Pacifica City Council
June 10, 2024

This DEIR evaluates the potential environmental effects of a project to construct a seawall that would extend along the base of the coastal bluff from the northern edge of the 300 Esplanade Avenue property to approximately the southern edge of the 340 Esplanade Avenue property, and revegetate the blufftop along the existing coastal bluff between 310 and 330 Esplanade Avenue in the City of Pacifica. The project includes utilizing the existing vacant blufftop areas at 310, 320 and 330 Esplanade Avenue, as well as the vacant blufftop area at the southern end of the 400 block of Esplanade Avenue adjacent to the existing beach access trail for equipment staging during construction of the project. The project includes using this trail as a temporary construction access for equipment to access the seawall construction site to the north via the beach below. The project does not include any construction on or improvements to any other portion of the 400 block of Esplanade Avenue. These proposed activities constitute a project under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The City of Pacifica (City) is the CEQA Lead Agency for the Project. The Coastal Commission, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), California State Lands Commission, and Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) are responsible agencies with permitting authority for the pProject.

Occurrences of Impact BIO-1, occurring on pages 2-3 bottom row, first column, and page

4.3-31 first paragraph:

Impact BIO-1: The Project could have a significant adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on special-status fish (steelhead, Coho salmon, and green sturgeon), Essential Fish Habitat (EFH), and American peregrine falcon, bank swallow, and other nesting birds.

Implementation of Mitigation Measures BIO-1a, 1b, and 1c, 1d, and 1e would reduce potential impacts to a less than significant level. (Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated).

Mitigation Measure BIO-1c: Bank Swallow Habitat Assessment Prior to initiating Project activities, a qualified biologist shall conduct a bank swallow habitat assessment of the cliff bluffs within and near the Project footprint. The habitat assessment will at minimum address the cliff face attributes of 1) slope, 2) vegetation cover, 3) soil type (e.g., friable soils), and 4) cliff height. Based on these and any other relevant attributes, the habitat assessment will identify potentially suitable bank swallow habitat. A qualified biologist is an individual who holds a bachelor’s degree from an accredited university and: 1) is knowledgeable in bank swallow

14.c
Packet Pg. 657 Attachment: Attachment C - Final Environmental Impact Report (Includes MMRP) (5680 : FEIR - 310-330 Esplanade Seawall) Chapter 4 Errata and Revisions
310-330 Esplanade Infrastructure Preservation Project City of Pacifica Final EIR 4-2 May 2024
and other relevant species’ life histories and ecology, 2) can correctly identify relevant species, 3) has conducted field surveys for relevant species, 4) is familiar with relevant survey protocols, and 5) is knowledgeable of state and federal laws regarding the protection of sensitive species.

If the habitat assessment described above identifies potentially suitable bank swallow habitat at or near the Project site, the qualified biologist shall identify whether the habitat can be avoided and if take of bank swallow could occur. If so, the qualified biologist shall prescribe avoidance, minimization and mitigation measures, in coordination with CDFW, as appropriate. An example of a measure could include restoration and enhancement of bank swallow habitat.

Mitigation Measure BIO-1d: Bank Swallow Incidental Take Permit If the Project has the potential to cause take of bank swallow, the City shall apply for and obtain a CESA Incidental Take Permit.

All references to Mitigation Measure “BIO-1c”, occurring on pages 2-8 third column, second paragraph, 4.3-31 first paragraph, 4.3-37 (fourth and fifth paragraphs), 4.3-40 fourth paragraph, 5-1 fourth paragraph, 5-10 second paragraph, and 5-20 fourth paragraph:

BIO-1c BIO-1e

The imperative to protect the coastal infrastructure with armoring arises from the imminent and ongoing threat of erosion along the bluff. Without intervention, the infrastructure, including the street itself (Esplanade Avenue), would be continuously exposed to the erosive forces of the coastline. The danger is perpetual, as erosion continues to degrade the coastal environment, jeopardizing critical elements.

The length of time at which such infrastructure is expected or likely to be in danger is indefinite without intervention. Coastal erosion is an ongoing process, and the rate of degradation will persist unless preventative measures are implemented. The threat extends not only to Esplanade Avenue but also to the broader coastal infrastructure network, including the potential risk of Highway 1 far down the line. This proactive approach aligns with the principles of sustainable coastal management, recognizing the necessity to act now to preserve the integrity and functionality of essential infrastructure for the benefit of the community in the face of ongoing coastal challenges.

The rationale as to why the armoring is proposed to extend slightly further south than 330 Esplanade is to ensure seamless integration with the existing shotcrete wall that exists at 360 Esplanade (CDP 2-08-020) to create a unified and resilient coastal protection system. In order to preserve the infrastructure between 310-330 Esplanade Avenue, the Project’s geotechnical report recommended that a continuous seawall be constructed along the base of the bluff. It stated that ideally, the seawall should overlap behind the existing seawall to the north (at Land’s End) and tie-in to the existing seawall to the south (at 360-380 Esplanade Avenue). Based on CSA’s evaluation of the neighboring seawalls to the north and south, the wall to the north does not appear

14.c
Packet Pg. 658 Attachment: Attachment C - Final Environmental Impact Report (Includes MMRP) (5680 : FEIR - 310-330 Esplanade Seawall) Chapter 4 Errata and Revisions
310-330 Esplanade Infrastructure Preservation Project City of Pacifica Final EIR 4-3 May 2024
to be providing satisfactory long‐term support to the lower portion of the bluff, and consequently the report recommended overlapping behind the wall to the north instead of connecting to it.

