task Force report and
on other open space issues
i
Packet Pg. 146 Attachment: I. Open Space & Parkland Advisory Committee Annual Report Presentation OSPAC Activities
Presented findings on com m unity im pacts associated with increased visitation to Mori Point to City Council in July 2021 . Presentation resulted in the City Mana ger sending a letter to GGNRA for suggested im provem ents to the Mori Point
entrance.
Letter was supported by Jackie Speier
i
Packet Pg. 147 Attachment: I. Open Space & Parkland Advisory Committee Annual Report Presentation OSPAC Activities
(Continued)
Brought a recom m endation
to nam e a form ally unnam ed trail on Cattle Hill
“Ahni Trail” to City Council in
July 2021.
The trail nam e recognizes
the historic use of the area
by indigenous people. OSPAC
coordinated with surviving
descendants of the
Ram aytush Ohlone, GGNRA,
GGNPC, and the public to
identify the recom m ended
trail nam e.
i
Packet Pg. 148 Attachment: I. Open Space & Parkland Advisory Committee Annual Report Presentation OSPAC Activities
(Continued)
Participated in the planning
of the Ahni Trail ribbon
cutting event which was
coordinated with the
anniversary of the OhlonePortolá Herita ge Hike.
Provided feedback to the
applicant of the
developm ent project at TBD
Am apola Ave.
i
Packet Pg. 149 Attachment: I. Open Space & Parkland Advisory Committee Annual Report Presentation OSPAC Activities
(Continued)
Created a subcom m ittee to research funding
opportunities to preserve and m aintain open space.
Created a subcom m ittee to draft an updated
resolution for OSPAC and presented the resolution
to Council. Council has included review of City
Com m ission and Com m ittee Charters as a FY
2022-2 3 City Council Priority.
i
Packet Pg. 150 Attachment: I. Open Space & Parkland Advisory Committee Annual Report Presentation Preservation Award
The Preservation Award honors individuals or
groups who have contributed to preserving or
m aintaining Pacifica’s open spaces, parklands or
other areas adjacent to Pacifica .
2022
Kathy Kellerm an
i
Packet Pg. 151 Attachment: I. Open Space & Parkland Advisory Committee Annual Report Presentation Thank you!
Open Space and Parkland Advisory Com m ittee:
Name Term
JoAnne Arnos 5/ 25
Sarah Cardona 5/24
Kate Johnson 5/24
Julie Lancelle 5/25
Ellen Natesan 5/23
Arlene Patton 5/22
Aaron Read 5/23
Pete Shoem aker 5/23
i
Packet Pg. 152 Attachment: I. Open Space & Parkland Advisory Committee Annual Report Presentation
CITY OF PACIFICA
COUNCIL AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT
6/13/2022
1 SUBJECT:
Approval of Disbursements for 4/16/22 through 4/30/22.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Move to approve attached lists of disbursements for 4/16/22 through 4/30/22.
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 4/16/22 through 4/30/22 in the amount of $504,470.70 as written on regular checks numbered 59928 - 60083 (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 59928-60083 -4-16 to 4-30-22 (PDF) 1 Packet Pg. 153
Report: CHECKREG Generated: 18DEC20 13:17 Run: FRIDAY MAY0622 8:07 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: FRIDAY MAY0622 8:07 Page: 2
CITY OF PACIFICA
CHECK REGISTER
CHECK RANGE: 59928 - 60083
CHECK
BANK CHECK # CHECK AMT CHECK DATE VENDOR # ADDRS # VENDOR NAME TYPE STATUS ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 1 59928 $6433.27 04/22/22 00009 8 AT&T S OUTSTANDING
1 59929 $489.88 04/22/22 00094 0 ADAM-HILL COMPANY, THE S OUTSTANDING 1 59930 $279.54 04/22/22 00045 2 ALBERTSONS / SAFEWAY S OUTSTANDING 1 59931 $493.42 04/22/22 00138 0 ALL INDUSTRIAL ELECTRIC SUPPLY, INC. S OUTSTANDING 1 59932 $677.03 04/22/22 04980 1 AMAZON.COM SALES, INC. S OUTSTANDING 1 59933 $406.77 04/22/22 00009 0 AT&T S OUTSTANDING
1 59934 $226.63 04/22/22 03424 1 AUTO GLASS NOW S OUTSTANDING 1 59935 $730.00 04/22/22 00001 343 BLACKBURN, CODY S OUTSTANDING 1 59936 $2028.24 04/22/22 00381 0 C.H. BULL COMPANY S OUTSTANDING 1 59937 $8462.90 04/22/22 05483 0 CALIFORNIA CONSULTING, INC. S OUTSTANDING 1 59938 $275.00 04/22/22 00014 5 CALIFORNIA STATE OF S OUTSTANDING 1 59939 $427.00 04/22/22 01690 0 CALTEST ANALYTICAL LAB S OUTSTANDING 1 59940 $109.87 04/22/22 00483 0 CDW GOVERNMENT, INC. S OUTSTANDING 1 59941 $94.37 04/22/22 00510 0 CINTAS CORPORATION #464 S OUTSTANDING 1 59942 $1350.00 04/22/22 00019 2 COLMA POLICE DEPARTMENT S OUTSTANDING 1 59943 $660.00 04/22/22 05082 1 COLUMN, PBC S OUTSTANDING 1 59944 $595.16 04/22/22 02168 1 COMCAST S OUTSTANDING
1 59945 $169.02 04/22/22 02168 2 COMCAST S OUTSTANDING
1 59946 $622.50 04/22/22 00611 2 CSG CONSULTANTS, INC. S OUTSTANDING 1 59947 $1251.44 04/22/22 00001 182 CUNANAN, SUZANNE S OUTSTANDING 1 59948 $340.01 04/22/22 00025 0 DALY CITY/CITY OF S OUTSTANDING 1 59949 $2905.00 04/22/22 05141 1 DAVEY RESOURCE GROUP, INC. S OUTSTANDING 1 59950 $3000.00 04/22/22 02201 0 DISCOUNT PLUMBING, INC. S OUTSTANDING 1 59951 $1745.73 04/22/22 05473 1 EC AMERICA, INC. S OUTSTANDING 1 59952 $1400.00 04/22/22 04274 0 EMCOR SERVICES S OUTSTANDING 1 59953 $242.74 04/22/22 02477 0 FASTENAL COMPANY S OUTSTANDING 1 59954 $5284.70 04/22/22 02767 0 FLYERS ENERGY, LLC S OUTSTANDING 1 59955 $13433.50 04/22/22 04369 0 GHD INC. S OUTSTANDING 1 59956 $1025.43 04/22/22 00872 0 GRAINGER S OUTSTANDING 1 59957 $1733.92 04/22/22 00875 0 GRANITE ROCK COMPANY #26577 S OUTSTANDING 1 59958 $110.00 04/22/22 00924 0 HILL SCOTT S OUTSTANDING 1 59959 $1382.50 04/22/22 05453 0 INFINITY TECHNOLOGIES S OUTSTANDING 1 59960 $3602.29 04/22/22 04085 0 JAMES FORD, INC. S OUTSTANDING 1 59961 $885.93 04/22/22 01014 0 JOHN THE SIGN GUY LLC S OUTSTANDING 1 59962 $563.48 04/22/22 01055 2 KONE INC S OUTSTANDING 1 59963 $1440.00 04/22/22 00001 285 LAVEZZO, GIORGIO S OUTSTANDING 1 59964 $1000.00 04/22/22 05498 0 LOURDES S. SIAN S OUTSTANDING 1 59965 $492.19 04/22/22 01007 0 MATCO TOOLS S OUTSTANDING 1 59966 $1000.00 04/22/22 05499 0 MATTHEW MONROE S OUTSTANDING 1 59967 $547.32 04/22/22 00001 298 MENDEZ, REY S OUTSTANDING 1 59968 $495.00 04/22/22 01378 1 MUSCIO ELECTRIC S OUTSTANDING 1 59969 $2248.75 04/22/22 04632 0 NICHOLS CONSULTING ENGINEERS, CHTD S OUTSTANDING 1 59970 $175.00 04/22/22 05497 0 NORCAL HUMAN RESOURCES DIRECTORS S OUTSTANDING 1 59971 $614.48 04/22/22 05018 1 NORTH BAY PETROLEUM S OUTSTANDING 1 59972 $6903.36 04/22/22 01206 0 NORTH COAST COUNTY WATER DIST. S OUTSTANDING 1 59973 $103.62 04/22/22 01217 0 OFFICE DEPOT S OUTSTANDING 1 59974 $18800.00 04/22/22 04630 1 OPENGOV, INC. S OUTSTANDING 1 59975 $117445.84 04/22/22 01240 0 PACIFIC GAS & ELECTRIC CO. S OUTSTANDING 1 59976 $1289.87 04/22/22 01297 0 PARS S OUTSTANDING
1 59977 $75.67 04/22/22 01289 0 PENINSULA UNIFORMS & EQUIPMENT, INC S OUTSTANDING 1 59978 $337.07 04/22/22 04139 0 PET FOOD EXPRESS S OUTSTANDING Report: CHECKREG Generated: 18DEC20 13:17 Run: FRIDAY MAY0622 8:07 Page: 3
CITY OF PACIFICA
CHECK REGISTER
CHECK RANGE: 59928 - 60083
CHECK
BANK CHECK # CHECK AMT CHECK DATE VENDOR # ADDRS # VENDOR NAME TYPE STATUS ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 1 59979 $311.46 04/22/22 01317 0 PREFERRED ALLIANCE, INC. S OUTSTANDING 1 59980 $264.27 04/22/22 05501 0 RELIABLE ROOFING S OUTSTANDING 1 59981 $43.29 04/22/22 01795 0 ROSS, LAURIE S OUTSTANDING 1 59982 $75.60 04/22/22 01402 1 SAFETY-KLEEN CORP. S OUTSTANDING 1 59983 $1854.00 04/22/22 00055 0 SAN MATEO COUNTY FORENSIC LAB S OUTSTANDING
http://pac-gems/fms/BISystem/ReadROCFile.asp?sWC=C&iIdx=&FileName=D:\GemsEnv... 5/6/2022
1.a
Packet Pg. 154 Attachment: FY 2021-2022 Disbursements 59928-60083 -4-16 to 4-30-22 (4992 : Disbursements - Dated 4/16/22 through 4/30/22) 1 59984 $164.51 04/22/22 00022 9 SAN MATEO COUNTY INFORMATION SERVICES S OUTSTANDING 1 59985 $70.51 04/22/22 05197 0 SAN MATEO COUNTY MOSQUITO & VECTOR CONTROL S OUTSTANDING 1 59986 $78.78 04/22/22 02182 0 SERVICE PRESS, INC. S OUTSTANDING 1 59987 $2411.00 04/22/22 01531 1 ST. FRANCIS ELECTRIC, INC. S OUTSTANDING 1 59988 $29007.50 04/22/22 01570 0 SYNAGRO WEST, LLC S OUTSTANDING 1 59989 $1579.14 04/22/22 01587 0 TELECOMMUNICATIONS ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES S OUTSTANDING 1 59990 $2525.47 04/22/22 02066 3 TELEDYNE INSTRUMENTS, INC. S OUTSTANDING 1 59991 $1006.25 04/22/22 03785 1 THATCHER COMPANY INC S OUTSTANDING 1 59992 $176.00 04/22/22 01029 2 THE PERMANENTE MEDICAL GROUP INC. S OUTSTANDING 1 59993 $36.27 04/22/22 02663 0 UNDERWOOD, EILEEN S OUTSTANDING 1 59994 $778.32 04/22/22 02353 0 UNISYS CORPORATION S OUTSTANDING 1 59995 $402.63 04/22/22 01812 3 US BANK EQUIPMENT FINANCE S OUTSTANDING 1 59996 $4776.37 04/22/22 03835 0 US FOODS, INC S OUTSTANDING 1 59997 $2237.81 04/22/22 01684 0 VERIZON WIRELESS S OUTSTANDING 1 59998 $660.46 04/22/22 01673 0 VWR INTERNATIONAL S OUTSTANDING 1 59999 $2092.79 04/22/22 01701 0 WECO INDUSTRIES S OUTSTANDING 1 60000 $103.50 04/22/22 05163 1 WEX HEALTH, INC. S OUTSTANDING 1 60001 $1100.00 04/22/22 01729 0 WITMER-TYSON IMPORTS, INC. S OUTSTANDING 1 60002 $78.39 04/22/22 00001 363 YEUNG, CHRISTIE S OUTSTANDING 1 60003 $319.80 04/20/22 05469 0 BCC BENEFIT COORDINATORS CORPORATION S OUTSTANDING 1 60004 $737.91 04/29/22 00092 0 AD BRAKES S OUTSTANDING 1 60005 $313.03 04/29/22 00094 0 ADAM-HILL COMPANY, THE S OUTSTANDING 1 60006 $361.00 04/29/22 04707 0 ALAMEDA COUNTY SHERIFFS OFFICE S OUTSTANDING 1 60007 $9000.00 04/29/22 04733 0 ALFARO ENGINEERING, INC. S OUTSTANDING 1 60008 $73.39 04/29/22 00136 0 ALHAMBRA S OUTSTANDING
1 60009 $675.00 04/29/22 03946 0 ALL BAY ENVIRONMENTAL S OUTSTANDING 1 60010 $83.16 04/29/22 00138 0 ALL INDUSTRIAL ELECTRIC SUPPLY, INC. S OUTSTANDING 1 60011 $350.93 04/29/22 04980 1 AMAZON.COM SALES, INC. S OUTSTANDING 1 60012 $129.87 04/29/22 00056 0 ARAMARK S OUTSTANDING
1 60013 $276.77 04/29/22 00009 0 AT&T S OUTSTANDING
1 60014 $464.22 04/29/22 00009 2 AT&T MOBILITY S OUTSTANDING 1 60015 $1200.00 04/29/22 03188 0 ATLAS PLUMBING & ROOTER INC S OUTSTANDING 1 60016 $1174.42 04/29/22 03424 0 AUTO GLASS NOW S OUTSTANDING 1 60017 $1065.78 04/29/22 00293 0 BEARING AGENCIES INC S OUTSTANDING 1 60018 $1577.96 04/29/22 00335 0 BLUE RIBBON SUPPLY COMPANY S OUTSTANDING 1 60019 $640.57 04/29/22 00365 0 BROADMOOR LANDSCAPE SUPPLY S OUTSTANDING 1 60020 $10080.00 04/29/22 03814 1 CAPPSTONE, INC. S OUTSTANDING 1 60021 $908.00 04/29/22 05494 0 CARAHSOFT TECHNOLOGY CORPORATION S OUTSTANDING 1 60022 $10461.60 04/29/22 00507 0 CHILDCARE CAREERS S OUTSTANDING 1 60023 $1994.66 04/29/22 00510 0 CINTAS CORPORATION #464 S OUTSTANDING 1 60024 $73.95 04/29/22 02168 1 COMCAST S OUTSTANDING
1 60025 $1154.01 04/29/22 04677 0 CORODATA RECORDS MANAGEMENT INC S OUTSTANDING 1 60026 $64646.21 04/29/22 00611 2 CSG CONSULTANTS, INC. S OUTSTANDING 1 60027 $2025.00 04/29/22 02071 0 DAVID GRANT, INC S OUTSTANDING 1 60028 $2245.06 04/29/22 05503 0 DAVID SCHAEFER-SLM LLC S OUTSTANDING 1 60029 $1816.99 04/29/22 00653 0 DELL MARKETING L.P. S OUTSTANDING Report: CHECKREG Generated: 18DEC20 13:17 Run: FRIDAY MAY0622 8:07 Page: 4
CITY OF PACIFICA
CHECK REGISTER
CHECK RANGE: 59928 - 60083
CHECK
BANK CHECK # CHECK AMT CHECK DATE VENDOR # ADDRS # VENDOR NAME TYPE STATUS ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 1 60030 $4800.00 04/29/22 02201 0 DISCOUNT PLUMBING, INC. S OUTSTANDING 1 60031 $55.91 04/29/22 02614 0 DISH S OUTSTANDING
1 60032 $1200.00 04/29/22 04321 0 DUBOCE JANITORIAL SERVICES S OUTSTANDING 1 60033 $521.69 04/29/22 04732 0 ECO PROMOTIONAL PRODUCTS, INC. S OUTSTANDING 1 60034 $9.05 04/29/22 03047 0 FASTRAK VIOLATION PROCESSING DEPARTMENT S OUTSTANDING 1 60035 $5510.00 04/29/22 03930 0 FREYER & LAURETA, INC. S OUTSTANDING 1 60036 $225.58 04/29/22 05504 0 GABRIEL MORRIS S OUTSTANDING 1 60037 $19731.15 04/29/22 04369 0 GHD INC. S OUTSTANDING 1 60038 $562.84 04/29/22 00872 0 GRAINGER S OUTSTANDING 1 60039 $474.00 04/29/22 04259 0 GREEN TIRES S OUTSTANDING 1 60040 $24002.30 04/29/22 03616 0 GROUP 4 ARCHITECTURE RESEARCH PLANNING INC S OUTSTANDING 1 60041 $263.81 04/29/22 04842 0 HEMRAJ SINGH S OUTSTANDING 1 60042 $772.28 04/29/22 04999 2 IMAGE SOURCE S OUTSTANDING 1 60043 $600.00 04/29/22 02544 1 IN & OUT PLUMBING S OUTSTANDING 1 60044 $130.00 04/29/22 00978 1 INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION FOR PROPERTY S OUTSTANDING 1 60045 $125.00 04/29/22 04085 0 JAMES FORD, INC. S OUTSTANDING 1 60046 $1592.60 04/29/22 05322 0 JDA ELECTRICAL CONTRACTORS, INC. S OUTSTANDING 1 60047 $288.04 04/29/22 05505 0 JEMICO LLC S OUTSTANDING 1 60048 $630.00 04/29/22 01014 0 JOHN THE SIGN GUY LLC S OUTSTANDING 1 60049 $62.70 04/29/22 01812 4 KBA DOCUSYS S OUTSTANDING 1 60050 $730.00 04/29/22 00001 257 LECHLEITNER, KYLE S OUTSTANDING 1 60051 $208.09 04/29/22 05482 1 LINDE GAS & EQUIPMENT INC. S OUTSTANDING 1 60052 $1718.75 04/29/22 03779 0 MAXX METALS S OUTSTANDING 1 60053 $701.40 04/29/22 01142 0 MC MASTER-CARR SUPPLY COMPANY S OUTSTANDING 1 60054 $1132.24 04/29/22 01154 0 METRO MOBILE COMMUNICATIONS S OUTSTANDING 1 60055 $360.85 04/29/22 00001 341 MOORE, JANELLE S OUTSTANDING 1 60056 $247.50 04/29/22 01378 1 MUSCIO ELECTRIC S OUTSTANDING 1 60057 $3787.40 04/29/22 04549 0 NAF SERVICES, INC. S OUTSTANDING 1 60058 $609.97 04/29/22 01217 0 OFFICE DEPOT S OUTSTANDING 1 60059 $721.62 04/29/22 01239 0 PACIFIC FIRE SAFE S OUTSTANDING 1 60060 $217.50 04/29/22 01758 3 PACIFICA FIREFIGHTERS ASSOCIATION S OUTSTANDING 1 60061 $2650.00 04/29/22 01300 0 PEPPER BROS BUILDING MAINTENANCE S OUTSTANDING 1 60062 $4370.76 04/29/22 00001 114 POMICPIC, CHARLES S OUTSTANDING 1 60063 $293.14 04/29/22 03160 0 PUBLIC PARKING ASSOCIATES, INC. S OUTSTANDING 1 60064 $40.56 04/29/22 01336 0 QUILL CORPORATION S OUTSTANDING 1 60065 $200.00 04/29/22 01353 6 REDWOOD CITY, CITY OF S OUTSTANDING 1 60066 $3401.20 04/29/22 03306 1 ROBERT HALF MANAGEMENT RESOURCES S OUTSTANDING 1 60067 $3172.17 04/29/22 04860 0 SERRA YELLOW CAB S OUTSTANDING 1 60068 $1124.31 04/29/22 01461 0 SERRAMONTE FORD INC. S OUTSTANDING
http://pac-gems/fms/BISystem/ReadROCFile.asp?sWC=C&iIdx=&FileName=D:\GemsEnv... 5/6/2022
1.a
Packet Pg. 155 Attachment: FY 2021-2022 Disbursements 59928-60083 -4-16 to 4-30-22 (4992 : Disbursements - Dated 4/16/22 through 4/30/22) 1 60069 $265.00 04/29/22 05465 0 SIGILLO SUPPLY, INC. S OUTSTANDING 1 60070 $225.38 04/29/22 05506 0 SKYTECH SOLAR S OUTSTANDING 1 60071 $2259.00 04/29/22 02681 0 SUN RIDGE SYSTEMS, INC S OUTSTANDING 1 60072 $258.53 04/29/22 05507 0 TODD HOWARD CONSTRUCTION INC. S OUTSTANDING 1 60073 $1264.09 04/29/22 01077 0 TREE MANAGEMENT EXPERTS S OUTSTANDING 1 60074 $600.00 04/29/22 05508 0 TYKEN CONSTRUCTION S OUTSTANDING 1 60075 $902.34 04/29/22 04576 0 UNIVAR USA INC S OUTSTANDING 1 60076 $325.01 04/29/22 01663 0 URBAN FARMER STORE, THE S OUTSTANDING 1 60077 $4213.62 04/29/22 03835 0 US FOODS, INC S OUTSTANDING 1 60078 $387.99 04/29/22 01667 0 USA BLUE BOOK S OUTSTANDING 1 60079 $250.12 04/29/22 02899 1 UTILITY TELECOM GROUP, LLC S OUTSTANDING 1 60080 $515.66 04/29/22 01698 1 WATSON-MARLOW INC. S OUTSTANDING Report: CHECKREG Generated: 18DEC20 13:17 Run: FRIDAY MAY0622 8:07 Page: 5
CITY OF PACIFICA
CHECK REGISTER
CHECK RANGE: 59928 - 60083
CHECK
BANK CHECK # CHECK AMT CHECK DATE VENDOR # ADDRS # VENDOR NAME TYPE STATUS ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 1 60081 $668.94 04/29/22 01701 0 WECO INDUSTRIES S OUTSTANDING 1 60082 $1280.41 04/29/22 04999 1 XEROX FINANCIAL SERVICES S OUTSTANDING 1 60083 $21721.15 04/26/22 04608 0 TRI COUNTIES BANK S OUTSTANDING TOTAL # OF ISSUED CHECKS: 156 TOTAL AMOUNT: 504,470.70
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: FRIDAY MAY0622 8:07 Page: 6
FUND TOTALS
-----------
FUND FUND NAME ISSUED TOTAL VOIDED/REISSUED TOTAL
------ ------------------------------ --------------- ---------------------- 001 GENERAL FUND 243,061.79 0.00
005 TRUST AND AGENCY FUND 71.09 0.00
009 STREET CONSTRUCTION FUND 1,272.50 0.00
010 GAS TAX MAINTENANCE FUND 12,306.85 0.00
016 NPDES STORMWATER FUND 521.69 0.00
018 SEWER CHARGE FUND 154,778.95 0.00
022 GENERAL CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT 48,244.70 0.00
028 PB&R SPECIAL REVENUE 3,172.17 0.00
034 SEWER FACILITY CONSTRUCT. FUND 8,333.42 0.00
035 BEACH PARKING FUND 293.14 0.00
038 DISASTER ACCOUNTING FUND 13,763.50 0.00
065 SELF-FUNDED DENTAL PLAN FUND 319.80 0.00
067 SELF-INSURANCE FUND (LIAB) 670.04 0.00
071 MOTOR POOL OPERATIONS FUND 17,661.06 0.00
================ ================
TOTAL - 504,470.70 0.00
http://pac-gems/fms/BISystem/ReadROCFile.asp?sWC=C&iIdx=&FileName=D:\GemsEnv... 5/6/2022 NO FY 2021-2022 CHECKS ISSUED ON 4/16/22-4/21/22.
1.a
Packet Pg. 156 Attachment: FY 2021-2022 Disbursements 59928-60083 -4-16 to 4-30-22 (4992 : Disbursements - Dated 4/16/22 through 4/30/22)
CITY OF PACIFICA
COUNCIL AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT
6/13/2022
1 SUBJECT:
Approval of Minutes
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Move to approve the minutes of the City Council Meeting held on May 23, 2022.
STAFF CONTACT:
Sarah Coffey, City Clerk
650-738-7307
[email protected]
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION:
Move to approve the minutes of the City Council Meeting held on May 23, 2022 (Attachment A).
FISCAL IMPACT:
None.
ORIGINATED BY:
City Clerk
ATTACHMENT LIST:
Attachment A: Minutes of May 23, 2022 City Council Meeting (PDF) 2 Packet Pg. 157
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 May 23, 2022
SPECIAL and REGULAR MEETING
May 23, 2022 (MONDAY)
www.cityofpacifica.org
Mayor Mary Bier called the meeting to order on May 23, 2022 at 4:30 PM 4:30 PM - CLOSED SESSION
Conference with Legal Counsel – Anticipated Litigation- Initiation of litigation pursuant to paragraph (4) of subdivision (d) of Section 54956.9: (One potential case) Mayor Bier called the meeting to order at 4:30 p.m. and announced that the Council would meet in Closed Session. Mayor Bier announced the business to be discussed. 5:00 PM - STUDY SESSION
Study Session - Tree Ordinance - Community Outreach & Benchmarking Study PROPOSED ACTION: Receive a report regarding the Tree Ordinance - Community Outreach & Benchmarking Study and provide direction to the City Manager regarding next steps for Tree Ordinance revisions.
Mayor Bier called the study session to order at 5:03 p.m.
PW Dep. Director Bautista stated that Allison Steere and Tina McKeand from Davey Resource Group were also present. He then introduced the staff report.
Allison Serafin Steere of DRG made the presentation.
Mayor Bier stated that Mayor pro Tem Bigstyck was attending by phone and Councilmember Beckmeyer was due to arrive to the meeting shortly. She then asked if there were any questions.
Councilmember O’Neill suggested that they have the public hearing before they have their discussion.
Mayor Bier agreed to open public hearing, requesting that City Attorney Kenyon guide her through the agenda.
City Attorney Kenyon stated that it is a study session so whatever the Council decides is fine.
2.a
Packet Pg. 158 Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of May 23, 2022 City Council Meeting (5006 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 2 May 23, 2022
Mayor Bier wanted the public to share comments and opened public comment.
Paul Totah, Pacifica, stated he was commenting for himself and fellow Tree City Pacifica members in support of this issue, mentioning some suggested changes with respect to expanding notifications, appeal period and fee, goals for urban forest tree canopy, etc.
Sandy Ayers, Pacifica, stated, as a member of Tree City Pacifica, he was speaking in support of this issue, mentioning some suggested changes with respect to mitigation tree replacement ratios for residential and development, in-lieu fees, evaluation of trees requested for removal by certified arborist, etc.
Gail Benton Shoemaker, Pacifica, stated, as a member of Tree City Pacifica, she approved of the presentation, but added suggestions of points that are missing from the proposed ordinance, referencing best practices from other cities that they would like to see in the ordinance, supporting the two to one plant-back ratio, concerns about lack of enforcement of the current ordinance, suggesting in-lieu fees, etc.
Jennifer Chaloemtiarana, Pacifica, stated that she appreciated the city’s efforts in protecting heritage trees, adding her concerns and suggestions for additional considerations of other trees that are left behind by this policy, concerns with large trees that are dead and dying that cause property damage and risk of fire due to debris drying out.
Cindy Abbott, Pacifica, appreciated all the work on this subject, and expressed support of the additional points presented by Tree City Pacifica and added her concerns and suggestions regarding mitigation recommendations for replanting, in-lieu fees, and the need for clear standards and penalties, the need to build a maintenance fund, better community communications and suggesting online resources for announcements and history of tree removals.
Aren Clark, Pacifica, stated he had no objection to increasing the canopy of the city, but he expressed his concerns about this ordinance, concerns about non-native invasive trees, trees that are dying dropping limbs and increasing fuel load on city property, suggestions for planned maintenance of habitats.
Kai Martin, Pacifica, stated he was a member of Tree City Pacifica and appreciated the efforts of staff and shared his thoughts on the ordinance and suggestions already made by speakers, supporting the diameter going to 12-inches, supporting the definition of native species and categorizations of heritage and protected trees, taking into consideration of extreme fire risk and the formulas and checklists proposed.
Mgmt. Analyst Montemayor introduced the call-ins.
Christine Boles, Pacifica, thanked staff and DRG for their work on this ordinance, and shared her concerns on past problems with respect to trees on development projects and put forth her suggested additions to the ordinance, such as no trees being removed or logging operations prior to a permit being issued. She gave examples from past development projects and issues with respect to trees.
Susan Miller, Pacifica, stated that she is a member of Tree City Pacifica and agreed with most of the speakers, and put forth her suggested additions to the ordinance such as permits being
2.a
Packet Pg. 159 Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of May 23, 2022 City Council Meeting (5006 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 3 May 23, 2022
required to prune more than 25% of a protected tree and no person shall destroy a tree without a permit, supporting a tree construction zone, penalties if trees or their roots are damaged, and no tree being removed in construction until building permits are approved.
Summer Lee, Pacifica, appreciated having this study session and allowing public input and she supported the Tree City Pacifica additional recommendations, and expressed her further thoughts on this issue and concerns about retroactive permits, need for transparency supporting the online recommendation for notification.
Mayor Bier closed the public comments, then opened for Council questions and following that, they would have a discussion to provide recommendations for staff to prepare an ordinance.
Councilmember Beckmeyer understood they had general questions they were asking now, but she asked if they want to follow staff’s report with the bullet point questions of the guides to make sure they get through all of them.
Mayor Bier stated that, after they all have something to say, they can follow it.
Councilmember Beckmeyer stated that she also referred to Tree City and they have to go back and forth between the two documents.
Mayor Bier thought the documents kind of mirror each other.
Mayor Bier stated that Tree City also recommended using the ISA basic tree risk assessment form, asking if they were familiar with that. She then went through the bullet points, beginning with definition for heritage tree. She thought they should adopt that and use the 12-inch diameter instead of the 14.
Councilmember Beckmeyer agreed.
Councilmember Vaterlaus thought in the report she thought they should change from heritage tree to protected tree then they added other information into that, not just heritage tree.
Mayor Bier stated that was the next question.
Councilmember Vaterlaus asked how you approve one and then the next one. She stated that, if she says yes, she wants to approve the definition for a heritage tree and then goes to the second one and she then says she didn’t want a heritage tree but called a protected tree.
Mayor Bier agreed, stating that they rename it as a protected tree.
Councilmember Beckmeyer stated that she was looking at the packet but she understands that they are moving from what is currently in the ordinance and the definition of a heritage tree and are now calling it a protected tree and a new definition for a heritage tree is what is on packet page 4 with the bullet points.
PW Dep. Director Bautista stated that she is correct.
Councilmember Beckmeyer asked if the diameter breast height (DBH) difference is for the Toyon because it is naturally a smaller tree.
2.a
Packet Pg. 160 Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of May 23, 2022 City Council Meeting (5006 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 4 May 23, 2022
Ms. McKeand stated that the reduction in DBH is for protected trees as heritage trees could be any size if they are significant for some reason.
Mayor Bier asked if that makes sense, and how Councilmember Vaterlaus feels about that.
Councilmember Vaterlaus stated that it says to use the current definition of a heritage tree and maybe they have one name instead of two as it is the same thing. If the heritage tree is a historic value tree and if large, it will fall into that category anyway, the habitat value.
Mayor Bier thought they were renaming it.
Councilmember O’Neill stated that they agreed to recommended definition of a heritage tree and the next thing is they will adopt the recommended definition of a protected tree, and it says all heritage trees will become protected trees.
Mayor pro Tem Bigstyck thought it might be beneficial if they swap the two question so the heritage and protected go first. He stated that they have a current definition of heritage trees and they are going to keep that but call it protected tree instead in the proposal, and they have a full new definition of what heritage tree means. He asked staff to help him understand the delineation, i.e., what is the difference between how they would approach their protected tree versus how they would approach the heritage tree if they have the two different definitions.
Ms. Steere stated that it would be addressed through the point system they mentioned in the presentation. She stated that, if the tree is a heritage tree, it would carry more weight to the decision of whether or not to approve or deny a permit.
Mayor Bier asked if the point system comes from the assessment form.
Ms. Steere stated that it would be based off the parameters set in the ordinance and staff would use it internally to help assess those permit applications.
Mayor pro Tem Bigstyck stated that, within that context, our new definition of heritage trees would make that subset of trees more difficult to cut down versus this new title protected tree which is essentially our current heritage tree. He didn’t think it would be easy, but there will be a difference in how they approach the two. He favors yes and yes for the first two questions.
Mayor Bier asked if they can talk about the 12-inch diameter instead of the 14.
Mayor pro Tem Bigstyck stated he is in favor of 12-inch.
PW Dep. Director Bautista stated that they are going to define what the current heritage tree definition is so they aren’t confused.
Ms. Steere referred to Section 4 of Chapter 12-02 of the ordinance under definition, heritage tree shall mean and include all trees within the city of Pacifica, exclusive of eucalyptus which have a trunk with a circumference of 50 inches, approximately 16 inches in diameter or more measured at 24 inches above the natural grade or a tree or grove of trees, including eucalyptus designated by resolution of Council to be of special historical environmental or aesthetic value.
She stated that would be a protected tree. She stated that the definition of a heritage tree would be more specifically defined, recognizing trees that are historically significant or culturally significant, even visibly prominent in the community, species such as native Toyon that are
2.a
Packet Pg. 161 Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of May 23, 2022 City Council Meeting (5006 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 5 May 23, 2022
currently not covered by the current definition of heritage trees.
Mayor Bier asked if they got enough feedback for the first two questions.
Councilmember Beckmeyer wanted to make sure Councilmembers Vaterlaus and O’Neill are okay with 12.
Councilmember Vaterlaus stated that the Monterey pine is in this definition, and she asked about that.
Councilmember Beckmeyer thought the question they are most worried about was hazard and illness or health of the tree, and it sounded like it would be defined later under part 2 of the process.
Councilmember O’Neill thought, if they are exempt, such as eucalyptus is agreed to be exempt, a homeowner can cut any size down with no issues. He stated that, if they exempt Monterey pine, they put it in the same category as eucalyptus and you have someone come in and you spend $400 on arborist report to find out if all six of their Monterey pines are diseased and have to be cut down, and if they exempt the Monterey pine, they can be cut down and the person doesn’t have to pay the $2,400.
Councilmember Beckmeyer stated that he is assuming that they look at it and say that it looks diseased, blocking my solar and my neighbor’s gutters.
Councilmember O’Neill stated that they had a city arborist state, and in the conference he attended, that virtually every Monterey pine has defined cancer or bug.
Councilmember Beckmeyer asked that it is pine pitch canker.
Councilmember O’Neill stated that, if they have it and dead, he thought they should consider exempting Monterey pine and eucalyptus only.
Councilmember Beckmeyer stated if they qualify and they are dead.
Councilmember O’Neill asked if they are more fire prone if they are in a weakened state.
City Attorney Kenyon asked if he was asking staff that question.
Councilmember O’Neill stated that he was asking Aren Clark as he is an arborist.
City Attorney Kenyon stated he is not on staff and Council needs to ask this staff.
Ms. McKeand stated that, depending on how stressed the tree is, it could make it more fire prone but she thought that is an arborist determination and she would not recommend that they allow the general public to make those decisions.
Councilmember O’Neill asked what she means by the general public, such as the public hearing they had.
Ms. McKeand stated that a tree can appear to be dead to someone who doesn’t understand the biology of the tree.
2.a
Packet Pg. 162 Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of May 23, 2022 City Council Meeting (5006 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 6 May 23, 2022
Councilmember O’Neill understood.
Mayor pro Tem Bigstyck heard from a certified arborist that I should be concerned after allowing Monterey pines to remain on the heritage list which is his understand of his comments. He asked city staff how concerned he should be about Monterey pines.
PW Dep. Director Bautista stated that he sees Director Petersen coming up to answer that question.
PW Director Petersen thought they were talking about, if there is a diseased or dying tree, they will want to take it out and she didn’t think they would want to blanket it and say that all Monterey pines are dead and dying trees. She stated that staff is capable of going out and looking at the tree and seeing if they are dying and they will not make someone go through a heritage tree permit to get that tree removed.
Councilmember O’Neill asked, if someone wants to cut down a tree, is she saying that they come in, fill out their application and Council is going to send a city staff member to look at it and see if the tree needs an arborist report or automatically give a list of approved arborist and tell them to call them.
PW Director Petersen thought they were talking about whether they should be requesting arborist reports in certain situations, and should they be requesting them for all heritage tree removals and protected trees that may have a pathogen or a pest. She stated that is the question they are talking about at this time, and currently it’s a bit of a gray area which is why they are here to get clarification so they can get the ordinance clearer for everyone, including the residents as they move forward. She stated that, obviously if the trees are dead or dying, they are going to let the person take it out, but if there is a question of whether that tree is healthy, they think they probably need to get an arborist report because staff deals with a lot of trees and thinks that tree looks healthy so it is that kind of scenario currently.
Councilmember Beckmeyer concluded it is professional judgment.
PW Director Petersen responded affirmatively.
Councilmember O’Neill stated that his question is what the process is, i.e., if he fills out an application to get a permit, is Pacifica going to send someone out to look at the tree and, if they look and see that it is dead and no need to have an arborist or it might be but you need to get an arborist report. He asked if staff can give permission for a tree to be torn down if they feel it is dead.
PW Director Petersen stated that they can and will let them take it down as it is a hazard for the home, a fire hazard.
Councilmember O’Neill concluded that will be part of the process if they move forward.
PW Director Petersen stated that he is correct and they will still do that.
Councilmember O’Neill didn’t want to see residents spend $400-$500 on arborist reports for trees staff looked at and are dead.
2.a
Packet Pg. 163 Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of May 23, 2022 City Council Meeting (5006 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 7 May 23, 2022
PE Director Petersen stated that it would be a situation where there was a question, but if it was obviously dead, they will let them take it down.
Mayor Bier thought they all agreed on the trunk diameter, and the city should adopt the standard for measuring tree diameter at 54 inches above natural grade, and she thinks they agree to that.
Should the diameter for the protected trees be decreased from 16 to 14 or 12, and she thinks they agree to 12. Next decision is should there be a separate permit for trees in construction zones that will not be removed. She thought they agreed that no tree should be removed before there is a building permit. Regarding requiring developers to hire an arborist to prepare a tree protection plan, she thought they all agreed on that.
Councilmember O’Neill added that, for clarity, if no trees on the property, they don’t need to hire an arborist as there is no need to have a tree protection plan.
Mayor Bier concluded they were in agreement. She then asked if developers should be required to protect trees on adjacent properties, as they question if it will affect the roots and if that is how it is defined.
Councilmember O’Neill stated that they have setbacks on property, and he asked if that generally covers the root systems of most trees.
Ms. McKeand thought likely not if it is a protected or heritage tree.
Councilmember O’Neill asked if they were saying that, if the roots of the neighbor’s tree goes underneath the property, they cannot build on that property.
Councilmember Beckmeyer thought they were saying they need to protect it and create a tree protection plan, stated that it would be a case by case, and it would be about the plan.
Mayor Bier concluded she meant the tree protection plan.
Councilmember Vaterlaus thought, if you have a tree that is 50 feet in diameter roots and you are on a 50 x 100 lot, that means that they have just taken your property and you can’t build at all.
Councilmember O’Neill asked if you can build on tree roots.
Ms. McKeand stated that what would typically be considered in those conditions would be the reasonable use of the property. She stated that tree protection doesn’t mean not doing anything around the trees, just that if you are not constructing or removing that tree as part of the process, you need to avoid stacking material and compacting the soil, spilling chemicals within the tree line, avoid parking under the tree for compaction. She stated that it may mean that, cutting off irrigation to the property during construction, they need to apply water and it is protecting a tree that was determined by that project to be a tree that needs to be protected.
Councilmember O’Neill asked, if the neighbor doesn’t want whatever is being built next door, can there be a tree protection plan developed if the neighbor says you can’t go on their property.
Ms. McKeand stated that you are only protecting the part of the tree that extends on the property being developed, not the entire tree and it would be considered the same as any other
2.a
Packet Pg. 164 Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of May 23, 2022 City Council Meeting (5006 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 8 May 23, 2022
protected tree if it were on the property.
Councilmember O’Neill stated that, if the neighbor doesn’t want what is being built, they can’t prohibit the builder to develop a tree protection plan for the tree on the other person’s property.
Ms. McKeand stated that some of that is up to the Planning Department but they didn’t think that was the case.
Mayor Bier asked if the developer be required to protect trees on adjacent property, and they were in agreement on that. The next item was if a point system be developed to provide guidance to staff on requested tree removals of protected and heritage trees, and they were all in agreement in support of that. The next issue is if there should be a separate permit for pruning protected and heritage trees, and they were all in agreement.
Councilmember Vaterlaus suggested they add a percentage of 25% because she might want to trim one branch and should be allowed.
Ms. McKeand stated that was not their recommendation, but Tree City Pacifica’s recommendation. She stated that they recommend there be a permit regardless of how much they want to prune because 25% could actually be extensive on a heritage tree or protected tree as they are typically older and mature and don’t react as well to more pruning and 25% would be the maximum they usually recommend for any tree and for an older tree, the threshold would likely be lower and they recommend that a permit be required to prune a heritage or protected tree so it gives staff an opportunity to provide guidance about what they should or shouldn’t do.
Councilmember O’Neill asked if she was saying even one limb.
Ms. McKeand stated that it depends on the size of the limb and the alternative would be to have some guidance on the city’s website that says they can do things but, if they want to do certain things, they need a permit. She stated that they don’t recommend a flat 25% threshold as it could excessive.
Councilmember O’Neill if they want to lower the 25% to 15% or so.
Councilmember Vaterlaus stated that she doesn’t want to get a permit for every time she trims her tree.
Councilmember O’Neill thought, every time they trim the tree is excessive but if they are saying 25% is too much, maybe they lower the percentage and he was throwing out 15%.
Councilmember Vaterlaus thought they would be happy as they suggested the 25%.
Councilmember O’Neill thought they have to be reasonable, i.e., if the tree is dangling and going to go through a window, they will want to cut it off before it breaks the window or power line.
Mayor pro Tem Bigstyck asked if staff had a recommendation of what threshold would be reasonable for the sake of the tree.
Councilmember O’Neill stated that Tree City members say 25%, the arborist lady says 0% and you get a permit for cutting everything off a tree.
2.a
Packet Pg. 165 Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of May 23, 2022 City Council Meeting (5006 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 9 May 23, 2022
Ms. McKeand added the alternative of providing some guidance on the website that tells people what to prune or what not to prune.
Mayor Bier thought that would be helpful.
Councilmember Vaterlaus thought guidance would be good.
Councilmember O’Neill stated they could have 15% plus the guidance.
Mayor pro Tem Bigstyck stated that he doesn’t know if 15% is still harmful to a heritage tree.
Ms. McKeand stated that it can be, i.e., if pruning a large branch off and it is only 15% of the tree, it could cause the tree to become a risk or it could kill the tree, and why they suggest guidance on that.
Mayor pro Tem Bigstyck liked the idea of making information available and having a process where someone taking it upon themselves and are wrong, they get fined accordingly and should have looked at the information available and you need a permit.
Mayor Bier agreed that they have a discussion.
Councilmember Beckmeyer stated she is hearing permit.