Conversely, the seawall to the south at 360/380 Esplanade Avenue appears to be providing satisfactory support to the bluff. The purpose of tying in to the existing seawall to the south would be to form a continuous barrier for bluff support against wave scour. The report stated that without adequate tie-in provisions, the potential for erosional out-flanking of the proposed seawall would be significantly increased.

The geotechnical report prepared for the project (refer to Appendix B) recommended that the seawall should overlap behind the existing seawall to the north (at Land’s End) and tie-in to the existing seawall to the south (at 360-380 Esplanade Avenue). Based on the report’s evaluation of the neighboring seawalls to the north and south, the wall to the north does not appear to be providing satisfactory long‐term support to the lower portion of the bluff, and consequently the report recommended overlapping behind the wall to the north instead of connecting to it.

Conversely, the seawall to the south at 360-380 Esplanade Avenue appears to be providing satisfactory support to the bluff. The purpose of tying into the existing seawall to the south would be to form a continuous barrier for bluff support against wave scour. The report stated that without adequate tie-in provisions, the potential for erosional out-flanking of the proposed seawall would be significantly increased.

Construction of the proposed seawall would occur on both weekdays and weekends. Because the construction requires a building permit from the City, the days and hours of construction would adhere to the provisions of the Pacifica Municipal Code Section 8-1.05 (Title 8. – Building Regulations, Chapter 1. – Building Code), which limits construction to the hours of 7:00 AM to 7:00 PM Monday through Friday, and from 9:00 AM to 5:00 PM on Saturday and Sunday.

Additionally, during the construction period for the Project, the City would install signage at the public path used for construction access and on the beach at the seawall construction site to notify the public of closures to these areas, in conformance with standard City protocols for construction projects in public areas.

Impact AES-3 – Public views are those that are experienced from publicly accessible vantage points. The Project would not substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of public views of the site and its surroundings or conflict with applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality. (Less Than Significant Impact) As noted above in response to Impact AES-1, the proposed Project installs a seawall and restoration plantings to protect the coastal bluff from further erosion. The construction method and design for the seawall proposed is similar to other seawall projects just north and south of the site as viewed from the beach. The construction plans for the Project specify that the finish facing of

14.c
Packet Pg. 659 Attachment: Attachment C - Final Environmental Impact Report (Includes MMRP) (5680 : FEIR - 310-330 Esplanade Seawall) Chapter 4 Errata and Revisions
310-330 Esplanade Infrastructure Preservation Project City of Pacifica Final EIR 4-4 May 2024
the seawall shall be colored, sculpted and stained to resemble the naturally occurring geologic formations, ensuring that the appearance of the seawall would match the surrounding bluff face as closely as possible. During construction, public views of the project site would change temporarily due to the presence and operation of various construction equipment, security fencing around work and staging areas, and construction vehicles entering and exiting the site, including from the designated access ramp near Manor Drive. Although views of the ocean from nearby residences and the adjacent Esplanade Avenue could be partially blocked by the equipment, materials, and stockpiles in the staging areas and access ramp, these changes would be temporary for the duration of construction as these visual obstructions would be removed once project construction is completed.

Because of the temporary nature of the construction of the Project, and because it proposes similar improvements to others currently in the area without significant changes to the existing grade of the bluff face and would be designed to match the appearance of the surrounding bluff face, the Project is not anticipated to result in a substantial degradation of the existing visual character or quality of the site from public vantage points. The Project would change the existing view on the blufftop from a flat, gravel, six-foot tall chain-linked fenced area devoid of vegetation, to a more natural state with various coastal scrub plantings, and would also include a paved path, benches, interpretive signage, and less prominent fencing. Therefore, the impact is considered less than significant.

American Peregrine Falcon (Falco peregrinus anatum)
The American peregrine falcon occurs throughout much of the world and is known as one of the fastest flying birds of prey. Peregrine falcons prey almost entirely on birds, which they kill while in flight. Peregrine falcons nest on ledges and caves on steep cliffs, as well as on human-made structures such as buildings, bridges, and electrical transmission towers. In California, they are known to nest along the entire coastline, the northern Coast Ranges, and the Cascade Ranges and Sierra Nevada. They have a Federal listing status of None, and a State listing status of Fully Protected however their State listing status of Fully Protected was removed with the 2023 passage of SB 147, which revised the list of fully protected bird species by removing American peregrine falcon and California brown pelican from the list.

California Brown Pelican (Pelecanus occidentalis)
The California brown pelican is a permanent resident of the coastal marine environment on the Pacific Coast and its range extends from British Columbia, Canada, south to Nayarit, Mexico. The bulk of the population (about 90%) nests in Mexico. The only long-term breeding colonies of California brown pelicans in the United States are on Anacapa and Santa Barbara Islands. They have a Federal listing status of None, and a State listing status of Fully Protected however their State listing status of Fully Protected was removed with the 2023 passage of SB 147, which revised

14.c
Packet Pg. 660 Attachment: Attachment C - Final Environmental Impact Report (Includes MMRP) (5680 : FEIR - 310-330 Esplanade Seawall) Chapter 4 Errata and Revisions
310-330 Esplanade Infrastructure Preservation Project City of Pacifica Final EIR 4-5 May 2024
the list of fully protected bird species by removing American peregrine falcon and California brown pelican from the list.