Councilmember O’Neill stated that Mayor pro Tem Bigstyck is saying put it on the website and permit for everything and Councilmember Vaterlaus is saying she doesn’t want to get a permit every time she cuts but she seemed to be happy with 15%. He suggested 15% and the information on the website.
Councilmember Beckmeyer concluded he is saying 15% and guidance.
Mayor Bier stated that was fine and they are okay with 15%. The next topic is should an arborist report be required to remove trees based on poor health, pest pathogen and/or when a tree is a heritage tree.
Councilmember Vaterlaus stated that PW Director Petersen said, if they go out and say that the tree is bad, why would you have to get an arborist report.
Mayor Bier asked how they would know, clarifying if she is speaking about city staff.
Councilmember Vaterlaus confirmed it is staff, and she thought an arborist report or a report from city staff.
Mayor Bier stated that, in the perfect world, they would have an arborist.
Councilmember Vaterlaus agreed.
Mayor Bier concluded that there would be an arborist report.
PW Director Petersen stated that, to clarify things, she stated that they can see that the tree has something wrong with it but it doesn’t mean that the tree is going to die, and she thought the goal of this recommendation is that, if you look at the tree and conclude you don’t know if it will
2.a
Packet Pg. 166 Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of May 23, 2022 City Council Meeting (5006 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 10 May 23, 2022
be a problem or not, and they will ask for an arborist report.
Councilmember Beckmeyer asked how they change the bullet point to say what she just said.
PW Director Petersen thought it was generally understood that, if staff is taking a look at the tree and see it is dead, they will say they can take it out, but if staff is unclear that it will die, they could get an arborist to look at it and then makes a different assessment based on the actual situation and at that point they would ask for an arborist report.
Councilmember Beckmeyer stated that the bullet point as written is confusing her as they are combining two things, should an arborist report be required to remove a tree based on poor health, pest pathogen, and she thought that might have a different answer than should an arborist report be required to remove a tree when it is a heritage tree. She stated that those three things are in one bullet point and that was what was tripping them.
Ms. McKeand thought the intent was that, if you want to remove a tree for construction and making a case of reasonable use on the property, it doesn’t matter about the health of the tree, but if you are saying the tree isn’t healthy and that is why you want to remove it, it requires a professional opinion which is the intent of those three distinctions.
Councilmember Beckmeyer thought the point of having to pay $400 or $500 for an arborist report was different from a professional opinion as an arborist report is a specific thing and cost.
Councilmember O’Neill stated he was okay if city staff says the tree is dead and there is no point in getting an arborist report.
Councilmember Beckmeyer stated that the bullet point doesn’t say that, and the way it is written, they would be saying that they need an arborist report.
Councilmember O’Neill stated he disagreed with that conclusion.
Councilmember Beckmeyer stated that is why she is asking how they fix it.
Councilmember Vaterlaus suggested staff recommendation or an arborist report, depending on staff’s recommendations.
Councilmember Beckmeyer asked if what she was saying is that a staff recommendation or arborist report should be required.
Councilmember Vaterlaus responded affirmatively.
PW Director Petersen stated that, typically, if staff sees that the tree is dead, they will suggest that they take it out. She stated that they want some backing to say that, if that tree has pest or pathogens, they will request that they get an arborist report. She stated that the way the verbiage is stated works, and they can add in, if people think they have a dead tree, that would be assessed by staff but if you have pests or pathogen and a protected tree, they should get an arborist report and if a heritage tree, they have to get an arborist report.
City Attorney Kenyon added that, this is not a yes or no answer, just the majority deliberating on this and giving feedback will help them in drafting an ordinance. She commented that they are running out of time and they may not finish all of these points, but there was no need to agree
2.a
Packet Pg. 167 Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of May 23, 2022 City Council Meeting (5006 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 11 May 23, 2022
with each bullet point and give them their thoughts and they can surmise from that.
Councilmember Beckmeyer assumed they have what they need on this one with Council’s concerns about dead/dying.
Mayor Bier then stated that should protection for groves of trees greater than six inches in diameter be added to Chapter 12, and all Councilmembers agreed.
Councilmember Vaterlaus thought it should include eucalyptus as they have had issues in the past where people clear cut eucalyptus on whole hillsides which was a problem.
Councilmember O’Neill stated that was what prompted the heritage tree ordinance.
Councilmember Vaterlaus stated they used to exempt all of the eucalyptus trees regardless of how many they cut down.
Councilmember O’Neill added that they are highly flammable, and asked if she was saying she didn’t want to exempt eucalyptus.
Councilmember Vaterlaus stated that, if you are going to have the groves, you still have to have some protection against clear cutting but if you eliminate eucalyptus from that, someone can take down all the eucalyptus they want with no regard to what the wind patterns, soil patterns, and other issues that occurred when that happened.
Mayor Bier concluded they agreed it should be part of that. She stated they haven’t talked about any of the ratio replacements.
Councilmember O’Neill stated that it was 7:00 p.m.
Mayor Bier acknowledged that.
Councilmember Beckmeyer asked if they draw the line here.
Mayor Bier stated that there are a few different things they didn’t get to talk about and they can talk about them next time. She thanked everyone’s time.
City Manager Woodhouse asked for clarification, since they didn’t get through all the questions, if it was Council’s preference that they continue the study session at a future date to be determined or work on developing a partial ordinance to bring back and finish the other questions.
Mayor Bier liked his suggestion regarding the partial ordinance and continue.
Councilmember Vaterlaus stated that they just ask the questions they didn’t answer, and they finished most of them.
Councilmember Beckmeyer stated that the one they didn’t get to was about penalties, fees, ratios and they are big topics.
City Attorney Kenyon agreed, adding that she thought they could draft a partial ordinance and she asked Council if they want staff to look into penalties, remedies, in addition to the $1,000
2.a
Packet Pg. 168 Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of May 23, 2022 City Council Meeting (5006 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 12 May 23, 2022
fine. If yes, she stated that they can come back with some options for Council.
Councilmembers all agreed.
Mayor Bier called a short break before starting the regular meeting.
RESULT: NO VOTE REQUIRED
7:00 PM OPEN SESSION
Call to Order
Mayor Bier reconvened the regular meeting at 7:06 p.m.
Attendee Name Title Status Arrived
Mary Bier Mayor Present
Tygarjas Bigstyck Mayor Pro Tem Remote
Mike O'Neill Councilmember Present
Sue Vaterlaus Councilmember Present
Sue Beckmeyer Councilmember Present
City Clerk Coffey took a verbal roll call, with Mayor pro Tem Bigstyck participating by phone.
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; Louis Sun, PW Dep. Director-Wastewater Div.; Raymund Donguines, Sr. Civil Engineer; Mike Perez, PB&R Director; Josh Montemayor, Management Analyst; Sarah Coffey, City Clerk.
Reading of Land Acknowledgment
Mayor Bier read the Land Acknowledgment.
Salute to the Flag led by Councilmember O'Neill
Closed Session Report
City Attorney Kenyon stated that, during the closed session, Council determined that they were going to initiate litigations and the specifics of the litigation and more details will be made known to the public after the filing of the litigation. She stated that the vote was unanimous by Council - 5-0.
SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS
A. Proclamation - Wildfire Awareness Month - May 2022
2.a
Packet Pg. 169 Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of May 23, 2022 City Council Meeting (5006 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 13 May 23, 2022
Mayor Bier read the proclamation for Wildfire Awareness Month.
Dep. Fire Chief Pomicpic accepted the proclamation, and reported that wildfire season is now year round, and while they continue to be a threat to homes and communities throughout California, there is a need for wildfire prevention and preparedness at both community and homeowner levels. He reported what Pacifica’s Fire Department is doing to have preventative activities in place and stated that, on June 11, 10:00 a.m.-1:00 p.m., , there will be a Pacifica wildfire preparedness event in the Community Center parking lot, with the presence of the North County Fire Authority, Pacifica Police Department, Fire Safe San Mateo County and California Department of Insurance, and mentioned the topics for discussion. He thanked the City for the proclamation recognizing Wildfire Awareness Month.
Mayor Bier invited Council to comment.
Councilmember Vaterlaus observed that they are talking about Wildfire Awareness when they were previously talking about trees as they go hand in hand and it was important for everyone.
Councilmember O’Neill wanted to acknowledge our Fire Department as he didn’t know of Pacificans know that, every time there is a call for a wildfire, and Pacifica has a green engine because they promised to respond and they have at least one crew at those fires and on the line including having to send a second shift to relieve the first, with those costs reimbursed by the state. He mentioned all the cities in California where we have gone, adding that he didn’t know if they ever went out of state.
Dep. Fire Chief Pomicpic stated that they have gone out of state to Washington, Colorado and all the way to the Mexican border.
Councilmember O’Neill acknowledged that Pacifica’s Fire Department goes international, adding that they still maintain our fully staffed fire houses and mutual aid kicks in from the county to cover everyone. He referred to the fire in Rockaway that was at the same time as the gas exploded in San Bruno and they had firefighters from Menlo Park fighting in Pacifica. He commended them all for their diligence in going international and to many states to fight fires.
Councilmember Beckmeyer highlighted the depth of training they have and the commitment and how they serve alongside our hospital ambulance crew, adding that they are often the first ones to get there, i.e., in her house when her mother collapsed. She commended their courtesy and professionalism which made her feel good that everyone in Pacifica is getting that.
Mayor pro Tem Bigstyck echoed what his fellow councilmembers have said. He felt they were all heroes doing a heroic job, and he sees them all over town. He is deeply grateful that they are in our community. He was looking forward to attending the event on June 11.
Mayor Bier stated that she will also be there on June 11. She stated that she had the opportunity to get to know some of the firefighters and see the family that they are. She thought it was important for our community to understand how much they care for one another and they build each other up and keep each other healthy. She stated that their job is extremely important and seeing them treat each other with love and respect was inspirational for her.
Dep. Fire Chief Pomicpic thanked her, adding that he has been a firefighter for 38 years and loves every minute of it.
2.a
Packet Pg. 170 Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of May 23, 2022 City Council Meeting (5006 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 14 May 23, 2022
They then took a picture.
CONSENT CALENDAR
Councilmember O’Neill asked to pull Item #6 off the consent calendar to have a deeper explanation as they got many emails about it.
Mayor Bier also wanted to pull Item #3 to have a conversation on that as well. She opened public comments.
City Manager Woodhouse clarified that comments on Items #3 and #6 would come when Council considers those.
City Attorney Kenyon asked the Mayor to list the items on consent that people should be coming to discuss, that would help them decide if they should come now or later.
Mayor stated that Items #1, #2, #4, #5 and #7 are available for comment now and opened public comment. She asked if they had any call-ins.
Mgmt. Analyst Montemayor stated that they have callers but no hands raised at this time.
Mayor Bier closed public comments.
Councilmember Beckmeyer moved to accept the consent calendar minus items #3 and #6; seconded by Councilmember Vaterlaus.
City Clerk Coffey took a vote by verbal roll call.
Vote: 5 - 0 (Consent Calendar, excluding Items #3 and #6) Item #3 Discussion:
Mayor Bier wanted to pull this item to talk about concerns they have in the community about the resurge of Covid and public meetings, and she thought they need to address that at this meeting.
City Manager Woodhouse stated that the city, after two years, continues to have to act nimbly with Covid and, with the recent surge and anticipation of a Councilmember needing to call into a meeting, they put the AB361 certification back on the consent agenda since they were meeting in person. He stated that this allows the flexibility, based on health concerns, to return to fully virtual meetings with significant Council items coming in June and potentially July. One of the questions for Council to determine they should return to fully virtual Zoom meeting for a certain time period to ensure that all Councilmembers or Commissioners can be participating as well as the public.
Councilmember Beckmeyer asked if they are voting on this item to revert to virtual meetings.
City Attorney Kenyon stated that there are two issues raised by City Manager in Item #3, adoption of the AB361 resolution and, if they choose to adopt that AB361 resolution, is Council interested in moving to all virtual for a limited period of time given the latest Covid outbreak.
2.a
Packet Pg. 171 Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of May 23, 2022 City Council Meeting (5006 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 15 May 23, 2022
Councilmember O’Neill asked if what they decide will carry over to commissions and committees also.
City Manager Woodhouse stated that was what they would look to do, and the most immediate pressing meeting is a Planning Commission meeting for the Plan Pacifica documents on June 1, and they could redo the notification required for that to meet the legal standards and hold that meeting virtually.
Councilmember Beckmeyer asked if they would need to set a time certain, such as through the end of July or a specific date.
City Attorney Kenyon stated that there is obviously a need to decide for the Planning Commission meeting and the next Council meeting, but they can decide after every Council meeting and have this resolution on the agenda if they want to decide to go back to virtual for a limited period of time. She stated that a number of cities have gone to all virtual for June only, but they can do it for two weeks, four weeks, etc., for whatever period of time they want.
City Manager Woodhouse added that typically Council does vote on the next agenda about not holding the second meeting in July for summer vacation break, and if that were the case and Council were to consider setting a date, they could go through the first meeting of July and they wouldn’t be back in person until the first meeting in August.
Councilmember O’Neill asked if they have to have public comments.
City Attorney Kenyon responded affirmatively.
Mayor Bier asked Mayor pro Tem Bigstyck if he had any questions.
Mayor pro Tem Bigstyck stated he did not.
Mayor Bier opened public comments and asked if they had any hands raised.
Mgmt. Analyst Montemayor stated they had two hands raised, and asked if she wanted to start with call-ins.
Mayor Bier responded affirmatively.
Mgmt. Analyst Montemayor introduced the call-in speakers.
Jim Kremer, Pacifica, stated that he encouraged them to open it and begin to use it as soon as they can, but he won’t mention this again.
Christine Boles, Pacifica, thanked the Mayor for bringing this up as she thought it was important as they are going to have some large meetings, and mentioned some technical concerns that, when they move back, tech staff can look at to make the meetings more accessible to everyone.
Clifford Lawrence, Pacifica, appreciated Council taking this up as he is among those who is more vulnerable and being isolated for a second time, and mentioned his thoughts in future important meetings.
2.a
Packet Pg. 172 Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of May 23, 2022 City Council Meeting (5006 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 16 May 23, 2022
Summer Lee, Pacifica, stated she didn’t hear all their deliberations, but she encouraged the tele meetings, then mentioned the tech problems for call-ins now compared to Zoom call-ins.
Mayor Bier closed public comments.
Councilmember O’Neill stated that he had no problems either way but, with general plan meetings, he can’t think of any venue in Pacifica that would have social distancing, and he will go with the majority of Council.
Councilmember Beckmeyer agreed, adding that whatever they decision they make should apply to all commissions and committees.
Councilmember Vaterlaus liked seeing everyone in person, but she understands as they got a letter from someone who is worried about trying to call-in and people have problems calling in.
She sees the big issues coming that they will need to have in virtual meetings.
Mayor pro Tem Bigstyck noticed, with the call-ins, when you unmute, you wait up to 10 seconds before you hear the voice say you are unmuted. He stated that maybe Councilmember Beckmeyer is the only one who had this experience, and he stated that after you press the button, you will wait another 10 seconds before you are able to talk, and he was using this process because he was exposed and has shown symptoms but is doing good and better to get back to life in three days. He stated that he is the poster child that they should go back to virtual until the surge stops.
Mayor Bier asked for a motion.
Councilmember O’Neill moved to move all commissions, committees and Council meetings to virtual until August 1.
City Attorney stated that the motion would be to approve Item #3 with direction to Council to move all meetings to virtual until the first meeting in August.
Councilmember O’Neill stated what the City Attorney said; seconded by Councilmember Beckmeyer
City Clerk Coffey took a vote by verbal roll call.
Vote: 5-0 (Item #3 AS AMENDED)
AGENDA ITEM #3:
RESULT: ADOPTED AS AMENDED [UNANIMOUS]
MOVER: Mike O’Neill, Councilmember
SECONDER: Sue Beckmeyer, Councilmember
AYES: Bier, Bigstyck, O'Neill, Vaterlaus, Beckmeyer
Item #6 Discussion:
Councilmember O’Neill stated he pulled Item #6 off the Consent calendar as they got many
2.a
Packet Pg. 173 Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of May 23, 2022 City Council Meeting (5006 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 17 May 23, 2022
emails about it and he wanted the city attorney to clarify why it is on the agenda to vote on so the public will know why.
City Attorney Kenyon stated that there are several reasons why they want to remove Article 10.
Article 10 requires that the rates be updated by ordinance, but the best practice is to update them by resolution and they wanted to fix that. She stated they are removing it because it references Health and Safety Code, but the rates are not required to be adopted pursuant to the Health and Safety Code. With the remove of Article 10, they will still be following all Prop. 218 notices, which is more notice, with 45 days prior to the hearing where the rates will be adopted and goes out to all owners and with a majority protest, it will come back for Council to determine if there is a majority protest and by removing Article 10, Council is not removing notice requirements under Prop. 218. Anytime there is an increase, there will still be notice prior to the hearing, protest allowed at the hearing and a Council determination.
City Manager Woodhouse asked Councilmember O’Neill if his question was generally why this adoption of an ordinance is on the consent calendar or was he specifically asking about the Article 10 piece. He stated that the ordinance was introduced on the May 9 meeting and, like the growth management of Item #7 on the consent, this is the formality of adoption.
Councilmember O’Neill stated that they have received many emails about it and he wanted clarification for the public that they are basically bringing their outdated ordinance in conformance with the state constitution and, while they applied Prop. 218, they are clarifying the ordinance to match Prop. 218 which they always did in practice. He stated that they are not removing public review, public noticing but just clarifying it to bring it in line with the state constitution and state law and amending our ordinances.
Mayor Bier suggested that, because of the extensive agenda, they limit the comments to two minutes for everything on the agenda. She asked if that was agreeable.
Mayor pro Tem Bigstyck agreed.
Mayor Bier opened the public comments.
Vicki Sundstrom, Pacifica, stated that she thought this was an addition to what was required by the state, mentioning her understanding of past discussions on this and asked if they were repealing the regulation that allowed for that annual discussion.
City Attorney Kenyon wanted to clarify that very good question, thanking her for asking it, and she stated that Prop. 218 does not require it every five years but anytime there is any increase to the rates and they will be bringing it back anytime there is a rate increase and follow all Prop. 218 requirements and it is a state constitutional requirement.
Mgmt. Analyst Montemayor introduced the call-ins.
Suzanne Moore, Pacifica, thanked them for pulling this for further discussion, and she expressed her concerns and thoughts on this item.
Clifford Lawrence, Pacifica, stated that he doesn’t understand this, but asked questions to hopefully get answers.
Christine Boles, Pacifica, appreciated the opportunity to talk about this item, specifically her
2.a
Packet Pg. 174 Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of May 23, 2022 City Council Meeting (5006 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 18 May 23, 2022
thoughts on the Sharp Park pump station and concerns on this issue.
Jim Kremer, Pacifica, referred to concerns expressed by other speakers, and gave his thoughts and concerns on this issue.
Mayor Bier closed public comments.
Councilmember O’Neill moved to approve Item #6 from the consent calendar; seconded by Councilmember Vaterlaus.
Mayor pro Tem Bigstyck asked if they could have a discussion before voting.
Mayor Bier agreed.
Mayor pro Tem Bigstyck wanted to ask some clarifying questions. He asked if there were still annual reviews.
City Manager Woodhouse stated that each year they come before Council during the budget development process and Council approves projects for the next fiscal year and for the wastewater rates, if there is no intention to have it exceed 3.5% increase for the next year, there is not a Prop. 218 notification process if necessary but in any given year Council could consider and approve a lower rate than the adopted 3.5% for five years under the Prop. 218 process.
Mayor pro Tem Bigstyck asked if they get to review all of this every year.
City Manager Woodhouse stated that, for clarity, they would come forth with the capital program, present the recommended wastewater capital program for the next five years, including focusing on the next fiscal year and the rates approved at 3.5% are sufficient to fund the program and the debt service to finance capital projects.
Mayor pro Tem Bigstyck asked why they fund the wastewater system through fees rather than bonds.
City Manager Woodhouse stated that Mr. Lawrence asked an excellent question, and he would try to take a stab at clarifying how this financing mechanism works, adding that Ms. Carter can add if necessary. He stated that when you debt finance, whether a bond, there needs to be a revenue stream that secures that, and in the case of wastewater capital projects, the revenue stream would be the ongoing wastewater rates that we have, and that is the security for the lender for the financing capitalization that the city would get to borrow $20 million necessary to start to do the capital projects. That debt service is paid back by the ratepayers via the rates.
City Clerk Coffey took a vote by verbal roll call.
Vote: 5-0 (Item #6)
AGENDA ITEM #6:
RESULT: ADOPTED [UNANIMOUS]
MOVER: Mike O’Neill, Councilmember
SECONDER: Sue Vaterlaus, Councilmember
AYES: Bier, Bigstyck, O'Neill, Vaterlaus, Beckmeyer
2.a
Packet Pg. 175 Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of May 23, 2022 City Council Meeting (5006 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 19 May 23, 2022
Mayor Bier stated that, before oral communications, as they have the Chamber people and the BID people present, she would like to request that they move their Item to the beginning of Considerations, ahead of Item #8.
Councilmember O’Neill stated he had no problem with that.
Councilmember Beckmeyer agreed.
Councilmember Vaterlaus agreed.
City Attorney Kenyon asked if they want to take a vote, where do they want to move it.
Mayor Bier stated she would like to move Item #10 before Item #8, at the beginning of Consideration.
City Attorney Kenyon asked if that was a motion and is there a second.
Mayor Bier made a motion to move item #10 to the beginning of Consideration; seconded by Councilmember Vaterlaus.
City Clerk Coffey took a vote by verbal roll call.
Vote: 5-0 (Amend Order of Agenda to move Item #10 to the beginning of Consideration) CONSENT CALENDAR, EXCLUDING ITEMS #3 & #6:
RESULT: ADOPTED [UNANIMOUS]
MOVER: Sue Beckmeyer, Councilmember
SECONDER: Sue Vaterlaus, Councilmember
AYES: Bier, Bigstyck, O'Neill, Vaterlaus, Beckmeyer
1. Approval of Disbursements for 4/01/22 through 4/15/22.
PROPOSED ACTION: Move to approve attached lists of disbursements for 4/01/22 through 4/15/22.
2. Approval of Minutes
PROPOSED ACTION: Move to approve the minutes of the City Council Meeting held on May 9, 2022.
3. Consideration of a Resolution Making Findings as Required by AB 361 to Continue to Permit the City Council to Conduct Teleconferenced Meetings Due to Health and Safety Concerns Relating to COVID-19
PROPOSED ACTION: Move to adopt a Resolution making findings pursuant to AB 361 to authorize the City Council to continue to conduct teleconferenced meetings due to health and safety concerns relating to COVID-19.
4. Agreement with Telecommunications Engineering Associates for Information Technology Equipment and Services
PROPOSED ACTION: Approve an Agreement with Telecommunications Engineering Associates for Technology Equipment and Services Related to Radio Communications
2.a
Packet Pg. 176 Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of May 23, 2022 City Council Meeting (5006 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 20 May 23, 2022
Infrastructure, and authorize the City Manager to execute all necessary documents related to this project.
5. Adoption of Resolution to Request to the Metropolitan Transportation Commission the Allocation of Fiscal Year 2022-23 Transportation Development Act Article 3 Pedestrian/Bicycle Project Funding for the Esplanade & Palmetto Bicycle & Pedestrian Improvement Project
PROPOSED ACTION: Adopt the resolution next in order, “A Resolution by the City Council of the City of Pacifica to request to the Metropolitan Transportation Commission the allocation of Fiscal Year 2022-23 Transportation Development Act Article 3 Pedestrian/Bicycle Project Funding” for the Esplanade & Palmetto Bicycle & Pedestrian Improvement Project; committing up to $37,240 of General funds for the required matching funds; and authorizing the City Manager to execute any documents required for the grant.
6. Adoption of an Ordinance titled “An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Pacifica Amending Chapter 6, “Sewer Charges” and Chapter 11, “Sewer Connection Charges” of Title 6, “Sanitation and Health” of the Pacifica Municipal Code Relating to Charges for Sewer Service and Connection Fees.”
PROPOSED ACTION: Move to Adopt an Ordinance titled “An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Pacifica Amending Chapter 6, “Sewer Charges” and Chapter 11, “Sewer Connection Charges” of Title 6, “Sanitation and Health” of the Pacifica Municipal Code Relating to Charges for Sewer Service and Connection Fees.”
7. Adoption of an Ordinance to approve Text Amendment TA-121-22, initiated by the City of Pacifica, to extend the Growth Management Ordinance codified in Chapter 5 of Title 9 of the Pacifica Municipal Code, which has a current termination date of June 30, 2022.
The Ordinance to be considered would affect property citywide in the A (Agricultural) zoning district and HPD (Hillside Preservation District) overlay zoning district.
Recommended California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) status: Exempt pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3). The Planning Commission recommended approval of the Ordinance by a vote of 5-0 (with two absences) on April 18, 2022.
PROPOSED ACTION: Move to adopt an Ordinance entitled “An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Pacifica approving Text Amendment TA-121-22 to amend Chapter 5 of Title 9 of the Pacifica Municipal Code to extend certain provisions of the Growth Management Ordinance.”
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
Pete Shoemaker, Pacifica, stated he is commenting on the certification of the release of the General Plan EIR and the certification coming up with that document, commenting specifically on the problems when it was released as they have a lot of comments coming in and it is proposed to drop on Wednesday right before a holiday, he encouraged thinking ahead to encourage public engagement and he wanted both sides to be polite and respectful.
Mgmt. Analyst Montemayor introduced the call-in speakers.
Suzanne Moore, Pacifica, stated that San Mateo County released preliminary numbers from the County’s one-day homeless count, and mentioned some specific facts and proposed
2.a
Packet Pg. 177 Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of May 23, 2022 City Council Meeting (5006 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 21 May 23, 2022
solutions as well as concerns.
Christine Boles, Pacifica, stated that she agreed with everything Mr. Shoemaker said, then shared her efforts and concern about the timing and necessary process for the General Plan and offered suggested options for the process.
Anita Rees, Pacifica Resource Center, reiterated PRC’s times when they continue to be open to the public and encourage calling for a phone appointment or schedule an in person appointment, the grocery distribution dates and details of other programs as well as assistance/outreach programs.
Clifford Lawrence, Pacifica, echoed remarks by Mr. Shoemaker, adding that the community is about public engagement and he expressed concerns about the public not hearing the public comments in any public forum as well as his concerns and thoughts on options for the process on this issue as well as on the housing issue.
Summer Lee, Pacifica, referred to the General Plan coming out during the holiday week, and expressed her concerns and thoughts on the process.
Jim Kremer, Pacifica, stated that an issue that he cares the most about and most qualified to comment on is the release of the planning documents which have many public comments, and he shared his concerns on the quick process.
David Whitney, Pacifica, referred to the sewer fund for the Beach Blvd. Project and expressed his concerns about the future problem with the recently passed rate increase.
COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS
Councilmember Vaterlaus attended the Fairmont Homeowners Association board meeting and City & County Association of Governments Legislative meeting and City & County Association of Governments regular meeting even though she was on vacation. She attended the Pacifica Emergency Preparedness Meeting for Mayor pro Tem Bigstyck and a lot of their information is published on NextDoor. She stated that Red Cross has a program for smoke detectors and they will install them for homeowners. She went to PW Open House and had fun riding up in the bucket truck. She also went on a tour of the sewer plant for the first time and found it interesting and recommended everyone going on a tour. She went to the Council of Cities and they talked about downtown plans which was interesting, and the Democrats, Peninsula Clean Energy and Christina Corpus who was running for sheriff.
Councilmember Beckmeyer attended the Coastal Cities group meeting and there is a Webinar coming up in June. There is a Webinar coming up that Cal Cities is promoting which will explain the various grant programs available through the Coastal Commission in support of local coastal plans, adding that Pacifica has already submitted ours but this is for all coastal cities. There will be a local government workshop coming up with the Coastal Commission in a July or August Coastal Commission meeting but a definitive date has not been confirmed yet. She will check the website to keep Council informed. She stated that the opportunity is for coastal cities and counties to have direct interaction with the Coastal Commission regarding the framework being worked out for addressing infrastructure that is primarily because some of the Coastal Act doesn’t address those specific issues. She stated their goal is to bring staff and commissioners together with the Cal City staff and the Coastal Cities group members to discuss these issues and she will keep them posted on that. She attended the Democrats meeting and heard a very
2.a
Packet Pg. 178 Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of May 23, 2022 City Council Meeting (5006 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 22 May 23, 2022
beneficial presentation from Peninsula Clean Energy. She is educating herself on their goals around Reach Codes as she wants to be sure she understands the implications will be for Pacifica property owners. She spent a lot of time on the weekend meeting with constituents.
Councilmember O’Neill attended LAFCO. He attended Jefferson High School’s 100th anniversary and groundbreaking ceremony on Friday, May 13, and met with a couple of people, one on Reach Codes, one on Tree City. He attended the Boys and Girls Club meeting on the 16th where they went over what was happening with the club. He stated they interviewed some applicants for the committees / commissions. He attended the Public Works open house and got to watch Councilmember Vaterlaus go up in the cherry picker and they use it for fixing the street lamps. He attended the LAFCO meeting on Friday and reelected to LAFCO again by Council of Cities and attended the Congestion Management meeting for CCAG Council of Cities dinner. He stated that this coming Friday he will be attending the awards dinner that the Lion’s on the Peninsula puts on for the Police Department and will be dining with the Chief of Police.
Mayor pro Tem Bigstyck stated that he has been enjoying his quarantine at home due his Covid experience. He stated that he 100% back despite having a viral prohibiting him from entering the room but he is in good spirits. He stated that it is on the rise, as he is a case in point. He was glad he was vaccinated and he urged anyone listening who has not been vaccinated to do it as, from his experience, he had mild symptoms. He also suggested that they wear a mask as often as they can while experiencing the spike. He mentioned that Ukraine is in his mind and his heart and will continue until there is a peaceful resolution. He stated that, on May 14, he attended the mental health first aid meeting at the Community Center. He thought it was fascinating and he felt more confident if he should wind up in close proximity to someone who is experiencing some form of mental health condition, even friends or family, as well as customers or neighbors. He stated that a major take away from that was that different cultures perceive mental illness in different ways and, depending on your culture, there could be different stigmas attached. He had a big emphasis on saying the word suicide, and recommended that they not be afraid to talk about it. If that is the topic at hand, he suggested that they have the conversation as it may be uncomfortable, but it may save a life and can lead someone to seeking greater help. He stated that there was an interesting psychosis exercise and it gave him some perspective. He stated that they stressed the acronym ALGEE which stands for assessing risk of suicide or harm, listening non-judgmentally, giving reassurance and information, encouraging professional help and self-help and other support strategies. He recommended seeking out other Mental Health First Aid opportunities as they may arise and recovery is the goal. He attended the Library JPA meeting on the 16th where they were talking about budget with a presentation about the services of the County Library system. He didn’t know until that meeting that libraries in our county give out backpacks that have state park passes and equipment and drove home the idea that libraries are not merely books anymore.
He also attended the Boys and Girls Club meeting at the Yosemite Clubhouse. He stated that it was a hard meeting but, at the end, it felt like they were coming together as a community but they felt they had a long way to go. He stated that they took the first steps to creating our Pacifica Boys and Girls Club chapter and they made sure that, as long as there is Pacifica, there will be a Boys and Girls Club that will remain open. He stated that he started checking in with the County and State to see what funding opportunities might look like, even if just a onetime grant. He enjoyed the LAFCO meeting on the 18th which Councilmember O’Neill was chairing. He was there to learn what LAFCO is about and what they do. He stated that Joshua Cosgrove who retired from LAFCO had been on LAFCO longer than Councilmember O’Neill had been. He has known him for a number of years and was happy to see him at his last meeting.
2.a
Packet Pg. 179 Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of May 23, 2022 City Council Meeting (5006 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 23 May 23, 2022
Mayor Bier stated that she went to Housing Our People Effectively Inter-Agency meeting, Sustainable San Mateo Awards. She met with people to talk about the Reach Codes which Peninsula Clean Energy spoke about at length at the Democrats meeting which she also attended. She attended the Jefferson Union High School District centennial and Staff Housing.
She thanked staff and Director Perez and Sophia at PB&R for hosting the Mental Health First Aid training. She appreciated all the work that went into that. She attended the Terra Nova Car Show and talked to the Pacifica Bike Park people. She attended the Boys and Girls Club meeting, met with Tree City Pacifica, participated in committee and commission interviews, attended the Open Space meeting. She was asked to be moderator for Working Together to end Homelessness, with a series of three workshops or Webinar. This was about from the street to interim housing and it was an honor to moderate that event. She stated that everything is online and you can hear the whole event. There was important information. She stated that, in the past, they have heard that the programs don’t work but, as they learn about the different processes and how all the agencies are working together, you can see that it does work and we have an infrastructure to address homelessness. She thought we should all be proud of that and find out everything we can about it so people say the families are suffering, they know what to do. She attended San Carlos Council of Cities meeting, attended Pacifica Sports Club Breakfast of Champions, went to a couple of baseball games at Fairway Park. While she was there, a bunch of young people helped her clean off the plaque for her nephew which was covered in dirt and moss. She stated that all the players gathered around, cleaned it off and talked about Johnny which was awesome.
STAFF COMMUNICATIONS
City Manager Woodhouse had a few quick comments. Regarding Councilmember Beckmeyer’s question, the Coastal Commission and sea level rise local government working group webinar is on Thursday, June 16 at 10:00 a.m. to 11:30 a.m., talking about the grant program for LCPs.
He didn’t have the date for the follow up workshop will be. He mentioned that, as mentioned by councilmembers, the Public Works appreciation week and the open house held at the courtyard was a fantastic event with several classes from Oceana High School and younger kids as well that came to the event. He stated that, when he was having lunch with some of the PW staff, he heard many testimonies from the employees and their engagement with the kids and stories from the PW employees about how they got into the work that they do, which is that they went to similar open houses when they were young and had no idea what they wanted to do in life.
He stated that it was a great thing to do which was temporarily interrupted by Covid and they hope to continue that in the future. He stated that it took a lot of work from the PW staff to organize it and bring it together, and he congratulated all of them for a great job. He mentioned that May 24 is the Civic Center groundbreaking event which is open to the public at 3:00 p.m. at 170 Santa Maria Avenue where they will be breaking ground for the Civic Center renovation project. He stated that they were notified by Congresswoman Eshoo, supported by Congresswoman Speier, that a project Pacifica had submitted for federal funding through various infrastructure bill funding mechanisms for the Sharp Park Priority Development area access resurfacing project, i.e., a paving project, was selected by Congresswoman Eshoo as one of her top 15 submittals for consideration and they were pleased as that is a good milestone to achieve and they will wait and see if they get the funding of approximately $0.75 million for the project.
Mayor Bier apologized for scheduling a 7:30 a.m. meeting on May 24.
2.a
Packet Pg. 180 Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of May 23, 2022 City Council Meeting (5006 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 24 May 23, 2022
PUBLIC HEARINGS - NONE.
CONSIDERATION
8. FY 22-23 General Fund Base Budget Report
PROPOSED ACTION: Accept the report and provide feedback and direction on the proposed FY 2022-23 General Fund Base Budget, position recommendations, Master Fee Schedule, and the FY2022-27 Capital Improvement Plan. [Item #10 was discussed / considered prior to Item #8 as the first item on Consideration.] City Manager Woodhouse introduced the staff report.
Chief Financial Sustainability Carter presented the staff report.
City Manager Woodhouse continued the staff report.
Councilmember O’Neill asked him how many records clerks does the city presently have.
City Manager Woodhouse stated that he believes they have two, with one who announced retirement and they are down to one, and he asked the Chief if that was accurate.
Police Chief Steidle stated that they had one records supervisor and one regular.
Councilmember O’Neill stated that we had two when most cities have five. He stated that it says they risk falling out of compliance, and he asked what that is referring to.
City Manager Woodhouse suggested that Chief Steidle come up and elaborate on that one.
Police Chief Steidle stated that each year our legislators create more laws that have to do with sealing of records and different ways that Police Departments have to process records and are time consuming processes, such as juvenile sealings where they have been inundated and the timeline has been reduced to 30 days, and once they get a request for a juvenile sealing, the court says we have 30 days to seal that record and put it by the wayside and, at any given time, they have a stack of them. He stated that the RIPA data reporting and transition to the CIBERS and NIBERS data reporting for crime statistics for the Department of Justice in California, as well as the FBI nationwide, and these are a couple of things that take an enormous amount of time. They did a study about two years ago when they had volunteers working for them, and the two people full-time and fully trained, nobody knew that they were 100 hours a month in personnel hours under what they needed to do to keep up with what they were doing and were using volunteers to take care of some of those tasks.
Councilmember O’Neill asked if he was talking about when you stop and there was a field interrogation, which he mentioned at a previous meeting, and an officer has to guess the ethnicity.
Police Chief Steidle agreed, and the new programs have caused is rather than the records department processing police reports, they have to process the police reports and work on that data component and our records department touches each and every single incident electronically that the officers handled.
2.a
Packet Pg. 181 Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of May 23, 2022 City Council Meeting (5006 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 25 May 23, 2022
City Manager Woodhouse continued the staff report.
Chief Financial Sustainability Officer Carter continued the staff report.
Councilmember Beckmeyer asked her if she was saying that, in the second column saying “adopted” and then (amended as of September 27), the bottom line number of negative $1,700,000 is what our deficit would have been this year if we didn’t have the ARPA money.
Chief Financial Sustainability Officer Carter said that was not what she was saying. She stated that you can look at the same surplus deficit line in the middle and the budget was adopted at $1.2 million surplus and what you see is a negative number that is reflecting the capital transfer.
She stated that they gave a one-time capital fund toward the Civic Center project and those numbers should not be counted to structural deficit as they are considered to be one time.
Councilmember Beckmeyer stated that it was the second green line.
Chief Financial Sustainability Officer Carter stated it was the second green number. She then continued the staff report.
Councilmember Beckmeyer asked if she can ask Police Chief Steidle about the police department line item and has a question for PW Director Petersen on the Public Works line item on the slide. She stated that, if she is understanding this correctly, Chief Financial Sustainability Officer Carter is telling them that, if they didn’t have the ARPA money, there would have been a 6% cut but departmentally it is a different amount as it reflects the amount of the General Fund that each of those departments draws.
Chief Financial Sustainability Officer Carter agreed, adding that they can see that everyone is getting, and they ask what a 6% cut would look like for each department.
Councilmember Beckmeyer stated that, when you look at the line item and see 25%, it looks like it is a 6% cut, but this would be 25% of the General Fund allocation for the police department, and she asked her if that was correct.
Chief Financial Sustainability Officer Carter agreed.
Councilmember Beckmeyer asked Police Steidle what that would be.
Police Chief Steidle stated it would be five police officers.
Councilmember Beckmeyer asked how many they have.
Police Chief Steidle stated that they currently have 31 and they are authorized 32 with the 33rd frozen now.
City Manager Woodhouse thought that the percentage was the distribution of the $2.7 million to the departments.
Councilmember Beckmeyer asked if of the ARPA money.
City Manager Woodhouse stated that it was of the $2.7 million deficit so 25% of that, if you
2.a
Packet Pg. 182 Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of May 23, 2022 City Council Meeting (5006 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 26 May 23, 2022
divide it up, falls to the police department but not 25% of the police department’s budget.
Chief Financial Sustainability Officer Carter stated that each department would have to submit programmatic changes or reduction options that would equal 6% of the operating budget, and for the police department, they are looking at $667,000 in this case.
Councilmember Beckmeyer asked her if she can give her a quick response to that question on Public Works when she looks at this number. She clarified that she wants to couch it in terms that they have ARPA money and this isn’t the actual situation but the hypothetical that they asked for when they were talking about this budget a long time ago.
PW Director Petersen stated that ultimately it would depend on which positions were cut but it would represent 2-3 position in their department and, as the City Manager already discussed, they are typically about 23% lower in staffing than comparable cities and that would be very difficult for us to absorb.
Councilmember O’Neill wanted to clarify that this was not from the sewer plant which is an enterprise fund as these are the people who respond to trees falling, cutting, maintaining, pave the streets, flooding emergencies, sea wall breach, and that is what Public Works department is.
PW Director Petersen stated he was correct, that they are the staff out there when we are having big storms, and we may not have as many people who can respond.
Chief Financial Sustainability Officer Carter continued the staff report.
City Manager Woodhouse stated that, before they go into the capital budget discussion, he wanted to point out the difference in what they were talking about in operating revenues and expenditures and the deficit that exists there. He stated that, while there is a relationship between operating revenues and one-time funding for capital projects, there is a significance difference in the budgeting viewpoint of that. He stated that a lot of the capital projects they are seeing recommended, i.e., non-discretionary essential recommended things, are one-time funding projects and they can use different sources and different funds that go to funding street paving that you can’t fund general fund staff out of that type of thing. He stated that it is very important for this conversation as well as the conversation they are going to have later about potential tax revenue measures and there is a very distinct point between annual operating revenue to pay the mortgage on your house versus the savings account that you sometimes dip into for the one-time purchases, and that also runs out if your annual operating revenues run out but they are different financial buckets.
PW Director Petersen stated that PW Dep. Director Bautista is also present and can help to respond to any questions Council may have regarding the PW capital program. She then continued the staff report.
Councilmember O’Neill stated that this was our local match for grant funding for other projects, and asked if there were any of these projects that, if not done, endanger losing other funding.
PW Director Petersen understood what he meant, and stated that, if they have something listed next to the project in parenthesis as grant funded, those are projects they will lose grant funding if they don’t move forward with them. She stated that, if they have questions related to any particular projects, she can answer that.
2.a
Packet Pg. 183 Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of May 23, 2022 City Council Meeting (5006 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 27 May 23, 2022
Councilmember O’Neill referred to the school cross walk beacon replacement, and he thought Safe Route to Schools initially funded all those, and they aren’t responsible for the ongoing maintenance or they won’t replace their stuff that is failing.
PW Director Petersen stated that, once we put it in, it becomes our maintenance responsibility and they are very maintenance intensive, and many cities are now removing these in street lights and moving toward rectangular rapid flashing beacons which is a much better product.
She then continued the staff report.
PB&R Director Perez continued the staff report.
Chief Financial Sustainability Officer Carter completed the staff report.
Councilmember Beckmeyer referred to beach use not including surf events, stating that is what he was referring to before where it was $200/day and she asked if now they were adding for a larger group bigger than 50 people.
PB&R Director Perez responded affirmatively.
Councilmember Beckmeyer asked if they have a fee for filming.
PB&R Director Perez responded affirmatively.
Councilmember Beckmeyer asked if he could help her find that.
PB&R Director Perez referred to page 183.
Councilmember Beckmeyer referred to film photo shoots.
PB&R Director Perez responded affirmatively.
Councilmember Beckmeyer stated it was $900/day. She asked if they have reviewed that fee anytime recently.
PB&R Director Perez stated that they decided they weren’t going to raise it this year and it seems to be fair, and they were talking about hand full of events. For a lot of beach events, some of the fees are about a handful of events a year that fall into any of these categories, and not like they are getting weekly or evenly monthly film shoot request. He asked if she had a question about the lower cost or higher cost.
Councilmember Beckmeyer stated it was more about the major commercial filming at $900/day, not that they have 5 million people calling every day, but, if they called tomorrow, she has anecdotal feedback that our rate is very low.
PB&R Director Perez stated he would be interested to hear more about that as he didn’t think that tells the whole story. He stated that is not the only fee that they pay, as they would also pay if there was extra Public Works needed, extra staffing on the beach, the police, reminding them of the movie, Chasing Mavericks, was filmed in Pacifica in two locations and that was one that tested how we did a real Hollywood film. He stated that, from one perspective of they can pay, but every day they are going somewhere to shoot and we are not allowed to charge them more than what it costs the city to do that and it was made abundantly clear when they did that.