Nesting Birds
Nesting Birds may nest within vegetation, shallow scrapes on bare ground, and on the coastal bluffs in and around the study area. Several bird species were noted during the field survey. All Nesting birds species are protected under California Fish and Game code.

The bank swallow is a threatened species under the California Endangered Species Act (CESA) and has seen a decline in California. The majority of remnant bank swallow colonies in California occur in riverine systems; coastal colonies are considered rare (BANS TAC 2013, Wright et al. 2014). According to research by the CDFW, banks swallows rely on ephemeral eroding banks with friable soil for nesting, and typically need a slope of 70 degrees or more for suitable nesting habitat, with a preference for banks or cliffs that are vertical (90 degrees) or slightly inclined (75 degrees). Bank stabilization activities halt natural bank erosion and remove habitat through hardening of the bank or reducing the slope. In addition, human harassment can cause nest abandonment and has contributed to the population declines in California. There is one documented CNDDB occurrence for a bank swallow colony within five miles of the project area at Fort Funston in San Francisco (CNDDB 2023, San Francisco Planning 2023). No suitable nesting habitat is present in or directly adjacent to the project site. However, some suitable cliff habitat for this species is present within 200 feet of the project area; therefore, if present, this species could fly through the project area. This species is not known to breed in the area.

Other birds that may forage in this habitat include wintering native species such as the whitecrowned sparrow, golden-crowned sparrow, and yellow-rumped warbler. Raptors, such as whitetailed kite, northern harrier, and red-tailed hawk may forage within the coastal bluff habitat. Redtailed hawk was observed during the reconnaissance survey. The bluff habitat also provides moderately suitable nesting habitat for bank swallow and/or colonial marine birds. However, marine bird colonies have not been observed within the study area and none were observed during the field surveys. The bluff habitat also supports California ground squirrel, which was observed during the field surveys.

Impacts to Bank Swallow Habitat – Less Than Significant with Mitigation Because suitable cliff habitat for bank swallow is present within the vicinity of the project area, if present, the project could potentially impact the habitat for this species, which is a listed species under the CESA. Implementation of Mitigation Measures BIO-1c and BIO-1d would avoid or reduce impacts to less than significant levels for the species.

14.c
Packet Pg. 661 Attachment: Attachment C - Final Environmental Impact Report (Includes MMRP) (5680 : FEIR - 310-330 Esplanade Seawall) Chapter 4 Errata and Revisions
310-330 Esplanade Infrastructure Preservation Project City of Pacifica Final EIR 4-6 May 2024
Mitigation Measure BIO-1c: Bank Swallow Habitat Assessment Prior to initiating Project activities, a qualified biologist shall conduct a bank swallow habitat assessment of the cliff bluffs within and near the Project footprint. The habitat assessment will at minimum address the cliff face attributes of 1) slope, 2) vegetation cover, 3) soil type (e.g., friable soils), and 4) cliff height. Based on these and any other relevant attributes, the habitat assessment will identify potentially suitable bank swallow habitat. A qualified biologist is an individual who holds a bachelor’s degree from an accredited university and: 1) is knowledgeable in bank swallow and other relevant species’ life histories and ecology, 2) can correctly identify relevant species, 3) has conducted field surveys for relevant species, 4) is familiar with relevant survey protocols, and 5) is knowledgeable of state and federal laws regarding the protection of sensitive species.

If the habitat assessment described above identifies potentially suitable bank swallow habitat at or near the Project site, the qualified biologist shall identify whether the habitat can be avoided and if take of bank swallow could occur. If so, the qualified biologist shall prescribe avoidance, minimization and mitigation measures, in coordination with CDFW, as appropriate. An example of a measure could include restoration and enhancement of bank swallow habitat.

Mitigation Measure BIO-1d: Bank Swallow Incidental Take Permit If the Project has the potential to cause take of bank swallow, the City shall apply for and obtain a CESA Incidental Take Permit.

By disrupting the bluff and beach environment, grading and excavation activities could reduce wildlife movement in the project area during construction. Wildlife would still be able to move through the area, but may be deterred when equipment is operating. Equipment would not be operating 24/7, and the area would not be blocked off, so wildlife would not be prevented from moving through the construction site during the entire construction period. If Project construction occurs at night, when many mammals, reptiles, and amphibians are active, use of the study area by dispersing nocturnal animals could be disrupted during the Project construction period. Night lighting during construction could disrupt foraging behavior of nocturnal birds that rely on darkness when hunting.