2.a
Packet Pg. 184 Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of May 23, 2022 City Council Meeting (5006 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 28 May 23, 2022
They were also able to charge them for parking spots before they had a parking program because they had a proposed fee and they used the parking spots with staffing and the city was right to the edge of where they might have said no. He stated they have had more recent ones but not quite as big as that one.
Mayor Bier opened public comments and, seeing no one, closed public comments.
Mayor Bier called a break then reconvened the meeting.
RESULT: NO VOTE REQUIRED
9. Vision 2025 & Beyond – Potential Local Revenue Options, Public Opinion Research Findings, and Council Direction on Next Steps on Potential Ballot Measures Related to Transactions and Use Tax, Utility Users Tax, and Transient Occupancy Tax PROPOSED ACTION: Receive and discuss public opinion research findings on potential local revenue options available to the City, community priorities and perspectives, and provide direction to the City Manager about which potential revenue measure needed to maintain the current level of City services, if any, should advance to the next phase of City Council consideration, including the development of a draft ordinance and related documents to place such a measure on the November 2022 General Election Ballot and return to City Council to consider such actions at an upcoming City Council meeting in June 2022.
City Manager Woodhouse introduced the staff report.
FM3 Consultant Curt Below continued the staff report.
City Manager Woodhouse completed the staff report.
Mayor pro Tem Bigstyck referred to the half cent cap the county could take up if the city doesn’t in the not too distant future, and he wondered if they could give a deeper explanation on how that works as he is curious as to how quickly the county might jump on that if Pacifica doesn’t take the opportunity while they still have that half cent leeway.
FM3 Consultant Below stated that, under California state law, there is a 2% cap on implementing local transaction and use taxes. One thing to point out in the discussion is that a transaction and use tax that Council could place on the ballot and voters could adopt if they wished is a little different than the 1% local sales tax, i.e., the 1% local sales tax is applied for businesses that are based in and operate in Pacifica. In a transaction and use tax, which is what they are talking about here, is applied to purchases by individuals who live in Pacifica, i.e., if someone is in Pacifica and they buy something online, the half cent applies, even if the online seller is not in Pacifica and if someone from Pacifica bought a car in a dealership in Colma or Daly City, they wouldn’t get the 1% but they would get the half cent and one of the interesting thing is that part of the study shows that a lot of residents shop outside their community and the half cent transaction and use tax brings in the same amount of money, the $2.6 million, as your 1% current sales tax does. He stated that is not true in many cities that have a large sales tax or retail base, but it is true in Pacifica because of the amount of leakage Pacifica has. He referred to Mayor pro Tem Bigstyck’s question about the cap, and stated that the county and the county transportation agencies over the last several years have passed transaction and use tax
2.a
Packet Pg. 185 Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of May 23, 2022 City Council Meeting (5006 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 29 May 23, 2022
measures that exceed the 2% cap and have passed 2.125% in local transaction and use taxes which they were able to do because they were able to exempt the last two measures they passed, Measure W which was a 2018 transit district tax and Measure RR which was a joint powers tax using state legislation. As it effects Pacifica, this answers a question that some may have which is in 2009, the city went for a 1% local transaction and use tax but today they can’t do that because the county went out in 2013, four years after Pacifica’s 1% measure and passed Measure K, a half cent measure and they are left with a half cent measure. He stated that there are five cities in the county that have a half cent sales tax and two cities that have a quarter cent sales tax. He stated that, if the county were to go out today after the final half cent, it could not be countywide because of those seven cities. He stated that there is always the possibility of getting legislation exempting a measure from the cap. He stated that one of the interesting things about that is that this year there was legislation proposed in Sacramento, not in San Mateo County but another one, to exempt a proposal from the cap which passed the legislature and vetoed by Governor Newsom. He stated that, even if they tried to get an exemption or raise the cap from a half cent to a higher number, there is no guarantee that, even if the legislature passed, the Governor wouldn’t veto that as he was vague in terms of why he vetoed the measure in that other county. He stated that, today, their choices are, if they move ahead with the local transaction and use tax, they can only go up to half cent but not beyond that today.
Mayor pro Tem Bigstyck thought, if they went the route of the state which sounded like a painful proposition for Pacifica, it would take as much as a swipe of the governor’s pen to deny Pacifica a great deal of hard work and he is interested in taking the half cent allowance while they still can.
Mayor Bier mentioned that it is 10:30 and asked if they have a motion to extend the meeting.
Councilmember O’Neill moved to extend the meeting to 11:30 p.m.; seconded by Councilmember Vaterlaus.
City Clerk Coffey took a vote by verbal roll call.
Vote: 5-0 (extend meeting to 11:30 p.m.)
Councilmember Vaterlaus asked if they can do both measures at the same time, the TOT and the half-cent sales tax.
FM3 Consultant Below responded that, based on his experience, they can but it would be challenging when both measures are double purpose measures and funding a similar set of services as one of the measures could be perceived as a tax that other people would pay, the TOT, versus a sales tax that local people would pay. He stated that, if you want to benefit for public safety and other services, and on reading the words, one might seem more appealing, i.e., TOT, and they might cut into the sales tax of both are on the ballot at the same time.
Mayor Bier opened public comments, stating that there were no cards and asked if there were any call-ins.
Mgmt. Analyst Montemayor said there was, and introduced the call-in speakers.
Remi Tan, Pacifica, liked Council supporting the idea of the actual sales tax as a good idea, and added his suggestions regarding looking at considering the joint services under Vision
2.a
Packet Pg. 186 Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of May 23, 2022 City Council Meeting (5006 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 30 May 23, 2022
2025.
Christine Boles, Pacifica, added her support for the sales tax and TOT and expressed her thoughts on the community supporting them to function better as a city. She referred to Mr.
Tan’s comments regarding the police and mentioned her thoughts on ways to pool our resources including applying for grants.
Mayor Bier closed public comments.
Mayor Bier agreed with the public comments that we need to go forward with the half-cent sales tax, and didn’t see what choice they have.
Councilmember O’Neill supported that.
Councilmember Beckmeyer stated reluctantly, as she is concerned about the cost of living, gas, etc., and didn’t think it was reflecting the value of staff or the need to bring in revenue to make sure they are funded but more about a pessimistic economic state of affairs which she thinks will make it more challenging, but concluded that it is what it is.
Councilmember O’Neill thought it was the opportunity for the public to decide how much services they want as they have clearly stated that, if it doesn’t happen, there will be five police officers, and three or four PW staff affected as services will have to be cut. He stated that they have to balance the budget, unlike federal government, and if they vote no, they will have to decide what departments to cut.
Mayor pro Tem Bigstyck referred to the comments they are getting regarding the General Plan process about the speed our citizens would like to see, and he sees what the staff is going through and holding together with a shoestring budget we have. He stated that we are talking about losing what ground we have currently. He thought it would be nice not to worry about maintaining the status quo, which is heroic given what we have to work with, but to actually get ahead by one or two persons to fill an extra pothole and listen to concerned community feedback and say they can change direction in a slight way because of wiggle room to be able to do something with having more to work with than we have now. He stated that it was frustrating going through the numbers and seeing the intense work our staff does on a constant basis, and wanting to become more functional than we currently are, and yes he is in favor of a half-cent sales tax.
Councilmember O’Neill moved to receive and discuss public opinion research findings on potential local revenue options available to the city, community priorities and perspectives, and provide direction to the City Manager about which potential revenue measure needed to maintain the current level of City services. He asked if he needed to read that.
City Attorney Kenyon stated he needs to decide what revenue measure he wants staff to do.
Councilmember O’Neill moved that they bring forth the transaction use tax to the November ballot; seconded by Councilmember Vaterlaus.
City Clerk Coffey took a vote by verbal roll call.
Vote: 5-0 (Item #9)
2.a
Packet Pg. 187 Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of May 23, 2022 City Council Meeting (5006 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 31 May 23, 2022
Councilmember O’Neill asked the City Manager when he will be bringing the fireworks advisory vote to Council.
City Manager Woodhouse stated that the fireworks advisory item for Council to consider putting it on the ballot will most likely be June 13. This item will be brought back on June 27.
Councilmember O’Neill concluded that they will have three Council races, fireworks and this transaction tax on the ballot.
City Manager Woodhouse responded affirmatively.
RESULT: ADOPTED [UNANIMOUS]
MOVER: Mike O'Neill, Councilmember
SECONDER: Sue Vaterlaus, Councilmember
AYES: Bier, Bigstyck, O'Neill, Vaterlaus, Beckmeyer
10. Resolution of Intention to Continue the Business Improvement District Program and Levy the Annual Assessments for the Fiscal Year 2022-2023
PROPOSED ACTION: Adopt the resolution entitled "A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Pacifica Confirming the Annual Report of the Advisory Board of the Pacifica Hotels and Business Improvement District (BID) and Declaring the City Council's Intention to Continue the BID Program and Levy the Annual Assessments for the Fiscal Year 2022-2023 at the Same Rate as Levied in the Fiscal Year 2021-2022 Without Change" and set the date of June 13, 2022, for the Public Hearing on the annual levy of assessments on hotels within the BID.
[Item #10 was discussed / considered prior to Item #8 as the first item on Consideration.] Chief Financial Sustainability Officer Carter presented the staff report.
Mayor Bier opened public comments.
Mgmt. Analyst Montemayor stated that they had a few callers and they needed time to sign in, then saying that there were no hands raised.
Mayor Bier closed public comments.
Councilmember O’Neill asked for clarification on what they are doing, referring to Ms. Carter saying that they had a deadline and then they are being asked to continue this to June 13. He asked if they are voting now to continue it to June 13 and then talk about it or is he voting to accept and adopt this.
Chief Financial Sustainability Officer Carter stated that the action before them is the resolution of intent to continue the assessment. She stated that, on June 13, they will have a public hearing, assuming that they vote recommending a public hearing to continue the assessment and levy the assessment and continue the BID.
Councilmember O’Neill asked what areas of concern does she have and did she address it with the BID management about reporting, accountability, etc.
Chief Financial Sustainability Officer Carter stated that they have a chance to meet with the BID
2.a
Packet Pg. 188 Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of May 23, 2022 City Council Meeting (5006 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 32 May 23, 2022
members so that is why the added this recommendation so the team today and on June 13, they will hold the meeting and they will be able to get some clarity.
Councilmember O’Neill assumed that, on June 13, they will have the answers to some of the questions and concerns the two of them discussed.
Chief Financial Sustainability Officer Carter stated that was the staff’s intent.
Councilmember O’Neill wanted to confirm that all he is doing today is continuing this to a resolution.
Chief Financial Sustainability Officer Carter stated that they are setting the public hearing date for June 13.
Councilmember O’Neill stated that he has questions, concerns and comments and he wants to be sure he gets to make them.
Mayor Bier added that she was concerned about their relationship and she would like to be a part of a collaborative effort so they can come to the table and talk to each other. She didn’t attend the last Economic Development meeting and she would love the opportunity to sit down with them as it would be good for all of them. She thought they need to be included, i.e., Councilmember Beckmeyer and her, because they are both on the Economic Development committee.
City Manager Woodhouse stated that they are recommending to adopt the resolution to have the hearing on June 13, but when staff reviewed the BID work plan, budget and report out, they had several questions about it, as the report talks about having had meetings and tried to work collaboratively about the city’s marketing plan and how to achieve our mutual goals and they need to continue those conversations as indicated and he was recommending that they get direction from Council to convene that meeting with Chamber administration and BID members to talk further about how the money is being used and what the marketing plan is for next year and how they can collaborate together to support our hotels and the conversation should include the Economic Development committee liaisons. He stated that one detail they will need to confront is, which the City Attorney can elaborate on if necessary, if there are substantive changes to the work plan, there might be an extra hoop to re-adopt the resolution of intent for a public hearing and hold that at a later date. He thought they needed to achieve clarification with the Chamber of Commerce administration that supports the BID on how that $1 per hotel room is being used. He knows the representative are present and, if there are any questions for them, they should feel free to ask them. He stated that, depending on the meeting and conversation, when they come back on June 13 or a later date, and Council is going to hear about whether to continue the $1 fee, that is when they will have more information and Council would have a series of alternatives to choose from at that time.
Councilmember Beckmeyer wanted to echo her concerns about having meetings as, based on what she read in the report, it looks like there is some overlap with what the city has been planning on and what Council has approved in terms of the marketing study and short term marketing plan. She wants to be sure they are not duplicating efforts but using all the funds in the most productive way possible to promote our hotels. She stated that they have determined that our visitors help our budget and TOT is a big thing for our city. She stated that maybe it was Mr. Mora’s presentation, but she remembers being shocked when she realized or learned that there are 21 hotels in Half Moon Bay and seven in Pacifica. She thought the magnitude of
2.a
Packet Pg. 189 Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of May 23, 2022 City Council Meeting (5006 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 33 May 23, 2022
the number of rooms, when they figure TOT, it is not a big wonder why Half Moon Bay has so much more to work with. She stated that one of them is the Ritz Carlton. She stated that, even for a plain room rate of close to $800, when you go and google it and look at Pacifica’s rates of $200 and the number of rooms we have which is smaller and we are in Covid recovery which is going well. She thought we were at a juncture where we need to leverage every bit of everyone’s effort and money to move Pacifica forward. She stated that was what ARPA money is for and what they are using it for, and she would love to see collaboration and cooperation and growth in working with the BID. She didn’t know if they need to formally request that they establish a meeting with BID members but she was asking for that to echo what the mayor said.
Councilmember O’Neill thought there will be a meeting before June 5 with the BID or bring a resolution to stop collecting the dollar per room. He stated, having been on Council for several years, they have been told that they have very little control over the BID and it is the management. He stated, if City Attorney Kenyon needs to send them an attorney client privilege letter detailing what the city’s rights and duties and abilities for BID are, he would appreciate that.
City Attorney Kenyon stated that they can provide that.
Mayor Bier reiterated that her main concern is their relationship and she looks forward to that meeting and she hopes that he does also.
Councilmember O’Neill moved to continue this item to the June 13 City Council Meeting City Attorney Kenyon stated that he needs to adopt the resolution.
Councilmember O’Neill stated that he moved to adopt the resolution entitled “A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Pacifica Confirming the Annual Report of the Advisory Board of the Pacifica Hotels and Business Improvement District (BID) and Declaring the City Council’s intention to Continue the BID Program and Levy the Annual Assessments for the Fiscal Year 2022-2023 at the Same Rate as levied in the Fiscal Year 2021-20211 Without Change” and set the date of June 13, 2022, for the Public Hearing on the annual levy of assessments on hotels within the BID and give direction to staff that there will be a meeting no later than June 5.
Councilmember O’Neill asked if that will give staff enough time to include it in the staff report.
Chief Financial Sustainability Officer Carter stated that they will start working on setting up the meeting tomorrow.
Councilmember O’Neill stated that will be part of the action and City Attorney will draft a letter for City Council on exactly what their rights and responsibilities and duties that they have with the BID; seconded by Councilmember Beckmeyer.
City Clerk Coffey took a vote by verbal roll call.
Vote: 5-0 (Item #10)
2.a
Packet Pg. 190 Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of May 23, 2022 City Council Meeting (5006 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 34 May 23, 2022
RESULT: ADOPTED AS AMENDED [UNANIMOUS]
MOVER: Mike O'Neill, Councilmember
SECONDER: Sue Beckmeyer, Councilmember
AYES: Bier, Bigstyck, O'Neill, Vaterlaus, Beckmeyer
11. Ad Hoc Committee Recommendations for Council Chambers Renovations PROPOSED ACTION: Approve the following actions for the City Council Chamber Renovation Project:
A. Accept report from Ad Hoc Committee; and
B. Approve the following actions recommended by the Ad Hoc Committee; a. Approve a project budget of $170,000 from unallocated General Fund Balance. b. Authorize the City Manager to execute agreements with various contractors to perform project tasks within this amount.
PW Dep. Director Bautista presented the staff report.
Councilmember O’Neill asked if they could do a virtual remodel which will be cheaper.
Mayor Bier asked if there were any questions.
Mayor pro Tem Bigstyck stated he has no questions but will have a statement at the end.
Mayor Bier opened public comments.
Mgmt. Analyst Montemayor introduced the call-in speaker.
Remi Tan, Pacifica, stated that Council should consider improving the broadcast system as the slides on PCTV are blurry as a priority on the renovation.
Mayor Bier closed the public hearing.
Councilmember Vaterlaus moved to accept the report from the Ad Hoc Committee, approve the following actions recommended by the Ad Hoc Committee to approve the project budget of $170,000 from unallocated General Fund balance, authorize the City Manager to execute agreements with various contractors to perform project tasks within this amount; seconded by Councilmember Beckmeyer.
Mayor Bier asked if Mayor pro Tem Bigstyck wanted to say something.
Mayor pro Tem Bigstyck stated that he did, i.e., given that they will be out of the space through July, it will be interesting to see how much they get done between now and then.
Mayor Bier wanted to comment on Mr. Tan’s comment regarding the screen. She was looking at the screen today and it has been blurry the whole time and she was curious if they can talk with PCTV during the time that they are not meeting in person to see what they can do to make it more readable.
City Clerk Coffey took a vote by verbal roll call.
Vote: 5-0 (Item #11)
2.a
Packet Pg. 191 Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of May 23, 2022 City Council Meeting (5006 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 35 May 23, 2022
RESULT: ADOPTED [UNANIMOUS]
MOVER: Sue Vaterlaus, Councilmember
SECONDER: Sue Beckmeyer, Councilmember
AYES: Bier, Bigstyck, O'Neill, Vaterlaus, Beckmeyer
12. Appointments to the Parks, Beaches & Recreation Commission; Beautification Advisory Committee; and Open Space & Parkland Advisory Committee PROPOSED ACTION:
1) Move to appoint applicant(s) to the Parks, Beaches & Recreation Commission: for one partial term to expire May 2024 and two full terms to expire May 2026; 2) Move to appoint one (1) applicant to the Beautification Advisory Committee for a full term to expire March 2026;
3) Move to appoint applicant(s) to the Open Space & Parkland Advisory Committee for two full terms to expire May 2026.
Councilmember Beckmeyer asked if she could ask the City Attorney and City Manager a question before they move on to this item. She stated that she wasn’t at the interviews, but she did screen the applications. She wanted to know what the practice is about whether she should abstain or if it is recommended that she vote.
City Attorney Kenyon stated that there is no legal reason why she cannot vote if she reviewed the applications and made clear that she feels she has enough information to make a decision, but there is no legal requirement that she interview all applicants, if she feels competent to make a decision.
Mayor Bier opened public comments.
Hernan Muirragui, Pacifica, stated that he has lived many years in Pacifica, and was local and attended Westmoor High School, stating that he wanted to join the Beautification Committee, providing his experience for being on this committee.
Mayor Bier closed public comments.
Councilmember Vaterlaus asked if she could make a motion to do all three at once.
City Attorney Kenyon responded affirmatively.
Councilmember Vaterlaus moved, for Parks, Beaches & Recreation, they accept Cindy Abbott; for Beautification Advisory Committee, they accept Hernan Muirragui and, for Open Space & Parkland Advisory Committee, they accept Arlene Patton.
Mayor Bier stated that, for PB&R, she has to say whether the full term or partial.
Councilmember Vaterlaus stated it is for the full term; seconded by Councilmember O’Neill.
City Clerk Coffey took a vote by verbal roll call.
Vote: 5-0 (Item #12)
2.a
Packet Pg. 192 Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of May 23, 2022 City Council Meeting (5006 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 36 May 23, 2022
RESULT: ADOPTED [UNANIMOUS]
MOVER: Sue Vaterlaus, Councilmember
SECONDER: Mike O'Neill, Councilmember
AYES: Bier, Bigstyck, O'Neill, Vaterlaus, Beckmeyer
ADJOURN
Mayor Bier stated that, before adjournment, she wanted to inform everyone that this is Mgmt.
Analyst Montemayor’s last night. She thanked him for all his service in the past years. She stated that they will adjourn in honor of him.
Councilmember Beckmeyer wished him well in his next step in his amazing career.
Mgmt. Analyst Montemayor thanked them, and appreciated their comments.
Mayor pro Tem Bigstyck stated that he did the right choice on the side of a pandemic.
Mayor Bier adjourned the meeting at 10:56 p.m.
Transcribed by Barbara Medina, Public Meeting Stenographer.
Respectfully Submitted,
Sarah Coffey, City Clerk
__________________________
Mary Bier, Mayor
2.a
Packet Pg. 193 Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of May 23, 2022 City Council Meeting (5006 : Approval of Minutes)
CITY OF PACIFICA
COUNCIL AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT
6/13/2022
1 SUBJECT:
Continuation of Proclamation of Local Emergency of the Pacifica Coastline from Westline Drive to the End of Beach Boulevard.
RECOMMENDED 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.
STAFF CONTACT:
Sam Bautista, P.E., Deputy Director of Public Works
650-738-3767
[email protected]
Sarah Coffey, City Clerk
650-738-7307
[email protected]
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION:
On January 22, 2016, the Director of Emergency Services proclaimed the existence of a local emergency along the Pacifica coastline from Westline Drive to the end of Beach Boulevard due to El Nino storm activity. Extreme wave heights for extended periods of time caused top-of-bluff retreat at several locations along the Pacifica coast and damage to City infrastructure. Since this date, the Director of Emergency Services has proclaimed the existence of other local emergencies along this same stretch of coastline. These emergencies are described below:
• Failure of the sea wall and promenade on Beach Blvd. (in the vicinity of Santa Maria Avenue), which have been repaired, from the January 22, 2016, storm. • The 300 & 400 block of Esplanade experience episodic bluff erosion. In recent years (2016-2018), the bluff erosion has progressed to a point where the erosion is now threatening public infrastructure and utilities.
• Undermining of a seven-foot diameter storm drain outfall and concrete headwall for the discharge of Milagra Creek into the Pacific Ocean in the vicinity of 700 Palmetto Avenue from the January 22, 2016, storm. Construction is scheduled to restart in February of 2021 due to project delays.
• A failure of the seawall and promenade on Beach Blvd. in the vicinity of Santa Rosa Avenue and the Pier was discovered on December 16, 2020. Ocean waves, king tides, and high swells undermined a portion of the sea wall and created a large void (25’x25”) between the pier abutment seawall connection, affecting the sidewalk and promenade.
City staff and contractors stabilized and repaired the large void on January 22, 2021.
The sidewalk and promenade restoration were completed on February 22, 2021.
Monitoring of the repaired area is on-going.
3 Packet Pg. 194
Pacifica City Council 2
June 13, 2022
• On December 29, 2020, another failure of the seawall occurred approximately 150-200 feet north of the intersection of Beach Blvd. and Santa Rosa Avenue. A void, approximately 10’ deep by 15’ long, was found behind the seawall and was repaired with geotextiles and concrete slurry on January 5, 2021. Full restoration of this section was complete in February 2021. Monitoring of the repaired area is on-going. • On January 14, 2021, a combination of high tides and large waves damaged a forty-foot section of the Pacifica Municipal Pier’s west facing deck and concrete railing. Following this event, the Pier was closed due to safety concerns. City staff requested a structural engineering assessment of the above deck pier elements and a proposed repair and associated cost from a local engineering consultant. This information was provided to the City by the end of March 2021. The pier was reopened on April 2, 2021, but the damaged portion was fenced off for safety reasons. The City is currently moving forward with a repair project and is designing the repair. Construction will be funded by grant money provided through a Senate Bill 129. The City Council approved a resolution on December 13, 2021, to approve the application of the state grant funds for the repair of the pier and the application has been sent to the State Department of Parks and Recreation for processing. On May 13, 2022, the City received a Coastal Development Permit waiver from the California Coastal Commission to perform this work. The repair project is anticipated to be released for bidding in the Summer of 2022.
The City Council first ratified this proclamation (Attachment 1) at its regular meeting of January 25, 2016. Since that date, additional damage had occurred along Beach Boulevard and Esplanade Avenue as noted above.
Pursuant to Government Code section 8630(c), the City Council must review the need for continuing the local emergency at least every 60 days until the City Council terminates the local emergency. Conditions of local emergency still exist since the City Council first acted to declare a local emergency on January 25, 2016, and since that time staff has brought the continuance of Proclamation confirming the existence of local emergency exists within the Pacifica Coastline from Westline Drive to the end of Beach Boulevard every 30 days with May 9, 2022, being the most recent.
The City is using a combination of city staff, contractors, and consultants to manage the discussed emergency work. Staff will bring recommendations to the Council to end the emergency designation for projects on the list once conditions stabilize and the projects are no longer in need of the emergency designation.
The City Manager recommends that the City Council make a determination that conditions of local emergency continue to exist within the Pacifica Coastline from Westline Drive to the end of Beach Boulevard.
FISCAL IMPACT:
None.
ORIGINATED BY:
Engineering
City Clerk
3 Packet Pg. 195
Pacifica City Council 3
June 13, 2022
ATTACHMENT LIST:
Attachment 1 - Proclamation of Local Emergency Regarding Pacifica Coastline From Westline Drive to End of Beach Blvd (PDF)
3 Packet Pg. 196
"ATTACHMENT 1"
3.a
Packet Pg. 197
Attachment: Attachment 1 - Proclamation of Local Emergency Regarding Pacifica Coastline From Westline Drive to End of Beach Blvd (5004 :
"ATTACHMENT 1"
3.a
Packet Pg. 198
Attachment: Attachment 1 - Proclamation of Local Emergency Regarding Pacifica Coastline From Westline Drive to End of Beach Blvd (5004 :
CITY OF PACIFICA
COUNCIL AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT
6/13/2022
1 SUBJECT:
Continuation of Proclamation of Local Emergency at the Anza Pump Station.
RECOMMENDED 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.
STAFF CONTACT:
Lisa Petersen, P.E., Director of Public Works
(650) 738-3767
[email protected]
Sam Bautista, P.E., Deputy Director of Public Works / City Engineer (650) 738-3771
[email protected]
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION:
On Monday, March 16, 2020, the Department of Public Works received a report regarding a fire at the Anza Pump Station at Pacifica State Beach. After Public Works staff investigated the report, it was determined that the storm drain pumping system and roof/bathrooms were damaged during the fire. The engines were destroyed, and the pumps needed to be replaced.
The damage to the pump station threatened and continues to threaten the safety of persons and properties within the watershed due to the risk of flooding without an operational pump station.
The City of Pacifica’s Emergency Plan and Section 4-2.01 et seq. of the Pacifica Municipal Code empower the City Manager, acting as the Director of Emergency Services, to proclaim the existence of a local emergency when there is an actual or threatened existence of conditions of disaster or of extreme peril to the safety of persons and properties within this City.
The proclamation is subject to ratification by the City Council within 7 days, pursuant to the Pacifica Municipal Code. The proclamation of the existence of a local emergency further designates the City Manager or designated representative to act on behalf of the City for public assistance and for individual assistance for purpose of receipt, processing and coordination of all inquiries and requirements necessary to obtain available State and Federal assistance.
Additionally, pursuant to Section 3-15.09 (A) of the Pacifica Municipal Code, in cases of an emergency the City Manager is authorized to proceed at once to replace or repair any public facility without adopting plans, specifications, or working details, or giving notice for bids to let contracts. The City must comply with Public Contract Code Section 22050, which provides a process for City Council’s review of the emergency action if notice of bids to let contracts for public projects will not be given because of the emergency.
In this case, the City Manager has determined that the damaged pump station threatens the health and safety of persons and properties, including critical public infrastructure, which 4 Packet Pg. 199
Pacifica City Council 2
June 13, 2022
requires immediate attention and constitutes an emergency pursuant to Pacifica Municipal Code section 4-2.02 and Public Contract Code Section 1102.
Such conditions are, or are likely to be, beyond the handling capability of the City’s services, personnel, equipment, and facilities, requiring the use of outside contractors to conduct emergency design and repair pursuant to Pacifica Municipal Code section 3-15.09 without giving notice for bids to let contracts. Immediate action is, and continues to be necessary, due to the clear and imminent danger presented by any storm event that could occur during the time the storm water pump station is non-functional. Flooding could occur to areas upstream of the pump station, causing health and safety issues, as well as extensive property damage. As such, on April 8, 2020, the City Manager did proclaim the existence of a local emergency within the City and the need to continue the emergency action continues as the repair will take approximately 8-14 months or longer. The Proclamation of Local Emergency is attached to this staff report as Attachment 1.
City staff has contracted with the civil engineering firm of Schaaf & Wheeler of San Jose, California to assist the City with the rehabilitation of the pump station. In addition, the pump station has been cleared of any fire damaged debris and the damaged pumps/engines have been removed. On July 13, 2020, the City Council approved construction services agreement for rebuild and re-installation of a pump and gear drive, the renovation of bathrooms, purchase and installation of new stainless-steel doors, and repair pump station wet-well grates. As part of the on-going maintenance for the pump station, staff purchased a new pump which was approved by the Council at the August 9, 2020 City Council meeting. An emergency purchase agreement with Herc Rental for a temporary rental engine was also approved on September 1, 2020 and will remain in place until the pump station is operational. On October 12, 2020, temporary measures were completed to allow for a non-standard system of pumping at the Anza Pump Station until final repairs are completed. This work included a new pump, transfer switch, temporary roof, portable generator connections, and exterior double doors have been installed. Staff is continuing to evaluate and monitor storm water flows and purchased two new sump pumps to accommodate flows.
On May 10, 2021, City Council approved the purchase of two new Caterpillar engines utilizing the City’s established Sourcewell Cooperative Purchase Agreement. The rehabilitation plan is currently 100% completed, and staff has completed the engineering review. The roofing plan was approved by the Building Department. Staff has also completed selection of the Construction Management firm which was from the established On-Call Construction Management list. Staff is in the process of discussing permitting requirements for the overall project with the California Coastal Commission.
Staff completed the field portion of a topographic survey to support a PG&E application to reestablish natural gas service at the Anza Pump Station to supply the natural gas to run the prepurchased natural gas engines to drive the pumps. The City entered into an agreement with PG&E to tap the gas main and install a new gas meter. The City has also engaged a gas pipeline contractor for a quotation on installing the gas service line from the gas main to the gas meter. In addition, the City has submitted the Caltrans Encroachment Permit application required for gas service line construction on Highway 1 and has obtained a separate emergency Coastal Development Permit request with the California Coastal Commission for installation of the new gas line and a redundant pump/engine that was approved.
During a storm event on the morning of December 16, 2021, the City experienced some flooding in the lower Linda Mar area due to the temporary nonstandard pumping system that has been in use at Anza pump station due to the fire damaged pump station engines in March of 2020. This temporary system has been in place because the City has been working to reach 4 Packet Pg. 200
Pacifica City Council 3
June 13, 2022
agreement with the California Coastal Commission on the remaining permitting requirements for the permanent pumping system. The City faced several significant stormwater related events from October 2021 through December 2021 and will face more with the continuing storm season. Replacement of this temporary system is considered an emergency and staff is moving forward with construction of the permanent system. To further improve operations between now and when the Anza Pump Station Repair Project is completed, the City recently purchased a small diesel engine that will be used to drive one of the existing smaller stormwater pumps, thereby improving pump station resiliency in the interim. Staff issued a public request to prequalify bidders for the Anza Pump Station project in December 2021. Ultimately, two contractors were deemed qualified to bid on the project. Both contactors submitted bids for the project in February of 2022. The contractors specialize in pump stations.
As of May 1, 2022, the Anza Pump Station Repair Project’s General Contractor, DW Nicholson (DWN), has begun the work and is focusing on providing project equipment submittals and requests for information (RFIs). DWN is also onsite and commencing with some of the demolition inside the pump station in preparation for installing the new roof in the June/July timeframe. City consultant team members Schaaf and Wheeler (engineer of record providing construction support) and Ghirardelli and Associates (third-party construction manager) are working closely with City staff to process paperwork and response to questions and issues as they arise. Additionally, fencing was installed around the perimeter of the pump station building for safety related to the active construction site, at the beginning of June 2022.
Pursuant to Government Code Section 8630(c), the City Council must review the need for continuing the local emergency at least every 60 days until the City Council terminates the local emergency. Conditions of local emergency still exist since the City Council first acted to declare a local emergency on April 13, 2020, and since that time staff has brought the continuance of Proclamation confirming the existence of local emergency at the Anza Pump Station every 30 days with May 9, 2022, being the most recent.
The City is using a combination of city staff, consultants, and contractors to manage the emergency work related to the Anza Pump Station repair project. The City Manager recommends that the City Council make a determination that conditions of local emergency continue to exist at the Anza Pump Station at the Pacifica State Beach. Staff will continue to update the Council on the progress of this emergency work monthly through the emergency declaration Council reports
FISCAL IMPACT:
There is no fiscal impact to continue this local emergency.
ORIGINATED BY:
Engineering
ATTACHMENT LIST:
Attachment 1 - Resolution No. 19-2020 Ratifying Proclamation of Local Emergency at the Anza Pump Station (PDF)
4 Packet Pg. 201
RESOLUTION NO. 19-2020
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PACIFICA
RATIFYING THE PROCLAMATION OF THE EXISTENCE OF A LOCAL EMERGENCY AT THE
ANZA PUMP STATION AT THE PACIFICA STATE BEACH
______________________________________________________
WHEREAS, Section 4-2.05 of the City of Pacifica Municipal Code (“PMC”) designate the City Manager as the Director of Emergency Services; and
WHEREAS, Government Code section 8630 and PMC section 4-2.05(a) empower the Director of Emergency Services to proclaim the existence or threatened existence of a local emergency when said city is affected or likely to be affected by an emergency, subject to ratification by the City Council; and
WHEREAS, Section 4-2.02 of the PMC defines "emergency" as the “actual or threatened existence of conditions of disaster or of extreme peril to the safety of persons and property within this City caused by such conditions as earthquake, hazardous materials, plane crash, landslide, tsunami, epidemic, flood, riot, fire, or other conditions, including conditions resulting from a labor controversy, which conditions are or are likely to be beyond the capability of control of the services, personnel, equipment, and facilities of this City, requiring the combined forces of other political subdivisions to combat”; and
WHEREAS, Section 4-2.01 et seq. of the Pacifica Municipal Code empowers the Director of Emergency Services to proclaim the existence or threatened existence of a local emergency when the City Council is not in session, subject to confirmation by the City Council; and WHEREAS, the City Manager is the Director of Emergency Services of the City of Pacifica; and WHEREAS, on Monday, March 16, 2020, the Department of Public Works received a report regarding a fire at the Anza Pump Station at the Pacifica State Beach; and WHEREAS, after Public Works staff investigated the report, it was determined that the storm drain pumping system was damaged during the fire and that the engine and the motors would need to be replaced; and
WHEREAS, the damage to this pump station threatens the safety of persons and properties within the watershed due to the risk of flooding that can occur without an operational pump station; and WHEREAS, the City Manager has determined that the damaged pump station threatens the health and safety of persons and properties, including critical public infrastructure due to the risk of flooding and requires immediate attention and repair and as such constitutes an emergency pursuant to Pacifica Municipal Code section 4-2.02 and Public Contract Code section 1102; and WHEREAS, such conditions are beyond the handling capability of the City’s services, personnel, equipment, and facilities, requiring the use of outside contractors to conduct emergency repair pursuant to Pacifica Municipal Code section 3-15.09 without giving notice for bids to let contract, ATTACHMENT 1
4.a
Packet Pg. 202 Attachment: Attachment 1 - Resolution No. 19-2020 Ratifying Proclamation of Local Emergency at the Anza Pump Station (5003 : Continuance pursuant to Public Contract Code 22050; and
WHEREAS, on April 8, 2020, the City Manager, in his capacity as Director of Emergency Services, proclaimed the existence of local emergency in the City of Pacifica, after determining that the damaged condition of the Anza Pump Station is likely to create conditions of disaster or extreme peril which will be beyond the services, personnel and equipment and facilities of the City; and WHEREAS, in accordance with Government Code section 8630 and PMC section 4-2.05(a) the City Council must take action to confirm the proclamation within 7 and in accordance with Public Contract Code section 22050 which requires confirmation by 2/3 of Council within 14 days of the emergency action.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that said Proclamation of Existence of Local Emergency, as issued by said City Manager in his capacity as Director of Emergency Services, which is attached hereto as Attachment “A”, is hereby ratified and approved by the City of Pacifica City Council.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that said local emergency is confirmed to exist and shall be deemed to continue to exist until its termination is proclaimed by the City Council of the City of Pacifica.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that during the existence of this local emergency, the powers, functions and duties of the Director of Emergency Services, and the emergency organization of the City of Pacifica shall be those prescribed by state law, by the existing ordinances and resolutions of the City of Pacifica, as well as this resolution and any subsequent emergency orders of the City Council. • • • • •
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Pacifica, California, held on the 13th day of April 2020, by the following vote:
AYES, Councilmembers: Martin, Beckmeyer, Vaterlaus, Bier, O’Neill NOES, Councilmembers: None.
ABSENT, Councilmembers: None.
ABSTAIN, Councilmembers: None.
CITY OF PACIFICA
Deirdre Martin, Mayor
ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
______________________________ ______________________________ Sarah Coffey, City Clerk Michelle Marchetta Kenyon, City Attorney
4.a
Packet Pg. 203 Attachment: Attachment 1 - Resolution No. 19-2020 Ratifying Proclamation of Local Emergency at the Anza Pump Station (5003 : Continuance
PROCLAMATION OF LOCAL EMERGENCY
WHEREAS, Section 4-2.01 et seq. of the Pacifica Municipal Code empowers the Director of Emergency Services to proclaim the existence or threatened existence of a local emergency when the City Council is not in session, subject to confirmation by the City Council at the earliest possible time; and
WHEREAS, the City Manager is the Director of Emergency Services of the City of Pacifica; and WHEREAS, on Monday, March 16, 2020, the Department of Public Works received a call regarding a fire at the Anza Pump Station at the Pacifica State Beach; and WHEREAS, after Public Works staff investigated, and determined that the storm drain pumping system was damaged during the fire; and
WHEREAS, the damage to the pump system threatens the safety of persons and property, including critical public infrastructure; and
WHEREAS, such conditions are or are likely to be beyond the handling capabilities of the City’s services, personnel, equipment, and facilities, requiring the use of outside contractors to conduct emergency repair; and
WHEREAS, the City provides this written notification to the San Mateo County and State CalEMA’s Regional and Headquarter offices of a proclamation of local emergency; and WHEREAS, such proclamation shall be subject to confirmation by the Pacifica City Council at the earliest possible time.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT PROCLAIMED that, in accordance with State Law and the City of Pacifica Municipal Code, the Director of Emergency Services proclaims the existence of a local emergency for the Anza Pump Station.
DATED: April 8, 2020
By:_____________________________
Kevin Woodhouse
Director of Emergency Services
Attachment 1
4.a
Packet Pg. 204 Attachment: Attachment 1 - Resolution No. 19-2020 Ratifying Proclamation of Local Emergency at the Anza Pump Station (5003 : Continuance
4.a
Packet Pg. 205 Attachment: Attachment 1 - Resolution No. 19-2020 Ratifying Proclamation of Local Emergency at the Anza Pump Station (5003 : Continuance
CITY OF PACIFICA
COUNCIL AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT
6/13/2022
1 SUBJECT:
Continuation of Proclamation of the Existence of a Local Emergency Regarding Novel (new) Coronavirus ("COVID-19”).
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Accept report and make determination that conditions of local emergency continue to exist regarding Novel (new) Coronavirus ("COVID-19”).
STAFF CONTACT:
Kevin Woodhouse, City Manager
(650) 738-7409
[email protected]
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION:
On March 16, 2020, the City Manager, acting in his capacity as Director of Emergency Services, proclaimed the existence of a local emergency pursuant to PMC 4-2.05(a) and executed the "Proclamation of the Existence of a Local Emergency Regarding Novel (new) Coronavirus ("COVID-19")" ("Proclamation"). On March 18, 2020, the City Council of the City of Pacifica adopted Resolution No. 18-2020 to ratify the Proclamation of local emergency due to COVID-19 (Attachment 1). The City’s Proclamation was sent to San Mateo County Offices of Emergency Services and the California Governor’s Office of Emergency Services (CalOES) and allows the City to seek state and federal funds relating to the emergency.
This proclamation of local emergency was based on the following findings.
BACKGROUND:
On January 30, 2020, the World Health Organization (“WHO”) declared the COVID-19 outbreak a public health emergency of international concern. On January 31, 2020, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services declared a Public Health Emergency for the United States of America. The United States Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (“CDC”) determined the virus presents a serious public health threat, requiring coordination among state and local health departments to ensure readiness for potential health threats associated with the virus.
On March 3, 2020 both the Director of Emergency Services of the County of San Mateo and the San Mateo County Health Officer issued proclamations of local emergencies based on the imminent and proximate threat to public health from the introduction of COVID-19 in San Mateo County. The San Mateo County Board of Supervisors ratified both proclamations on March 10, 2020.
5 Packet Pg. 206
Pacifica City Council 2
June 13, 2022
On March 4, 2020 Governor Gavin Newsom declared a State of Emergency to make additional resources available, formalize emergency actions already underway across multiple state agencies and departments, and help the state prepare for broader spread of COVID-19.
On March 11, 2020 the WHO declared a global pandemic due to the significant spread of the virus and the increased numbers of confirmed cases worldwide.
On March 13, 2020, then President Donald J. Trump issued a Proclamation Declaring a National Emergency Concerning the Novel Coronavirus Disease (COVID-19) Outbreak finding that the COVID-19 outbreak in the United States constituted a national emergency, beginning as of March 1, 2020.
As of June 15, 2021, the California Governor terminated the Executive Orders that put into place the Stay Home Order and the Blueprint for a Safer Economy, and also phased out the majority of executive actions put in place since March 2020 as part of the pandemic response, leaving a subset of provisions in place that facilitate the ongoing recovery. Governor’s Orders currently in effect were N-07-21 and N-08-21, both adopted on June 11, 2021.
The California State Public Health Officer issued a new Order on June 11, 2021 to be effective June 15, 2021, which supercedes all prior State health orders. Restrictions that ended on June 15, 2021 include: physical distancing, capacity limits on businesses and the County tier system.
Starting on June 15, 2021, California reopened the economy and the state moved beyond the Blueprint for a Safer Economy system. All sectors listed in the current Blueprint returned to usual operations based on general public health recommendations. Starting on June 15, capacity and distancing restrictions were lifted for most businesses and activities.
In March 2020, the City closed public access to many City facilities, consistent with the State and County health orders in effect at that time. City operations continued with adjusted programs and services, staffing levels and modified operations to support a predominantly remote work model in order to protect public safety and to limit the potential for exposure to the COVID-19 virus. The City has further modified its operations and guidelines based on the orders and guidelines that went into effect on June 15, 2021.
Governor’s Executive Order N-08-21 continues modifications of the Brown Act to allow for local legislative bodies to hold meetings via teleconferencing and allows members of the public to observe and address the meeting telephonically or otherwise electronically, and supersedes the provisions previously set forth in Executive Order N-29-20, paragraph 3. These provisions of Executive Order N-08-21, subsection 42 applied though September 30, 2021.
On August 2, 2021, the Health Officer of the County of San Mateo issued Order No. C19-12 mandating the wearing of face coverings when indoors in workplaces and public settings, with limited exceptions. This Order was issued due to evidence of the SARS-CoV-2 B.1.617.2 (Delta) variant circulating in San Mateo County. This variant is highly transmissible in indoor settings. San Mateo County Health Order No. C19-12 was ordered effective at 12:01 am on August 3, 2021 and will continue to be in effect until extended, rescinded, superseded, or amended in writing by the Health Officer.