Artificial night lighting can disrupt the circadian rhythms of many wildlife species, and lead to a significant impact on resident and migratory species that utilize the Project area and surrounding lands and waters. Many species use photoperiod cues for communication (e.g., bird song; Miller 2006), determining when to begin foraging (Stone et al 2009), behavior thermoregulation (Beiswenger 1977), and migration (Longcore and Rich 2004). Several species in the Project area travel only during the evening, including bats. Impacts to nocturnal species movement with lighting can expose them to predators and force them to take less preferred routes, leading to mortality and/or indirect impacts to the population. Nighttime lighting also attracts insects, which in turn attracts insectivorous species. Attracting these species to lights at night can increase the likelihood of direct mortality from traffic and construction equipment. Artificial night lighting has

14.c
Packet Pg. 662 Attachment: Attachment C - Final Environmental Impact Report (Includes MMRP) (5680 : FEIR - 310-330 Esplanade Seawall) Chapter 4 Errata and Revisions
310-330 Esplanade Infrastructure Preservation Project City of Pacifica Final EIR 4-7 May 2024
also been found to impact juvenile salmonid overwintering success by delaying the emergence of salmonids from benthic refugia and reducing their ability to feed during the winter (Contor and Griffith 1995), while larval green sturgeon avoid light at night (Nguyen and Crocker 2006). For nocturnally migrating birds, direct mortality as a result of collisions with structures due to attraction to light (Gauthreaux, 2006) is another direct effect of artificial light pollution. Additional more subtle effects, such as disrupted orientation (Poot et al. 2008) and changes in habitat selection (McLaren et al. 2018). There is also growing evidence that light pollution alters behavior at regional scales (La Sote et al. 2021) and that migrating birds avoid strongly lit areas when selecting critical resting sites needed to rebuild energy stores (McLaren et al. 2018).

Night lighting proposed for the Project would be localized, and temporary, and night work is not expected to occur throughout the duration of the Project, only when necessary to address tidal conditions. Numerous animals may breed within and around the study area, but no particularly important wildlife nursery areas are present in the study area or would be impacted by the Project.

Once construction activities are complete wildlife movement conditions would be similar to preProject conditions, and wildlife dispersal through the study area is expected to return to existing conditions.

The SLF search was negative for tribal resources in the Project area. Subsequent outreach was made to the tribal contacts provided by the NAHC for information on the location and nature of the resource(s) to determine if the Project would impact known resources. Certified letters were sent to tribal representatives by MIG staff on behalf of the City of Pacifica on April 25, 2019, informing them of the Project and requesting any information they may have about Tribal Cultural Resources in the vicinity of the Project. A follow up email message was sent to one of the representatives on August 2, 2019 after the original certified letter was returned. Tribal outreach occurred on April 25, 2019 via certified letters to the following tribes:
• Amah Mutsun Tribal Band of Mission San Juan Bautista – Irene Zwierlein, Chaiperson • Costanoan Rumsen Carmel Tribe - Tony Cerda, Chairperson • Indian Canyon Mutsun Band of Costanoan - Ann Marie Sayers, Chairperson • Muwekma Ohlone Indian Tribe of the SF Bay Area – Charlene Nijmeh, Chairperson • The Ohlone Indian Tribe – Andrew Galvan
The letters included the objectives of the project, proposed design elements, anticipated construction duration, noted the negative Sacred Lands File search and California Historical Resources Information System results, and requested information on Tribal Cultural Resources not included in the SLF search or if they had additional information on archaeological resources in the project vicinity.

One certified letter to Ann Marie Sayers was returned to sender, therefore a follow up email was sent on August 2, 2019. No responses were received from any Tribe as a result of this outreach.

The Tribes are on the City’s mailing list for announcements regarding this Project. Because no specific information was provided by the tribal contacts regarding the location and nature of tribal

14.c
Packet Pg. 663 Attachment: Attachment C - Final Environmental Impact Report (Includes MMRP) (5680 : FEIR - 310-330 Esplanade Seawall) Chapter 4 Errata and Revisions
310-330 Esplanade Infrastructure Preservation Project City of Pacifica Final EIR 4-8 May 2024
resources in the area in response to the letters, therefore, there is no confirmed potential for impacting known tribal cultural resources.

Pages 4.5-1 – 4.5-12; header:

Chapter 4.6 Hazards and Hazardous MaterialsChapter 4.5 Geology and Soils Chapter 4.7 Hazards and Hazardous MaterialsChapter 4.5 Geology and Soils Pages 4.6-2, 4.6-4, 4.6-6, 4.6-8, 4.6-10; header:

Chapter 4.7 Hazards and Hazardous MaterialsChapter 4.6 Hazards and Hazardous Materials

Impact PUB-1: The Project would not result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for fire protection, police protection, schools, libraries, or parks and recreation facilities. (Less Than Significant Impact)
The proposed Project is the construction of a new seawall along the toe of a coastal bluff.

Construction could restrict access in the area during construction, however the construction site would be managed in accordance with established mandates regarding access for emergency service vehicles and would not necessitate the alteration of any other facilities, including fire protection, police protection, schools, libraries or parks, and recreation facilities to accommodate the construction process.

The presence of construction equipment on the beach in the area of the seawall construction, and on the blufftop areas as well, could present a danger to the public. However, protective fencing and signage to alert people using the beach, access trail and blufftop of the closure of these areas would be installed, in conformance with the City’s standard practices for such construction projects.