On September 16, 2021, Assembly Bill 361 (AB 361) was signed by the Governor and went into effect immediately upon signature as urgency legislation (codified under Government Code § 54953). AB 361 amends the Brown Act to provide additional provisions that allow meetings of 5 Packet Pg. 207
Pacifica City Council 3
June 13, 2022
legislative bodies to be conducted via teleconference.
Order No. C19-12 issued on August 2, 2021 by the Health Officer of the County of San Mateo mandating the wearing of face coverings when indoors in workplaces and public settings remains in effect. The City's current practices at City facilities conform to the Health Order currently in effect.
In late November 2021, a new concerning COVID-19 variant was discovered and identified as the Omicron variant. The Omicron variant spreads rapidly even amongst some vaccinated individuals.
In December 2021, in response to the rapid spread of the Omicron variant, the California Department of Public Health issued guidance requiring masking indoors through January 15, 2022. This requirement was subsequently extended to February 15, 2022.
On January 8, 2002, the California Department of Public Health issued Updated Guidance for Local Health Jurisdictions on Isolation and Quarantine of the General Public (Link). This guidance updates isolation and quarantine recommendations in alignment with recommendations from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), recommends additional mitigation measures to exit isolation and quarantine, and clarifies that fully-vaccinated persons who are booster-eligible, but have not yet received their booster dose are now recommended to quarantine per updated CDC recommendations. The San Mateo County Health Department may adopt stricter guidance but has not done so as of the date of this report.
With COVID-19 case rates subsiding in early February 2022, on February 9, 2022, the County of San Mateo Health Officer announced that San Mateo County would align with the state in lifting its indoor mask mandate for vaccinated persons beginning February 16, 2022.
CURRENT ANALYSIS:
Effective March 1, 2022, the State revised its mask mandate requirement such that unvaccinated individuals are no longer required to mask in indoor public settings; however, it is strongly recommended that all persons, regardless of vaccine status, continue indoor masking.
Universal masking shall remain required in specified high-risk settings such as public transportation; health care settings; congregate settings; long term care facilities; and in K-12 schools and childcare settings. As of March 11, 2022, the universal masking requirement for K12 and Childcare settings was terminated.
There have been no changes to State or County Health Orders or mandates with respect to COVID-19 that have a material effect on the City’s operations since the last update brought to Council at the May 9, 2022 regular meeting. However, the County of San Mateo Health Officer reports that COVID-19 case transmission, test positivity and hospitalization rates are increasing in San Mateo County. Community transmission of COVID-19 is high and increasing. In the Centers for Disease Control rubric, as of May 19, 2022, San Mateo County is categorized in “medium” category for COVID-19 community levels within the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) rubric based on the higher of new admissions and inpatient beds metrics in the past 7 days and as of May 19, 2022, the County reported that the daily rate was 50 cases per 100K during the last seven days, which is an average of 386 new cases per day, test positivity rates are 7.7% countywide and the testing level report by the State (incorporating a 7-day lag) was 679 tests per 100k in the population and remains among the highest in the State. The San Mateo County Health Officer strongly encourages the following key actions to “LIMITT” COVID:
5 Packet Pg. 208
Pacifica City Council 4
June 13, 2022
(1) Limit large gatherings to well-ventilated areas or outdoors; (2) Improve ventilation; (3) Mask – wearing a well-fitting mask (N95 provides better protection than cloth masks) in indoor public places; (3) Isolate for COVID if you feel sick; (4) Test for COVID if you have symptoms; and (5) Treatments are available if you test positive for COVID and must be started within days after you first develop symptoms to be effective.
FISCAL IMPACT:
None by this action; however, continuation of the local emergency will facilitate the ability for the City to request resources including financial support and reimbursement from the State Office of Emergency Services (OES) and Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) for costs incurred in preparation and/or response to the COVID-19 outbreak.
ORIGINATED BY:
City Clerk
ATTACHMENT LIST:
Attachment A: Resolution No 18-2020 - Ratifying Local Emergency Due to COVID-19 (PDF) 5 Packet Pg. 209
5.a
Packet Pg. 210 Attachment: Attachment A: Resolution No 18-2020 - Ratifying Local Emergency Due to COVID-19 (5007 : Continuation of Proclamation of Local
5.a
Packet Pg. 211 Attachment: Attachment A: Resolution No 18-2020 - Ratifying Local Emergency Due to COVID-19 (5007 : Continuation of Proclamation of Local
5.a
Packet Pg. 212 Attachment: Attachment A: Resolution No 18-2020 - Ratifying Local Emergency Due to COVID-19 (5007 : Continuation of Proclamation of Local
5.a
Packet Pg. 213 Attachment: Attachment A: Resolution No 18-2020 - Ratifying Local Emergency Due to COVID-19 (5007 : Continuation of Proclamation of Local
5.a
Packet Pg. 214 Attachment: Attachment A: Resolution No 18-2020 - Ratifying Local Emergency Due to COVID-19 (5007 : Continuation of Proclamation of Local
5.a
Packet Pg. 215 Attachment: Attachment A: Resolution No 18-2020 - Ratifying Local Emergency Due to COVID-19 (5007 : Continuation of Proclamation of Local
CITY OF PACIFICA
COUNCIL AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT
6/13/2022
1 SUBJECT:
Consideration of a Resolution Making Findings as Required by AB 361 to Continue to Permit the City Council and City Commissions and Committees to Conduct Teleconferenced Meetings Due to Health and Safety Concerns Relating to COVID-19
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Move to adopt a Resolution making findings pursuant to AB 361 to authorize the City Council and City Commissions and Committees to conduct teleconferenced meetings due to health and safety concerns relating to COVID-19.
STAFF CONTACT:
Kevin Woodhouse, City Manager
650-738-7409
[email protected]
Sarah Coffey, City Clerk
650-738-7307
[email protected]
BACKGROUND:
On March 4, 2020 Governor Gavin Newsom declared a State of Emergency to make additional resources available, formalize emergency actions already underway across multiple state agencies and departments, and help the State prepare for broader spread of COVID-19. On March 16, 2020, the City Manager, acting in his capacity as Director of Emergency Services, proclaimed the existence of a local emergency pursuant to PMC 4-2.05(a) and executed the "Proclamation of the Existence of a Local Emergency Regarding Novel (new) Coronavirus ("COVID-19")" ("Proclamation"). On March 18, 2020, the City Council of the City of Pacifica adopted Resolution No. 18-2020 to ratify the Proclamation of local emergency due to COVID-19 and continues to affirm the existence of the local emergency.
Beginning with the Special City Council Meeting held on March 18, 2020 for the purpose of adopting Resolution No. 18-2020 ratifying the City Manager’s Proclamation of the Existence of a Local Emergency Regarding Novel (new) Coronavirus (“COVID-19”), all City Council, Committee and Commission meetings have been held via videoconference using a Zoom Meeting or Zoom Webinar platform with no physical meeting location open to the public. The Governor’s Executive Orders N-25-20 and N-29-20 suspended certain requirements of the Brown Act to allow for public meetings to be held via teleconferenced meetings, either via audio or video or both, for all members of the body to participate from remote locations with no physical meeting location open to the public.
The Governor’s Executive Order N-08-21 issued on June 11, 2021 provided local jurisdictions a 6 Packet Pg. 216
Pacifica City Council 2
June 13, 2022
basis upon which to continue conducting public meetings via videoconference without a physical location open to the public under the relaxed provisions of the Brown Act until September 30, 2021.
On August 2, 2021, the Health Officer of the County of San Mateo issued Order No. C19-12 mandating the wearing of face coverings when indoors in workplaces and public settings, with limited exceptions. This Order was issued due to evidence of the SARS-CoV-2 B.1.617.2 (Delta) variant circulating in San Mateo County. This variant is highly transmissible in indoor settings. San Mateo County Health Order No. C19-12 was ordered effective at 12:01 am on August 3, 2021.
Assembly Bill 361 (AB 361) was signed by the Governor on September 16, 2021 and went into effect immediately upon signature as urgency legislation (codified under Government Code § 54953). AB 361 amends the Brown Act to provide additional provisions that allow meetings of legislative bodies to be conducted via teleconference. Its provisions allow a local agency legislative body to meet without complying with the standard teleconferencing requirements of the Brown Act if the Governor has proclaimed a State of Emergency and any of the following occurs:
1) State or local officials have imposed or recommended measures to promote social distancing,
2) the meeting is being held for the purposes of determining, by a majority vote, whether as a result of the emergency, meeting in person would present imminent risks to the health and safety of attendees;
3) the legislative body has determined that as a result of the emergency, meeting in person would present imminent risks to the health or safety of attendees.
In addition, AB 361 adds new procedures and clarifies the requirements for conducting remote meetings, including the following:
• Public Comment Opportunities in Real Time - a legislative body that meets remotely pursuant to AB 361 must allow members of the public to access the meeting via a call-in option or an internet-based service option, and the agenda for the remote meeting must provide an opportunity for members of the public to directly address the body in real time. A legislative body cannot require public comments to be submitted in advance of the meeting.
• No Action During Disruptions - in the event of a disruption that prevents the local agency from broadcasting the remote meeting, or in the event of a disruption within the local agency’s control that prevents members of the public from offering public comments using the call-in option or internet-based service option, AB 361 prohibits the legislative body from taking any further action on items appearing on the meeting agenda until public access is restored.
• Periodic Findings - Government Code § 54953(e)(B) requires the legislative body to hold a meeting during a proclaimed state of emergency for the purpose of determining, by majority vote, whether as a result of the emergency, meeting in person would present imminent risk to the health or safety of attendees.
6 Packet Pg. 217
Pacifica City Council 3
June 13, 2022
AB 361 will sunset on January 1, 2024.
DISCUSSION:
At the regular meeting of the City Council held on October 11, 2021, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 63-2021 making findings as required by AB 361 to permit the City Council and City Committees and Commissions to conduct teleconferenced meetings due to the health and safety concerns relating to COVID-19. The resolution also directed staff to agendize for Council consideration no less than every 30 days the need to continue to utilize teleconferenced meetings pursuant to AB 361. The City Council subsequently adopted Resolution No. 69-2021 on November 8, 2021; Resolution No. 80-2021 on December 13, 2021; Resolution No. 01-2022 on January 10, 2022; and Resolution No. 07-2022 on February 14, 2022 re-affirming the findings required by AB 361 to continue to conduct teleconferenced public meetings due to COVID-19 risk.
With the COVID-19 update provided at the City Council meeting held on February 28, 2022, it was reported that although the Omicron variant spread rapidly during and after the December 2021 holiday season, with positive case rates spiking in mid-January 2022, there had been a dramatic decrease in positive cases in the third week of February, the health effects of the Omicron variant generally much less severe for vaccinated persons, and San Mateo County has a 93.9% vaccination rate for 5+ age. Effective February 16, 2022, the County of San Mateo Health Officer announced that Health Officer Order No. c19-12 (For The Wearing of Face Coverings In Workplaces And Public Settings issued on August 2, 2021) was rescinded in full.
As a result of the decrease in case rates, lower health risks and higher vaccination rates, at the City Council meeting held on February 28, 2022, the City Manager had recommended the return to in-person City Council and City Committee and Commission meetings beginning March 14, 2022. The City Council approved of the return to in-person meetings beginning March 14, 2022 by majority vote at the February 28, 2022 City Council meeting.
With the May 19, 2022 update regarding COVID-19 transmission rates, the County of San Mateo Health Officer reports that the County is still experiencing an increasing rate of COVID-19 transmission and positive tests in the community in addition to the level of COVID-19 hospitalizations rising. With the current Centers for Disease Control (CDC) rubric, based on the higher of new admissions and inpatient beds metrics in the past 7 days, San Mateo County is categorized in “medium” category for COVID-19 community levels. The County has reported that, as of May 19, 2022, the daily rate was 50 cases per 100K during the last seven days, which is an average of 386 new cases per day, test positivity rates are 7.7% countywide and the testing level report by the State (incorporating a 7-day lag) was 679 tests per 100k in the population and remains among the highest in the State. The CDC has cautioned that some people and communities, such as our oldest citizens, people who are immunocompromised, and people with disabilities, are at higher risk for serious illness. With the increase in COVID-19 incidence and transmission and the vulnerability of certain segments of the population, the City Manager is recommending that the City Council consider again adopting a Resolution making findings as required by AB 361 to permit the City Council and City Committees and Commissions to conduct teleconferenced meetings if necessary due to the 6 Packet Pg. 218
Pacifica City Council 4
June 13, 2022
health and safety concerns relating to COVID-19 and to evaluate 30 days thereafter the need to continue to utilize if necessary teleconferenced meetings pursuant to AB 361.
At the City Council meeting held on May 23, 2022, the City Council authorized public meetings of the City Council and City Commissions and Committees to return to teleconferenced meetings with no physical location open to the public due to the health and safety concerns relating to COVID-19. The enclosed Resolution makes the required findings under AB 361, and if adopted, it will allow the City to conduct City Council and City Commission and Committee meetings via teleconference with no physical location open to the public, to help mitigate the spread of COVID-19, as well as during other state-proclaimed emergencies, such as earthquakes or wildfires, where physical attendance may present a risk.
The resolution also directs staff to agendize for Council consideration no less than every 30 days the need to continue to utilize teleconferenced meetings pursuant to AB 361 if found that there is a continued risk to public health and safety.
RELATION TO CITY COUNCIL GOALS AND WORK PLAN:
“An Engaged Community” - includes taking actions to restore trust in city government, expanding communication, and building community.
“Maintaining a Safe Community” - includes support our first responders (police, fire, public works), responding to emergencies, protecting people, property, businesses, and our infrastructure (streets, sidewalks, storm and waste water), and engaging in emergency preparedness and prevention activities.
FISCAL IMPACT:
There is no fiscal impact associated with this action.
ORIGINATED BY:
City Clerk
ATTACHMENT LIST:
Attachment A: Full text of AB 361 (PDF)
Attachment B: Resolution No. 18-2020 - Ratifying Local Emergency Due to COVID-19 (PDF) 6 Packet Pg. 219
Pacifica City Council 5
June 13, 2022
RESOLUTION NO. ________
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PACIFICA MAKING FINDINGS AS REQUIRED BY AB 361 TO PERMIT THE CITY COUNCIL AND CITY
COMMITTEES AND COMMISSIONS ESTABLISHED BY THE COUNCIL TO CONDUCT
TELECONFERENCED MEETINGS DUE TO THE HEALTH AND SAFETY CONCERNS RELATING TO COVID-19
WHEREAS, on March 4, 2020, as part of the State of California’s response to address the global COVID-19 outbreak, Governor Gavin Newsom declared a State of Emergency to make additional resources available, formalize emergency actions already underway across multiple state agencies and departments, and help the state prepare for broader spread of COVID-19; and
WHEREAS, on March 16, 2020, at 12:11 p.m., the City Manager, in his capacity as Director of Emergency Services, proclaimed the existence of local emergency in the City of Pacifica, after determining that the rapidly widespread of COVID-19 is likely to create conditions of disaster or extreme peril which will be beyond the services, personnel and equipment and facilities of the City and executed the “Proclamation of the Existence of a Local Emergency Regarding Novel (new) Coronavirus ("COVID-19”)” (“Proclamation”); and WHEREAS, on March 18, 2020, the City Council of the City of Pacifica adopted Resolution No. 18-2020 ratifying the “Proclamation of the Existence of a Local Emergency Regarding Novel (new) Coronavirus ("COVID-19”)”, which continues to remain in place; and WHEREAS, on March 17, 2020, the Governor of California executed Executive Order N-29-20 which suspended and modified specified provisions in the Ralph M. Brown Act (Government Code Section § 54950 et seq.) and authorized local legislative bodies to hold public meetings via teleconferencing and to make public meetings accessible telephonically or otherwise electronically to all members of the public seeking to observe and address the local legislative body; and
WHEREAS, on August 2, 2021, the Health Officer of the County of San Mateo issued Order No. C19-12 mandating the wearing of face coverings when indoors in workplaces and public settings, with limited exceptions due to the COVID-19 Delta variant circulating in San Mateo County and evidence of the Delta variant being highly transmissible in indoor settings; and
6 Packet Pg. 220
Pacifica City Council 6
June 13, 2022
WHEREAS, on June 11, 2021, the Governor of California executed Executive Order N-08-21 which extended the provisions of Executive Order N-29-20 concerning teleconference accommodations for public meetings through September 30, 2021; and WHEREAS, on September 16, 2021, the Governor of California signed into law Assembly Bill 361 (AB 361, Rivas) (Stats. 2021, ch. 165) amending Government Code § 54953 and providing alternative teleconferencing requirements to conduct public meetings during a proclaimed state of emergency; and
WHEREAS, the City of Pacifica has conducted public meetings of City Council and City Committees and Commissions via teleconference from March 18, 2020 through March 13, 2022 under the modified provisions of the Brown Act as allowed for by Governor’s Orders N-29-20, N-08-21 and/or N-15-21 in effect at the time; and WHEREAS, AB 361 (Stats. 2021, ch. 165) imposes requirements to ensure members of the public are able to attend and participate in public meetings conducted via teleconference, including:
• Notice of the means by which members of the public may access the meeting and offer public comment, including an opportunity for all persons to attend via a call-in option or an internet-based service option;
• The legislative body shall take no further action on agenda items when there is a disruption which prevents the public agency from broadcasting the meeting, or in the event of a disruption within the local agency’s control which prevents members of the public from offering public comments, until public access is restored; • Prohibits the legislative body from requiring public comments to be submitted in advance of the meeting and specifies that the legislative body must provide an opportunity for members of the public to address the legislative body and offer comments in real time;
• Prohibits the legislative body from closing the public comment period until the public comment period has elapsed or until a reasonable amount of time has elapsed; and WHEREAS, the City has already implemented and is in full compliance with the requirements listed above when conducting public meetings via teleconference, which are now codified in Government Code § 54953(e)(2)(B-G); and WHEREAS, pursuant to Government Code § 54953(e)(B), the legislative body shall hold a meeting during a proclaimed state of emergency for the purpose of determining, by majority vote, whether as a result of the emergency, meeting in person would present imminent risks to the health and safety of attendees. The City Council must make these findings no later than 30 days after the first teleconferenced meeting is held pursuant to AB 361 (Stats. 2021, ch. 165) after September 30, 2021, and must also make these findings 6 Packet Pg. 221
Pacifica City Council 7
June 13, 2022
every 30 days thereafter, in order to continue to allow teleconference accessibility for conducing public meetings; and
WHEREAS, on August 2, 2021, the Health Officer of the County of San Mateo issued Order No. C19-12 mandating the wearing of face coverings when indoors in workplaces and public settings, with limited exceptions. This Order was issued due to evidence of the SARS-CoV-2 B.1.617.2 (Delta) variant circulating in San Mateo County.
This variant is highly transmissible in indoor settings. San Mateo County Health Order No.
C19-12 was ordered effective at 12:01 am on August 3, 2021; and WHEREAS, in December 2021 and January 2022 the COVID-19 Omicron variant has been observed by scientists and medical professionals to spread rapidly even amongst some vaccinated individuals and continues to present a health and safety risk to the general public; and
WHEREAS, effective February 16, 2022 the County of San Mateo Health Officer announced that Health Officer Order No. c19-12 (For The Wearing of Face Coverings In Workplaces And Public Settings issued on August 2, 2021) was rescinded in full); and WHEREAS, to the County of San Mateo Health Officer strongly recommends getting vaccinated or boosters for COVID-19, improve ventilation throughout indoor spaces as much as possible, wear a well-fitting mask in crowded indoor public places, and continue to follow State isolation and quarantine guidance to prevent the spread of COVID-19; and WHEREAS, as of May 19, 2022, San Mateo County is categorized in “medium” category for COVID-19 community levels within the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) rubric based on the higher of new admissions and inpatient beds metrics in the past 7 days and as of May 19, 2022, the County reported that the daily rate was 50 cases per 100K during the last seven days, which is an average of 386 new cases per day, test positivity rates are 7.7% countywide and the testing level report by the State (incorporating a 7-day lag) was 679 tests per 100k in the population and remains among the highest in the State; and
WHEREAS, the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) has cautioned that some people and communities, such as our oldest citizens, people who are immunocompromised, and people with disabilities, are at higher risk for serious illness due to COVID-19; and WHEREAS, the City cannot ensure that social distancing can be maintained by Councilmembers, Commissioners, Committee members and/or members of the public in Council Chambers or at other locations where City Committees and Commissions regularly meet for the duration of meetings in order to safeguard the most vulnerable populations, and COVID-19 variants and transmission rates remain an imminent and serious risk to public health.
6 Packet Pg. 222
Pacifica City Council 8
June 13, 2022
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Pacifica, California, as follows:
SECTION 1. The City Council hereby declares that the recitals set forth above are true and correct, and incorporated into this resolution as findings of the City Council.
SECTION 2. The City Council hereby declares that a state of emergency as a result of the threat of COVID-19 still exists and continues to impact the ability of members of the public, the City Council, Council appointed Commissions and Committees, City staff and consultants to meet safely in person and would present imminent risks to the health and safety of attendees.
SECTION 3. The State of California and the City of Pacifica continue to follow safety measures in response to COVID-19 as ordered or recommended by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), California Department of Public Health (DPH), and/or County of San Mateo, as applicable, including facial coverings when required. Based upon that guidance, in person attendance indoors at public meetings continues to present a health risk for certain segments of the population, necessitating teleconferencing to allow for meaningful public participation options for all Pacifica constituents.
SECTION 4. The City Council hereby declares that, pursuant to the findings listed in this Resolution, the City Council and Council appointed Commissions and Committees are authorized to utilize teleconferencing to conduct public meetings pursuant to AB 361 and Government Code § 54953, as amended thereby.
SECTION 5. The City Council determines that, every 30 days, it will reconsider the circumstances of the emergency and review whether it continues to directly impact the ability of the Council and appointed Committees and Commissions members to meet safely in person.
SECTION 6. Severability: If any section, subsection, subdivision, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this Resolution is, for any reason, held to be invalid or unconstitutional by the decision of any court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this Resolution. The City Council hereby declares that it would have adopted this Resolution and each and every section, subsection, subdivision, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion thereof, irrespective of the fact that any one or more sections, subsections, subdivisions, sentences, clauses, phrases, or portions thereof be declared unconstitutional.
SECTION 7. Effective Date: This Resolution shall become effective immediately upon adoption.
• • • • •
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Pacifica, California, held on the 13th day of June, 2022, by the following vote:
6 Packet Pg. 223
Pacifica City Council 9
June 13, 2022
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. 224
Assembly Bill No. 361
CHAPTER 165
An act to add and repeal Section 89305.6 of the Education Code, and to amend, repeal, and add Section 54953 of, and to add and repeal Section 11133 of, the Government Code, relating to open meetings, and declaring the urgency thereof, to take effect immediately.
[Approved by Governor September 16, 2021. Filed with
Secretary of State September 16, 2021.]
legislative counsel
’
s digest
AB 361, Robert Rivas. Open meetings: state and local agencies:
teleconferences.
(1) Existing law, the Ralph M. Brown Act requires, with specified exceptions, that all meetings of a legislative body of a local agency, as those terms are defined, be open and public and that all persons be permitted to attend and participate. The act contains specified provisions regarding the timelines for posting an agenda and providing for the ability of the public to directly address the legislative body on any item of interest to the public.
The act generally requires all regular and special meetings of the legislative body be held within the boundaries of the territory over which the local agency exercises jurisdiction, subject to certain exceptions. The act allows for meetings to occur via teleconferencing subject to certain requirements, particularly that the legislative body notice each teleconference location of each member that will be participating in the public meeting, that each teleconference location be accessible to the public, that members of the public be allowed to address the legislative body at each teleconference location, that the legislative body post an agenda at each teleconference location, and that at least a quorum of the legislative body participate from locations within the boundaries of the local agency’s jurisdiction. The act provides an exemption to the jurisdictional requirement for health authorities, as defined. The act authorizes the district attorney or any interested person, subject to certain provisions, to commence an action by mandamus or injunction for the purpose of obtaining a judicial determination that specified actions taken by a legislative body are null and void.
Existing law, the California Emergency Services Act, authorizes the Governor, or the Director of Emergency Services when the governor is inaccessible, to proclaim a state of emergency under specified circumstances.
Executive Order No. N-29-20 suspends the Ralph M. Brown Act’s requirements for teleconferencing during the COVID-19 pandemic provided that notice and accessibility requirements are met, the public members are allowed to observe and address the legislative body at the meeting, and that a legislative body of a local agency has a procedure for receiving and swiftly
92 6.a
Packet Pg. 225 Attachment: Attachment A: Full text of AB 361 (5016 : Resolution - AB 361 to Permit Teleconferenced Meetings due to COVID-19) resolving requests for reasonable accommodation for individuals with disabilities, as specified.
This bill, until January 1, 2024, would authorize a local agency to use teleconferencing without complying with the teleconferencing requirements imposed by the Ralph M. Brown Act when a legislative body of a local agency holds a meeting during a declared state of emergency, as that term is defined, when state or local health officials have imposed or recommended measures to promote social distancing, during a proclaimed state of emergency held for the purpose of determining, by majority vote, whether meeting in person would present imminent risks to the health or safety of attendees, and during a proclaimed state of emergency when the legislative body has determined that meeting in person would present imminent risks to the health or safety of attendees, as provided.
This bill would require legislative bodies that hold teleconferenced meetings under these abbreviated teleconferencing procedures to give notice of the meeting and post agendas, as described, to allow members of the public to access the meeting and address the legislative body, to give notice of the means by which members of the public may access the meeting and offer public comment, including an opportunity for all persons to attend via a call-in option or an internet-based service option, and to conduct the meeting in a manner that protects the statutory and constitutional rights of the parties and the public appearing before the legislative body. The bill would require the legislative body to take no further action on agenda items when there is a disruption which prevents the public agency from broadcasting the meeting, or in the event of a disruption within the local agency’s control which prevents members of the public from offering public comments, until public access is restored. The bill would specify that actions taken during the disruption are subject to challenge proceedings, as specified.
This bill would prohibit the legislative body from requiring public comments to be submitted in advance of the meeting and would specify that the legislative body must provide an opportunity for the public to address the legislative body and offer comment in real time. The bill would prohibit the legislative body from closing the public comment period and the opportunity to register to provide public comment, until the public comment period has elapsed or until a reasonable amount of time has elapsed, as specified. When there is a continuing state of emergency, or when state or local officials have imposed or recommended measures to promote social distancing, the bill would require a legislative body to make specified findings not later than 30 days after the first teleconferenced meeting pursuant to these provisions, and to make those findings every 30 days thereafter, in order to continue to meet under these abbreviated teleconferencing procedures.
Existing law prohibits a legislative body from requiring, as a condition to attend a meeting, a person to register the person’s name, or to provide other information, or to fulfill any condition precedent to the person’s attendance.
92 Ch. 165 — 2 —
6.a
Packet Pg. 226 Attachment: Attachment A: Full text of AB 361 (5016 : Resolution - AB 361 to Permit Teleconferenced Meetings due to COVID-19) This bill would exclude from that prohibition, a registration requirement imposed by a third-party internet website or other online platform not under the control of the legislative body.
(2) Existing law, the Bagley-Keene Open Meeting Act, requires, with specified exceptions, that all meetings of a state body be open and public and all persons be permitted to attend any meeting of a state body. The act requires at least one member of the state body to be physically present at the location specified in the notice of the meeting.
The Governor’s Executive Order No. N-29-20 suspends the requirements of the Bagley-Keene Open Meeting Act for teleconferencing during the COVID-19 pandemic, provided that notice and accessibility requirements are met, the public members are allowed to observe and address the state body at the meeting, and that a state body has a procedure for receiving and swiftly resolving requests for reasonable accommodation for individuals with disabilities, as specified.
This bill, until January 31, 2022, would authorize, subject to specified notice and accessibility requirements, a state body to hold public meetings through teleconferencing and to make public meetings accessible telephonically, or otherwise electronically, to all members of the public seeking to observe and to address the state body. With respect to a state body holding a public meeting pursuant to these provisions, the bill would suspend certain requirements of existing law, including the requirements that each teleconference location be accessible to the public and that members of the public be able to address the state body at each teleconference location. Under the bill, a state body that holds a meeting through teleconferencing and allows members of the public to observe and address the meeting telephonically or otherwise electronically would satisfy any requirement that the state body allow members of the public to attend the meeting and offer public comment. The bill would require that each state body that holds a meeting through teleconferencing provide notice of the meeting, and post the agenda, as provided. The bill would urge state bodies utilizing these teleconferencing procedures in the bill to use sound discretion and to make reasonable efforts to adhere as closely as reasonably possible to existing law, as provided.
(3) Existing law establishes the various campuses of the California State University under the administration of the Trustees of the California State University, and authorizes the establishment of student body organizations in connection with the operations of California State University campuses.
The Gloria Romero Open Meetings Act of 2000 generally requires a legislative body, as defined, of a student body organization to conduct its business in a meeting that is open and public. The act authorizes the legislative body to use teleconferencing, as defined, for the benefit of the public and the legislative body in connection with any meeting or proceeding authorized by law.
This bill, until January 31, 2022, would authorize, subject to specified notice and accessibility requirements, a legislative body, as defined for purposes of the act, to hold public meetings through teleconferencing and 92 — 3 — Ch. 165
6.a
Packet Pg. 227 Attachment: Attachment A: Full text of AB 361 (5016 : Resolution - AB 361 to Permit Teleconferenced Meetings due to COVID-19) to make public meetings accessible telephonically, or otherwise electronically, to all members of the public seeking to observe and to address the legislative body. With respect to a legislative body holding a public meeting pursuant to these provisions, the bill would suspend certain requirements of existing law, including the requirements that each teleconference location be accessible to the public and that members of the public be able to address the legislative body at each teleconference location.
Under the bill, a legislative body that holds a meeting through teleconferencing and allows members of the public to observe and address the meeting telephonically or otherwise electronically would satisfy any requirement that the legislative body allow members of the public to attend the meeting and offer public comment. The bill would require that each legislative body that holds a meeting through teleconferencing provide notice of the meeting, and post the agenda, as provided. The bill would urge legislative bodies utilizing these teleconferencing procedures in the bill to use sound discretion and to make reasonable efforts to adhere as closely as reasonably possible to existing law, as provided.
(4) This bill would declare the Legislature’s intent, consistent with the Governor’s Executive Order No. N-29-20, to improve and enhance public access to state and local agency meetings during the COVID-19 pandemic and future emergencies by allowing broader access through teleconferencing options.
(5) This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 54953 of the Government Code proposed by AB 339 to be operative only if this bill and AB 339 are enacted and this bill is enacted last.
(6) The California Constitution requires local agencies, for the purpose of ensuring public access to the meetings of public bodies and the writings of public officials and agencies, to comply with a statutory enactment that amends or enacts laws relating to public records or open meetings and contains findings demonstrating that the enactment furthers the constitutional requirements relating to this purpose.
This bill would make legislative findings to that effect. (7) Existing constitutional provisions require that a statute that limits the right of access to the meetings of public bodies or the writings of public officials and agencies be adopted with findings demonstrating the interest protected by the limitation and the need for protecting that interest.
This bill would make legislative findings to that effect. (8) This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.
The people of the State of California do enact as follows:
SECTION 1. Section 89305.6 is added to the Education Code, to read:
89305.6. (a) Notwithstanding any other provision of this article, and subject to the notice and accessibility requirements in subdivisions (d) and (e), a legislative body may hold public meetings through teleconferencing 92 Ch. 165 — 4 —
6.a
Packet Pg. 228 Attachment: Attachment A: Full text of AB 361 (5016 : Resolution - AB 361 to Permit Teleconferenced Meetings due to COVID-19) and make public meetings accessible telephonically, or otherwise electronically, to all members of the public seeking to observe and to address the legislative body.
(b) (1) For a legislative body holding a public meeting through teleconferencing pursuant to this section, all requirements in this article requiring the physical presence of members, the clerk or other personnel of the legislative body, or the public, as a condition of participation in or quorum for a public meeting, are hereby suspended.
(2) For a legislative body holding a public meeting through teleconferencing pursuant to this section, all of the following requirements in this article are suspended:
(A) Each teleconference location from which a member will be participating in a public meeting or proceeding be identified in the notice and agenda of the public meeting or proceeding.
(B) Each teleconference location be accessible to the public. (C) Members of the public may address the legislative body at each teleconference conference location.
(D) Post agendas at all teleconference locations.
(E) At least one member of the legislative body be physically present at the location specified in the notice of the meeting.
(c) A legislative body that holds a meeting through teleconferencing and allows members of the public to observe and address the meeting telephonically or otherwise electronically, consistent with the notice and accessibility requirements in subdivisions (d) and (e), shall have satisfied any requirement that the legislative body allow members of the public to attend the meeting and offer public comment. A legislative body need not make available any physical location from which members of the public may observe the meeting and offer public comment.
(d) If a legislative body holds a meeting through teleconferencing pursuant to this section and allows members of the public to observe and address the meeting telephonically or otherwise electronically, the legislative body shall also do both of the following:
(1) Implement a procedure for receiving and swiftly resolving requests for reasonable modification or accommodation from individuals with disabilities, consistent with the federal Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (42 U.S.C. Sec. 12101 et seq.), and resolving any doubt whatsoever in favor of accessibility.
(2) Advertise that procedure each time notice is given of the means by which members of the public may observe the meeting and offer public comment, pursuant to paragraph (2) of subdivision (e).
(e) Except to the extent this section provides otherwise, each legislative body that holds a meeting through teleconferencing pursuant to this section shall do both of the following:
(1) Give advance notice of the time of, and post the agenda for, each public meeting according to the timeframes otherwise prescribed by this article, and using the means otherwise prescribed by this article, as applicable.
92 — 5 — Ch. 165
6.a
Packet Pg. 229 Attachment: Attachment A: Full text of AB 361 (5016 : Resolution - AB 361 to Permit Teleconferenced Meetings due to COVID-19) (2) In each instance in which notice of the time of the meeting is otherwise given or the agenda for the meeting is otherwise posted, also give notice of the means by which members of the public may observe the meeting and offer public comment. As to any instance in which there is a change in the means of public observation and comment, or any instance prior to the effective date of this section in which the time of the meeting has been noticed or the agenda for the meeting has been posted without also including notice of the means of public observation and comment, a legislative body may satisfy this requirement by advertising the means of public observation and comment using the most rapid means of communication available at the time. Advertising the means of public observation and comment using the most rapid means of communication available at the time shall include, but need not be limited to, posting such means on the legislative body’s internet website.
(f) All legislative bodies utilizing the teleconferencing procedures in this section are urged to use sound discretion and to make reasonable efforts to adhere as closely as reasonably possible to the otherwise applicable provisions of this article, in order to maximize transparency and provide the public access to legislative body meetings.
(g) This section shall remain in effect only until January 31, 2022, and as of that date is repealed.
SEC. 2. Section 11133 is added to the Government Code, to read:
11133. (a) Notwithstanding any other provision of this article, and subject to the notice and accessibility requirements in subdivisions (d) and (e), a state body may hold public meetings through teleconferencing and make public meetings accessible telephonically, or otherwise electronically, to all members of the public seeking to observe and to address the state body.
(b) (1) For a state body holding a public meeting through teleconferencing pursuant to this section, all requirements in this article requiring the physical presence of members, the clerk or other personnel of the state body, or the public, as a condition of participation in or quorum for a public meeting, are hereby suspended.
(2) For a state body holding a public meeting through teleconferencing pursuant to this section, all of the following requirements in this article are suspended:
(A) Each teleconference location from which a member will be participating in a public meeting or proceeding be identified in the notice and agenda of the public meeting or proceeding.
(B) Each teleconference location be accessible to the public. (C) Members of the public may address the state body at each teleconference conference location.
(D) Post agendas at all teleconference locations.
(E) At least one member of the state body be physically present at the location specified in the notice of the meeting.
(c) A state body that holds a meeting through teleconferencing and allows members of the public to observe and address the meeting telephonically 92 Ch. 165 — 6 —
6.a
Packet Pg. 230 Attachment: Attachment A: Full text of AB 361 (5016 : Resolution - AB 361 to Permit Teleconferenced Meetings due to COVID-19) or otherwise electronically, consistent with the notice and accessibility requirements in subdivisions (d) and (e), shall have satisfied any requirement that the state body allow members of the public to attend the meeting and offer public comment. A state body need not make available any physical location from which members of the public may observe the meeting and offer public comment.
(d) If a state body holds a meeting through teleconferencing pursuant to this section and allows members of the public to observe and address the meeting telephonically or otherwise electronically, the state body shall also do both of the following:
(1) Implement a procedure for receiving and swiftly resolving requests for reasonable modification or accommodation from individuals with disabilities, consistent with the federal Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (42 U.S.C. Sec. 12101 et seq.), and resolving any doubt whatsoever in favor of accessibility.
(2) Advertise that procedure each time notice is given of the means by which members of the public may observe the meeting and offer public comment, pursuant to paragraph (2) of subdivision (e).
(e) Except to the extent this section provides otherwise, each state body that holds a meeting through teleconferencing pursuant to this section shall do both of the following:
(1) Give advance notice of the time of, and post the agenda for, each public meeting according to the timeframes otherwise prescribed by this article, and using the means otherwise prescribed by this article, as applicable.
(2) In each instance in which notice of the time of the meeting is otherwise given or the agenda for the meeting is otherwise posted, also give notice of the means by which members of the public may observe the meeting and offer public comment. As to any instance in which there is a change in the means of public observation and comment, or any instance prior to the effective date of this section in which the time of the meeting has been noticed or the agenda for the meeting has been posted without also including notice of the means of public observation and comment, a state body may satisfy this requirement by advertising the means of public observation and comment using the most rapid means of communication available at the time. Advertising the means of public observation and comment using the most rapid means of communication available at the time shall include, but need not be limited to, posting such means on the state body’s internet website.
(f) All state bodies utilizing the teleconferencing procedures in this section are urged to use sound discretion and to make reasonable efforts to adhere as closely as reasonably possible to the otherwise applicable provisions of this article, in order to maximize transparency and provide the public access to state body meetings.
(g) This section shall remain in effect only until January 31, 2022, and as of that date is repealed.
SEC. 3. Section 54953 of the Government Code is amended to read:
92 — 7 — Ch. 165
6.a
Packet Pg. 231 Attachment: Attachment A: Full text of AB 361 (5016 : Resolution - AB 361 to Permit Teleconferenced Meetings due to COVID-19) 54953. (a) All meetings of the legislati
ve body of a local agency shall
be open and public, and all persons shall be permitted to attend any meeting of the legislative body of a local agency, except as otherwise provided in this chapter.
(b) (1) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the legislative body of a local agency may use teleconferencing for the benefit of the public and the legislative body of a local agency in connection with any meeting or proceeding authorized by law. The teleconferenced meeting or proceeding shall comply with all otherwise applicable requirements of this chapter and all otherwise applicable provisions of law relating to a specific type of meeting or proceeding.
(2) Teleconferencing, as authorized by this section, may be used for all purposes in connection with any meeting within the subject matter jurisdiction of the legislative body. All votes taken during a teleconferenced meeting shall be by rollcall.
(3) If the legislative body of a local agency elects to use teleconferencing, it shall post agendas at all teleconference locations and conduct teleconference meetings in a manner that protects the statutory and constitutional rights of the parties or the public appearing before the legislative body of a local agency. Each teleconference location shall be identified in the notice and agenda of the meeting or proceeding, and each teleconference location shall be accessible to the public. During the teleconference, at least a quorum of the members of the legislative body shall participate from locations within the boundaries of the territory over which the local agency exercises jurisdiction, except as provided in subdivisions (d) and (e). The agenda shall provide an opportunity for members of the public to address the legislative body directly pursuant to Section 54954.3 at each teleconference location.
(4) For the purposes of this section, “teleconference” means a meeting of a legislative body, the members of which are in different locations, connected by electronic means, through either audio or video, or both.
Nothing in this section shall prohibit a local agency from providing the public with additional teleconference locations.
(c) (1) No legislative body shall take action by secret ballot, whether preliminary or final.
(2) The legislative body of a local agency shall publicly report any action taken and the vote or abstention on that action of each member present for the action.
(3) Prior to taking final action, the legislative body shall orally report a summary of a recommendation for a final action on the salaries, salary schedules, or compensation paid in the form of fringe benefits of a local agency executive, as defined in subdivision (d) of Section 3511.1, during the open meeting in which the final action is to be taken. This paragraph shall not affect the public’s right under the California Public Records Act (Chapter 3.5 (commencing with Section 6250) of Division 7 of Title 1) to inspect or copy records created or received in the process of developing the recommendation.
92 Ch. 165 — 8 —
6.a
Packet Pg. 232 Attachment: Attachment A: Full text of AB 361 (5016 : Resolution - AB 361 to Permit Teleconferenced Meetings due to COVID-19) (d) (1) Notwithstanding the provisions relating to a quorum in paragraph (3) of subdivision (b), if a health authority conducts a teleconference meeting, members who are outside the jurisdiction of the authority may be counted toward the establishment of a quorum when participating in the teleconference if at least 50 percent of the number of members that would establish a quorum are present within the boundaries of the territory over which the authority exercises jurisdiction, and the health authority provides a teleconference number, and associated access codes, if any, that allows any person to call in to participate in the meeting and the number and access codes are identified in the notice and agenda of the meeting. (2) Nothing in this subdivision shall be construed as discouraging health authority members from regularly meeting at a common physical site within the jurisdiction of the authority or from using teleconference locations within or near the jurisdiction of the authority. A teleconference meeting for which a quorum is established pursuant to this subdivision shall be subject to all other requirements of this section.
(3) For purposes of this subdivision, a health authority means any entity created pursuant to Sections 14018.7, 14087.31, 14087.35, 14087.36, 14087.38, and 14087.9605 of the Welfare and Institutions Code, any joint powers authority created pursuant to Article 1 (commencing with Section 6500) of Chapter 5 of Division 7 for the purpose of contracting pursuant to Section 14087.3 of the Welfare and Institutions Code, and any advisory committee to a county-sponsored health plan licensed pursuant to Chapter
2.2 (commencing with Section 1340) of Division 2 of the Health and Safety Code if the advisory committee has 12 or more members.
(e) (1) A local agency may use teleconferencing without complying with the requirements of paragraph (3) of subdivision (b) if the legislative body complies with the requirements of paragraph (2) of this subdivision in any of the following circumstances:
(A) The legislative body holds a meeting during a proclaimed state of emergency, and state or local officials have imposed or recommended measures to promote social distancing.
(B) The legislative body holds a meeting during a proclaimed state of emergency for the purpose of determining, by majority vote, whether as a result of the emergency, meeting in person would present imminent risks to the health or safety of attendees.
(C) The legislative body holds a meeting during a proclaimed state of emergency and has determined, by majority vote, pursuant to subparagraph (B), that, as a result of the emergency, meeting in person would present imminent risks to the health or safety of attendees.
(2) A legislative body that holds a meeting pursuant to this subdivision shall do all of the following:
(A) The legislative body shall give notice of the meeting and post agendas as otherwise required by this chapter.
(B) The legislative body shall allow members of the public to access the meeting and the agenda shall provide an opportunity for members of the public to address the legislative body directly pursuant to Section 54954.3. 92 — 9 — Ch. 165
6.a
Packet Pg. 233 Attachment: Attachment A: Full text of AB 361 (5016 : Resolution - AB 361 to Permit Teleconferenced Meetings due to COVID-19) In each instance in which notice of the time of the teleconferenced meeting is otherwise given or the agenda for the meeting is otherwise posted, the legislative body shall also give notice of the means by which members of the public may access the meeting and offer public comment. The agenda shall identify and include an opportunity for all persons to attend via a call-in option or an internet-based service option. This subparagraph shall not be construed to require the legislative body to provide a physical location from which the public may attend or comment.