The proposed Project does not include new housing and would not induce population; therefore, it would not increase enrollment at local schools, or require the provision of new or physically altered schools nor increase the use of local and regional parks or require the provision of new or physically altered parks, or other governmental facilities.

The Project may restrict some adjacent beach uses during construction, as the existing access ramp to the beach from Esplanade Avenue near Manor Drive (currently closed to the public) would be used for construction vehicle and equipment access, which could obstruct its use by the public when equipment is present. also provide public access to the beach and would remain closed to the public during construction. However, these impacts would be temporary, lasting only for the

14.c
Packet Pg. 664 Attachment: Attachment C - Final Environmental Impact Report (Includes MMRP) (5680 : FEIR - 310-330 Esplanade Seawall) Chapter 4 Errata and Revisions
310-330 Esplanade Infrastructure Preservation Project City of Pacifica Final EIR 4-9 May 2024
duration of construction, and would only impact roughly 650 linear feet of beach. The ramp would be open for public access to the beach during construction, and Iit is likely that the access it would be improved following the project construction in conjunction with the City’s planned park and infrastructure preservation improvements for the adjacent 400 block of Esplanade Avenue. (City of Pacifica, 2023).

There is a possibility that bluff erosion rates could, over time, normalize to lower rates more consistent with historic rates.

Page5-7; last paragraph:
k. Noise. The Project would generate noise and vibration during construction. The DEIR found that the Project’s impacts related to noise would be short term and less than significant with the implementation of noise control mitigation measures as noted in Mitigation Measures NOI-1A through NOI-1G and Mitigation Measures NOI-2A and NOI-2B. Vibration impacts were found to be less than significant. Because the No Project Alternative would not result in any construction, it would not generate any construction noise and thus would have a reduced noise impact compared to the proposed Project.

The potential impacts of the proposed seawall project on sand supply to the beach fronting the toe of the bluff were analyzed in a memorandum prepared by Cotton, Shires & Associates (CSA) in 2020. The memo provided a calculation of the volume of beach quality sand that would have been supplied to the beach over the 30-year life of the project if natural erosion continued. The total volume of sand was calculated to be 2,145 yards, however, based on a comparison of sieve analyses between bluff material and beach sand conducted by CSA, the memo concluded that the bluff material is significantly finer in texture than the beach sand and that consequently the bluff material composed zero or a very small fraction of the beach sand. The project would therefore not likely have an impact on sand supply to the beach.

k. Noise. The Project would generate noise and vibration during construction. The DEIR found that the Project’s impacts related to noise would be short term and less than significant with the implementation of noise control mitigation measures as noted in Mitigation Measures NOI-1A through NOI-1G and Mitigation Measures NOI-2A and NOI-2B. Vibration impacts were found to be less than significant. Construction of the Rock Revetment Alternative would involve very noise-intensive activities such as mechanical picking, placing and driving rocks down to the beach with trucks. These activities would also be expected to be short term in nature and therefore result in less than significant noise impacts. The Rock Revetment Alternative would have similar Noise impacts compared to the proposed Project.

14.c
Packet Pg. 665 Attachment: Attachment C - Final Environmental Impact Report (Includes MMRP) (5680 : FEIR - 310-330 Esplanade Seawall) Chapter 5 List of Preparers
310-330 Esplanade Infrastructure Preservation Project City of Pacifica Final EIR 5-1 May 2024
5 LIST OF PREPARERS

5.1 LEAD AGENCY
City of Pacifica
540 Crespi Drive, Pacifica, CA 94044
www.cityofpacifica.org
Christian Murdock, Planning Director
Stephanie Cervantes, AICP, Senior Planner

5.2 CONSULTANTS
MIG, Inc.
2055 Junction Avenue, San Jose, CA 95131
www.migcom.com
Mike Campbell, AICP, Director of Environmental Analysis Chris Dugan, Director of Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas, and Noise Services Tay Peterson, Director of Biological Analysis
David Gallagher, Senior Biologist
Christina Lau, Senior Environmental Analyst/Project Manager William Deeman, Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas, and Noise Services Analyst Alex Broskoff, Biologist /GIS Analyst/UAV Operator
Rose Redlich, CEQA Analyst
Cotton, Shires and Associates
330 Village Lane, Los Gatos, CA 95030
www.cottonshires.com
David Schrier, Principal Geotechnical Engineer
Andrew Mead, Principal Engineering Geologist

14.c
Packet Pg. 666 Attachment: Attachment C - Final Environmental Impact Report (Includes MMRP) (5680 : FEIR - 310-330 Esplanade Seawall) This page intentionally left blank.

14.c
Packet Pg. 667 Attachment: Attachment C - Final Environmental Impact Report (Includes MMRP) (5680 : FEIR - 310-330 Esplanade Seawall) Appendix A: Mitigation Monitoring and
Reporting Program

14.c
Packet Pg. 668 Attachment: Attachment C - Final Environmental Impact Report (Includes MMRP) (5680 : FEIR - 310-330 Esplanade Seawall) 310-330 Esplanade Infrastructure Preservation Project City of Pacifica MMRP 1 May 2024

MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
CEQA Statute Section 21081.6 and State CEQA Guidelines Section 15097 require a public agency to adopt a reporting or monitoring program (MMRP) to ensure compliance with the mitigation measures adopted by the agency at the time of project approval. A mitigation monitoring program would therefore be required for the San Carlos Focused General Plan Update EIR to ensure compliance with the mitigation measures that are adopted and incorporated into the project.