(C) The legislative body shall conduct teleconference meetings in a manner that protects the statutory and constitutional rights of the parties and the public appearing before the legislative body of a local agency. (D) In the event of a disruption which prevents the public agency from broadcasting the meeting to members of the public using the call-in option or internet-based service option, or in the event of a disruption within the local agency’s control which prevents members of the public from offering public comments using the call-in option or internet-based service option, the body shall take no further action on items appearing on the meeting agenda until public access to the meeting via the call-in option or internet-based service option is restored. Actions taken on agenda items during a disruption which prevents the public agency from broadcasting the meeting may be challenged pursuant to Section 54960.1.
(E) The legislative body shall not require public comments to be submitted in advance of the meeting and must provide an opportunity for the public to address the legislative body and offer comment in real time.
This subparagraph shall not be construed to require the legislative body to provide a physical location from which the public may attend or comment. (F) Notwithstanding Section 54953.3, an individual desiring to provide public comment through the use of an internet website, or other online platform, not under the control of the local legislative body, that requires registration to log in to a teleconference may be required to register as required by the third-party internet website or online platform to participate. (G) (i) A legislative body that provides a timed public comment period for each agenda item shall not close the public comment period for the agenda item, or the opportunity to register, pursuant to subparagraph (F), to provide public comment until that timed public comment period has elapsed.
(ii) A legislative body that does not provide a timed public comment period, but takes public comment separately on each agenda item, shall allow a reasonable amount of time per agenda item to allow public members the opportunity to provide public comment, including time for members of the public to register pursuant to subparagraph (F), or otherwise be recognized for the purpose of providing public comment. (iii) A legislative body that provides a timed general public comment period that does not correspond to a specific agenda item shall not close the public comment period or the opportunity to register, pursuant to subparagraph (F), until the timed general public comment period has elapsed. 92 Ch. 165 — 10 —
6.a
Packet Pg. 234 Attachment: Attachment A: Full text of AB 361 (5016 : Resolution - AB 361 to Permit Teleconferenced Meetings due to COVID-19) (3) If a state of emergency remains acti
ve, or state or local officials have
imposed or recommended measures to promote social distancing, in order to continue to teleconference without compliance with paragraph (3) of subdivision (b), the legislative body shall, not later than 30 days after teleconferencing for the first time pursuant to subparagraph (A), (B), or (C) of paragraph (1), and every 30 days thereafter, make the following findings by majority vote:
(A) The legislative body has reconsidered the circumstances of the state of emergency.
(B) Any of the following circumstances exist:
(i) The state of emergency continues to directly impact the ability of the members to meet safely in person.
(ii) State or local officials continue to impose or recommend measures to promote social distancing.
(4) For the purposes of this subdivision, “state of emergency” means a state of emergency proclaimed pursuant to Section 8625 of the California Emergency Services Act (Article 1 (commencing with Section 8550) of Chapter 7 of Division 1 of Title 2).
(f) This section shall remain in effect only until January 1, 2024, and as of that date is repealed.
SEC. 3.1. Section 54953 of the Government Code is amended to read:
54953. (a) All meetings of the legislative body of a local agency shall be open and public, and all persons shall be permitted to attend any meeting of the legislative body of a local agency in person, except as otherwise provided in this chapter. Local agencies shall conduct meetings subject to this chapter consistent with applicable state and federal civil rights laws, including, but not limited to, any applicable language access and other nondiscrimination obligations.
(b) (1) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the legislative body of a local agency may use teleconferencing for the benefit of the public and the legislative body of a local agency in connection with any meeting or proceeding authorized by law. The teleconferenced meeting or proceeding shall comply with all otherwise applicable requirements of this chapter and all otherwise applicable provisions of law relating to a specific type of meeting or proceeding.
(2) Teleconferencing, as authorized by this section, may be used for all purposes in connection with any meeting within the subject matter jurisdiction of the legislative body. All votes taken during a teleconferenced meeting shall be by rollcall.
(3) If the legislative body of a local agency elects to use teleconferencing, it shall post agendas at all teleconference locations and conduct teleconference meetings in a manner that protects the statutory and constitutional rights of the parties or the public appearing before the legislative body of a local agency. Each teleconference location shall be identified in the notice and agenda of the meeting or proceeding, and each teleconference location shall be accessible to the public. During the teleconference, at least a quorum of the members of the legislative body 92 — 11 — Ch. 165
6.a
Packet Pg. 235 Attachment: Attachment A: Full text of AB 361 (5016 : Resolution - AB 361 to Permit Teleconferenced Meetings due to COVID-19) shall participate from locations within the boundaries of the territory o ver
which the local agency exercises jurisdiction, except as provided in subdivisions (d) and (e). The agenda shall provide an opportunity for members of the public to address the legislative body directly pursuant to Section 54954.3 at each teleconference location.
(4) For the purposes of this section, “teleconference” means a meeting of a legislative body, the members of which are in different locations, connected by electronic means, through either audio or video, or both.
Nothing in this section shall prohibit a local agency from providing the public with additional teleconference locations.
(c) (1) No legislative body shall take action by secret ballot, whether preliminary or final.
(2) The legislative body of a local agency shall publicly report any action taken and the vote or abstention on that action of each member present for the action.
(3) Prior to taking final action, the legislative body shall orally report a summary of a recommendation for a final action on the salaries, salary schedules, or compensation paid in the form of fringe benefits of a local agency executive, as defined in subdivision (d) of Section 3511.1, during the open meeting in which the final action is to be taken. This paragraph shall not affect the public’s right under the California Public Records Act (Chapter 3.5 (commencing with Section 6250) of Division 7 of Title 1) to inspect or copy records created or received in the process of developing the recommendation.
(d) (1) Notwithstanding the provisions relating to a quorum in paragraph (3) of subdivision (b), if a health authority conducts a teleconference meeting, members who are outside the jurisdiction of the authority may be counted toward the establishment of a quorum when participating in the teleconference if at least 50 percent of the number of members that would establish a quorum are present within the boundaries of the territory over which the authority exercises jurisdiction, and the health authority provides a teleconference number, and associated access codes, if any, that allows any person to call in to participate in the meeting and the number and access codes are identified in the notice and agenda of the meeting. (2) Nothing in this subdivision shall be construed as discouraging health authority members from regularly meeting at a common physical site within the jurisdiction of the authority or from using teleconference locations within or near the jurisdiction of the authority. A teleconference meeting for which a quorum is established pursuant to this subdivision shall be subject to all other requirements of this section.
(3) For purposes of this subdivision, a health authority means any entity created pursuant to Sections 14018.7, 14087.31, 14087.35, 14087.36, 14087.38, and 14087.9605 of the Welfare and Institutions Code, any joint powers authority created pursuant to Article 1 (commencing with Section 6500) of Chapter 5 of Division 7 for the purpose of contracting pursuant to Section 14087.3 of the Welfare and Institutions Code, and any advisory committee to a county-sponsored health plan licensed pursuant to Chapter 92 Ch. 165 — 12 —
6.a
Packet Pg. 236 Attachment: Attachment A: Full text of AB 361 (5016 : Resolution - AB 361 to Permit Teleconferenced Meetings due to COVID-19)
2.2 (commencing with Section 1340) of Division 2 of the Health and Safety Code if the advisory committee has 12 or more members.
(e) (1) A local agency may use teleconferencing without complying with the requirements of paragraph (3) of subdivision (b) if the legislative body complies with the requirements of paragraph (2) of this subdivision in any of the following circumstances:
(A) The legislative body holds a meeting during a proclaimed state of emergency, and state or local officials have imposed or recommended measures to promote social distancing.
(B) The legislative body holds a meeting during a proclaimed state of emergency for the purpose of determining, by majority vote, whether as a result of the emergency, meeting in person would present imminent risks to the health or safety of attendees.
(C) The legislative body holds a meeting during a proclaimed state of emergency and has determined, by majority vote, pursuant to subparagraph (B), that, as a result of the emergency, meeting in person would present imminent risks to the health or safety of attendees.
(2) A legislative body that holds a meeting pursuant to this subdivision shall do all of the following:
(A) The legislative body shall give notice of the meeting and post agendas as otherwise required by this chapter.
(B) The legislative body shall allow members of the public to access the meeting and the agenda shall provide an opportunity for members of the public to address the legislative body directly pursuant to Section 54954.3.
In each instance in which notice of the time of the teleconferenced meeting is otherwise given or the agenda for the meeting is otherwise posted, the legislative body shall also give notice of the means by which members of the public may access the meeting and offer public comment. The agenda shall identify and include an opportunity for all persons to attend via a call-in option or an internet-based service option. This subparagraph shall not be construed to require the legislative body to provide a physical location from which the public may attend or comment.
(C) The legislative body shall conduct teleconference meetings in a manner that protects the statutory and constitutional rights of the parties and the public appearing before the legislative body of a local agency. (D) In the event of a disruption which prevents the public agency from broadcasting the meeting to members of the public using the call-in option or internet-based service option, or in the event of a disruption within the local agency’s control which prevents members of the public from offering public comments using the call-in option or internet-based service option, the body shall take no further action on items appearing on the meeting agenda until public access to the meeting via the call-in option or internet-based service option is restored. Actions taken on agenda items during a disruption which prevents the public agency from broadcasting the meeting may be challenged pursuant to Section 54960.1.
(E) The legislative body shall not require public comments to be submitted in advance of the meeting and must provide an opportunity for 92 — 13 — Ch. 165
6.a
Packet Pg. 237 Attachment: Attachment A: Full text of AB 361 (5016 : Resolution - AB 361 to Permit Teleconferenced Meetings due to COVID-19) the public to address the legislati
ve body and offer comment in real time.
This subparagraph shall not be construed to require the legislative body to provide a physical location from which the public may attend or comment. (F) Notwithstanding Section 54953.3, an individual desiring to provide public comment through the use of an internet website, or other online platform, not under the control of the local legislative body, that requires registration to log in to a teleconference may be required to register as required by the third-party internet website or online platform to participate. (G) (i) A legislative body that provides a timed public comment period for each agenda item shall not close the public comment period for the agenda item, or the opportunity to register, pursuant to subparagraph (F), to provide public comment until that timed public comment period has elapsed.
(ii) A legislative body that does not provide a timed public comment period, but takes public comment separately on each agenda item, shall allow a reasonable amount of time per agenda item to allow public members the opportunity to provide public comment, including time for members of the public to register pursuant to subparagraph (F), or otherwise be recognized for the purpose of providing public comment. (iii) A legislative body that provides a timed general public comment period that does not correspond to a specific agenda item shall not close the public comment period or the opportunity to register, pursuant to subparagraph (F), until the timed general public comment period has elapsed. (3) If a state of emergency remains active, or state or local officials have imposed or recommended measures to promote social distancing, in order to continue to teleconference without compliance with paragraph (3) of subdivision (b), the legislative body shall, not later than 30 days after teleconferencing for the first time pursuant to subparagraph (A), (B), or (C) of paragraph (1), and every 30 days thereafter, make the following findings by majority vote:
(A) The legislative body has reconsidered the circumstances of the state of emergency.
(B) Any of the following circumstances exist:
(i) The state of emergency continues to directly impact the ability of the members to meet safely in person.
(ii) State or local officials continue to impose or recommend measures to promote social distancing.
(4) For the purposes of this subdivision, “state of emergency” means a state of emergency proclaimed pursuant to Section 8625 of the California Emergency Services Act (Article 1 (commencing with Section 8550) of Chapter 7 of Division 1 of Title 2).
(f) This section shall remain in effect only until January 1, 2024, and as of that date is repealed.
SEC. 4. Section 54953 is added to the Government Code, to read:
54953. (a) All meetings of the legislative body of a local agency shall be open and public, and all persons shall be permitted to attend any meeting 92 Ch. 165 — 14 —
6.a
Packet Pg. 238 Attachment: Attachment A: Full text of AB 361 (5016 : Resolution - AB 361 to Permit Teleconferenced Meetings due to COVID-19) of the legislati
ve body of a local agency, except as otherwise provided in this chapter.
(b) (1) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the legislative body of a local agency may use teleconferencing for the benefit of the public and the legislative body of a local agency in connection with any meeting or proceeding authorized by law. The teleconferenced meeting or proceeding shall comply with all requirements of this chapter and all otherwise applicable provisions of law relating to a specific type of meeting or proceeding.
(2) Teleconferencing, as authorized by this section, may be used for all purposes in connection with any meeting within the subject matter jurisdiction of the legislative body. All votes taken during a teleconferenced meeting shall be by rollcall.
(3) If the legislative body of a local agency elects to use teleconferencing, it shall post agendas at all teleconference locations and conduct teleconference meetings in a manner that protects the statutory and constitutional rights of the parties or the public appearing before the legislative body of a local agency. Each teleconference location shall be identified in the notice and agenda of the meeting or proceeding, and each teleconference location shall be accessible to the public. During the teleconference, at least a quorum of the members of the legislative body shall participate from locations within the boundaries of the territory over which the local agency exercises jurisdiction, except as provided in subdivision (d). The agenda shall provide an opportunity for members of the public to address the legislative body directly pursuant to Section 54954.3 at each teleconference location.
(4) For the purposes of this section, “teleconference” means a meeting of a legislative body, the members of which are in different locations, connected by electronic means, through either audio or video, or both.
Nothing in this section shall prohibit a local agency from providing the public with additional teleconference locations
(c) (1) No legislative body shall take action by secret ballot, whether preliminary or final.
(2) The legislative body of a local agency shall publicly report any action taken and the vote or abstention on that action of each member present for the action.
(3) Prior to taking final action, the legislative body shall orally report a summary of a recommendation for a final action on the salaries, salary schedules, or compensation paid in the form of fringe benefits of a local agency executive, as defined in subdivision (d) of Section 3511.1, during the open meeting in which the final action is to be taken. This paragraph shall not affect the public’s right under the California Public Records Act (Chapter 3.5 (commencing with Section 6250) of Division 7 of Title 1) to inspect or copy records created or received in the process of developing the recommendation.
(d) (1) Notwithstanding the provisions relating to a quorum in paragraph (3) of subdivision (b), if a health authority conducts a teleconference meeting, 92 — 15 — Ch. 165
6.a
Packet Pg. 239 Attachment: Attachment A: Full text of AB 361 (5016 : Resolution - AB 361 to Permit Teleconferenced Meetings due to COVID-19) members who are outside the jurisdiction of the authority may be counted toward the establishment of a quorum when participating in the teleconference if at least 50 percent of the number of members that would establish a quorum are present within the boundaries of the territory over which the authority exercises jurisdiction, and the health authority provides a teleconference number, and associated access codes, if any, that allows any person to call in to participate in the meeting and the number and access codes are identified in the notice and agenda of the meeting. (2) Nothing in this subdivision shall be construed as discouraging health authority members from regularly meeting at a common physical site within the jurisdiction of the authority or from using teleconference locations within or near the jurisdiction of the authority. A teleconference meeting for which a quorum is established pursuant to this subdivision shall be subject to all other requirements of this section.
(3) For purposes of this subdivision, a health authority means any entity created pursuant to Sections 14018.7, 14087.31, 14087.35, 14087.36, 14087.38, and 14087.9605 of the Welfare and Institutions Code, any joint powers authority created pursuant to Article 1 (commencing with Section 6500) of Chapter 5 of Division 7 for the purpose of contracting pursuant to Section 14087.3 of the Welfare and Institutions Code, and any advisory committee to a county-sponsored health plan licensed pursuant to Chapter
2.2 (commencing with Section 1340) of Division 2 of the Health and Safety Code if the advisory committee has 12 or more members.
(e) This section shall become operative January 1, 2024.
SEC. 4.1. Section 54953 is added to the Government Code, to read:
54953. (a) All meetings of the legislative body of a local agency shall be open and public, and all persons shall be permitted to attend any meeting of the legislative body of a local agency, in person except as otherwise provided in this chapter. Local agencies shall conduct meetings subject to this chapter consistent with applicable state and federal civil rights laws, including, but not limited to, any applicable language access and other nondiscrimination obligations.
(b) (1) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the legislative body of a local agency may use teleconferencing for the benefit of the public and the legislative body of a local agency in connection with any meeting or proceeding authorized by law. The teleconferenced meeting or proceeding shall comply with all requirements of this chapter and all otherwise applicable provisions of law relating to a specific type of meeting or proceeding.
(2) Teleconferencing, as authorized by this section, may be used for all purposes in connection with any meeting within the subject matter jurisdiction of the legislative body. All votes taken during a teleconferenced meeting shall be by rollcall.
(3) If the legislative body of a local agency elects to use teleconferencing, it shall post agendas at all teleconference locations and conduct teleconference meetings in a manner that protects the statutory and constitutional rights of the parties or the public appearing before the 92 Ch. 165 — 16 —
6.a
Packet Pg. 240 Attachment: Attachment A: Full text of AB 361 (5016 : Resolution - AB 361 to Permit Teleconferenced Meetings due to COVID-19) legislati
ve body of a local agency. Each teleconference location shall be identified in the notice and agenda of the meeting or proceeding, and each teleconference location shall be accessible to the public. During the teleconference, at least a quorum of the members of the legislative body shall participate from locations within the boundaries of the territory over which the local agency exercises jurisdiction, except as provided in subdivision (d). The agenda shall provide an opportunity for members of the public to address the legislative body directly pursuant to Section 54954.3 at each teleconference location.
(4) For the purposes of this section, “teleconference” means a meeting of a legislative body, the members of which are in different locations, connected by electronic means, through either audio or video, or both.
Nothing in this section shall prohibit a local agency from providing the public with additional teleconference locations.
(c) (1) No legislative body shall take action by secret ballot, whether preliminary or final.
(2) The legislative body of a local agency shall publicly report any action taken and the vote or abstention on that action of each member present for the action.
(3) Prior to taking final action, the legislative body shall orally report a summary of a recommendation for a final action on the salaries, salary schedules, or compensation paid in the form of fringe benefits of a local agency executive, as defined in subdivision (d) of Section 3511.1, during the open meeting in which the final action is to be taken. This paragraph shall not affect the public’s right under the California Public Records Act (Chapter 3.5 (commencing with Section 6250) of Division 7 of Title 1) to inspect or copy records created or received in the process of developing the recommendation.
(d) (1) Notwithstanding the provisions relating to a quorum in paragraph (3) of subdivision (b), if a health authority conducts a teleconference meeting, members who are outside the jurisdiction of the authority may be counted toward the establishment of a quorum when participating in the teleconference if at least 50 percent of the number of members that would establish a quorum are present within the boundaries of the territory over which the authority exercises jurisdiction, and the health authority provides a teleconference number, and associated access codes, if any, that allows any person to call in to participate in the meeting and the number and access codes are identified in the notice and agenda of the meeting. (2) Nothing in this subdivision shall be construed as discouraging health authority members from regularly meeting at a common physical site within the jurisdiction of the authority or from using teleconference locations within or near the jurisdiction of the authority. A teleconference meeting for which a quorum is established pursuant to this subdivision shall be subject to all other requirements of this section.
(3) For purposes of this subdivision, a health authority means any entity created pursuant to Sections 14018.7, 14087.31, 14087.35, 14087.36, 14087.38, and 14087.9605 of the Welfare and Institutions Code, any joint 92 — 17 — Ch. 165
6.a
Packet Pg. 241 Attachment: Attachment A: Full text of AB 361 (5016 : Resolution - AB 361 to Permit Teleconferenced Meetings due to COVID-19) powers authority created pursuant to Article 1 (commencing with Section 6500) of Chapter 5 of Division 7 for the purpose of contracting pursuant to Section 14087.3 of the Welfare and Institutions Code, and any advisory committee to a county-sponsored health plan licensed pursuant to Chapter
2.2 (commencing with Section 1340) of Division 2 of the Health and Safety Code if the advisory committee has 12 or more members.
(e) This section shall become operative January 1, 2024.
SEC. 5. Sections 3.1 and 4.1 of this bill incorporate amendments to Section 54953 of the Government Code proposed by both this bill and Assembly Bill 339. Those sections of this bill shall only become operative if (1) both bills are enacted and become effective on or before January 1, 2022, but this bill becomes operative first, (2) each bill amends Section 54953 of the Government Code, and (3) this bill is enacted after Assembly Bill 339, in which case Section 54953 of the Government Code, as amended by Sections 3 and 4 of this bill, shall remain operative only until the operative date of Assembly Bill 339, at which time Sections 3.1 and 4.1 of this bill shall become operative.
SEC. 6. It is the intent of the Legislature in enacting this act to improve and enhance public access to state and local agency meetings during the COVID-19 pandemic and future applicable emergencies, by allowing broader access through teleconferencing options consistent with the Governor’s Executive Order No. N-29-20 dated March 17, 2020, permitting expanded use of teleconferencing during the COVID-19 pandemic.
SEC. 7. The Legislature finds and declares that Sections 3 and 4 of this act, which amend, repeal, and add Section 54953 of the Government Code, further, within the meaning of paragraph (7) of subdivision (b) of Section 3 of Article I of the California Constitution, the purposes of that constitutional section as it relates to the right of public access to the meetings of local public bodies or the writings of local public officials and local agencies. Pursuant to paragraph (7) of subdivision (b) of Section 3 of Article I of the California Constitution, the Legislature makes the following findings:
This act is necessary to ensure minimum standards for public participation and notice requirements allowing for greater public participation in teleconference meetings during applicable emergencies.
SEC. 8. (a) The Legislature finds and declares that during the COVID-19 public health emergency, certain requirements of the Bagley-Keene Open Meeting Act (Article 9 (commencing with Section 11120) of Chapter 1 of Part 1 of Division 3 of Title 2 of the Government Code) were suspended by Executive Order N-29-20. Audio and video teleconference were widely used to conduct public meetings in lieu of physical location meetings, and public meetings conducted by teleconference during the COVID-19 public health emergency have been productive, have increased public participation by all members of the public regardless of their location in the state and ability to travel to physical meeting locations, have protected the health and safety of civil servants and the public, and have reduced travel costs incurred by members of state bodies and reduced work hours spent traveling to and from meetings.
92 Ch. 165 — 18 —
6.a
Packet Pg. 242 Attachment: Attachment A: Full text of AB 361 (5016 : Resolution - AB 361 to Permit Teleconferenced Meetings due to COVID-19) (b) The Legislature finds and declares that Section 1 of this act, which adds and repeals Section 89305.6 of the Education Code, Section 2 of this act, which adds and repeals Section 11133 of the Government Code, and Sections 3 and 4 of this act, which amend, repeal, and add Section 54953 of the Government Code, all increase and potentially limit the public’s right of access to the meetings of public bodies or the writings of public officials and agencies within the meaning of Section 3 of Article I of the California Constitution. Pursuant to that constitutional provision, the Legislature makes the following findings to demonstrate the interest protected by this limitation and the need for protecting that interest:
(1) By removing the requirement that public meetings be conducted at a primary physical location with a quorum of members present, this act protects the health and safety of civil servants and the public and does not preference the experience of members of the public who might be able to attend a meeting in a physical location over members of the public who cannot travel or attend that meeting in a physical location. (2) By removing the requirement for agendas to be placed at the location of each public official participating in a public meeting remotely, including from the member’s private home or hotel room, this act protects the personal, private information of public officials and their families while preserving the public’s right to access information concerning the conduct of the people’s business.
SEC. 9. This act is an urgency statute necessary for the immediate preservation of the public peace, health, or safety within the meaning of Article IV of the California Constitution and shall go into immediate effect.
The facts constituting the necessity are:
In order to ensure that state and local agencies can continue holding public meetings while providing essential services like water, power, and fire protection to their constituents during public health, wildfire, or other states of emergencies, it is necessary that this act take effect immediately.
O
92 — 19 — Ch. 165
6.a
Packet Pg. 243 Attachment: Attachment A: Full text of AB 361 (5016 : Resolution - AB 361 to Permit Teleconferenced Meetings due to COVID-19)
6.b
Packet Pg. 244 Attachment: Attachment B: Resolution No. 18-2020 - Ratifying Local Emergency Due to COVID-19 (5016 : Resolution - AB 361 to Permit Teleconferenced
6.b
Packet Pg. 245 Attachment: Attachment B: Resolution No. 18-2020 - Ratifying Local Emergency Due to COVID-19 (5016 : Resolution - AB 361 to Permit Teleconferenced
6.b
Packet Pg. 246 Attachment: Attachment B: Resolution No. 18-2020 - Ratifying Local Emergency Due to COVID-19 (5016 : Resolution - AB 361 to Permit Teleconferenced
6.b
Packet Pg. 247 Attachment: Attachment B: Resolution No. 18-2020 - Ratifying Local Emergency Due to COVID-19 (5016 : Resolution - AB 361 to Permit Teleconferenced
6.b
Packet Pg. 248 Attachment: Attachment B: Resolution No. 18-2020 - Ratifying Local Emergency Due to COVID-19 (5016 : Resolution - AB 361 to Permit Teleconferenced
6.b
Packet Pg. 249 Attachment: Attachment B: Resolution No. 18-2020 - Ratifying Local Emergency Due to COVID-19 (5016 : Resolution - AB 361 to Permit Teleconferenced
CITY OF PACIFICA
COUNCIL AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT
6/13/2022
1 SUBJECT:
Task Order #2 between the City of Pacifica and The Davey Tree Expert Company for Tree Maintenance Services
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Approve Task Order #2 between the City of Pacifica and The Davey Tree Expert Company for Tree Maintenance Services in the Public Right-of-Way and on City Owned Properties and Facilities to increase the Budget Authority by $50,000 for Fiscal Year 2021-22; and Authorize City Manager to execute the Task Order.
STAFF CONTACT:
Gino Assereto, Parks Superintendent
(650) 738-3764
[email protected]
Sam Bautista, P.E., Deputy Director of Public Works
(650) 738-3771
[email protected]
Lisa Petersen, P.E., Director of Public Works
(650) 738-3767
[email protected]
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION:
The City of Pacifica has approximately 1,650 street trees and trees within City-owned properties. The City’s approved FY 20-21 Public Works operating budget for street tree and parks services included funding for tree maintenance. On April 5, 2021, the City issued a Request for Proposals (RFP) for Maintenance Services for Trees in the public right of way and for trees on all City owned properties and facilities. The work includes the pruning, cutting, removal, maintenance and planting of trees, including stump grinding. The objective of the RFP is to keep City trees in a safe condition.
On June 14, 2021, the City Council approved the Master Tree Service Agreement between the City of Pacifica and The Davey Tree Expert Company for Tree Maintenance Services and Emergency Tree Maintenance Services (Attachment 1), establishing a budget authority of up to $150,000 a year for Fiscal Years 2021-22, 2022-23, and 2023-24 .
City staff identified several other trees this Fiscal Year that are in need of immediate maintenance. There is budget to cover this additional work in the Street Trees operating budget. The City Manager recommends approval of Task Order #2 between the City of Pacifica and The Davey Tree Expert Company for additional Tree Maintenance Services (Attachment 2) by increasing the Budget Authority for Fiscal Year 2021-22 by $50,000, for a total of $200,000.
7 Packet Pg. 250
Pacifica City Council 2
June 13, 2022
ALTERNATIVE ACTION:
Council may choose not to approve Task Order #2. However, this will result delayed tree maintenance and unsafe trees. Staff does not recommend this alternate action.
RELATION TO CITY COUNCIL GOALS AND WORK PLAN:
Approval of the tree maintenance service agreement is consistent with the following Council adopted Goal:
• “Maintaining a Safe Community” - This task order will help the City maintain its trees by pruning and trimming their branches, as well as provide emergency tree maintenance services during storms.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The work to be done under Task No. 2 will be implemented on a time and materials basis in a not to exceed amount of $50,000.
Total Project Source and Use of Funds
Public Works - Street Tree Services (Fund 01) $ 163,000.00 Public Works - City Park & Playfields (Fund 01) $ 37,000.00 Total Source of Funds $ 200,000.00
Total Use of Funds Tree Maintenance $ 200,000.00
Estimated Project End Balance $ 0
The City Manager recommends approval of Task Order #2 between the City of Pacifica and The Davey Tree Expert Company for additional Tree Maintenance Services (Attachment 2) by increasing the Budget Authority for Fiscal Year 2021-22 by $50,000, for a total of $200,000.
ORIGINATED BY:
Public Works
ATTACHMENT LIST:
Attachment 1 - Master Agreement between the City of Pacifica and The Davey Tree Expert Company (PDF)
Attachment 2 - Task Order #2 between the City of Pacifica and The Davey Tree Expert Company (PDF)
7 Packet Pg. 251
ATTACHMENT 1
7.a
Packet Pg. 252 Attachment: Attachment 1 - Master Agreement between the City of Pacifica and The Davey Tree Expert Company [Revision 1] (5017 : Task
7.a
Packet Pg. 253 Attachment: Attachment 1 - Master Agreement between the City of Pacifica and The Davey Tree Expert Company [Revision 1] (5017 : Task
7.a
Packet Pg. 254 Attachment: Attachment 1 - Master Agreement between the City of Pacifica and The Davey Tree Expert Company [Revision 1] (5017 : Task
7.a
Packet Pg. 255 Attachment: Attachment 1 - Master Agreement between the City of Pacifica and The Davey Tree Expert Company [Revision 1] (5017 : Task
7.a
Packet Pg. 256 Attachment: Attachment 1 - Master Agreement between the City of Pacifica and The Davey Tree Expert Company [Revision 1] (5017 : Task
7.a
Packet Pg. 257 Attachment: Attachment 1 - Master Agreement between the City of Pacifica and The Davey Tree Expert Company [Revision 1] (5017 : Task
7.a
Packet Pg. 258 Attachment: Attachment 1 - Master Agreement between the City of Pacifica and The Davey Tree Expert Company [Revision 1] (5017 : Task
7.a
Packet Pg. 259 Attachment: Attachment 1 - Master Agreement between the City of Pacifica and The Davey Tree Expert Company [Revision 1] (5017 : Task
7.a
Packet Pg. 260 Attachment: Attachment 1 - Master Agreement between the City of Pacifica and The Davey Tree Expert Company [Revision 1] (5017 : Task
7.a
Packet Pg. 261 Attachment: Attachment 1 - Master Agreement between the City of Pacifica and The Davey Tree Expert Company [Revision 1] (5017 : Task
7.a
Packet Pg. 262 Attachment: Attachment 1 - Master Agreement between the City of Pacifica and The Davey Tree Expert Company [Revision 1] (5017 : Task TASK ORDER NO. 2
CITY OF PACIFICA
AND
DAVEY TREE EXPERT COMPANY
SECTION 1 ± PURPOSE
The purpose of this Task Order is to authorize and direct the Davey Tree Expert Company to proceed with the work specified in SECTION 2 below, in accordance with the provisions of the 0DVWHU$JUHHPHQWIRU7UHH6HUYLFHVEHWZHHQWKH&LW\RI3DFLILFD ³&,7<´) and
³&2175$&725´
KHUHWRGDWHGJune 14
³0$67(5$*5((0(17´
SECTION 2 ± SCOPE OF WORK
7KHLWHPVDXWKRUL]HGE\WKLV7DVN2UGHUDUHSUHVHQWHGLQ$WWDFKPHQW³$´± Scope of Services, which is attached hereto and incorporated by this reference.
SECTION 3 ± COMPENSATION AND PAYMENT
Compensation shall be as provided in the MASTER AGREEMENT. Compensation for services DVVHWIRUWKLQ6(&7,21VKDOOEHDVVHWIRUWKLQ$WWDFKPHQW³%´± Compensation, which is attached hereto and incorporated by this reference. Total compensation for all services provided under this Task Order shall not exceed Fourty Seven Thousand Four Hundred Fifty dollars ($47,450.00)
³&RVW &HLOLQJ´
SECTION 4 ± TIME OF PERFORMANCE
The services described in SECTION 2 of this Task Order shall be completed by July 31, 2022 or as extended in writing by the Deputy Director of Public Works.
SECTION 5 ± ITEMS AND CONDITIONS
All terms and conditions contained in the MASTER AGREEMENT are incorporated by reference and remain in full force and effect.
Approved this 6th day of June, 2022.
[Signatures on Next Page]
ATTACHMENT 2
7.b
Packet Pg. 263 Attachment: Attachment 2 - Task Order #2 between the City of Pacifica and The Davey Tree Expert Company [Revision 1] (5017 : Task Order #2
CITY OF PACIFICA
By: Date
Kevin Woodhouse, City Manager
CONTRACTOR: DAVEY TREE EXPERT COMPANY
By: Date
Approved As To Form
By:
Michelle Marchetta Kenyon, City Attorney
Attest:
By:
Sarah Coffey, City Clerk
7.b
Packet Pg. 264 Attachment: Attachment 2 - Task Order #2 between the City of Pacifica and The Davey Tree Expert Company [Revision 1] (5017 : Task Order #2 $77$&+0(17³$´
SCOPE OF SERVICES
7.b
Packet Pg. 265 Attachment: Attachment 2 - Task Order #2 between the City of Pacifica and The Davey Tree Expert Company [Revision 1] (5017 : Task Order #2
!
"#$%&'!( !
#$%&'!( !
)# *+,*
-
'
)
'././//
012
" 0
0
"34-0526
"
7
"
8
(/%'
"
)9#/%:%('%/:/
9#//%%
;#$'%&7:!(:7'
<)#$'%&:!(/ !
#$'%&7:!( 77
)#=
,
8
*=
123
>0-
2 2"-
2"12
;02>
0?>
4142;
123 >3$;
2> 2&
4
2
>1526 14
) @
%* @
%*
2
(
)A
)=
A
))A
) @!
%* @!
%*
+
"(
)A
)=
B
" = @
* @
*
C))
)
(
)=
<
0)
)(
.==D
D
)
D))=<
1
)
)
B<*
<
<
*1
E
A B
D*0D) A
=
D * )))
<
*0
)
<=
*
)<A
AD
A
:*
!"#
$
%
!
&& &
%'(&)
& '*
+
E
"
#'././// "=D
7.b
Packet Pg. 266 Attachment: Attachment 2 - Task Order #2 between the City of Pacifica and The Davey Tree Expert Company [Revision 1] (5017 : Task Order #2 +!
,!
-!
.!
&%
"
.
*, ! #&#& * (# /###0#&
!!
!
$/
!# "& (&
.!%*! +! %
!%%% (
&.
*
1
+
(%"
"
!
!
!
2
3..%&
*
%#& 45( ! !.(" *
1
& (&
"
!%.6!
"# ! *
!%.#""0$#&
!%.&.
%! (
% &.
#"(
!
&#
& *&.%/
"0$"*
)1
/"!
&/
/ #
! &0%*
#!
&
%"
# "%*
7
+87
+
" " (
!% . *
.%
%
!!#0
/
!
(! -!
.
. *
&!"9 8
:!"
#
!..
;
&&! &.&
% &! &
#%%
% % . %&.&
"%"%!% "&&
.
&! &&
.
&
*
. %
# !(9
/ &!%
/$
&%!
&
*
! (%!/"+ /#0
#& !(9#&!"! /"!
%
&&( *
&
*
&
!
6 &9 & !
!
%*
& .
&#
&%" $
"+ .
/ ! &
/
/
&&( *
&!" <&
+
!
%9%
%
."%
.$.
*!&
&%
!(".
/...
%
"-!*
+
. %
&!&..%&% % ( !.
*
..
"
.$
*
+
.$%
% .!
."%
*,&&. !/&%!
/&.
" / & %
#&%
*
..%
#".. #&
!
*
&%
1
!%.
"
,0;
%.
*&%.
!(.
6!
..
% "
*((
! "$"
-!
.
(!$(
! *
,=
+,
<
+<
+
&. ( /&
%
(("
(
"
! / ! /.
.
(
/&&
.
%.
% &
!
& !
.$
#
"
&%.
*"
.
&!.
"
&
!!(!( ! &
#"&&
(! !%
*
"% "! *,&
0
"
$"
!.
&
"
.#&&%#0#&%% /##%0 "((.#&
&6".%.
*<#/##
!%"
(
/% 6!
&%
! & !
&"6
!!.
!
" �*
.
!
!!
!
*1
&#
.$/
% #
!
% ;
!!
"
*,%
%%
0
% " !( & *
#0
".(% #&! %
!2
3
(
.
*
,
<
8
:
.
!
.
#
&&
..
( &
-!&#
"
&
&# .%
&
" #0
#&& &
;
..
*
>
2> 3
?"
.(% > "
#""(&% &6"2 ! ! &"03/ (%&6"/ %
!
*
7 +>
@
%!
.
#&!
#&"
!! ..
%!
!
!*!
!
AB
(% *
%
"
!!
! "
*
#"
.6!
*
%
%.
!
%!
!"%.
(&($%.
!
(% ! &%. !%" #&
.%.% *
:
,.&0
*.
%
%
"% !#"
*
"
&0!&9
!
& (%
(%
!&0
!" 0(.
% *
1
+1
:
,
.
"(
! ! ..
!
#&" (%"
!&...! !
*
<
1
+
?"
&!
. !. #&
#0
*
7.b
Packet Pg. 267 Attachment: Attachment 2 - Task Order #2 between the City of Pacifica and The Davey Tree Expert Company [Revision 1] (5017 : Task Order #2 (
.$
71<
72C
753
&
.
%.
2#!
3
#&&
7! !%"4DEBBF*
7
&
!%
.
&
!
!
*
7"!%.
/
.
6! %
&.
7*%.
!
#&
7
#&(!
(& * (% GBB*AHF*HIJH
###*
"** #
7/**7H4BBB/
% /DJGH4*
:
2 A B<)<
DA
A)))<)
DA B
)
<
=
=
=
<
< <)
)*
@,=
A BA))<
<A
=
)=
=
A))<
D
A=<
)
)
F=
*
<
)
)=
A
* A)
<
A
)=
*
)<
)
)< )
*
D
<
)
)< G
A
))
A
A BA
)*
=
)
)=<)
)
A
/(" ) >
*
)H
)
BA
=
)D
*4
D)(B
=
<D
*1
A
I
B
A B=D
*
D
)=
AAA*
)<*
*=*
)*
,=87=1:8
+
5
=
A B=D D
A*0D
8)<B
=
)
*1
=
A
A
*
A):
+<
&<%
-!
(&%
&"!
&2A3"!
& * #&!.
" /
!
%!
!
# "
%/(/%&
(
!
&�
.(%*
(
!.%
/##!
!%
#& 2FB3
(!
.(
! *&
&
%
.
&
!-!
".(%
& *& & & % #& #
" #0 .(%
. *
(
! /
!%!
%0"!
.0!.
."
!
!*
(# .0&%!.#& HB
/
!%
.
(&%#&!(!&" *
7.b
Packet Pg. 268 Attachment: Attachment 2 - Task Order #2 between the City of Pacifica and The Davey Tree Expert Company [Revision 1] (5017 : Task Order #2 $77$&+0(17³%´
COMPENSATION
7.b
Packet Pg. 269 Attachment: Attachment 2 - Task Order #2 between the City of Pacifica and The Davey Tree Expert Company [Revision 1] (5017 : Task Order #2
!
"#$%&'!( !
#$%&'!( !
)# *+,*
-
'
)
'././//
012
" 0
0
"34-0526
"
7
"
8
(/%'
"
)9#/%:%('%/:/
9#//%%
;#$'%&7:!(:7'
<)#$'%&:!(/ !
#$'%&7:!( 77
)#=
,
8
*=
123
>0-
2 2"-
2"12
;02>
0?>
4142;
123 >3$;
2> 2&
4
2
>1526 14
) @
%* @
%*
2
(
)A
)=
A
))A
) @!
%* @!
%*
+
"(
)A
)=
B
" = @
* @
*
C))
)
(
)=
<
0)
)(
.==D
D
)
D))=<
1
)
)
B<*
<
<
*1
E
A B
D*0D) A
=
D * )))
<
*0
)
<=
*
)<A
AD
A
:*
!"#
$
%
!
&& &
%'(&)
& '*
+
E
"
#'././// "=D
7.b
Packet Pg. 270 Attachment: Attachment 2 - Task Order #2 between the City of Pacifica and The Davey Tree Expert Company [Revision 1] (5017 : Task Order #2
CITY OF PACIFICA
COUNCIL AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT
6/13/2022
1 SUBJECT:
Amendment No. 1 to the Construction Services Agreement dated February 10, 2022 to Chesterwerks
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Approve Amendment No. 1 (Attachment 1) to the Construction Services Agreement dated February 10, 2022, to Chesterwerks in the amount of $120,960 for the Civic Center Campus Facilities Project for Project Construction Services.
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:
During the design phase of the Civic Center Campus Facilities Project, the City needed project management services to assist the City with various aspects of the design of the project. On February 10, 2022, the City executed a Construction Services Agreement to Chesterwerks for Project Management Services (Attachment 2) for the Civic Center Campus Facilities Project in the amount of $15,000 to assist the City in providing support for staff design decisions during finalization of the plans and specifications; conducting value engineering and constructability reviews; reviewing the design consultant’s schedule and cost estimates; and make recommendations for design delivery. Chesterwerks is a professional firm that specializes in building renovations and provides solutions in the field during construction.
The Civic Center Campus Facilities Project is underway, and the City’s contractor mobilized on the site on June 6, 2022. The first two weeks of the project will be preparing the site for construction, and renovation should start by June 27, 2022. During the renovation of City Hall and the P+P building, the City’s project manager will be overseeing the day to day tasks of the project; however, it is recommended that Chesterwerks continue to assist the City with providing support for staff design decisions during construction; conduct in-field value engineering and constructability methods; coordinate with contractors during the construction phase, assist City with review of Request For Information (RFIs), submittal, substitutions; and make recommendations for construction delivery. It is estimated that Chesterworks will provide these services for no more than 16 hours per week. The Public Works Department has limited bandwidth to oversee the project, but with the addition of Chesterwerks as temporary staff augmentation during the construction phase, the City can benefit from the building expertise Chesterwerks can provide. Chesterwerks can provide up to 896 hours, which should be adequate for the length of the construction period, in the amount of $120,960 by amending the 8 Packet Pg. 271
Pacifica City Council 2
June 13, 2022
current Construction Services Agreement to include the amended scope of work and compensation.
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:
During the project budget approval with Council in April, an allowance for Construction Management in the amount of $300,000 was established for the project. Chesterwerks’ scope of work is an eligible expense for this allowance. The estimated project Source and Use of Funds table is shown below:
Total Project Source and Use of Funds (SUF)
Capital Improvement Fund 22 (Construction Management) $ 300,000 Total Source of Funds $ 300,000
Construction Management Services $ (120,960)
Total Use of Funds $ (120,960)
Estimated Project End Balance $ 179,040
There are adequate funds to execute the proposed amendment. The City Manager recommends the approval of the Amendment to Chesterwerks’ Construction Services Agreement in the amount of $120,960.
ORIGINATED BY:
Engineering
ATTACHMENT LIST:
Attachment 1 - Amendment 1 - Chesterwerks Construction Services Agreement (DOCX) Attachment 2 - Approved Construction Services Agreement for Chesterwerks dated February 10, 2022 (PDF)
8 Packet Pg. 272
ATTACHMENT 1
Construction Services Agreement - Amendment #1
Chesterwerks Page 1
OAK #4817-6120-9406 v3
CONSTRUCTION SERVICES AGREEMENT
AMENDMENT NO. 1
This AMENDMENT NUMBER 1 is entered into as of the 13th day of June, 2022, by and between the CITY OF PACIFICA, herein called the “City,” and CHESTERWERKS, herein called the “Consultant.”