Adoption of the MMRP would occur at the time of project approval.

This Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) has been prepared pursuant to the CEQA Guidelines, which state:
“When adopting a final EIR with findings as required under 14 CCR section 15091(a)(1) the lead agency shall also adopt a program for reporting on or monitoring the changes which it has either required in the project or made a condition of approval to mitigate or avoid significant environmental effects” (§15097(a)); and
“The Lead Agency may choose whether its program will monitor mitigation, report on mitigation, or both. “Reporting” generally consists of a written compliance review that is presented to the decision-making body or authorized staff person. A report may be required at various stages during project implementation or upon completion of the mitigation measure. “Monitoring” is generally an ongoing or periodic process of project oversight. There is often no clear distinction between monitoring and reporting and the program best suited to ensuring compliance in any given instance will usually involve elements of both.” (§15097(c)) The table beginning on the next page lists the impacts, mitigation measures, and timing of the mitigation measure (when the measure will be implemented) related to the Project. The “Impact” column lists each significant impact, by resource topic, that is identified in the EIR and for which mitigation measures are recommended. The “Mitigation Measure” column provides the full text of each mitigation measure identified in the EIR. The “Monitoring” column describes (1) the “implementation entity” responsible for carrying out each mitigation measure (such a “project applicant” or “City of Pacifica Planning Department”); (2) mitigation implementation timing requirements (e.g., at the completion of a particular future individual project development review or construction phase, prior to occupancy, or when some other specific threshold is reached); and (3) the entity responsible for performing the monitoring of each mitigation measure (the “monitoring and verification entity;” e.g., a City department or agency, another public agency, or some other entity).

According to CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.4(a)(2), “Mitigation measures must be fully enforceable through permit conditions, agreements, or other legally-binding instruments. In the case of the adoption of a plan, policy, regulation, or other public project, mitigation measures can be incorporated into the plan, policy, regulation, or project design.” Therefore, all mitigation measures as listed in this MMRP will be adopted by the City of Pacifica when the project is approved.

14.c
Packet Pg. 669 Attachment: Attachment C - Final Environmental Impact Report (Includes MMRP) (5680 : FEIR - 310-330 Esplanade Seawall) 310-330 Esplanade Infrastructure Preservation Project City of Pacifica MMRP 2 May 2024

IDENTIFIED IMPACT RELATED MITIGATION MEASURE

MONITORING VERIFICATION
Implementation
Entity
Monitoring and
Verification
Entity
Timing
Requirements Signature Date
Air Quality
Impact AIR-3: The
Project could expose
sensitive receptors to
substantial pollutant
concentrations and
associated adverse health
risks. (Less than
Significant with
Mitigation Incorporated).

Mitigation Measure AIR-3: To reduce
potential, short-term adverse health risks
associated with PM2.5 exhaust emissions,
including emissions of DPM generated during
Project construction activities, the City shall
require its designated contractors, contractor’s
representatives, and/or other appropriate
personnel to comply with the following
construction equipment restrictions. All mobile
construction equipment greater than 50
horsepower in size shall meet with U.S. EPA
and CARB Tier IV interim exhaust emission
standards. This may be achieved via the use of
equipment with engines that have been
certified to meet U.S. EPA and CARB Tier IV
interim emissions standards, or through the use
of equipment that has been retrofitted with a
CARB-verified diesel emission control strategy
(e.g., particulate filter) capable of reducing
exhaust PM2.5 emissions to levels that meet
U.S. EPA and CARB Tier IV interim
emissions standards.

As an alternative to having all mobile
construction equipment greater than 50
horsepower meet with U.S. EPA and CARB
Tier IV interim exhaust emission standards, the
City may prepare a refined construction health
risk assessment once additional Projectspecific construction information is known (e.g., specific construction equipment type,
quantity, engine tier, and runtime by phase).

The refined health risk assessment shall
demonstrate and identify any measures
necessary such that the proposed Project’s
incremental carcinogenic health risk at nearby
City of Pacifica
Public Works
Department
City of Pacifica
Planning
Department
Prior to the start of
and during
construction
activities.

14.c
Packet Pg. 670 Attachment: Attachment C - Final Environmental Impact Report (Includes MMRP) (5680 : FEIR - 310-330 310-330 Esplanade Infrastructure Preservation Project City of Pacifica MMRP 3 May 2024
sensitive receptor locations is below the
applicable BAAQMD threshold of 10 cancers
in a million.