RECITALS
A. City desired to obtain Project/Construction Management Services in connection with the design and construction of the Civic Center Campus Facilities Project, and for that purpose entered into an agreement with Consultant dated February 10, 2022 (“Original Agreement”).
B. Consultant hereby warrants to the City that Consultant is skilled and able to provide such services described in this Amendment #1.
C. City desires to authorize Consultant to provide the additional services described in this Amendment #1.
AGREEMENT
1. Scope of Services. The services to be provided are as outlined in the proposed Amendment No.1 provided to City by Consultant, dated June 1, 2022, and attached hereto as Exhibit A “Scope of Amendment #1” and incorporated by reference (“Additional Work”). Consultant shall perform such Additional Work as requested by City through its staff from time to time.
2. Time of Performance. The services of Consultant are to commence upon direction to proceed from City staff and shall be undertaken and completed by September 30, 2022 for the City to comply with requirements imposed upon by the City.
3. Compensation and Method of Payment.
A. Compensation. The compensation to be paid to Consultant, including both payment for professional services and reimbursable expenses, shall be at the rate and schedules set forth in the Original Agreement and this Amendment #1. However, in no event shall the amount of Consultant’s compensation for the Additional Work exceed an additional one-hundred twenty thousand nine hundred sixty dollars ($120,960). The total combined compensation for the Original Agreement and this Amendment #1 shall not exceed one-hundred thirty-five thousand nine hundred sixty dollars ($135,960). Payment by City under the Original Agreement, as amended, shall not be deemed a waiver of defects, even if such defects were known to City at the time of payment. The 5% retention does not apply to Consultant’s compensation.
B. Method of Payment.
i. Monthly Statements. As a condition precedent to any payment to Consultant under the Original Agreement, as amended, Consultant shall submit monthly to
8.a
Packet Pg. 273 Attachment: Attachment 1 - Amendment 1 - Chesterwerks Construction Services Agreement (5010 : Amendment No. 1 to the Construction ATTACHMENT 1
Construction Services Agreement - Amendment #1
Chesterwerks Page 2
OAK #4817-6120-9406 v3
the City a statement of account that clearly sets forth the designated items of work for which the billing is submitted. Each statement of account shall also include a detailed record of the month’s actual reimbursable expenditures. ii. Timing of Payment. City shall review and approve Consultant’s monthly statement and pay Consultant for services rendered hereunder if acceptable to the satisfaction of the City at the rates and in the amounts provided hereunder on a monthly basis in accordance with the approved monthly statements.
C. Changes in Compensation. Consultant shall not undertake any work on the Additional Work that will incur costs in excess of the amount of one-hundred twenty thousand nine hundred sixty dollars ($120,960) or any work under the Original Agreement, as amended by this Amendment #1, in excess of the amount of onehundred thirty-five thousand nine hundred sixty dollars ($135,960) without further written amendment to the Original Agreement.
4. Agreement in Effect. All other provisions of the Original Agreement, as amended, shall remain in full force and effect.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the City and Consultant have executed this Amendment #1 as of the date first written above.
CITY OF PACIFICA CONSULTANT
CHESTERWERKS
By: By:
Kevin Woodhouse Brett Stollenwerk
City Manager President
ATTEST:
By: __________________
Sarah Coffey
City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
By:
Michelle M. Kenyon
City Attorney
8.a
Packet Pg. 274 Attachment: Attachment 1 - Amendment 1 - Chesterwerks Construction Services Agreement (5010 : Amendment No. 1 to the Construction ATTACHMENT 1
Construction Services Agreement - Amendment #1
Chesterwerks Page 3
OAK #4817-6120-9406 v3
EXHIBIT A
SCOPE OF AMENDMENT #1
SCOPE OF WORK dated June 1, 2022
CHESTERWERKS PROJECT MANAGEMENT SERVICES ($15,000)
Hourly rate is $135 an hour and travel time when necessary. -Provide support for staff design decisions during finalization of PS&E -Conduct value engineering and constructability reviews -Outreach to contractors during pre-qualification process -Review of design consultant schedule and cost estimates -Make recommendations for design delivery
CHESTERWERKS CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT SERVICES ($120,960) Hourly rate is $135 an hour and travel time when necessary. -Provide support for staff design decisions during construction -Conduct in-field value engineering and constructability -Coordinate with contractors during the construction phase -Review of RFI, submittal, substititions
-Make recommendations for construction delivery
-Up to 896 hours during the construction phase.
8.a
Packet Pg. 275 Attachment: Attachment 1 - Amendment 1 - Chesterwerks Construction Services Agreement (5010 : Amendment No. 1 to the Construction ATTACHMENT 2 8.b
Packet Pg. 276 Attachment: Attachment 2 - Approved Construction Services Agreement for Chesterwerks dated February 10, 2022 (5010 : Amendment No. 1 to
8.b
Packet Pg. 277 Attachment: Attachment 2 - Approved Construction Services Agreement for Chesterwerks dated February 10, 2022 (5010 : Amendment No. 1 to Construction Services Agreement 00 5205 - 3
OAK #4836-0105-9886 v2
05620-0129
4/1/20
Appendix A to Construction Services Agreement
SCOPE OF WORK
CHESTERWERKS PROJECT MANAGEMENT SERVICES
Hourly rate is $135 an hour and travel time when necessary. -Provide support for staff design decisions during finalization of PS&E -Conduct value engineering and constructability reviews -Outreach to contractors during pre-qualification process -Review of design consultant schedule and cost estimates -Make recommendations for design delivery
8.b
Packet Pg. 278 Attachment: Attachment 2 - Approved Construction Services Agreement for Chesterwerks dated February 10, 2022 (5010 : Amendment No. 1 to Construction Services Agreement 00 5205 - 4
OAK #4836-0105-9886 v2
05620-0129
4/1/20
Appendix B to Construction Services Agreement
GENERAL CONDITIONS
ARTICLE 1 TERMS OF PERFORMANCE
1.01 Construction Services Agreement (Agreement) Force and Effect. The provisions of the Agreement and other Contract Documents constitute the entire agreement between the Contractor and Owner regarding the Work described herein. No representation, term or covenant not expressly specified in the Contract Documents shall be a part of the parties’ agreement. The Agreement and other Contract Documents shall govern the Work (whenever performed), and shall supersede all other purchase orders and agreements between Contractor and Owner, and any proposal, with respect to the Work.
1.02 Construction Performance Bond; Construction Labor and Materials Payment Bond; Securities in Lieu of Retention Escrow Account.
A. If Contract Sum under the Agreement exceeds (or is expected to exceed) $25,000, Contractor shall provide (i) a construction labor and material payment bond, in accordance with Civil Code Section 9550 and in form attached hereto Appendix D – Construction Labor and Materials Payment Bond, and (ii) a construction performance bond in form attached hereto as Appendix E – Construction Performance Bond. Contractor may not substitute cash in lieu of the required bond(s).
B. If the Agreement specifies performance retention, Contractor may elect to substitute securities or direct payment to an escrow account, pursuant to Public Contract Code Section 22300 (incorporated herein by this reference).
1.03 Records and Payment Requests. Contractor shall submit all billings with all necessary invoices or other appropriate evidence of proper performance, after which Owner shall make payment within 30 days. Upon Owner’s written request, Contractor shall make available to Owner, its authorized agents, officers, or employees, any and all ledgers, books of accounts, invoices, vouchers, cancelled checks, and other records or documents evidencing or relating to the Work or the expenditures and disbursement charged to Owner, and all correspondence, internal memoranda, calculations, books and accounts, records documenting its Work under the Contract Documents, and invoices, payrolls, timecards, records and all other data related to matters covered by the Contract Documents. Contractor shall furnish to Owner, its authorized agents, officers, or employees, such other evidence or information as Owner may require with regard to the Work or any such expenditure or disbursement charged by Contractor. Contractor shall maintain all such documents and records prepared by or furnished to Contractor during the course of performing the Work for at least five years following completion of the Work, except that all such items pertaining to hazardous materials shall be maintained for at least 30 years.
Contractor shall permit Owner to audit, examine and make copies, excerpts and transcripts from such records.
The State of California or any federal agency having an interest in the subject of the Contract Documents shall have the same rights conferred to Owner by this section. Such rights shall be specifically enforceable.
1.04 Use of Contract Documents and Other Information. Drawings, Specifications, and other Contract Documents are made available to Contractor solely for Contractor’s use under the Contract Documents. Further, all tangible and intangible property developed, produced and/or provided by Contractor under the Contract Documents, and all such items (other than Contract Documents) provided by Owner to Contractor in connection with the Contract Documents including, without limitation, drawings, specifications, sketches, models, samples, tools, computer programs, technical information, confidential business information, scripts, customer or personnel information and data, whether written, oral or otherwise (all hereinafter referred to as Information) shall be Owner’s sole property.
Contractor may not use Contract Documents or Information for any purpose unrelated to Contract Documents without Owner’s prior written consent. All copies of Information in written, graphic or other tangible form shall be delivered to Owner upon completion of Work, or earlier if otherwise provided in Contract Documents.
1.05 Performance of Work/No Assignment. Time is of the essence in the performance of the Work. Contractor will perform the Work in a skillful and workmanlike manner; comply fully with criteria established by Owner, and with applicable laws, codes, and all applicable industry standards. Contractor shall maintain its work area in a clean and sanitary condition, clear debris and trash at the end of each work day, and shall not damage or disrupt any
8.b
Packet Pg. 279 Attachment: Attachment 2 - Approved Construction Services Agreement for Chesterwerks dated February 10, 2022 (5010 : Amendment No. 1 to Construction Services Agreement 00 5205 - 5
OAK #4836-0105-9886 v2
05620-0129
4/1/20
property unless specifically part of the scope of the Contract Documents. Contractor shall not contract any portion of the Work or otherwise assign the Contract Documents without prior written approval of Owner. (Contractor shall remain responsible for compliance with all terms of the Contract Documents, regardless of the terms of any such assignment.) Contractor shall permit Owner (or its designees) access to the work area, Contractor’s shop, or any other facility, to permit inspection of the Work at all times during construction and/or manufacture and fabrication. The granting of any progress payment, and any inspections, reviews, approvals or oral statements by any Owner representative, or certification by any governmental entity, shall in no way limit or relieve Contractor from its obligations under the Contract Documents. Either party’s waiver of any breach, or the omission or failure of either party, at any time, to enforce any right reserved to it, or to require strict performance of any provision of the Contract Documents, shall not be a waiver of any other right to which any party is entitled, and shall not in any way affect, limit, modify or waive that party’s right thereafter to enforce or compel strict compliance with every provision hereof. Owner shall have, at all times, set-off rights with respect to any payment and Contractor’s failure to perform the terms of the Contract Documents.
1.06 Defective Work; Warranties. Contractor warrants that all construction services shall be performed in accordance with generally accepted professional standards of good and sound construction practices, all Contract Documents requirements, and all laws, codes, standards, licenses, and permits. Contractor warrants that all materials and equipment shall be new, of suitable grade of their respective kinds for their intended uses, and free from defects. Contractor hereby grants to Owner for a period of one year following the date of completion 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. If either prior to completion of the Work, or within one year after completion, any Work (completed or incomplete) is found to violate any of the foregoing warranties (Defective Work), Contractor shall promptly, without cost to Owner and in accordance with Owner’s written instructions, correct, remove and replace the Defective Work with conforming Work, and correct, remove and replace any damage to other Work or other property resulting therefrom. If Contractor fails to do so within five days of Owner’s written notice (or other time period specified in the notice), Contractor shall pay all of the Owner’s resulting claims, costs, losses and damages. Where Contractor fails to timely correct Defective Work, or defects are discovered outside the correction period, Owner shall have all rights and remedies granted by law.
1.07 Earthwork and Underground Facilities. If the Work involves digging trenches or other excavations that extend deeper than four feet below the surface, Contractor shall notify Owner in writing of any material that Contractor believes may be hazardous waste that is required to be removed in accordance law, subsurface or latent physical conditions at the site differing from those indicated by information about the site made available to bidders prior to the deadline for submitting bids, or unknown physical conditions at the site of any unusual nature, different materially from those ordinarily encountered and generally recognized as inherent in work of the character provided for in the Contract Documents, pursuant to Public Contract Code Section 7104. For any Work involving trench shoring that costs in excess of $25,000, Contractor shall submit and Owner (or a registered civil or structural engineer employed by Owner) must accept, in advance of excavation, a detailed plan showing the design of shoring, bracing, sloping, or other provisions to be made for worker protection from the hazard of caving ground during the excavation of such trench or trenches, pursuant to Labor Code Section 6705. If such plan varies from the shoring system standards, the plan shall be prepared by a registered civil or structural engineer.
Consistent with Government Code Section 4215, as between Owner and Contractor, Owner will be responsible for the timely removal, relocation, or protection of existing main or trunk line utility facilities located on the Site only if such utilities are not identified in the Contract Documents or information made available for bidding.
ARTICLE 2 LEGAL
2.01 Compliance with Laws; Conflict of Interests. Contractor shall comply with all applicable federal and state laws, regulations and policies, as amended, including those regarding discrimination, unfair labor practices, antikick-back, collusion, prevailing wages, labor compliance, and the provisions of the Americans with Disability Act.
Contractor, its officer, partners, associates, agents, and employees, shall not make, participate in making, or in any way attempt to use the position afforded them by the Contract Documents to influence any governmental decision in which he or she knows or has reason to know that he or she has a financial interest under applicable state, federal and local conflict of interest regulations. Contractor warrants that no person or agency has been employed or retained, or will be employed or retained, to solicit or obtain any contract with Owner, upon an agreement or understanding for a contingent fee, except a bona fide employee or agency.
8.b
Packet Pg. 280 Attachment: Attachment 2 - Approved Construction Services Agreement for Chesterwerks dated February 10, 2022 (5010 : Amendment No. 1 to Construction Services Agreement 00 5205 - 6
OAK #4836-0105-9886 v2
05620-0129
4/1/20
2.02 Licenses, Patents, Permits. Before commencing Work, Contractor shall apply for, obtain and maintain in current status, at its own expense, any license, permit or approval required from any agency for the performance of Work.
To the greatest extent permitted by law, Contractor shall not be entitled to any compensation for any Work performed while not properly licensed, etc.
2.03 Employee Wages; Records; Apprentices. This Project is subject to compliance monitoring and enforcement by the Department of Industrial Relations. Contractor shall post job site notices as prescribed by regulation.
Contractor shall pay prevailing wages to its employees on any Order in excess of $1,000.00. Copies of the prevailing rate of per diem wages are on file at Owner’s principal office. Contractor shall comply with the 8-hours per day/40 hours per week/overtime/working hours restrictions for all employees, pursuant to the California Labor Code. Contractor and all subcontractors shall keep and maintain accurate employee payroll records for Work performed. The payroll records shall be certified and submitted as required by law, including Labor Code Section 1771.4 and 1776, including (if the Agreement is awarded on or after April 1, 2015 or continues on or after January 1, 2016) to the Labor Commissioner no less frequently than monthly. Contractor shall comply fully with Labor Code Section 1777.5 in the hiring of apprentices for work relating to the Agreement. If Contract Sum exceeds $2,000 and is funded with federal funds, then Contractor shall pay federal Davis Bacon wages and comply with applicable federal requirements.
2.04 Mandatory Contractor and Subcontractor Registration. 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.
2.05 Indemnity/Liability. Contractor shall defend, indemnify, and save harmless, to the fullest extent permitted by law, the Owner and each of its officers, directors, representatives, agents and employees, against all claims, suits, actions, loss, cost, damage, expense, and liability arising from or related to bodily injury to or death of any person or damage to any property, or resulting from any breach and/or Contractor’s negligence in performing the Work pursuant to the Contract Documents. Notwithstanding any provision of the Contract Documents, Owner shall not be liable to Contractor or anyone claiming under it, in contract or tort, for any special, consequential, indirect or incidental damages arising out of or in connection with the Contract Documents or the Work. Owner’s rights and remedies, whether under the Contract Documents or other applicable law, shall be cumulative and not subject to limitation.
2.06 Worker’s Compensation. Pursuant to Labor Code Sections 1860 and 1861, in accordance with the provisions of Section 3700 of the Labor Code, every contractor will be required to secure the payment of compensation to his 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 self-insurance in accordance with the provisions of that Code, and Contractor shall comply with such provisions before commencing the performance of the Work.
ARTICLE 3 MISCELLANEOUS
3.01 No Modification or Waiver; Severability. The Contract Documents may not be modified, nor may compliance with any of its terms be waived, except by written instrument executed and approved by fully authorized representatives of Owner and Contractor. Contract Documents headings are for convenience only and do not affect the construction of the Contract Documents. Should any part of the Contract Documents be declared invalid, void or unenforceable, all remaining parts, terms and provisions of the Contract Documents shall remain in full force and effect and shall in no way be invalidated, impaired or affected thereby.
3.02 Independent Contractor. Contractor is an independent Contractor and does not act as Owner’s agent in any capacity, whatsoever. Contractor is not entitled to any benefits that Owner provides to Owner employees including, without limitation, insurance, worker’s compensation benefits or payments, pension benefits, health benefits or insurance benefits. Terms within the Contract Documents regarding directives apply to and concern the result of the Contractor’s provision of Work not the means, methods, or scheduling of the Contractor’s Work.
Contractor shall be solely responsible for the means, methods, techniques, sequences and procedures with respect to its provision of Work under the Contract Documents. Contractor shall pay all payroll taxes imposed by any governmental entity and will pay all other taxes not specifically identified in the Contract Documents as Owner’s responsibility.
8.b
Packet Pg. 281 Attachment: Attachment 2 - Approved Construction Services Agreement for Chesterwerks dated February 10, 2022 (5010 : Amendment No. 1 to Construction Services Agreement 00 5205 - 7
OAK #4836-0105-9886 v2
05620-0129
4/1/20
3.03 Termination; Suspension; Disputes. Owner may direct Contractor to terminate, suspend, delay, interrupt or accelerate Work, in whole or in part, for such periods of time as Owner may determine in its sole discretion.
Owner will issue such directives in writing, and may do so, in whole or in part, for its convenience or due to Contractor’s fault. Owner will compensate Contractor for extra costs resulting from such directives only to the extent that Owner issues such directives for its convenience and not due to Contractor’s fault (but Owner shall not compensate Contractor for costs, profit or overhead anticipated to be earned or incurred on Work terminated for Owner’s convenience.) Contractor shall continue its Work throughout the course of any dispute, and Contractor’s failure to continue Work during a dispute shall be a material breach of the Contract Documents. All claims by Contractor against Owner shall be submitted in writing to Owner, and shall be governed by Public Contract Code Sections 20104 – 20104.6, after which time the one year time period in Government Code Section 911.2 shall be, pursuant to Government Code Section 930.2, reduced to 90 days. Should Contractor be terminated for default, and such termination is subsequently determined to be wrongful, such termination will be converted to a termination for convenience as provided herein.
3.04 Notices. All notices between the parties hereto shall be in writing and may be served by commercial express/overnight courier service or by depositing the same in the United States mail, postage prepaid and certified receipt requested, and addressed as indicated beneath each party’s signature in the Master Agreement, or as either party may otherwise provide to the other.
3.05 Dispute Resolution. All Contractor claims not otherwise subject to Public Contract Code Sections 20104 et seq shall, as a condition precedent to litigation thereon, first be mediated. Mediation shall be confidential, non-binding, pursuant to the construction mediation procedures of JAMS in San Francisco, California, and utilize the services of a mediator mutually acceptable to the parties. If the parties are unable to agree, the mediator will be selected by JAMS from its panel of approved construction industry mediators, having a minimum of 10 years’ experience in the construction industry. The cost of mediation shall be equally shared by all parties to the mediation. The parties shall, prior to the commencement of a mediation pursuant to this Paragraph, upon notice of the other party, exchange relevant, non-privileged project documents in compliance with Code of Civil Procedure Sections 2031.010 et seq. Additionally, the parties may agree mutually to engage in additional discovery prior to mediation.
Should the parties proceed with additional discovery, they shall, unless mutually agreed otherwise, comply with Code of Civil Procedure Sections 2019, et. seq. The Mediator will undertake to resolve any discovery disputes relating to the Mediation.
3.06 Execution; Venue; Limitations. The Agreement shall be deemed to have been executed in San Mateo County, California. Enforcement of the Contract Documents shall be governed by the laws of the State of California, excluding its conflict of laws rules. Except as expressly provided in the Contract Documents, nothing in the Contract Documents shall operate to confer rights or benefits on persons or entities other than Owner and Contractor. As between the parties to the Agreement, any applicable statute of limitations for any act or failure to act shall commence to run on the date of Owner’s issuance of the final Certificate for Payment, or termination of the Contract Documents, whichever is earlier, except for latent defects, for which the statute of limitation shall begin running upon discovery of the defect and its cause.
8.b
Packet Pg. 282 Attachment: Attachment 2 - Approved Construction Services Agreement for Chesterwerks dated February 10, 2022 (5010 : Amendment No. 1 to Construction Services Agreement 00 5205 - 8
OAK #4836-0105-9886 v2
05620-0129
4/1/20
[DRAFT FOR REVIEW AND APPROVAL BY OWNER’S RISK MANAGER] Appendix C to Construction Services Agreement
INSURANCE
1. Commercial General Liability Insurance, written on an “occurrence” basis, which shall provide coverage for bodily injury, death and property damage resulting from operations, liability for slander, false arrest and invasion of privacy, blanket contractual liability, broad form endorsement, and completed operations, personal and advertising liability, with limits of not less than [$1,000,000] general aggregate and [$1,000,000] each occurrence, subject to a deductible of not more than [$1,000] payable by Contractor.
2. Business Automobile Liability Insurance with limits not less than [$1,000,000] each occurrence including coverage for owned, non-owned and hired vehicles, subject to a deductible of not more than [$1,000] payable by Contractor.
3. Workers’ Compensation Employers’ Liability limits not less than [$1,000,000] each accident, [$1,000,000] per disease and [$1,000,000] aggregate. Contractor’s Workers’ Compensation Insurance policy shall contain a Waiver of Subrogation against the City of Pacifica, its officers, directors, officials, agents, employees and volunteers. In the event Contractor is self-insured, it shall furnish Certificate of Permission to Self-Insure signed by Department of Industrial Relations Administration of Self-Insurance, State of California.
4. [If applicable] Builder’s Risk Insurance including, without limitation, coverage against loss or damage to the Work by fire, lightening, wind, hail, aircraft, riot, vehicle damage, explosion, smoke, falling objects, vandalism, malicious mischief, collapse, and other such hazards as are normally covered by such coverage. Such insurance shall be in amount equal to the replacement cost (without deduction for depreciation and subject to stipulated value in lieu of average clause) of all construction constituting any part of the Work, excluding the cost of excavations, of grading and filling of the land. [Alternatively, if applicable] An Installation Floater including, without limitation, coverage against loss or damage to the Work by fire, lightening, wind, hail, vandalism, malicious mischief, and other such hazards as are normally covered by such coverage. Such insurance shall be in amount equal to the replacement cost (without deduction for depreciation and subject to stipulated value in lieu of average clause) of the Work. [If either Builder’s Risk or an Installation Floater is required, continue] Such insurance may be subject to deductible clauses not to exceed [$10,000] for any one loss. Such insurance will not cover loss or damage to Contractor’s equipment, scaffolding or other materials not to be consumed in the performance of the Work. The insurer shall waive all rights of subrogation against Owner.
5. Insurance policies in Appendix C shall contain an endorsement containing the following terms:
5.01 City of Pacifica, its officers, directors, officials, agents, employees, and volunteers, shall be named as additional insureds, but only with respect to liability arising out of the activities of the named insured, and there shall be a waiver of subrogation as to each named and additional insured.
5.02 The policies shall apply separately to each insured against whom claim is made or suit is brought except with respect to the limits of the company’s liability.
5.03 Written notice of cancellation, non-renewal or of any material change in the policies shall be mailed to Owner thirty (30) days in advance of the effective date thereof.
5.04 Insurance shall be primary insurance and no other insurance or self-insured retention carried or held by any named or additional insureds other than Contractor shall be called upon to contribute to a loss covered by insurance for the named insured.
6. Certificates of Insurance and Endorsements shall have clearly typed thereon the Project Name, shall clearly describe the coverage and shall contain a provision requiring the mailing of written notices of cancellation described in clause
5.03 above.
7. All policies of insurance shall be placed with insurers acceptable to Owner. The insurance underwriter(s) must be duly licensed to do business in the State of California and (other than for workers’ compensation) must have an A. M.
Best Company rating of [A-,VII] or better. Required minimum amounts of insurance may be increased should conditions of Work, in the opinion of Owner, warrant such increase. Contractor shall increase required insurance amounts upon direction by Owner.
8.b
Packet Pg. 283 Attachment: Attachment 2 - Approved Construction Services Agreement for Chesterwerks dated February 10, 2022 (5010 : Amendment No. 1 to Construction Services Agreement 00 5205 - 9
OAK #4836-0105-9886 v2
05620-0129
4/1/20
Appendix D to Construction Services Agreement (NOT APPLICABLE)
CONSTRUCTION LABOR AND MATERIAL PAYMENT BOND
KNOW ALL PERSONS BY THESE PRESENTS:
1. THAT WHEREAS, the City of Pacifica, a general law city and municipal corporation of the State of California (Owner) has awarded to _______ as Principal a Construction Services Agreement, dated the ______ (Agreement), _____ located at _______ (Contract Sum), which Agreement is by this reference made a part hereof, for the work described as follows: ____________
2. AND WHEREAS, Principal is required to furnish a bond in connection with the Agreement to secure the payment of claims of laborers, mechanics, material suppliers, and other persons as provided by law;
3. NOW, THEREFORE, we, the undersigned Principal and ______________________________ as Surety, are held and firmly bound unto Owner in the sum of 100% OF THE CONTRACT SUM ($25,651.71), 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.
4. THE CONDITION OF THIS OBLIGATION IS SUCH, that if Principal, or its heirs, 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 Agreement, 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 California Unemployment Insurance Code Section 13020 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.
5. 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.
6. 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 Agreement, 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 Agreement, or to the work to be performed thereunder.
7. 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 Agreement; 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.
8. 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
8.b
Packet Pg. 284 Attachment: Attachment 2 - Approved Construction Services Agreement for Chesterwerks dated February 10, 2022 (5010 : Amendment No. 1 to Construction Services Agreement 00 5205
- 10
OAK #4836-0105-9886 v2
05620-0129
4/1/20
Name Name
Title Title
Street Address Street Address
City, State, Zip Code City, State, Zip Code
END OF DOCUMENT
8.b
Packet Pg. 285 Attachment: Attachment 2 - Approved Construction Services Agreement for Chesterwerks dated February 10, 2022 (5010 : Amendment No. 1 to Construction Services Agreement 00 5205 - 11
OAK #4836-0105-9886 v2
05620-0129
4/1/20
Appendix E to Construction Services Agreement (NOT APPLICABLE)
CONSTRUCTION PERFORMANCE BOND
KNOW ALL PERSONS BY THESE PRESENTS:
1. THAT WHEREAS, City of Pacifica, a general law city and municipal corporation of the State of California (Owner) has awarded to_______ as Principal a Construction Services Agreement, dated the _____(Agreement), titled _______in the amount of _____ (Contract Sum), which Agreement is by this reference made a part hereof, for the work described as follows: __________________________
2. AND WHEREAS, Principal is required to furnish a bond in connection with the Agreement, guaranteeing the faithful performance thereof;
3. NOW, THEREFORE, we, the undersigned Principal and _________________________ as Surety are held and firmly bound unto Owner in the sum of 100% OF THE CONTRACT SUM to be paid to Owner or its successors and assigns; 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.
4. THE CONDITION OF THIS OBLIGATION IS SUCH, that if Principal, or its heirs, executors, administrators, successors, or assigns approved by Owner, shall promptly and faithfully perform the covenants, conditions, and agreements of the Agreement during the original term and any extensions thereof as may be granted by Owner, with or without notice to Surety, and during the period of any guarantees or warranties required under the Agreement, and shall also promptly and faithfully perform all the covenants, conditions, and agreements of any alteration of the Agreement made as therein provided, notice of which alterations to Surety being hereby waived, on Principal’s part to be kept and performed at the time and in the manner therein specified, and in all respects according to their true intent and meaning, and shall indemnify, defend, protect, and hold harmless Owner as stipulated in the Agreement, then this obligation shall become and be null and void; otherwise it shall be and remain in full force and effect.
5. No extension of time, change, alteration, modification, or addition to the Agreement, or of the work required thereunder, shall release or exonerate Surety on this bond or in any way affect the obligation of this bond; and Surety does hereby waive notice of any such extension of time, change, alteration, modification, or addition.
6. Whenever Principal shall be and declared by Owner in default under the Agreement, Surety shall promptly remedy the default, or shall promptly:
6.01 Undertake through its agents or independent contractors, reasonably acceptable to Owner, to complete the Agreement in accordance with its terms and conditions and to pay and perform all obligations of Principal under the Agreement including, without limitation, all obligations with respect to warranties, guarantees, indemnities, and the payment of liquidated damages; or
6.02 Obtain a bid or bids for completing the Agreement in accordance with its terms and conditions, and, upon determination by Owner of the lowest responsible bidder, reasonably acceptable to Owner, arrange for a contract between such bidder and Owner and make available as work progresses (even though there should be a default or a succession of defaults under the contract or contracts of completion arranged under this paragraph) sufficient funds to pay the cost of completion less the balance of the Contract Sum, and to pay and perform all obligations of Principal under the Agreement including, without limitation, all obligations with respect to warranties, guarantees, and the payment of liquidated damages; but, in any event, Surety’s total obligations hereunder shall not exceed the amount set forth in the third paragraph hereof. The term “balance of the Contract Sum,” as used in this paragraph, shall mean the total amount payable by Owner to the Principal under the Agreement and any amendments thereto, less the amount Owner paid to Principal.
7. Surety’s obligations hereunder are independent of the obligations of any other surety for the performance of the Agreement, 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 others. Surety may not use Contractor to complete the Agreement absent Owner’s written consent.
8. No right of action shall accrue on this bond to or for the use of any person or corporation other than Owner or its successors or assigns.
9. Surety may join in any proceedings brought under the Agreement and shall be bound by any judgment.
8.b
Packet Pg. 286 Attachment: Attachment 2 - Approved Construction Services Agreement for Chesterwerks dated February 10, 2022 (5010 : Amendment No. 1 to Construction Services Agreement 00 5205 - 12
OAK #4836-0105-9886 v2
05620-0129
4/1/20
10. 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
8.b
Packet Pg. 287 Attachment: Attachment 2 - Approved Construction Services Agreement for Chesterwerks dated February 10, 2022 (5010 : Amendment No. 1 to Construction Services Agreement 00 5205 - 13
OAK #4836-0105-9886 v2
05620-0129
4/1/20
Appendix F to Construction Services Agreement
SUPPLEMENTAL CONDITIONS
1. Plans
No project plans for this project.
2. Shop Drawings
Shop drawings shall not be required on this project.
3. Dust Control and Cleanup
During the construction period, the dust level shall be kept at a minimum. The premises shall also be kept free from the accumulation of waste material or rubbish. Failure to meet this requirement may result in project shutdown.
The final cleaning shall leave the facilities ready for use with no additional cleanup. Use no cleaning materials which will contaminate the ocean. At the completion of the contract, the Contractor shall remove all remaining litter, debris, materials, temporary structures and equipment from the site. The premises shall be left in a clean and orderly condition acceptable to the City Engineer.
In the event Contractor leaves the job overnight in an unclean condition, City may take action to provide necessary requirements and will deduct the cost of doing so from subsequent Contractor payments.
4. Public Safety
Contractor shall be responsible during all phases of work to provide for public safety and convenience.
It shall be the Contractor’s responsibility to provide adequate provisions to assure the safety of the general public throughout the duration of the project, including periods when no work is being performed. The site shall be thoroughly fenced-off when work is not actively in progress, and lighted barricades shall be placed around any obstructions not encompassed by this fence.
In the event Contractor leaves the job overnight in an unsafe condition, or fails to provide for public safety and convenience, City may take action to provide necessary requirements and will deduct the cost of doing so from subsequent Contractor payments.
All applicable safety regulations shall be complied with to protect the public and the Contractor’s employees. Strict compliance with Cal/OSHA safety requirements in doing the work is required.
5. Prevailing Wage Rates
The Contractor shall post, in a location on the job site, the prevailing wage rate Determination which is applicable to this project.
6. Discrimination
No discrimination shall be made in the employment of persons upon public works because of the race, sex, age, color, national origin, creed, sexual orientation or marital status of such persons and every
8.b
Packet Pg. 288 Attachment: Attachment 2 - Approved Construction Services Agreement for Chesterwerks dated February 10, 2022 (5010 : Amendment No. 1 to Construction Services Agreement 00 5205 - 14
OAK #4836-0105-9886 v2
05620-0129
4/1/20
contractor for public works violating this section is subject to all the penalties imposed for a violation of Section 1735 of the California Labor Code.
7. Employment of Apprentices
Attention is directed to the provisions in Sections 1777.5 (Chapter 1411, Statutes of 1967) and 1777.6 of the Labor Code concerning the employment of apprentices by the Contractor or any subcontractor under him.
The Contractor and any subcontractor shall comply with the requirements of Sections 1777.5 and 1777.6 in the employment of apprentices.
Information relative to apprenticeship standards, wage schedules and other requirements may be obtained from the Director of Industrial Relations, ex officio the Administrator of Apprenticeship, San Francisco, California, or from the Division of Apprenticeship Standards and its branch offices.
8. Materials and Supplies
All materials and supplies called for by contractor’s scope and proposal and shall be new unless otherwise specified.
9. Protection
The Contractor shall provide adequate protection for the site and surroundings throughout the work. All damage done to existing property shall be neatly repaired or replaced at the Contractor’s expense.
Work shall be executed in a careful and orderly manner with the least possible disturbance to public and occupants of the area.
The Contractor shall conduct his operations in such a manner as to avoid damage to existing improvements and adjacent property. The Contractor shall, at its sole cost and expense, repair or replace any damage occurring from his operations to pursue completion of the contract. The repairs and replacement shall be to the satisfaction of the Engineer and according to City standards and practices. The minimum repair or replacement shall be equal to surrounding existing conditions or better, and the Engineer’s decision as to acceptable repair or replacement shall be final. The burden of proof as to whether there was existing damage by the Contractor shall rest with the Contractor.
The site shall be maintained in a neat and orderly manner at all times. All existing facilities shall be protected and, if they are damaged or destroyed by the Contractor, shall be restored or replaced in kind at his expense, to their original conditions, or better, as approved by the City or other owner thereof.
The site shall be secured at the conclusion of each work day.
10. Inspections
Inspectors, employed by the City, shall be authorized to inspect all work done and all materials furnished. Such inspection may extend to all or any part of the work on the project and to the preparation, fabrication or manufacture of the materials to be used. An inspector is not authorized to revoke, alter or waive any requirements of the specifications. He is authorized to call the attention of the Contractor to any failure of the work or materials to conform to the specifications and contract. He shall have the authority to reject materials or suspend the work until any question at issue can be referred to and decided by the Engineer.
8.b
Packet Pg. 289 Attachment: Attachment 2 - Approved Construction Services Agreement for Chesterwerks dated February 10, 2022 (5010 : Amendment No. 1 to Construction Services Agreement 00 5205 - 15
OAK #4836-0105-9886 v2
05620-0129
4/1/20
An inspector will in no case act as foreman or perform other duties for the Contractor, nor interfere with the Contractor’s management of the work.
In case the Contractor refuses to suspend operations on verbal order, the inspector giving such verbal order will then issue the order in writing. After placing the order in the hands of the person in charge of the work for the Contractor, the inspector will immediately leave the job. Work done during the absence of the inspector will not be accepted or compensated.
The Contractor shall prosecute work only in the presence of an authorized inspector or authorized representative of the Engineer, and any work done without such inspection shall be at the Contractor’s risk and be subject to rejection.
The Contractor shall furnish the Engineer with every reasonable facility for ascertaining whether or not the work, as performed, is in accordance with the requirements and intent of the specifications and contract. The Contractor shall at all times and for any purpose permit the Engineer and any of his representatives and representatives of the City to have access to the work and the premises used by the Contractor.
11. Defective Materials
Any materials condemned or rejected by the Engineer as not meeting the requirements of these specifications may be branded or otherwise marked by the Engineer and shall, on demand, be at once removed by the Contractor to a satisfactory distance from the work.
If the Contractor does not remove such material within a reasonable time, fixed by written notice, the City may remove and store the materials at the expense of the Contractor. If the Contractor does not pay the expense of such removal and storage within ten days thereafter, the City may, upon ten days’ written notice, sell such materials at auction or at private sale. The City will account for the net proceeds thereof after deducting all the costs and expenses that should have been borne by the Contractor.
No partial payment, inspection, taking possession of, or other act made or done by the Engineer or the City with respect to the work prior to the final completion and acceptance thereof shall relieve Contractor from performing the Work in accordance with this contract, and shall not affect or prejudice the right of the Engineer or the City to reject any defective work or material or to require the Contractor complete fulfillment of all the provisions of the contract.
If the Engineer deems it expedient and not in the best interests of the City to correct work injured or done not in accordance with the contract, the defective work may be accepted subject to an equitable deduction from the contract price which may be made therefor by the City upon certificate from the Engineer.
12. Temporary Suspension of Work and Extension of Time for Performance When conditions at the site of the proposed work are unsatisfactory for the prosecution of a part or all of the work as adjudged by the Contractor and he is forced to suspend such work until reasonable conditions for its prosecution exist, he may request, in writing, that the Engineer authorize such suspension of work. Without the Engineer’s approval, any suspensions violate this specification.
Unsatisfactory conditions may include, but not limited to: inclement weather, excessively high surf and/or tides, strikes, excessive high or low ambient temperature and inability of delivery of materials by suppliers for good reason.
8.b
Packet Pg. 290 Attachment: Attachment 2 - Approved Construction Services Agreement for Chesterwerks dated February 10, 2022 (5010 : Amendment No. 1 to Construction Services Agreement 00 5205 - 16
OAK #4836-0105-9886 v2
05620-0129
4/1/20
When, in the opinion of the Engineer, suspensions of work are beyond the control of both the Contractor and the City (including, without limitation, adverse weather, conditions, earthquakes, force majeure events), the time of performance as set forth in the Agreement will be extended by the Engineer, in writing, by a period of time equal to that lost due to the delay occasioned by the allowed suspension, all at no additional cost to the City and without waiver of remedies for nonproliferation of the work. Such allowed suspension of work shall not relieve the Contractor of his contractual responsibilities.
13. Laws and Regulations
The Contractor shall comply with all local, regional, State and Federal laws and regulations at all times.
In addition, the Contractor shall meet the standards set by the Air Quality Act for Noise and Pollution.
If there is any conflict between these specifications and provisions and any laws or regulations, the matter shall be brought to the attention of the Engineer immediately.
14. Sound Control Requirements
The Contractor shall comply with all local sound control and noise level rules, regulations and ordinances which apply to any work performed pursuant to the contract.
Each internal combustion engine, used for any purposes on the job or related to the job, shall be equipped with a muffler of a type recommended by the manufacturer. No internal combustion engine shall be operated on the project without said muffler.
15. Air Pollution Control
The Contractor shall comply with all air pollution control rules, regulations, ordinances and statutes which apply to any work performed pursuant to the contract, involving any air pollution control rules, regulations, ordinances and statutes specified in Section 11017 of the Government Code.
16. Water Pollution
General:
Contractor shall take all measures necessary to prevent debris or contamination from entering the ocean. Best Management Practice (BMP) shall be enforced at all times.
Correction of Inadequate Pollution and Erosion Control Measures:
If the measures being taken by the Contractor are inadequate to control water pollution effectively, the City Engineer may direct the Contractor to revise operations. The directions will be in writing and will specify the items of work for which the Contractor’s water pollution control measures are inadequate.
No further work shall be performed on those items until the water pollution control measures are made adequate.
Abatement of Other Water Pollution:
The cleanup of water pollution by chemicals, petroleum products, cement or by the escape of any other material that is harmful or potentially harmful, from the work site as a result of the Contractor’s operations, into drainage systems or the ocean shall be the financial responsibility of the Contractor.
The means of cleanup and the party or parties to be engaged to perform the cleanup work shall be determined by the Engineer in consultation with appropriate hazardous materials, pollution control,
8.b
Packet Pg. 291 Attachment: Attachment 2 - Approved Construction Services Agreement for Chesterwerks dated February 10, 2022 (5010 : Amendment No. 1 to Construction Services Agreement 00 5205 - 17
OAK #4836-0105-9886 v2
05620-0129
4/1/20
safety, health and wildlife authorities and officials. The Contractor shall immediately carry out cleanup orders issued to him through or by the Engineer and shall make the work site accessible to personnel and equipment from outside pollution control resources called in by the Engineer. The cost of cleanup action called for by the Engineer and performed by outside resources shall be deducted from any monies due or become due the Contractor.
Compensation:
Full compensation for conforming to the requirements of this section shall be considered as included in the Contract Sum paid for the various items of work and no additional compensation will be allowed therefor.
17. Environmental Protection Requirements
Source Reduction and Recycling
The California Integrated Waste Management Act of 1989 (AB 939) mandates that 25 percent of the waste stream in the City of Pacifica be diverted from landfill by 1995 and that this diversion increase to 50 percent by 2000. AB 939 also required the City of Pacifica to prepare and adopt a Source Reduction and Recycling Element (SRRE) outlining recommended programs to meet the above noted diversion goals. One of the approved SRRE programs is to require the utilization of recycled construction materials for City projects. All work performed under this contract and all contractors and their associates and/or employees shall utilize recycled materials and recycle construction materials where feasible. Construction/Demolition Recycling Resources Lists are available from the Pacifica Planning Department and the California Integrated Waste Management Board.
Contractor shall reuse or recycle any useful construction materials generated during the project.
Disposal
At the end of each working day, the Contractor shall collect all scrap, debris and waste material and dispose of such materials properly.
Hazardous Material/Waste Management
A. Storage
The Contractor shall label and store all hazardous materials, such as pesticides, paints, thinners, solvents, and fuels; and all hazardous wastes, such as waste oil and antifreeze; in accordance with the City of Pacifica Hazardous Materials Storage Ordinance and all applicable State and Federal regulations.
The Contractor shall store all hazardous materials and all hazardous wastes in accordance with secondary containment regulations, and it is recommended that these materials and wastes be covered, as needed, to avoid potential management of collected rain water as a hazardous waste.
The Contractor shall keep an accurate, up-to-date inventory, including Material Safety Data Sheets (MSDSs), of hazardous materials and hazardous wastes stored on-site, to assist emergency response personnel in the event of a hazardous materials incident.
B. Disposal
8.b
Packet Pg. 292 Attachment: Attachment 2 - Approved Construction Services Agreement for Chesterwerks dated February 10, 2022 (5010 : Amendment No. 1 to Construction Services Agreement 00 5205 - 18
OAK #4836-0105-9886 v2
05620-0129
4/1/20
The Contractor shall use secondary containment, such as a drip pan, to catch leaks or spills any time that vehicle or equipment fluids are dispensed, changed or poured.
The Contractor shall keep a stockpile of spill cleanup materials, such as rags or absorbents, readily accessible on site.
The Contractor shall clean up leaks and spills of vehicle or equipment fluids immediately and dispose of the waste and cleanup materials as hazardous waste, as described in the section above.
The Contractor shall not wash any spilled material into streets, gutters, storm drains or creeks and shall not bury spilled hazardous materials.