Biological Resources
Impact BIO-1: The
Project could have a
significant adverse effect,
either directly or through
habitat modifications, on
special-status fish
(steelhead, Coho salmon,
and green sturgeon),
Essential Fish Habitat
(EFH), and American
peregrine falcon, bank
swallow, and other nesting
birds. Implementation of
Mitigation Measures BIO1a, 1b, 1c, 1d, and 1e
would reduce potential
impacts to a less than
significant level. (Less
than Significant with
Mitigation Incorporated)
Mitigation Measure BIO-1a: Best
Management Practices (BMPs) to Protect
Water Quality, Special-Status Fish, and
EFH
The project shall minimize to the greatest
extent feasible all construction in tidal / open
water habitat areas. During all construction in
and near tidal aquatic habitat, standard BMPs
shall be used to minimize erosion and impacts
to water quality as well as direct impacts to
special-status fish and EFH. The following
BMPs shall be included in the Project to
minimize erosion, impacts to water quality, and
impacts to special-status species (also see
BMPs in Chapter 3.3.9, of the Project
Description):
• The contractor shall monitor the tides
and coordinate work to avoid
construction activities in open water
habitat. The timing and elevation of
tides can be monitored by checking
the San Francisco NOAA tidal station
(#9414290) found online at
https://tidesandcurrents.noaa.gov/noaa
tidepredictions.html?id=9414290.

Because the Project area is
approximately 16 miles south of the
tidal station, the actual timing and
elevation of tides needs to be adjusted
specifically for the Project area.
• No vehicles or heavy equipment shall
be operated in open water habitat.
• Earthmoving and clearing activities
shall be performed in dry weather
only.

City of Pacifica
Public Works
Department
City of Pacifica
Planning
Department
BIO-1a: Prior to
the start of
construction and
during
construction
activities.

14.c
Packet Pg. 671 Attachment: Attachment C - Final Environmental Impact Report (Includes MMRP) (5680 : FEIR - 310-330 310
-330 Esplanade Infrastructure Preservation Project City of Pacifica MMRP4 May 2024
• Spoils shall be removed promptly and
stockpiling of fill materials shall be
avoided when rain is forecast.

Stockpiles shall only be placed in
designated locations, including near
the 500 Esplanade ramp and at the
staging area at the 310-330 lots at
least 20 feet from the bluff face. No
stockpiles shall be located on the
beach. Soil stockpiles and other
materials shall be covered with a tarp
or other waterproof material during
rain events.
• In the event of rain, all grading work
is to cease immediately.
• Implement an erosion control plan
during the wet season (October 15
through April 15), including, at a
minimum, the following: o During the rainy season,
all paved areas will be
kept clear of earth
material and debris.
o Inlet protection will be
installed at open inlets to
prevent sediment from
entering the storm drain
system.
o Straw rolls will be placed
at the toe of slopes, and
along the down slope
perimeter of the Project
area.
• Equipment staging and parking of
vehicles shall occur on defined
staging areas only.
• The integrity and effectiveness of
erosion control measures shall be
inspected on a daily basis or as
required under the approved SWPPP.

Corrective actions and repairs shall be
carried out immediately for
ineffective BMPs.
• Fueling, washing, and maintenance of

14.c
Packet Pg. 672 Attachment: Attachment C - Final Environmental Impact Report (Includes MMRP) (5680 : FEIR - 310-330 310
-330 Esplanade Infrastructure Preservation Project City of Pacifica MMRP5 May 2024
vehicles shall occur in the defined
staging areas, away from open water
habitat. Equipment shall be regularly
maintained to avoid fluid leaks. Any
leaks shall be captured in containers
until equipment is moved to a repair
location. Hazardous materials shall be
stored only within the defined staging
areas. Containment and cleanup plans
shall be prepared and implemented for
the immediate cleanup of fluid or
hazardous materials spills.
• Sediment-laden water shall not be
allowed to enter the ocean.
• All litter and construction debris shall
be disposed of off-site in accordance
with state and local regulations. All
trash and debris within the work area
shall be placed in containers with
secure lids before the end of work
each day to reduce the likelihood of
predators being attracted to the site by
discarded food wrappers and other
rubbish. If containers meeting these
criteria are not available, all rubbish
shall be removed from the study area
on a daily basis.
• Discharge of all potential pollutants,
including solid wastes, paints,
concrete, petroleum products,
chemicals, wash water or sediment
and non-stormwater discharges to
storm drains and water courses shall
be controlled and prevented.
• A hazardous spill plan shall be
developed prior to construction. The
plan shall describe what actions shall
be taken in the event of a spill. The
plan shall also incorporate
preventative measures to be
implemented, such as vehicle and
equipment staging, cleaning,
maintenance, and refueling; and
contaminant (including fuel)

14.c
Packet Pg. 673 Attachment: Attachment C - Final Environmental Impact Report (Includes MMRP) (5680 : FEIR - 310-330 310
-330 Esplanade Infrastructure Preservation Project City of Pacifica MMRP6 May 2024
management and storage. In the event
of a contaminant spill, work at the site
shall immediately cease until the
contractor has contained and
mitigated the spill. The contractor
shall immediately prevent further
contamination and notify appropriate
authorities and mitigate damage as
appropriate. Adequate spill
containment materials, such as oil
diapers and hydrocarbon cleanup kits,
shall be available on site at all times.

Containers for storage, transportation,
and disposal of contaminated
absorbent materials shall be provided
in the study area.
• Trash and construction related solid
wastes shall be deposited into a
covered receptacle to prevent
contamination and dispersal by wind.

Trash and solid waste shall not be
stored on the beach.
• Work areas that are temporarily
impacted shall be restored with
respect to pre-existing contours and
conditions, to the extent feasible, upon
completion of work. Restoration work
including revegetation and soil
stabilization will be evaluated upon
completion of work and performed, as
needed. Construction materials and
wastes shall be stored, handled, and
disposed of properly, so as to prevent
their contact with stormwater.