The Contractor shall report any hazardous materials spill to the City of Pacifica Building Division at (650) 738-7344.
The Contractor shall inspect vehicles and equipment arriving on site for leaking fluids and shall promptly repair leaking vehicles and equipment. Drip pans shall be used to catch leaks until repairs are made.
C. Activity-Specific Requirements
The following requirements shall be met on all projects within the City of Pacifica that include the listed activities.
Concrete, Grout and Mortar Waste Management
Material Management:
The Contractor shall store concrete, grout, and mortar away from drainage areas and ensure that these materials do not enter the storm drain system or the ocean waters.
Concrete Truck/Equipment Wash Out:
The Contractor shall not wash out concrete trucks or equipment into streets or gutters.
The Contractor shall perform washout of concrete trucks or equipment off-site or in a designated area on-site where the water will flow onto dirt or into a temporary pit in a dirt area. The Contractor shall let the water percolate into the soil and dispose of the hardened concrete in a trash container. If a suitable dirt area is not available, then the Contractor shall collect the wash water and remove it off-site.
18. Layout of Work
Layout of work shall be done by the Contractor. Contractor shall mark the work area limits and facilities to be removed and replaced. All layout shall be approved by the City.
19. Substitutions
8.b
Packet Pg. 293 Attachment: Attachment 2 - Approved Construction Services Agreement for Chesterwerks dated February 10, 2022 (5010 : Amendment No. 1 to Construction Services Agreement 00 5205 - 19
OAK #4836-0105-9886 v2
05620-0129
4/1/20
Substitutions in material or methods of construction, when necessary because of material shortages or in order to avoid serious delay may be made only after they are approved by the City Engineer in writing.
20. Traffic Control and Public Access
The Contractor shall be responsible for proper traffic control to assure public safety and convenience.
Continuous safe public access shall be maintained to residential structures at all times.
21. Material and Workmanship
All materials and workmanship are to be the best of their respective kinds. The terms “or equal,” “approved,” “selected” and so forth shall mean as approved, etc. by the City Engineer. All materials and equipment used should be in accordance with the manufacturer’s printed directions.
Use adequate numbers of skilled workmen who are thoroughly trained and experienced in necessary crafts and who are completely familiar with the specified requirements and methods needed for proper performance of work specified. Use equipment adequate in terms of size, capacity and numbers to accomplish work in a timely manner.
22. Drug-Free Workplace
The Contractor is required to comply with the Drug-Free Workplace Act of 1988. The requirements of the Drug-Free Workplace Policy are described in City of Pacifica Administrative Policy Number 46.
23. Harassment and Discrimination
The Contractor is required to comply with City of Pacifica Administrative Policy Number 33, Harassment and Discrimination in the Workplace.
24. Payroll Records
Contractor and each Sub-Contractor shall keep an accurate payroll record, showing the name, address, social security number, work week, and the actual per diem wages paid to each journeyman, apprentice, worker, or other employee employed by him in connection with the public work. All payroll records shall be certified and maintained by the Contractor and be made available to auditors and managers from the City upon request.
8.b
Packet Pg. 294 Attachment: Attachment 2 - Approved Construction Services Agreement for Chesterwerks dated February 10, 2022 (5010 : Amendment No. 1 to
8.b
Packet Pg. 295 Attachment: Attachment 2 - Approved Construction Services Agreement for Chesterwerks dated February 10, 2022 (5010 : Amendment No. 1 to
CITY OF PACIFICA
COUNCIL AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT
6/13/2022
1 SUBJECT:
Resolution Authorizing and Designating the City Manager & City Engineer to Accept Interests in Real Property on Behalf of the City
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Adopt Resolution Authorizing and Designating the City Manager & City Engineer to Accept Interests in Real Property on Behalf of the City
STAFF CONTACT:
Ryan Marquez, P.E., Associate Engineer
(650) 738-3767
[email protected]
Sam Bautista, P.E., Deputy Dir. of Public Works
(650) 738-3767
[email protected]
Kevin Woodhouse, City Manager
(650) 738- 7409
[email protected]
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION:
Typically, public use easements and right-of-way dedications are dedicated to the City and accepted through Council approved subdivision maps. However, there are times when public use easements or right-of-way dedications are not created through a subdivision map process.
There are times when the City will require these dedications for public use, such as re-routing City owned sewer or storm drainage lines through new public easements, as an example. In those cases, the California Government Code allows the City Council to authorize and designate City staff to accept interests in real property, such as public use easements and rightof-way dedications, through a resolution approved by the City Council. Cities throughout California use this method of accepting such real property interests to help streamline project approvals.
Specifically, California Government Code Section 27281 provides that deeds or grants conveying interests in real property to a governmental agency for public purposes will not be accepted for recording absent a certificate or resolution of acceptance by the governing body of the entity attached to the document. Section 27281 further provides that a governmental agency may, by resolution, designate an officer to accept and consent to such deeds or grants on behalf of the agency. The City of Pacifica anticipates that it will receive transfers of easements and other real property in connection with its activities and wishes to designate the City Manager or the City Engineer as the officer to accept such real property interests on behalf of the City.
9 Packet Pg. 296
Pacifica City Council 2
June 13, 2022
The City Manager recommends approving the attached resolution authorizing and designating the City Manager or City Engineer to accept any public use easements or right-of-way dedications for public use. This will allow projects to be streamlined though the project approvals.
ALTERNATIVE ACTION:
Approval of the resolution allows projects requiring land dedications for public use to be more streamlined. Council may choose not to approve the resolution which will result in delaying projects.
RELATION TO CITY COUNCIL GOALS AND WORK PLAN:
Approval of these actions is consistent with the following Council adopted Goals:
• Stewardship of City Infrastructure: includes repairing/replacing outdated city facilities such as city hall, the libraries, fire stations, etc., improving streets, and responding to sea level rise.
The approval of the resolution will allow the City to address infrastructure related issues through acceptance of easements.
FISCAL IMPACT:
There is no fiscal impact to approving the resolution.
ORIGINATED BY:
Engineering
ATTACHMENT LIST:
9 Packet Pg. 297
Pacifica City Council 3
June 13, 2022
RESOLUTION NO. ___-2022
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF PACIFICA AUTHORIZING AND DESIGNATING THE
CITY MANAGER OR CITY ENGINEER TO ACCEPT INTERESTS IN REAL PROPERTY
ON BEHALF OF THE CITY
WHEREAS, California Government Code Section 27281 provides that deeds or grants conveying interests in real property to a governmental agency for public purposes will not be accepted for recording absent a certificate or resolution of acceptance by the governing body of the entity attached to the document;
WHEREAS, Section 27281 further provides that a governmental agency may, by resolution, designate an officer to accept and consent to such deeds or grants on behalf of the agency; and
WHEREAS, the City of Pacifica anticipates that it will receive transfers of easements and other real property in connection with its activities and desires to designate the City Manager or the City Engineer as the officer to accept such real property interests on behalf of the City.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Pacifica that:
1. The City Council hereby approves, authorizes and designates the City Manager or City Engineer, or his or her designee, as the officer to accept conveyances of real property on behalf of the City of Pacifica pursuant to the terms of California Government Code Section 27281.
2. The City Manager or City Engineer, or his or her designee, is authorized to execute certificates of acceptance accepting interests in real property to be recorded.
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Pacifica, California, held on 13th of June, 2022, by the following vote:
AYES, Council Members:
NOES, Council Members:
ABSENT, Council Members:
ABSTAIN, Council Members:
9 Packet Pg. 298
Pacifica City Council 4
June 13, 2022
Mary Bier, Mayor
ATTEST:
Sarah Coffey, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Michelle Marchetta Kenyon, City Attorney
9 Packet Pg. 299
CITY OF PACIFICA
COUNCIL AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT
6/13/2022
1 SUBJECT:
Introduction of “An Ordinance Amending Article 1 Within Chapter 1, “City Council” Of Title 2 Of the Pacifica Municipal Code Relating To Rules And Procedures For City Council Meetings“ (Status: CEQA Exempt)
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Move to Introduce by Title Only and Waive further reading of “An Ordinance Amending Article 1 Within Chapter 1, “City Council” Of Title 2 Of the Pacifica Municipal Code Relating To Rules And Procedures For City Council Meetings” and finding the ordinance exempt under the California Environmental Quality Act.
STAFF CONTACT:
Kevin Woodhouse, City Manager
650-738-7409
[email protected]
Michelle Marchetta Kenyon, City Attorney
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION:
California Government Code section 36813 authorizes the City Council to adopt ordinances or resolutions establishing rules for the conduct of its proceedings. It further provides that the Council “may punish a member or other person for disorderly behavior at a meeting.” Government Code section 38638 provides that “The mayor or other officer in control of the police force in a city shall direct a sufficient number of peace officers to attend and keep order at any public meeting in the city at which, in his or her opinion, a breach of the peace may occur.” The City’s Municipal Code currently includes rules and procedures for City Council meetings at Article 1 within Chapter 1, “City Council” of Title 2 of the Pacifica Municipal Code. Most of these provisions have not been updated since the 1970s and 1980s.
However, the City has separately adopted City Council Rules and Code of Ethics, which were most recently amended in 2014 (“Council Rules”). The Council Rules also include rules and procedures for City Council meetings and many of the provisions are duplicative of the provisions in Article 1. On January 10, 2022 the Council appointed an ad hoc committee comprised of Councilmember O’Neill and Mayor Pro Tem Bigstyck to make recommendations regarding revisions to the Council Rules.
During those discussions and in advance of those proposed changes to the Council Rules, we are recommending that Article 1 within Chapter 1, “City Council” of Title 2 of the Pacifica Municipal Code be amended to avoid any perceived inconsistency between the Pacifica Municipal Code and the Council Rules. Having one set of rules and procedures will streamline proceedings at City Council meetings and be more understandable to the general public. 10 Packet Pg. 300
Pacifica City Council 2
June 13, 2022
However, there are certain provisions in Article 1 that are more appropriately maintained in the City’s Municipal Code and/or will not be duplicative of the Council Rules.
For example, the Council Rules do not include a provision designating members of the Police Department as sergeant at arms and authorizing the sergeant at arms to maintain order and decorum at Council meetings. Accordingly, staff recommends that this designation and authorization, which is currently found at Pacifica Municipal Code section 2-1.119, be maintained in the City’s Municipal Code. This will ensure the police will continue to be able maintain order and decorum at Council meetings, and ensure compliance with Government Code section 38638. Similarly, Article 1 currently contains provisions concerning Council salaries and reimbursements. These are not duplicative of the Council Rules and should be retained as well.
The proposed ordinance includes the provisions from the current version of Article 1 that would be retained. The text of these provisions has not changed aside from adopting non-substantive updates such as using gender neutral language, but they have been renumbered from 2-1.103- 2-1.108.
A copy of the proposed Ordinance is attached.
Provisions currently in the municipal code concerning the following subjects would be repealed if the ordinance is adopted: notices for council meetings and special meetings, study sessions, public access to meetings, disclosure of information from closed sessions, the designation of a presiding officer, the preparation of an agenda, meeting minutes, rules of debate, order, and decorum, rules concerning addressing the council, voting procedures, reconsideration of actions, the appointment of special Council committees, and redevelopment agency member compensation.
Section 2-1.101 of the Municipal Code would be revised to state “All meetings of the Council shall be held in accordance with the City Council Rules and Code of Ethics adopted by Resolution of the Council and which may be amended from time to time.” CEQA:
Introduction 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 may wish to consider the following alternatives:
1. Choose not to introduce “An Ordinance Amending Article 1 Within Chapter 1, “City Council” Of Title 2 Of the Pacifica Municipal Code Relating To Rules And Procedures For City Council Meetings”
RELATION TO CITY COUNCIL GOALS AND WORK PLAN:
“An Engaged Community” includes creating opportunities to expand public participation, increase communication, and build community post-COVID. 10 Packet Pg. 301
Pacifica City Council 3
June 13, 2022
FISCAL IMPACT:
This action will not result in any direct fiscal impact.
ORIGINATED BY:
City Manager's Office
City Attorney's Office
ATTACHMENT LIST:
10 Packet Pg. 302
Pacifica City Council 4
June 13, 2022
ORDINANCE NO. (ID # 5018)
ORDINANCE NO. ___________
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PACIFICA AMENDING ARTICLE 1 WITHIN CHAPTER 1, “CITY COUNCIL” OF TITLE 2 OF THE PACIFICA
MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO RULES AND PROCEDURES FOR CITY COUNCIL
MEETINGS
WHEREAS, California Government Code section 36813 authorizes the City Council to establish rules for the conduct of its proceedings; and WHEREAS, Article 1 within Chapter 1, “CITY COUNCIL” of Title 2 of the City’s Municipal Code currently includes provisions concerning rules and procedures at City Council meetings; and
WHEREAS, the City has separately adopted a City Council Rules and Code of Ethics; and
WHEREAS, the City Council Rules and Code of Ethics also includes rules and procedures for City Council meetings; and
WHEREAS, staff is recommending that Article 1 within Chapter 1, “CITY COUNCIL” of Title 2 of the City’s Municipal Code be amended to refer to the City Council Rules and Code of Ethics, thus clarifying that there is a single set of rules and procedures for City Council meetings; and
WHEREAS, staff is recommending that an enforcement mechanism be in place in the municipal code to ensure Council meetings proceed in accord with the City Council Rules and Code of Ethics and are not disrupted.
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. Article 1 within Chapter 1, “City Council” of Title 2 of the Pacifica Municipal Code is hereby amended by repealing Article 1 in its entirety and replacing Article 1 to read as follows:
“Article 1 – Meetings
Sec. 2-1.101. Meetings.
All meetings of the Council shall be held in accordance with the City Council Rules and Code of Ethics adopted by Resolution of the Council and which may be amended from time to time.
Sec. 2-1.102. Enforcement.
The Chief of Police or such members of the Police Department as the Chief of Police may designate shall be sergeants at arms of the Council and shall carry out all orders given by the presiding officer for the purpose of maintaining order and decorum at Council meetings. Any 10 Packet Pg. 303
Pacifica City Council 5
June 13, 2022
Councilmember may move to require the presiding officer to enforce the rules, and the affirmative vote of a majority of the Council shall require him to do so.
Sec. 2-1.103. - Ordinances, resolutions, and contracts.
All ordinances shall be approved by the City Attorney. No ordinance shall be prepared for presentation to the Council unless ordered by a majority vote of the Council, requested by the Mayor or City Manager, or prepared by the City Attorney on his own initiative. All ordinances, resolutions, and contract documents, before presentation to the Council, shall have been approved as to form and legality by the City Attorney and shall have been examined and approved for administration by the City Manager or his authorized representative.
Sec. 2-1.104. - Dangerous instruments.
No person may enter the chambers of a legislative body, as defined in Section 54952 of the Government Code of the State, or any place where such legislative body is in session, with any firearm, weapon, or explosive device of any nature. The provisions of this section shall not apply to authorized peace officers or to those persons authorized by the Penal Code of the State to carry such weapons.
Sec. 2-1.105. - Council call-up of decisions.
Any decision of a board, commission, committee or City staff member which is appealable to the Council and any action or recommendation of commissions and committees subject to review by the Council pursuant to this Code may be called up for Council review by any Councilmember in accordance with the following procedures:
(a)The Councilmember shall file with the City Clerk a written request for review, with no need to cite the basis for call-up, within the time set by this Code for filing an appeal of the same decision;
(b)The review shall be heard in the same manner as an appeal would be heard under this Code of the same decision, except that no appeal fee shall be assessed; (c)The Councilmember who called up the decision may participate in the review thereof; and (d)The Council may either approve, disapprove, or modify any decision.
Sec. 2-1.106. - Council salaries.
The Council may provide by ordinance for a salary and adjustment in salary in accordance with the provisions of the Government Code of the State.
Sec. 2-1.107. - Council reimbursement for expenses.
The provisions for Council salaries set forth in this article are and shall be exclusive of any amount payable to each member of the Council as reimbursement for actual and necessary expenses incurred by him in the performance of official duties for the City.
Sec. 2-1.108. - Adjustment of Council salaries.
(a) Each member of the City Council shall receive a salary in the sum of Seven Hundred and no/100ths ($700.00) Dollars per month, which sum is comprised of the base amount of Four Hundred and no/100ths ($400.00) Dollars as set forth in California Government Code section 36516(a)(2) and adjusted pursuant to California Government Code section 36516(c). The salary is payable at the same time and in the same manner as the salaries are paid to each of the officers and employees of the City.
(b)This section shall go into effect for all members of the City Council pursuant to California Government Code section 36516.5 when one or more members of the City Council becomes eligible for a salary increase by virtue of that member's beginning a new term of office.” 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 10 Packet Pg. 304
Pacifica City Council 6
June 13, 2022
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.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this ______ day of ___________________, 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 10 Packet Pg. 305
Pacifica City Council 7
June 13, 2022
* * * * *
(ID # 5018) at 6/13/2022 5:00 PM City Council Regular Meeting 10 Packet Pg. 306
CITY OF PACIFICA
COUNCIL AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT
6/13/2022
1 SUBJECT:
Public Hearing on Proposed Ordinances adding Sections 7-2.214 (Utility Pavement Cut Recovery Fee) of Title 7 and Chapter 21 (Construction Vehicle Impact Fee) of Title 8 of the Pacifica Municipal Code and adoption of Resolution setting rates for the Utility Pavement Cut Recovery Fee and Construction Vehicle Impact Fee.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
1. Move to Waive the First Reading of and Introduce by Title an Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Pacifica Establishing a Utility Pavement Cut Recovery Fee and finding the Ordinance exempt under the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”).
2. Move to Waive the First Reading of and Introduce by Title an Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Pacifica Establishing a Construction Vehicle Impact Fee and finding the Ordinance exempt under the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”).
3. Adopt resolution entitled A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Pacifica Setting Rates for the Utility Pavement Cut Recovery Fee and the Construction Vehicle Impact Fee and Adding both Fees to the City’s Master Fee Schedule.
STAFF CONTACT:
Ryan Marquez, Associate Engineer
(650) 738-3769
[email protected]
Lisa Petersen, Director of Public Works
(650) 738-3770
[email protected]
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION:
The City of Pacifica is responsible for maintaining over 90 centerline miles of street pavement.
The City currently has the lowest pavement condition index (PCI) score of the one hundred and one (101) bay area cities and faces a growing deficit in needed pavement maintenance and rehabilitation funding. At the October 12, 2020 City Council meeting, staff provided Council an update on the overall condition of the City’s pavements based on the City’s 2019 Pavement Condition Index Report (also known as the Budget Options Report). At this meeting, Council approved the City’s 5-year Street Maintenance Program. Although the program addresses a number of streets with seal coat treatments and provides a few asphalt overlays, the program funding level will not stop the continued decline of the City’s overall pavement condition. At the same Council meeting, Council approved an agreement with NCE Consulting Engineers to provide a study that reviewed the costs to the City related to of utility pavement cuts and construction/waste trucks on the City’s street network to develop a proposed fee related to any damage caused by these activities.
Staff returned to City Council with a study session on March 14, 2022 to present the findings and initial recommended fee structure for implementing fees for damage caused by utility pavement cuts and heavy construction vehicle impacts. Staff again discussed the fees related to 11 Packet Pg. 307
Pacifica City Council 2
June 13, 2022
utility cuts and construction vehicle impacts during the City budget, CIP, and Master Fee schedule presentation at the May 23, 2022 City Council meeting.
Utility Pavement Cut Recovery Fees
Study and quantification of the damage of utility cuts on road and street performance has been occurring for over 30 years. Public agencies, as well as utility companies, have sponsored engineering investigations and studies to quantify the impact of utility cuts on pavement performance and estimate the financial cost. NCE Consulting completed a study of the impact of utility cuts to Pacifica’s pavements (Attachment 1). The purpose of this study was to compare pavement performance for the street sections with and without cuts, quantify damage caused by utility cuts to the pavements within the City and develop a fee schedule for the City to recover any costs associated with such damage.
To accomplish this, NCE looked at both the structural and functional deterioration of pavements due to utility pavement cuts. The field evaluation included selecting sixteen sites on city streets of different ages. Deflection testing using a falling weight deflectometer (FWD) was conducted to assess loss of structural capacity due to cuts. In addition, the City’s StreetSaver® database, which contains 15 years of pavement distress data and thousands of data points with a wide range of pavement age and conditions, was analyzed to assess the impact of utility cuts. The findings from the study included:
• Pavements with cuts of any size deteriorate more than pavements without cuts across all pavement age groups (0-5 years, 6-10 years, 11-15 years and >15years).
The exception is residential streets older than 10 years with small cuts (cut area <10% of section area), however; the cumulative effect of multiple small cuts is equivalent to a section with large cuts.
• On average, the PCI drops by 30% if the cut area is greater than 10% of the section area.
• Cuts do more damage to new (<10 years) pavements than older (≥10years) pavements. This results in an average percent reduction of the remaining service life of approximately 33% for new pavements and 17% for old pavements.
These findings were used to develop a fee schedule for the City of Pacifica that is shown in the equations and table below.
Utility Pavement Cut Fee (<10% Section Area) = ((Length+4')*(Width+4') * (Unit Cost))/(0.10) Utility Pavement Cut Fee (≥10% Section Area) = Full Block Area * Unit Cost Section Area and Full Block Area is defined as the full block area from the center of intersection to the center of intersection.
Age Group Unit Costs
<10% of Section Area ≥10% of Section Area
Arterials/Collectors <10 years $2.50 $4.00
≥10 years $1.50 $2.50
Residential <10 years $1.50 $3.00
≥10 years $1.00 $2.50
As noted previously, although individual small cuts show less significant difference, there is a cumulative impact from multiple small cuts. Over time, this impact will be equivalent to a section with large cuts (10% or greater). The fee calculation (as shown in the Study) accounts for this by having the small cuts pay a “fair share” for this cumulative effect by dividing the small cut fee total by 10%. Additionally, because pavement cuts cause “slumping” of the soil 2 feet beyond the cut area, this area also needs to be accounted for to assess the correct impact to the 11 Packet Pg. 308
Pacifica City Council 3
June 13, 2022
pavement. For example, a 4’x4’ cut has the impact of an 8’x8’ cut due to this slumping. The following is an example of a 4’x’4 pavement cut fee for a residential pavement 10 years old or older and would be typical for a sewer lateral replacement: $1 x (4+4) x (4+4)/0.1 = $640.
Heavy Construction Vehicle Impacts
The City completed a study (Attachment 2) related to the impacts of heavy construction vehicles on pavement longevity to determine what a correlated fee would be. The purpose of the study was to estimate the structural and therefore financial impact to the roadway from construction vehicles.
The Study identified local pavement quality, assumed a future PCI level increase over the next 15 years, and explained why that was appropriate and needed to conclude the fees for heavy vehicles. Furthermore, the City does periodic pavement surveys and reports to City Council on the quality of the City’s pavement in addition to scenario planning that includes: increasing PCI with an unconstrained budget, maintaining current PCI, increase PCI by 5 points, do nothing, or other target scenarios. From that report along with expected paving budget, a 5-year pavement plan was put together for 2020-25 and will be updated for 2026-2030 in the future.
The study considered impacts on City streets during construction of development projects by heavy construction vehicles traversing City streets to get back and forth from development projects. The impact of heavy construction vehicles to pavements from these trips has been studied by many cities and was included in the recent NCE pavement impact study for the City of Pacifica.
The study calculated damage to pavement caused by heavy construction vehicles during construction of development projects and developed a fee related to this damage. Estimating this damage cost for the study of heavy construction vehicles was completed by the following:
• Calculating the average cost per vehicle-mile traveled through conversion of yearly vehicle damage.
• Estimating the conservative number of vehicle trips/miles travelled to development sites. • Developing costs associated with square foot of construction.
Using this information, NCE’s report recommendation includes a per square foot price for residential, multi-family, and commercial developments of $1.19/square foot of new structure.
This would translate to a one-time fee of $2,126 for a new 1800 sf single family home or $952 for a new 800 sf multi-family unit.
Government Code section 66001 of the Mitigation Fee Act requires agencies to make certain findings before adopting new impact fees. Below are the required findings and required information.
• The purpose of the fee is to provide funds to restore City streets and pavements, which rapidly deteriorate as a result of the impacts of heavy construction vehicles associated with new development
• The fee will be used to pay for street and road maintenance and improvements related to the impacts of construction vehicles associated with new development. The projects that will be funded by the fee are identified in the City’s 5-year paving work plan that is then annually identified in the City’s Capital Improvement Program under the Annual Street Resurfacing and Rehabilitation Project.
• There is a reasonable relationship between the Construction Vehicle Impact Fees and the projects on which the fees will be imposed because, as demonstrated in the NCE fee study, the fees will only fund costs necessitated by each new development. There is a reasonable relationship between the need for the pavement improvements that will be funded by the Construction Vehicle Impact Fee revenues and the types of development 11 Packet Pg. 309
Pacifica City Council 4
June 13, 2022
projects on which the fee will imposed because those development projects require the use of heavy construction vehicles that damage the City’s streets and pavements, and the fees are limited to the amounts necessary to mitigate the impacts of that damage.
Exceptions
The Council can adopt reduced fees for all developments or for a certain type of development for a justifiable reason associated with a Council adopted policy. The policy does not need to be adopted before the reduced fees are adopted. Below are the recommend fee changes related to City development/construction priorities as noted below:
• Construction Vehicle Pavement Impact Fees and Utility Pavement Cut Fees for Accessory Dwelling Units (ADU) - Any ADU that is under 750 square feet shall not be charged a pavement impact fee or utility cut fee, per state law. Staff is recommending that both fees shall not be charged for an ADU of any size when the ADU is being constructed at the same time, under the same permit, as a new main residential unit or an expansion of the main unit that makes payment of the fees as required. Essentially, ADUs that are part of new construction won’t be included in the square footage calculation. The Council has also directed staff to evaluate policies to incentivize affordable housing production by reducing fees during the Housing Element development and implementation.
• Partially or Fully Credit Utility Pavement Cut Recovery Fees for Developments with Pavement Improvements - As a condition of approval, many new developments are required to pave the roadway in front of the development as a nexus for improving infrastructure adjacent to the development. Staff will recommend providing these developments a credit against their Utility Cut Fees for completing frontage roadway paving as this will mitigate the impacts of the utility cuts associated with the new development.
• Reduced Utility Cut Fees Related to Sewer Lateral Repairs Not Requiring a Lateral Compliance Certificate - Staff will recommend charging a minimal fixed fee ($500) for pavement cuts related to fixing a sewer lateral not requiring a Sewer Lateral Compliance Certificate. Lowering the fee for these types of repairs will prevent the fee from becoming an obstacle to needed sewer lateral replacement for cracked/broken laterals.
Staff recommends adoption of fees as noted above by staff and review of fees related to ADU’s/low-income housing during upcoming Housing Element meetings. During these meetings, all City fees that could impact building of low-income housing can be reviewed and discussed.
Ordinances & Resolution Needed
In order to codify these fees, City Council will need to update the Municipal Code with two new ordinances and adopt a resolution to set the fee schedule. The ordinance entitled an Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Pacifica Establishing a Utility Pavement Cut Recovery Fee (Attachment 3) codifies the utility pavement cut recovery fee and the ordinance entitled an Ordinance of the City Council of the City Of Pacifica Establishing a Construction Vehicle Impact Fee (Attachment 4) codifies the heavy construction vehicle impact fee. Lastly, the resolution entitled A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Pacifica Setting Rates for the Utility Pavement Cut Recovery Fee and the Construction Vehicle Impact Fee and Adding both Fees to the City’s Master Fee Schedule lays out the fee schedule for the two proposed fees.
It is therefore the City Manager's recommendation to waive the first reading and introduce by title an Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Pacifica Establishing a Utility Pavement Cut Recovery Fee and an Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Pacifica Establishing a 11 Packet Pg. 310
Pacifica City Council 5
June 13, 2022
Construction Vehicle Impact Fee and an Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Pacifica Establishing a Construction Vehicle Impact Fee. Furthermore, the City Manager recommends adoption of the resolution to set the fees for the Utility Pavement Cut Recovery Fee and Heavy Construction Vehicle Impact Fee.
CEQA:
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.
ALTERNATIVE ACTION:
Alternative action could be:
• Council may choose not to adopt one or both fees, however this option would mean that persons engaging in pavement damaging activities would not pay their fair share of the costs to mitigate that damage, and therefore is not recommended. • Council may direct staff to re-study the fees with specific direction on areas that they may need more information on. This alternative is also not recommended as it would need additional budget to perform, and staff believes the studies are adequate and the fees are fair.
RELATION TO CITY COUNCIL GOALS AND WORK PLAN:
Approval of these actions is consistent with the following Council adopted Goals:
• Stewardship of City Infrastructure: includes repairing/replacing outdated city facilities such as city hall, the libraries, fire stations, etc., improving streets, and responding to sea level rise. These fees will help maintain and improve the existing streets.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The completed Studies provide justification for the City to implement these fees as noted in the report. Staff has estimated heavy construction impact fees could range from $10,000 to $60,000 per year depending on development levels. Utility pavement cut fees could generate $100,000 to $200,000 per year depending on if large PG&E or telecom projects are completed.
For example, the large PG&E project recently completed on Oddstad and Terra Nova would have resulted in approximately $100,000 worth of utility pavement cut fees due to the extensive 11 Packet Pg. 311
Pacifica City Council 6
June 13, 2022
pavement cutting during the project. Should the City decide to charge these fees, the fees cannot exceed the amounts set forth in the Studies and the fees must be charged equally unless the Council has a justifiable policy basis for lowering the fee for certain types of fee payers, as noted earlier in the report. All fees generated from these will be used in the City’s annual Pavement Resurfacing Project.
ORIGINATED BY:
Engineering
ATTACHMENT LIST:
Attachment 1 - Utility Cut Impact Fee Report(PDF)
Attachment 2 - Heavy Vehicle Impact Fee Report (PDF)
Attachment 3 - Ordinance Adopting Utility Pavement Cut Recovery Fee (PDF) Attachment 4 - Ordinance Adopting Heavy Vehicle Impact Fee (PDF) 11 Packet Pg. 312
Pacifica City Council 7
June 13, 2022
RESOLUTION NO. ___-2022
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PACIFICA SETTING RATES
FOR THE UTILITY PAVEMENT CUT RECOVERY FEE AND THE CONSTRUCTION VEHICLE IMPACT FEE AND ADDING BOTH FEES TO THE CITY’S MASTER FEE SCHEDULE WHEREAS, the City of Pacifica Municipal Code (“PMC”) imposes upon all persons who excavate portions of the City’s pavement to service utility infrastructure the obligation to pay a Utility Pavement Cut Recovery Fee (PMC § 7-2.214 referred to herein as “Utility Cut Fee”); and WHEREAS, PMC section 7-2.214(b) empowers the City Council to establish the amount of the Utility Cut Fee by resolution; and
WHEREAS, the City contracted with NCE Consulting Engineers to study the impact of utility cuts on the City’s street network and to develop proposed fees related to these impacts; and
WHEREAS, NCE Consulting Engineers completed a study, in January 2022, to compare pavement performance for the street sections with and without cuts, quantify damage caused by utility cuts to the pavement within the City and to develop a fee schedule for the City to recover any costs associated with such damage (“Utility Cut Impact Fee Study”), which is attached to the staff report accompanying this resolution and incorporated herein by reference; and WHEREAS, the Utility Cut Impact Fee Study concluded that pavements with cuts of any size deteriorates more quickly than pavements without cuts across all pavement age groups, and therefore, utility cuts reduce the remaining service life of all pavement; WHEREAS, the City Council desires to ensure that persons engaging in utility cuts pay for the impacts to the City’s pavement; and
WHEREAS, the Utility Cut Impact Fee Study establishes that there is a reasonable relationship between the amount of the proposed Utility Cut Fee and the additional costs associated with repairing and maintaining pavement with utility cuts; and WHEREAS, the Utility Cut Fee adopted herein is considered a fee for the use of government Property pursuant to Article XIII C, section 1(e)(4), which excludes such fees from the definition of “tax;” and
WHEREAS, in the alternative, the Utility Cut Fee could also be exempt from the definition of “tax” under Article XIII C, section 1(e)(1) or (6); and WHEREAS, this Resolution does not conflict with provisions of State law, including but not limited to, Public Utilities Code sections 7901 and 12808 related to interstate telecommunications franchises because the fees hereunder are not charged for the same right granted by State law, but instead are charged to recover costs of mitigating the degradation that the excavation causes to City pavement and the increased cost to the City in reconstructing a street that has been patched following an excavation; and 11 Packet Pg. 313
Pacifica City Council 8
June 13, 2022
WHEREAS, this Resolution is in conformance with Section 253(C) of the Federal Telecommunications Act of 1996 which expressly recognizes the authority of local governments to impose reasonable nondiscriminatory fees upon telecommunications providers using the public right-of-way, as well as California Government Code 50030 which specifically authorizes the imposition of a permit fee that do not exceed the reasonable costs of providing the service for which the fee is charged; and
WHEREAS, the PMC requires that all individuals who obtain a building permit must pay a Construction Vehicle Impact Fee (PMC Chapter 8-21 referred to herein as “Construction Vehicle Impact Fee”); and
WHEREAS, Section 8-21.04 empowers the City Council to establish the amount of the Construction Vehicle Impact Fee by resolution; and
WHEREAS, NCE Consulting Engineers also completed a study to investigate damage caused to City streets by heavy construction vehicles related to the construction of development projects (“Construction Vehicle Impact Fee Study”), which is attached to the staff report accompanying this resolution and incorporated herein by reference; and WHEREAS, with regard to the impact of construction vehicles, the Construction Vehicle Impact Fee Study found that such vehicles contribute to the damage to City streets by reducing the life of the pavement; and
WHEREAS, the Construction Vehicle Impact Fee is necessary to address the impacts of construction vehicles on City roads; and
WHEREAS, this Resolution is in conformance with Vehicle Code section 9400.8 because it is a fee charged as a condition of development, not a fee for the use of City roads; and
WHEREAS, the Construction Vehicle Impact Fee is exempt from the definition of “tax” under Article XIII C, section 1(e)(6) because it is a charge imposed as a condition of property development; and
WHEREAS, the Construction Vehicle Impact Fee Study establishes that there is a reasonable relationship between the amount of the proposed Construction Vehicle Impact Fee and the costs of remedying the impacts to the City’s pavement caused by construction vehicles; and
WHEREAS, the staff report includes information that supports the City’s actions, as required by subdivision (a) of Section 66001 of the Government Code; and WHEREAS, the Construction Vehicle Impact Fee Study substantiates a methodology that will charge each new development project only for the costs necessary to mitigate the impacts expected to be caused by that development project; and
11 Packet Pg. 314
Pacifica City Council 9
June 13, 2022
WHEREAS, there is a reasonable relationship between the Construction Vehicle Impact Fees and the development projects on which the fees will be imposed because the fees will only fund costs necessitated by each new development; and WHEREAS, the Construction Vehicle Impact Fees will not exceed the estimated reasonable costs of providing the infrastructure improvements for which the fees are imposed; and
WHEREAS, the Construction Vehicle Impact Fees will not be levied, collected, or imposed for general revenue purposes, but are levied specifically to fund the restoration of the City’s pavement related to the impact of construction vehicles; and WHEREAS, the Construction Vehicle Impact Fee Study establishes proposed amounts and provides an evaluation of the need for new Construction Vehicle Impact Fees and establishes the nexus between the imposition of the new fees and the estimated reasonable costs of providing the services for which the fees are charged; and
WHEREAS, the Construction Vehicle Impact Fee Study identifies the City’s existing level of pavement quality, identifies the proposed new level of service, and includes an explanation of why the new level of service is appropriate; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Government Code section 66018 the enactment or increase in any fees to be charged for services must be adopted by the City Council by ordinance or resolution, after providing notice and holding a public hearing; and, WHEREAS, pursuant to Government Code sections 66018 and 6062a, a notice of a public hearing on the proposed fee schedule, including the proposed Utility Pavement Cut Recovery Fee and the proposed Construction Vehicle Impact Fee, was published on June 1, 2022 and June 8, 2022 in the Pacifica Tribune a newspaper of general circulation; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Government Code sections 66016 and 66016.5, notice of the 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, a duly noticed public hearing before the City Council was held on June 13, 2022 at which public testimony was received and duly considered on the proposed new fees; 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 66018; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT the City Council of the City of Pacifica hereby resolves as follows:
Section 1. Findings. The City Council finds and determines as follows:
a) The fees established are imposed for a specific government service provided directly to the payor and/or for the use of government property.
11 Packet Pg. 315
Pacifica City Council 10 June 13, 2022
b) The above recitals are correct and are material to this Resolution and are incorporated into this Resolution as findings of the City Council.
c) These fees are not subject to the requirements of Proposition 26. The fees are not a “tax” under Section 1(e) of Article XIII C of the California Constitution, since they do not exceed the reasonable costs to the City of providing the service or product or the City’s costs to address the impacts of development projects.
Section 2. Adoption of Fee Reports. The City Council approves and adopts the Utility Cut Impact Fee Study and the Construction Vehicle Impact Study and determines that they are consistent with the General Plan.
Section 3. Master Fee Schedule. The Utility Cut Impact Recovery Fee and the Construction Vehicle Impact Fee are hereby adopted at the rates set forth in Exhibit A and Exhibit B, respectively, which are attached hereto and incorporated by this reference. The new fees shall be incorporated into the Master Fee Schedule.
Section 4. Effective Date. This Resolution shall take effect 60 days after its adoption and shall be published or posted as required by law.
Section 5. Validity. The above recitations are true and correct, are material to the adoption of this Resolution, and are incorporated herein by reference.
Section 6. 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 7. 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. 11 Packet Pg. 316
Pacifica City Council 11 June 13, 2022
Section 8. 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 day of 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 11 Packet Pg. 317
Pacifica City Council 12 June 13, 2022
EXHIBIT A
11 Packet Pg. 318
City of Pacifica
Department of Public Works
155 Milagra Drive
Pacifica, CA 94044
Utility Cut Impact Assessment and Fee Development
Final Report
NCE Project No. 1004.05.55
Jan 2022
Richmond, CA
501 Canal Blvd., Suite I
Richmond, CA 94804
ATTACHMENT 1 11.a
Packet Pg. 319 Attachment: Attachment 1 - Utility Cut Impact Fee Report [Revision 1] (5013 : Resolution & Ordinances - Utility Cut Fee & Construction Vehicle Final Report
Utility Cut Impact Assessment and Fee Development
City of Pacifica
January 2022
Prepared for:
City of Pacifica
Department of Public Works
155 Milagra Drive
Pacifica, CA 94044
Prepared by:
Debaroti Ghosh, PhD
Project Engineer
Sharlan Montgomery Dunn, PhD
Project Engineer
Mei-Hui Lee, PhD, PE
Senior Engineer
NCE
501 Canal Blvd Suite I
Point Richmond, CA 94804
(510) 215-3620
NCE Project No. 1004.05.55
11.a
Packet Pg. 320 Attachment: Attachment 1 - Utility Cut Impact Fee Report [Revision 1] (5013 : Resolution & Ordinances - Utility Cut Fee & Construction Vehicle This Page Intentionally Left Blank
11.a
Packet Pg. 321 Attachment: Attachment 1 - Utility Cut Impact Fee Report [Revision 1] (5013 : Resolution & Ordinances - Utility Cut Fee & Construction Vehicle
UTILITY CUT IMPACT ASSESSMENT AND FEE DEVELOPMENT
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY CITY OF PACIFICA
FINAL REPORT JANUARY 2022
ES-1
Executive Summary
Interest in studying and quantifying the impact of utility cuts on road and street performance has been high for over 30 years. Public agencies, as well as utility companies, have sponsored engineering investigations and studies to quantify the impact of utility cuts on pavement performance and estimate the corresponding financial impacts.
The purpose of this study was to conduct a literature review on utility cut impacts in other agencies, estimate any damage caused by utility cuts to the pavements, and develop a fee schedule to recover the costs associated with such damage.
To accomplish this, NCE looked at both the structural and functional deterioration of pavements due to utility cuts. The field evaluation included selecting sixteen sites on city streets of different ages. Deflection testing using a falling weight deflectometer (FWD) was conducted to assess loss of structural capacity due to cuts. In addition, the City’s StreetSaver® database, which contains 15 years of pavement distress data and thousands of data points with a wide range of pavement age and conditions, was analyzed to assess the impact of utility cuts.
The findings from this study include:
• Pavements with cuts of any size deteriorate more than pavements without cuts across all age groups (0-5 years, 6-10 years, 11-15 years and >15 years). The exception is residentials older than 10 years with small cuts (cut area <10% of section area)
• On average, the PCI drops by 30% if the cut area is greater than 10% of the section area.
• Cuts do more damage to new (< 10 years) pavements than older (≥10 years) pavements. This results in an average percent reduction of the remaining service life of approximately 33% for new pavements and 17% for old pavements.
All these findings were used to develop fee schedule for the City of Pacifica which is shown in the table below.
Fee, $/SF
Functional
Class Age Group
Cut Area
(Percent of Section Area)
<10% of Section
Area
≥10% of Section
Area
Arterials/
Collectors
<10 years $ 2.50 $ 4.00
≥10 years $ 1.50 $ 2.50
Residential <10 years $ 1.50 $ 3.00
≥10 years $ 1.00 $ 2.50
11.a
Packet Pg. 322 Attachment: Attachment 1 - Utility Cut Impact Fee Report [Revision 1] (5013 : Resolution & Ordinances - Utility Cut Fee & Construction Vehicle
UTILITY CUT IMPACT ASSESSMENT AND FEE DEVELOPMENT
TABLE OF CONTENTS CITY OF PACIFICA
FINAL REPORT JANUARY 2022
i
Table of Contents
1 Introduction....................................................................................... 1
1.1 Background ..................................................................................... 1
1.2 Literature Review ............................................................................. 2 2 Technical Approach ............................................................................ 4
2.1 Structural evaluation ........................................................................ 5
2.2 Functional Evaluation........................................................................ 5 3 Structural Evaluation ......................................................................... 7
3.1 Site Selection .................................................................................. 7
3.2 Structural Deterioration..................................................................... 7 4 Functional Evaluation......................................................................... 9
4.1 Development of Performance Model .................................................... 9
4.2 PCI difference by Age Group and Cut Size.......................................... 10
4.3 Reduction in PCI............................................................................. 12
4.4 Percent Reduction in Pavement Life................................................... 13
4.5 Statistical Analysis.......................................................................... 17 5 Fee Development .............................................................................19
5.1 Approach for Tiered Fee .................................................................. 19
5.2 Fee Implementation........................................................................ 19
5.2.1 Large Pavement Cuts ................................................................ 19
5.2.2 Small Pavement Cuts ................................................................ 20
5.2.3 Examples of Fee Implementation ................................................ 21
5.3 Fee Comparison with other agencies ................................................. 23 6 Summary .........................................................................................25 7 References.......................................................................................26 Appendix A (Summary of Utility Cut Studies and Policies) ........................27
11.a
Packet Pg. 323 Attachment: Attachment 1 - Utility Cut Impact Fee Report [Revision 1] (5013 : Resolution & Ordinances - Utility Cut Fee & Construction Vehicle
UTILITY CUT IMPACT ASSESSMENT AND FEE DEVELOPMENT
TABLE OF CONTENTS CITY OF PACIFICA
FINAL REPORT JANUARY 2022
ii
List of Figures
Figure 1. Utility Cut Damage Mechanism .......................................................... 2 Figure 2. Technical Approach.......................................................................... 5 Figure 3. Examples of Site Selection................................................................ 7 Figure 4. FWD Testing Layout......................................................................... 8 Figure 5. Pavement Deterioration Curve for Cut and No-Cut Sections – Arterials and Collectors..................................................................................... 10 Figure 6. Pavement Deterioration Curve for Cut and No-Cut Sections - Residentials .................................................................................................. 10 Figure 7. PCI Comparison by Functional Class, Age Group and Cut Size – Arterials/Collectors ........................................................................ 11 Figure 8. PCI Comparison by Functional Class, Age Group and Cut Size – Residentials .................................................................................. 12 Figure 9 Pavement Deterioration Family Curves for Streets in the City of Pacifica . 14 Figure 10. Example of Percent Reduction in Life .............................................. 15 Figure 11. Percent Reduction in Pavement Service Life -Arterials/Collectors ........ 15 Figure 12. Percent Reduction in Pavement Service Life -Residentials .................. 16 Figure 13. Multiple Small Cuts ...................................................................... 20 Figure 14. One Large Cut............................................................................. 20 Figure 15. Examples of Fee Implementation for Typical 700'x30' Residential Street .................................................................................................. 22 Figure 16 Typical Full Block Trench Cut in Pacifica ........................................... 22
11.a
Packet Pg. 324 Attachment: Attachment 1 - Utility Cut Impact Fee Report [Revision 1] (5013 : Resolution & Ordinances - Utility Cut Fee & Construction Vehicle
UTILITY CUT IMPACT ASSESSMENT AND FEE DEVELOPMENT
TABLE OF CONTENTS CITY OF PACIFICA
FINAL REPORT JANUARY 2022
iii
List of Tables
Table 1. Experimental Design for Site Selection................................................. 7 Table 2. Reduction in PCI by Age Groups and Cut Size ..................................... 12 Table 3. Impact of PCI Reduction on Pavement Condition Category.................... 13 Table 4. Percent Reduction in Pavement Life by Functional Class, Pavement Age and Cut-Size....................................................................................... 17 Table 5. Statistical Analysis of StreetSaver® Data Grouped by Age and Cut-Size .. 18 Table 6. Tiered Fee Schedule ($/SF) (Option 1)............................................... 19 Table 7 Utility Cut Fee Schedule Range Comparison......................................... 24
11.a
Packet Pg. 325 Attachment: Attachment 1 - Utility Cut Impact Fee Report [Revision 1] (5013 : Resolution & Ordinances - Utility Cut Fee & Construction Vehicle
UTILITY CUT IMPACT ASSESSMENT AND FEE DEVELOPMENT
INTRODUCTION CITY OF PACIFICA
FINAL REPORT JANUARY 2022
1 1 Introduction
Utility companies often need to cut existing pavements to access and service their underground equipment. Ideally, all underground utility maintenance would be performed prior to pavement rehabilitation or reconstruction so that cuts are never made in new pavement structures. However, despite the best coordination, utility cuts cannot always be avoided because unanticipated work is often required to maintain essential public services.
Over the last 30 years, local agencies have been interested in understanding and quantifying the impact of utility cuts on pavement performance as well as the corresponding financial impacts. To obtain this information, public agencies, as well as utility companies, have sponsored engineering investigations and studies (Todres and Baker 1996). Many such studies are performed in-house or by consulting companies and are therefore unpublished or difficult to access. In addition, the impact of utility cuts on pavement performance can vary significantly based on site-and agency-specific information.
Thus, the purpose of this study was to compare pavement performance for the street sections with and without cuts, quantify damage caused by utility cuts to the pavements within the City of Pacifica (City) and develop a fee schedule for the City to recover any costs associated with such damage.
1.1 BACKGROUND
Studies of utility cut impacts often use deflection testing, condition surveys, and statistical analyses to quantify reduced pavement performance as a loss in structural capacity and a decrease in pavement condition. To manage the identified impacts, many studies have recommended restoring additional areas surrounding the cut, increasing the overlay thickness, or imposing a restoration fee on utility companies.
These studies and recommendations have led to an increase in public policies that 1) compensate local agencies for the loss of pavement life caused by utility cuts through a utility cut fee, and 2) achieve more acceptable performance of repair work following underground utility access and maintenance through rigorous utility cut restoration standards and moratoria, or “no-cut” periods.
The impact of utility cuts varies depending on a variety of factors, such as:
• Existing pavement condition, structure, and age
• Location, orientation, and extent of the utility cut
• Environmental factors
• Traffic loads
• Restoration practices and standards
11.a
Packet Pg. 326 Attachment: Attachment 1 - Utility Cut Impact Fee Report [Revision 1] (5013 : Resolution & Ordinances - Utility Cut Fee & Construction Vehicle
UTILITY CUT IMPACT ASSESSMENT AND FEE DEVELOPMENT
INTRODUCTION CITY OF PACIFICA
FINAL REPORT JANUARY 2022
2 Further, quantifying utility cut impacts also depends on local maintenance treatments and costs. Therefore, to really understand the impact of utility cuts on roadway performance for a particular agency, a site-specific study and analysis must be performed.
Underground utility work can damage pavements in three general ways, as illustrated in Figure 1.
Figure 1. Utility Cut Damage Mechanism
First, the act of cutting a pavement structure creates an easy-entry point for water that can damage the underlying pavement layers. Second, the removal of the pavement layers creates a plane of weakness where the pavement structure may not be adequately supported laterally – particularly during underground utility maintenance, but also after restoration. Third, the quality of the repair may not match the adjacent pavement structure, thus introducing roughness into the pavement.
Rough pavements can cause vehicles to bounce, which creates greater loads on the pavement and leads to more rapid deterioration (Tarakji 1995; Wilde et al. 2002).
These deterioration mechanisms reduce the condition and structural capacity of a pavement, which reduces the life of the pavement within and adjacent to the utility cut (Stevens et al. 2010). Multiple utility cuts on the same street or within a small area can magnify this impact (San Francisco Department of Public Works 1998, Tarakji 1995).
1.2 LITERATURE REVIEW
Research has shown that utility cuts can reduce pavement life by 15% to 55%, which consequently costs local agencies millions of dollars in premature street repair and remediation expenses. Studies have also shown that underground utility work affects not only the excavated area, but often weakens the adjacent pavement. The affected
11.a
Packet Pg. 327 Attachment: Attachment 1 - Utility Cut Impact Fee Report [Revision 1] (5013 : Resolution & Ordinances - Utility Cut Fee & Construction Vehicle
UTILITY CUT IMPACT ASSESSMENT AND FEE DEVELOPMENT
INTRODUCTION CITY OF PACIFICA
FINAL REPORT JANUARY 2022
3 pavement varies based on agency and location but is typically 4 to 5 feet from the edge of the trench.
To help restore some of the lost structural capacity and performance due to cutting the pavement, many agencies have set restoration standards. Restoration standards in California typically include a T-Cut along with a restoration treatment that may be as extensive as replacing the full lane for the entire affected block.
To recover the cost of pavement damage associated with performing underground utility work, many agencies impose utility cut fees. In California, these fees are typically based on factors including functional classification, pavement age, Pavement Condition Index (PCI), and/or utility cut depth and orientation (longitudinal or transverse).
As evidenced by the variety of studies, standards, policies, and fees presented in Appendix A, the impact of utility cuts on roadway performance can vary significantly based on site-and agency-specific information. Therefore, to really understand and quantify the impact of utility cuts on roadway performance for a particular agency, a site-specific study and analysis must be performed. In addition, utility cut fees should be updated regularly to reflect accurate and current damage costs.
Appendix A discusses the impact of utility cuts on pavement performance, details the importance of adequate utility cut restoration, and summarizes the policies in place by various California agencies to address pavement degradation caused by utility cuts.
11.a
Packet Pg. 328 Attachment: Attachment 1 - Utility Cut Impact Fee Report [Revision 1] (5013 : Resolution & Ordinances - Utility Cut Fee & Construction Vehicle
UTILITY CUT IMPACT ASSESSMENT AND FEE DEVELOPMENT
TECHNICAL APPROACH CITY OF PACIFICA
FINAL REPORT JANUARY 2022
4 2 Technical Approach
Based on the relevant studies reviewed, it is clear that utility cuts have an overall negative impact on pavement performance. These impacts can take two forms:
• Structural – Reduced pavement strength
• Functional – Shortened pavement service life
Impact fees can be developed using either of the two approaches to compensate for shortened pavement service life or reduced pavement strength. Consequently, City streets both with and without cuts were evaluated in terms of both structural and functional deterioration in this study.
The structural deterioration is evaluated by measuring the overlay thickness needed to reach an acceptable structural capacity under a specified traffic load, usually expressed through the Traffic Index (TI). If the cut weakens the pavement structure, then the sections with cuts will require a higher overlay thickness than the sections with no cuts. The overlay thickness is calculated using deflection data obtained through falling weight deflectometer (FWD) testing following Caltrans Highway Design Manual. Deflection data can be used as measures to establish the relative loss of structural capacity resulting from the presence of utility cuts, where higher deflections represent weaker pavements. This loss of structural capacity necessitates thicker overlays, thus increasing the cost of rehabilitation for a street with utility cuts over the cost for a street without cuts.
The functional deterioration is evaluated in terms of “Pavement Condition Index (PCI),” which ranges from 0 to 100. Pavement in excellent condition have a PCI above 85, pavement in good condition have a PCI between 70 and 84, pavements in fair condition have a PCI between 50 and 69, pavement in poor condition have a PCI between 25 and 49, and pavements in failed condition have a PCI below 25. Note that these condition categories are consistent with those presented in the City’s Budget Options Report with one modification—the excellent condition category was added to provide an additional data point during the analysis portion of this study.
The PCI is calculated from pavement distress data collected through visual inspection surveys. The degree of pavement deterioration is affected by the types of distresses found as well as the severity and quantity of those distresses. It is expected that the PCI of the sections with cuts will be lower than the PCI of sections without cuts.
The flowchart shown in Figure 2 presents the methodology for this study where both structural and functional deterioration approaches were used to evaluate the pavement damage due to the cuts. As shown, the functional deterioration approach was conducted using distress data from the StreetSaver® database and field testing was used to estimate loss in structural capacity due to cuts (structural deterioration approach).
11.a
Packet Pg. 329 Attachment: Attachment 1 - Utility Cut Impact Fee Report [Revision 1] (5013 : Resolution & Ordinances - Utility Cut Fee & Construction Vehicle
UTILITY CUT IMPACT ASSESSMENT AND FEE DEVELOPMENT
TECHNICAL APPROACH CITY OF PACIFICA
FINAL REPORT JANUARY 2022
5 Figure 2. Technical Approach
2.1 STRUCTURAL EVALUATION
The following tasks were performed for the field evaluation:
• Selected 16 sites with and without cuts.
• Conducted deflection testing and coring.
• Calculated and compared overlay thicknesses for the sections with and without cuts.
2.2 FUNCTIONAL EVALUATION
To perform a rigorous analysis using this approach, a pavement management system (PMS) database that contains sufficient historical data to allow comparison of streets with and without utility cuts is required. The city has a robust PMS (StreetSaver®) containing pavement distress data from the last 15 years with thousands of data points.
The following tasks were completed as part of this evaluation:
• Exported PCI inspection history.
• Sorted PCI by distress type (with and without utility cuts). • Extracted last rehabilitation dates or construction dates for the sections to derive age of the pavement.
• Compared the PCIs of the sections with and without cuts by functional class and age group.
11.a
Packet Pg. 330 Attachment: Attachment 1 - Utility Cut Impact Fee Report [Revision 1] (5013 : Resolution & Ordinances - Utility Cut Fee & Construction Vehicle
UTILITY CUT IMPACT ASSESSMENT AND FEE DEVELOPMENT
TECHNICAL APPROACH CITY OF PACIFICA
FINAL REPORT JANUARY 2022
6 • Developed pavement deterioration curves based on inspection history for sections with and without utility cuts.
• Calculated and compared the percent reduction in life by functional class, age group and size of the cut from the pavement deterioration curves.
11.a
Packet Pg. 331 Attachment: Attachment 1 - Utility Cut Impact Fee Report [Revision 1] (5013 : Resolution & Ordinances - Utility Cut Fee & Construction Vehicle
UTILITY CUT IMPACT ASSESSMENT AND FEE DEVELOPMENT
STRUCTURAL EVALUATION CITY OF PACIFICA
FINAL REPORT JANUARY 2022
7 3 Structural Evaluation
3.1 SITE SELECTION
Sixteen sites were selected; each site had a section with a cut and one without a cut (Figure 3 has examples of test sites). The variables in the experiment design were functional class and age group. Table 1 below shows the planned versus actual site selection in each age group. Ideally, approximately four sites would have been identified in each age group.
Figure 3. Examples of Site Selection
Table 1. Experimental Design for Site Selection
Functional
Class
Pavement Age at Time of Cut,
years
No. of Sites in Each
Age Group
Plan Actual
Arterials/
Collectors or
Residentials
0-5 4 3
5-10 4 2
10-15 4 0
>15 4 11
However, as can be seen from Table 1, the sites were not well-distributed among different age groups as 69% of the sections were older than 15 years at the time of the cut. This is due to the lack of testing sites that met the age criteria and cut-size criteria to conduct the deflection testing and consequently, the analysis is skewed towards older pavements.
3.2 STRUCTURAL DETERIORATION
Deflection testing was performed using an FWD, which delivers a transient impulse load to the pavement surface and measures the resultant pavement response in terms of deflection. Testing was conducted along the cut, 2 feet away from the cut as well as on sections with no cuts (see Figure 4).
11.a
Packet Pg. 332 Attachment: Attachment 1 - Utility Cut Impact Fee Report [Revision 1] (5013 : Resolution & Ordinances - Utility Cut Fee & Construction Vehicle
UTILITY CUT IMPACT ASSESSMENT AND FEE DEVELOPMENT
STRUCTURAL EVALUATION CITY OF PACIFICA
FINAL REPORT JANUARY 2022
8 Figure 4. FWD Testing Layout
Since the selected sites were not well-distributed among different age groups, it was not possible to develop performance trends based on pavement age. Therefore, the results were not incorporated in the remainder of this assessment.
It is important to mention that the lack of the structural analysis results does not impact the development of a fee; again, as was noted in Chapter 2, fees can be developed using either structural or functional approaches. For this study, the functional deterioration approach was utilized and is further discussed in the subsequent chapters.
11.a
Packet Pg. 333 Attachment: Attachment 1 - Utility Cut Impact Fee Report [Revision 1] (5013 : Resolution & Ordinances - Utility Cut Fee & Construction Vehicle
UTILITY CUT IMPACT ASSESSMENT AND FEE DEVELOPMENT
FUNCTIONAL EVALUATION CITY OF PACIFICA
FINAL REPORT JANUARY 2022
9 4 Functional Evaluation
The City maintains a StreetSaver® PMS, which contains inspection data dating back to 2001. The StreetSaver® database contains an inventory of all the City’s streets, which are divided into management sections. For each management section, one or more sample units were surveyed for pavement condition based on a 10% sampling rate. Using the surveyed distresses, the PCI for each sample unit was calculated according to ASTM D6433.
Since the condition of the sample units is representative of the overall condition of the management section, the average PCI for all sample units within a management section is the PCI for that management section. The database contains 15 years of inspection history with approximately 1,500 sample units that include a recorded rehabilitation date for the corresponding management sections. Only sample units for sections with known rehabilitation dates were used for this study because pavement age is a crucial variable for this analysis and the rehabilitation date provides an estimate of pavement age. The observations based on the analysis of sample units could be used for management sections.
This study analyzed the following relationships between utility cuts and pavement performance based on three variables:
1. Different functional class (arterials/collectors versus residentials)
2. Different pavement age groups (0-5 years, 6-10 years, 11-15 years and >15 years)
3. Different sizes of cuts (small, medium and large)
4.1 DEVELOPMENT OF PERFORMANCE MODEL
Pavement deterioration curves of cut and no-cut sections for arterials/collectors and residentials were developed using the historical data from the City’s database. These curves are shown in Figures 5 and 6.
These curves indicate the following:
• For arterials/collectors, overall sections with cuts deteriorate more rapidly than sections without cuts within all age groups.
• For residentials, the above observation is true for pavements less than 15 years old. Some streets more than 15 years did not exhibit this trend due to the existing distresses present.
11.a
Packet Pg. 334 Attachment: Attachment 1 - Utility Cut Impact Fee Report [Revision 1] (5013 : Resolution & Ordinances - Utility Cut Fee & Construction Vehicle
UTILITY CUT IMPACT ASSESSMENT AND FEE DEVELOPMENT
FUNCTIONAL EVALUATION CITY OF PACIFICA
FINAL REPORT JANUARY 2022
10 Figure 5. Pavement Deterioration Curve for Cut and No-Cut Sections – Arterials and Collectors
Figure 6. Pavement Deterioration Curve for Cut and No-Cut Sections - Residentials
4.2 PCI DIFFERENCE BY AGE GROUP AND CUT SIZE
Next, the sample units of different functional classes were grouped by cut size within different age groups (0-5 years, 6-10 years, 11-15 years and >15 years) for further evaluation. Different cut sizes ranging between 0.2% to 77.3% of the sample unit area were analyzed and finally categorized into two groups; cut area <10% (small cuts) and cut area ≥10% (large cuts) of sample unit area. The selection of this threshold is discussed in the next section.
11.a
Packet Pg. 335 Attachment: Attachment 1 - Utility Cut Impact Fee Report [Revision 1] (5013 : Resolution & Ordinances - Utility Cut Fee & Construction Vehicle
UTILITY CUT IMPACT ASSESSMENT AND FEE DEVELOPMENT
FUNCTIONAL EVALUATION CITY OF PACIFICA
FINAL REPORT JANUARY 2022
11 However, very few data points were available for streets older than 15 years and a small sample size (N<5) can affect the reliability of analysis because it leads to a higher variability, which may lead to bias. Consequently, data points for all streets older than 10 years were grouped together to ensure avoid the bias. The PCI of cut and no-cut sections in each group were then compared.
Figures 7 and 8 show the PCI comparison for arterials/collectors and residentials, respectively. These figures indicate the following:
• Overall PCI decreases with pavement age.
• The PCI decreases as the cut size increases.
Note that data points for newer residential streets with large cuts were not available.
Figure 7. PCI Comparison by Functional Class, Age Group and Cut Size – Arterials/Collectors
11.a
Packet Pg. 336 Attachment: Attachment 1 - Utility Cut Impact Fee Report [Revision 1] (5013 : Resolution & Ordinances - Utility Cut Fee & Construction Vehicle
UTILITY CUT IMPACT ASSESSMENT AND FEE DEVELOPMENT
FUNCTIONAL EVALUATION CITY OF PACIFICA
FINAL REPORT JANUARY 2022
12 Figure 8. PCI Comparison by Functional Class, Age Group and Cut Size – Residentials
4.3 REDUCTION IN PCI
Table 2 below presents reduction in PCI within each age group based on cut-size.
Table 2. Reduction in PCI by Age Groups and Cut Size
Functional
Class Age Group Percent Reduction in PCI by Cut Size*
Small Cut Large Cut
Arterials/
Collectors
0-5 years 13% 36%
6-10 years 14% 34%
>10 years 11% 32%
Residential
0-5 years 6% -
6-10 years 8% 16%
>10 years 1% 30%
*Represents the amount the PCI of the section would be reduced compared to a no-cut section
Small cut =Cut Area <10% of Section Area
Large cut =Cut Area ≥10% of Section Area
Table 2 indicates the following:
• Overall, an average PCI reduction of approximately 10% was observed if the cut area was less than 10% of the section area.
• If the cut area was equal to or greater than 10% of the sample unit area, overall, an average PCI reduction of 30% was observed (34% for arterials/collectors and 23% for residentials). Note that residentials within the0-5 year age group and with large cuts were not included in the average.
11.a
Packet Pg. 337 Attachment: Attachment 1 - Utility Cut Impact Fee Report [Revision 1] (5013 : Resolution & Ordinances - Utility Cut Fee & Construction Vehicle
UTILITY CUT IMPACT ASSESSMENT AND FEE DEVELOPMENT
FUNCTIONAL EVALUATION CITY OF PACIFICA
FINAL REPORT JANUARY 2022
13 Based on the PCI range, pavements are assigned one of five condition categories (Table 3). A 30% reduction in PCI means that the pavement condition drops an entire condition category. An example is shown below in Table 3, where large cuts made to the pavements result in PCI drops that bring the pavement to a lower condition category. This means that a street requiring a slurry seal would now need a thin overlay because of the presence of a large cut and this further triggers a higher treatment unit cost for maintenance.
This analysis indicates cut sizes equal to or above 10% of the section area have a critical impact on pavement performance and more expensive restoration measures need to be considered on bigger cuts.
Table 3. Impact of PCI Reduction on Pavement Condition Category Condition Category PCI Range
Examples
No-Cut
Section PCI
Cut Section PCI after
30% Reduction
(Cut Area≥10%)
I- Excellent 85-100 90 -
I- Very Good/Good 70-85 80 -
II/III- Fair 50-70 60 63, 56
IV- Poor 25-50 35 42
V- Failed 0-25 24
4.4 PERCENT REDUCTION IN PAVEMENT LIFE
The percent reduction in pavement service life was next estimated using the StreetSaver® family deterioration curves for asphalt concrete (AC) streets. Those family deterioration curves are illustrated in Figure 9.
Based on the standard Remaining Service Life (RSL) definition, a pavement’s RSL reaches zero when a pavement falls into failed condition, meaning it has a PCI of 24 or less. Consequently, residentials have a total service life of approximately 34 years, while arterials/collectors have a total service life of approximately 29.5 years.
11.a
Packet Pg. 338 Attachment: Attachment 1 - Utility Cut Impact Fee Report [Revision 1] (5013 : Resolution & Ordinances - Utility Cut Fee & Construction Vehicle
UTILITY CUT IMPACT ASSESSMENT AND FEE DEVELOPMENT
FUNCTIONAL EVALUATION CITY OF PACIFICA
FINAL REPORT JANUARY 2022
14 Figure 9 Pavement Deterioration Family Curves for Streets in the City of Pacifica For example (see Figure 10), an arterial/collector (aged 0-to-5 years) with no cut has a PCI of 89. Based on the analysis in the previous section, a cut area greater than 10% of the section area would drop the PCI to 57. A PCI of 89 for arterials/collectors corresponds to an equivalent service life of approximately 2 years, whereas a PCI of 57 corresponds to an equivalent service life of 19 years. Consequently, the cut in this example reduces the pavement service life by 17 years, or 58% of its 29.5-year service life.
The above calculation was performed for both functional classes in all age groups and for all cut sizes to estimate the percent reduction in pavement service life and illustrated in the Figures 11 and 12.
RSL=0 at
29.5 yrs
RSL=0
at 34 yrs
11.a
Packet Pg. 339 Attachment: Attachment 1 - Utility Cut Impact Fee Report [Revision 1] (5013 : Resolution & Ordinances - Utility Cut Fee & Construction Vehicle
UTILITY CUT IMPACT ASSESSMENT AND FEE DEVELOPMENT
FUNCTIONAL EVALUATION CITY OF PACIFICA
FINAL REPORT JANUARY 2022
15 Figure 10. Example of Percent Reduction in Life
Figure 11. Percent Reduction in Pavement Service Life -Arterials/Collectors 2 18 29
11.a
Packet Pg. 340 Attachment: Attachment 1 - Utility Cut Impact Fee Report [Revision 1] (5013 : Resolution & Ordinances - Utility Cut Fee & Construction Vehicle
UTILITY CUT IMPACT ASSESSMENT AND FEE DEVELOPMENT
FUNCTIONAL EVALUATION CITY OF PACIFICA
FINAL REPORT JANUARY 2022
16 Figure 12. Percent Reduction in Pavement Service Life -Residentials Figures 11 and 12 indicate the following:
• The reduction in pavement life decreases as pavements get older; this means that cuts have a greater impact on new pavements than old pavements. • Larger cut sizes result in greater reductions in pavement service life. An average pavement life is reduced by approximately 38% if the cut area is equal to or greater than 10% of the section area.
Also, multiple small cuts on one street combined that when add up to more than 10% of the section area would be more detrimental than small- or medium-sized cuts on streets that total less than 10% of the section area.
Table 4 summarizes the percent reduction in pavement life based on functional class, pavement age, and cut size following the analysis in the previous sections. Since data was not available for residential streets within age group of 0-5 years with large cuts, streets newer than 10 years were grouped together which resulted in two final age groups (Age < 10 years and Age ≥ 10 years) for both functional classes.
11.a
Packet Pg. 341 Attachment: Attachment 1 - Utility Cut Impact Fee Report [Revision 1] (5013 : Resolution & Ordinances - Utility Cut Fee & Construction Vehicle
UTILITY CUT IMPACT ASSESSMENT AND FEE DEVELOPMENT
FUNCTIONAL EVALUATION CITY OF PACIFICA
FINAL REPORT JANUARY 2022
17 Table 4. Percent Reduction in Pavement Life by Functional Class, Pavement Age and Cut-Size
Percent Reduction in Pavement Service Life*
Functional Class Age Group Small Cut Large Cut
Arterials/ Collectors <10 years 25% 55%
≥10 years 10% 25%
Residentials <10 years 15% 40%
≥10 years 2% 35%
*Represents the amount the service life of the section would be reduced compared to a nocut section Small cut =Cut Area <10% of Section Area
Large cut =Cut Area ≥10% of Section Area
4.5 STATISTICAL ANALYSIS
A statistical analysis was next conducted on the data from StreetSaver® to determine whether significant differences in the PCI exist between pavements with cuts and those without cuts within the groups specified in Table 4. The t-test was performed within each pavement age group to compare the cut and no-cut sample units. The ttest provides a “P-value” that indicates the probability of a statement being true or how likely a particular set of observations would occur. In this case, the goal is to determine if the probability of two groups of data (PCI of cut and no-cut sample units) are significantly different.
• A P-value less than 0.05 (at a 95% confidence level) indicates that the PCI of the cut sample units are significantly lower than PCI of no-cut sample units. Thus, it is expected that cuts would have an adverse impact on the pavement. • A P-value above 0.05 indicates that the PCI of cut and no-cut sample units are not statistically significant.
As can be seen from Table 5, residential streets older than 10 years do not have a significant difference if the cuts are small (less than 10% of the section area). A Pvalue of 0.32 in Table 5 indicates that the probability of not finding any adverse impact due to small cuts on residential streets older than 10 years is 32%.
However, if multiple small cuts are made over time (as is the case for most streets), their individual impacts will add up and have an equivalent impact of a large cut, thus resulting in an adverse impact on pavement performance.
11.a
Packet Pg. 342 Attachment: Attachment 1 - Utility Cut Impact Fee Report [Revision 1] (5013 : Resolution & Ordinances - Utility Cut Fee & Construction Vehicle
UTILITY CUT IMPACT ASSESSMENT AND FEE DEVELOPMENT
FUNCTIONAL EVALUATION CITY OF PACIFICA
FINAL REPORT JANUARY 2022
18 Table 5. Statistical Analysis of StreetSaver® Data Grouped by Age and Cut-Size Category Age
Group
PCI
No-Cut
Section
PCI
Cut-Section P-Value Significant Difference
FC Small
Cut
Large
Cut
Small
Cut
Large
Cut
Small
Cut
Large
Cut
Arterials/
Collectors
<10 years 83 72 53 0.00 0.00 Yes Yes
≥10 years 61 56 42 0.02 0.04 Yes Yes
Residentials <10 years 89 82 73 0.00 0.00 Yes Yes
≥10 years 67 66 47 0.32 0.00 No* Yes
*Although individual small cuts do not show a significant difference, there is a cumulative impact from multiple small cuts. Over time, this impact will be equivalent to a section with large cuts.
11.a
Packet Pg. 343 Attachment: Attachment 1 - Utility Cut Impact Fee Report [Revision 1] (5013 : Resolution & Ordinances - Utility Cut Fee & Construction Vehicle
UTILITY CUT IMPACT ASSESSMENT AND FEE DEVELOPMENT
FEE DEVELOPMENT CITY OF PACIFICA
FINAL REPORT JANUARY 2022
19 5 Fee Development
5.1 APPROACH FOR TIERED FEE
To calculate a cost value equivalent to pavement life reduction, the StreetSaver® decision tree was used to extract unit costs for overlays (including milling) for each functional class. These unit costs were estimated using the City’s construction bid tabs. The costs were $6.25 per square foot (SF) for arterials/collectors and $5.25/SF for residentials.
These unit costs were multiplied by the percent reductions in service life in Table 4 and a slurry seal cost ($0.50/SF) was then added to derive a fee per square foot based on pavement age and cut size (the slurry seal is part of the restoration requirements after the cut have been made). Table 6 presents the fees rounded to the nearest 50 cents based on functional class, pavement age and cut size.
Table 6. Tiered Fee Schedule ($/SF) (Option 1)
Fee, $/SF
Functional
Class Age Group
Cut Area
(% of Section Area)
Small Cut Large Cut
Arterials/
Collectors
<10 years $ 2.50 $ 4.00
≥10 years $ 1.50 $ 2.50
Residential <10 years $ 1.50 $ 3.00
≥10 years $ 1.00 $ 2.50
5.2 FEE IMPLEMENTATION
Table 6 can be used to charge the full recovery costs for the damage caused by the cuts. Note that “section area” for fee implementation is defined here as City’s individual management section area from StreetSaver®. The typical management section area obtained from the StreetSaver® database for residential streets (700 feet x 30 feet) or arterials/collectors streets (1,274 feet x 40 feet) could be used as representative average section area. However, actual street areas or block areas can be utilized with similar implementation strategy if desired.
5.2.1 Large Pavement Cuts
The analysis in Chapter 4 showed that large cuts have (cut area equal to or greater than 10% of the section area) critical impact on pavement performance and results in the pavement condition dropping by an entire condition category. In addition, it also results in a 30% reduction in the pavement service life. Therefore, large cuts equal to or greater than 10% of the section area would trigger a more aggressive restoration measure e.g., overlay of the entire section.
The following fee equation was developed for large cuts:
11.a
Packet Pg. 344 Attachment: Attachment 1 - Utility Cut Impact Fee Report [Revision 1] (5013 : Resolution & Ordinances - Utility Cut Fee & Construction Vehicle
UTILITY CUT IMPACT ASSESSMENT AND FEE DEVELOPMENT
FEE DEVELOPMENT CITY OF PACIFICA
FINAL REPORT JANUARY 2022
20 𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇 𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅 𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅 𝐹𝐹 , $ = 𝑈𝑈𝑈𝑈𝑈𝑈 𝐶𝐶 𝐶𝐶 𝑓𝑓 𝑓𝑓 𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇 6 ∗ 𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇 𝑀𝑀 𝑀𝑀 𝑆𝑆 𝐴𝐴 𝑂𝑂 Eqn 1
If the utility cut area is large enough (either singly or in combination) to require an overlay, then the responsible party(ies) will pay the full amount of the overlay cost.
5.2.2 Small Pavement Cuts
For small cuts, the fees in Table 6 need to be pro-rated so that their individual impacts are captured (see Figures 13 and 14). Over time, as multiple small cuts are made, their impacts will be cumulative and eventually be equivalent to the impact of a large cut.
For example, the fee for a large cut (10% of section area) would be the total overlay cost (100%) as mentioned in Section 5.2.1 while the fee for a small cut (2% of section area) would be (2/10)%= 20% of the total overlay cost.
(Multiple small cuts can add up to 10% of the section area, and their impacts are pro-rated accordingly)
Figure 13. Multiple Small Cuts
(A 3-foot side trench cut that is the length of the section will be = 10% of section area) Figure 14. One Large Cut
This is illustrated in the steps below.
𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇 𝑂𝑂 𝐶𝐶 𝐶𝐶 , $ = 𝑈𝑈𝑈𝑈𝑈𝑈 𝐶𝐶 𝐶𝐶 ∗ 𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇 𝑀𝑀 𝑀𝑀 𝑆𝑆 𝐴𝐴 𝑂𝑂 Eqn 2
11.a
Packet Pg. 345 Attachment: Attachment 1 - Utility Cut Impact Fee Report [Revision 1] (5013 : Resolution & Ordinances - Utility Cut Fee & Construction Vehicle
UTILITY CUT IMPACT ASSESSMENT AND FEE DEVELOPMENT
FEE DEVELOPMENT CITY OF PACIFICA
FINAL REPORT JANUARY 2022
21 Eq 2 with the unit costs from Table 6 is applicable for the sections with cuts equal to or greater than 10% of the total section area.
If Area of Cut ≥10% Area of Section:
𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇 𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅 𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅 𝐹𝐹 , $ = 𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇 𝑂𝑂 𝐶𝐶 𝐶𝐶 Eq 3 If Area of Cut < 10% Area of Section:
𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇 𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅 𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅 𝐹𝐹 , $ = � 𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴 𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜 𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶 10% 𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴 𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜 𝑀𝑀 𝑀𝑀 𝑀𝑀 𝑀𝑀 𝑀𝑀 𝑆𝑆 𝑆𝑆 𝑆𝑆 � ∗ 𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇 𝑂𝑂 𝐶𝐶 𝐶𝐶 Eq 4 Incorporating Unit Costs:
𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇 𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅 𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅 𝐹𝐹 , $ = � 𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴 𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜 𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶 10% 𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴 𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜 𝑀𝑀 𝑀𝑀 𝑀𝑀 𝑆𝑆 𝑆𝑆 𝑆𝑆 � ∗ (𝑈𝑈𝑈𝑈𝑈𝑈 𝐶𝐶 𝐶𝐶 ∗ 𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇 𝑀𝑀 𝑀𝑀 𝑆𝑆 𝐴𝐴 ) Eq 5
Simplifying, by eliminating Area of Section:
𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇 𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅 𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅 𝐹𝐹 , $ = �
𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴 𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜 𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶
10% � ∗ 𝑈𝑈𝑈𝑈𝑈𝑈 𝐶𝐶 𝐶𝐶 (𝐹𝐹 𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇 6) Eq 6
An additional 2-feet in each direction is included in the fee calculation to incorporate 2-foot zone of influence surrounding the cut area because a slumping effect is usually predominant. Thus, the following fee equation for small cuts would be:
𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇 𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅 𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅 𝐹𝐹 , $ = 𝑈𝑈𝑈𝑈𝑈𝑈 𝐶𝐶 𝐶𝐶 (𝐹𝐹 𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇 6) ∗ (𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶 𝐿𝐿 ℎ + 2′ + 2′ ) ∗ (𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶 𝑊𝑊 𝑊𝑊 ℎ + 2′ +
2′
)/10% = 𝑈𝑈𝑈𝑈𝑈𝑈 𝐶𝐶 𝐶𝐶 (𝐹𝐹 𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇 6) ∗ (𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶 𝐿𝐿 ℎ + 4′
) ∗ (𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶 𝑊𝑊 𝑊𝑊 ℎ + 4′
)/10% Eq 7
5.2.3 Examples of Fee Implementation
Figure 15 presents three examples of cuts of different sizes on residential streets.
Based on the StreetSaver® database, the typical length and width of a residential management section in the City is 700 feet by 30 feet. Thus, if a cut of 4 feet x 4 feet is made to a residential street that is less than 10 years old, it would be only
0.1% of the section area and the fee charged would be $1.50/SF (Table 6).
A similar fee would be applied for a cut of 30 feet x 6 feet, where the cut area is 1% of the section area.
For large cuts, we observed many full-block longitudinal trench cuts (Figure 16). A cut of this type would be equal to or greater than 10% of the section area and thus $3.00/SF would be charged for the full recovery.
11.a
Packet Pg. 346 Attachment: Attachment 1 - Utility Cut Impact Fee Report [Revision 1] (5013 : Resolution & Ordinances - Utility Cut Fee & Construction Vehicle
UTILITY CUT IMPACT ASSESSMENT AND FEE DEVELOPMENT
FEE DEVELOPMENT CITY OF PACIFICA
FINAL REPORT JANUARY 2022
22 Example 1
Example 2
Example 3
Figure 15. Examples of Fee Implementation for Typical 700'x30' Residential Street Figure 16 Typical Full Block Trench Cut in Pacifica
11.a
Packet Pg. 347 Attachment: Attachment 1 - Utility Cut Impact Fee Report [Revision 1] (5013 : Resolution & Ordinances - Utility Cut Fee & Construction Vehicle
UTILITY CUT IMPACT ASSESSMENT AND FEE DEVELOPMENT
FEE DEVELOPMENT CITY OF PACIFICA
FINAL REPORT JANUARY 2022
23 5.3 FEE COMPARISON WITH OTHER AGENCIES
Utility cut fees are prevalent as a way for local agencies to recoup the cost of pavement damage associated with underground utility work. Table 7 summarizes various utility cut fees for agencies throughout California. These fees are based on factors including functional classification, pavement age, PCI, and/or utility cut depth and orientation (longitudinal or transverse). The fees, in dollars per area, are multiplied by the utility cut area to obtain a dollar value that represents the damage done to the pavement.
As can be seen from Table 7, the proposed fee range in Pacifica aligns very closely with the fee in the City and County of San Francisco where the range is $1.00/SF to $3.50/SF. When compared with longitudinal cut fees from other agencies, the proposed utility cut fee for Pacifica is in the same ballpark as many of the other agencies. The transverse cut fees for other agencies are higher than the fees proposed for Pacifica. When comparing fees among different agencies, it is important to consider that the overall pavement condition varies among different agencies and thus the performance of pavements with cuts are critical to existing condition.
11.a
Packet Pg. 348 Attachment: Attachment 1 - Utility Cut Impact Fee Report [Revision 1] (5013 : Resolution & Ordinances - Utility Cut Fee & Construction Vehicle
UTILITY CUT IMPACT ASSESSMENT AND FEE DEVELOPMENT
FEE DEVELOPMENT CITY OF PACIFICA
FINAL REPORT JANUARY 2022
24 Table 7 Utility Cut Fee Schedule Range Comparison
Agency Criteria Range, $/SF
Pacifica Type of Street, Size of Cut, Age of
Pavement $1.00-$4.00
City and County of
San Francisco Age of Pavement $1.00-$3.50
Sacramento
County, Elk Grove,
Santa Cruz
Trench Depth, Type of Streets,
PCI, Type of Cut
$1.80-$3.90
(Longitudinal Cut and Trench Depth <4ft)
$2.36-$7.80
(Transverse Cut and Trench Depth <4ft)
$1.80-$5.91
(Longitudinal Cut and Trench Depth >4ft)
$3.60-$11.82
(Transverse Cut and Trench Depth >4ft)
Sacramento Type of Cut, Pavement Age
$1.00-$3.50
(Longitudinal Cut)
$2.00-$7.00
(Transverse Cut)
Modesto PCI $0-$2.50
Patterson PCI $0-$7.30
Santa Ana Type of Streets and Age of
Pavement $6.21-$13.68
Los Angeles Type of Street $8.24-$19.44
11.a
Packet Pg. 349 Attachment: Attachment 1 - Utility Cut Impact Fee Report [Revision 1] (5013 : Resolution & Ordinances -
UTILITY CUT IMPACT ASSESSMENT AND FEE DEVELOPMENT
SUMMARY CITY OF PACIFICA
FINAL REPORT JANUARY 2022
25 6 Summary
The purpose of this study was to conduct a detailed literature review of existing studies, determine the impact of utility cuts on pavement performance in Pacifica, quantify the damage and develop a fee to recover the costs associated with such damage.
Two approaches were utilized in this study based on both the functional and structural deterioration of the pavement. Due to the limited number of sites available among different age groups for the latter, the fee was developed using the functional approach.
The following conclusions were determined:
• Pavements with cuts of any size deteriorate more than pavements without cuts across all age groups (0-5 years, 6-10 years, 11-15 years and >15 years). The exception is residentials older than 10 years with small cuts (cut area <10% of section area)
• On average, the PCI drops by 30% if the cut area is greater than 10% of the section area.
• Cuts do more damage to new (< 10 years) pavements than older (>10 years) pavements. This results in an average percent reduction of the remaining service life of approximately 33% for new pavements and 17% for old pavements.
Finally, a fee schedule was developed to recover the full costs of repair for the damage caused by the cuts. The information required to implement this fee includes the functional class, age of the pavement, size of the management section area and size of the cut (see Tables 6).
11.a
Packet Pg. 350 Attachment: Attachment 1 - Utility Cut Impact Fee Report [Revision 1] (5013 : Resolution & Ordinances - Utility Cut Fee & Construction Vehicle
UTILITY CUT IMPACT ASSESSMENT AND FEE DEVELOPMENT
REFERENCES CITY OF PACIFICA
FINAL REPORT JANUARY 2022
26 7 References
Department of Public Works. 1998. The Impact of Excavation on San Francisco Streets. Department of Public Works, City and County of San Francisco and BlueRibbon Panel on Pavement Damage.
Tarakji, G. 1995. The Effects of Utility Cuts on the Service Life of Pavements in San Francisco. Volume I, Department of Public Works, San Francisco State University.
Todres, H.A. and Baker, P.E., 1996. Utilities Conduct Research in Pavement Restoration. APWA Reporter, 63(10).
Wilde, W.J., Grant, C.A., and Nelson, P.K. 2002. Manual for Controlling and Reducing the Frequency of Pavement Utility Cuts. FHWA Report No. FHWA-RD-02- %%%
11.a
Packet Pg. 351 Attachment: Attachment 1 - Utility Cut Impact Fee Report [Revision 1] (5013 : Resolution & Ordinances - Utility Cut Fee & Construction Vehicle
UTILITY CUT IMPACT ASSESSMENT AND FEE DEVELOPMENT
APPENDIX CITY OF PACIFICA
FINAL REPORT JANUARY 2022
Appendix A (Summary of Utility Cut Studies and Policies)
11.a
Packet Pg. 352 Attachment: Attachment 1 - Utility Cut Impact Fee Report [Revision 1] (5013 : Resolution & Ordinances - Utility Cut Fee & Construction Vehicle
MEMORANDUM
Date:
To:
From:
Subject:
Job Number:
July 31, 2021
City of Pacifica
Debaroti Ghosh, Sharlan Montgomery Dunn, Margot Yapp
Summary of Utility Cut Studies and Policies
1004.05.55
INTRODUCTION
Utility companies often need to cut existing pavements to access and service their underground equipment. Ideally, all underground utility maintenance would be performed prior to pavement rehabilitation or reconstruction so that cuts are never made in new pavement structures. However, despite the best coordination, utility cuts cannot always be avoided because unanticipated work is often required to maintain essential public services.
Over the last 30 years, local agencies have been interested in understanding and quantifying the impact of utility cuts on pavement performance as well as the corresponding financial impacts. To obtain this information, public agencies, as well as utility companies, have sponsored engineering investigations and studies (Todres and Baker 1996). Many such studies are performed in-house or by consulting companies and are therefore unpublished or difficult to access. These studies often use deflection testing, condition surveys, and statistical analyses to quantify reduced pavement performance as a loss in structural capacity and a decrease in pavement condition. To manage the identified impacts, many studies have recommended restoring additional area surrounding the cut, increasing the overlay thickness, or imposing a restoration fee on utility companies.
These studies and recommendations have led to an increase in public policies that 1) compensate local agencies for the loss of pavement life caused by utility cuts through a utility cut fee, and 2) achieve more acceptable performance of repair work following underground utility access and maintenance through rigorous utility cut restoration standards and moratoria, or “no cut”, periods.
This technical memorandum discusses the impact of utility cuts on pavement performance, details the importance of adequate utility cut restoration, and summarizes the policies in place by various California agencies to address pavement degradation caused by utility cuts.
11.a
Packet Pg. 353 Attachment: Attachment 1 - Utility Cut Impact Fee Report [Revision 1] (5013 : Resolution & Ordinances - Utility Cut Fee & Construction Vehicle July 31, 2021