14.c
Packet Pg. 674 Attachment: Attachment C - Final Environmental Impact Report (Includes MMRP) (5680 : FEIR - 310-330 310-330 Esplanade Infrastructure Preservation Project City of Pacifica MMRP 7 May 2024

IDENTIFIED
IMPACT

RELATED MITIGATION MEASURE

MONITORING VERIFICATION
Implementation
Entity
Monitoring
and
Verification
Entity
Timing
Requirements Signature Date
Mitigation Measure BIO-1b: PreConstruction/Pre-Disturbance Surveys for Nesting Birds
Avoidance. To the extent feasible,
construction activities should be scheduled to
avoid the nesting season. If construction
activities are scheduled to take place outside
the nesting season, all impacts to nesting
birds protected under the MBTA and
California Fish and Game Code would be
avoided. The nesting season for most birds in
San Mateo County extends from February 1
through September 15.

Pre-Construction Surveys. If it is not
possible to schedule construction activities
between September 1 and January 31, then
preconstruction surveys for nesting birds will
be conducted by a qualified biologist to
ensure that no nests would be disturbed
during Project implementation. These surveys
will be conducted no more than five days
prior to the initiation of any site disturbance
activities and equipment mobilization. If
Project activities are delayed by more than
five days, an additional nesting bird survey
will be performed. During this survey, the
biologist will inspect all potential nesting
habitats (e.g., shrubs, ruderal areas, cliff
terraces, etc.) in and immediately adjacent to
the impact area and a 250-foot buffer around
the area for nests. Active nesting is present if
a bird is building a nest, sitting in a nest, a
nest has eggs or chicks in it, or adults are
City of Pacifica
Public Works
Department
City of Pacifica
Planning
Department
BIO-1b: Prior to the
start of construction
activities.

14.c
Packet Pg. 675 Attachment: Attachment C - Final Environmental Impact Report (Includes MMRP) (5680 : FEIR - 310-330 310-330 Esplanade Infrastructure Preservation Project City of Pacifica MMRP 8 May 2024
observed carrying food to the nest. The
results of the surveys will be documented.

If an active nest is found in the impact area or
the 250 foot buffer, the biologist will
determine the extent of a construction-free
buffer zone to be established around the nest
(typically up to 1000 feet for raptors and up to
250 feet for other species though this may
sometimes be reduced in urban areas at the
discretion of the biologist), to ensure that no
nests of species protected by the MBTA and
California Fish and Game Code will be
disturbed during project implementation.

Within the buffer zone, no site disturbance
and mobilization of heavy equipment,
including but not limited to equipment
staging, fence installation, clearing, grubbing,
vegetation removal, demolition, and grading
will be permitted until the chicks have
fledged. Monitoring will be required to ensure
compliance with MBTA and relevant
California Fish and Game Code requirements.

Monitoring dates and findings will be
documented.

Mitigation Measure BIO-1c: Bank Swallow
Habitat Assessment
Prior to initiating Project activities, a
qualified biologist shall conduct a bank
swallow habitat assessment of the cliff bluffs
within and near the Project footprint. The
habitat assessment will at minimum address
the cliff face attributes of 1) slope, 2)
vegetation cover, 3) soil type (e.g., friable
soils), and 4) cliff height. Based on these and
any other relevant attributes, the habitat
assessment will identify potentially suitable
bank swallow habitat. A qualified biologist is
an individual who holds a bachelor’s degree
City of Pacifica
Public Works
Department
City of Pacifica
Planning
Department
BIO-1c: Prior to the
start of construction
activities.

14.c
Packet Pg. 676 Attachment: Attachment C - Final Environmental Impact Report (Includes MMRP) (5680 : FEIR - 310-330 310-330 Esplanade Infrastructure Preservation Project City of Pacifica MMRP 9 May 2024
from an accredited university and: 1) is
knowledgeable in bank swallow and other
relevant species’ life histories and ecology, 2)
can correctly identify relevant species, 3) has
conducted field surveys for relevant species,
4) is familiar with relevant survey protocols,
and 5) is knowledgeable of state and federal
laws regarding the protection of sensitive
species.

If the habitat assessment described above
identifies potentially suitable bank swallow
habitat at or near the Project site, the qualified
biologist shall identify whether the habitat can
be avoided and if take of bank swallow could
occur. If so, the qualified biologist shall
prescribe avoidance, minimization and
mitigation measures, in coordination with
CDFW, as appropriate. An example of a
measure could include restoration and
enhancement of bank swallow habitat.

Mitigation Measure BIO-1d: Bank
Swallow Incidental Take Permit
If the Project has the potential to cause take of
bank swallow, the City shall apply for and
obtain a CESA Incidental Take Permit.

Mitigation Measure BIO-1e: Invasive
Species Best Management Practices
The following measures will be implemented
to limit the spread of invasive species into
native habitats:
• All ground disturbing equipment used
adjacent to native habitats will be
washed (including wheels, tracks, and
undercarriages) at a legally operating
equipment yard both before and after
City of Pacifica
Public Works
Department
City of Pacifica
Public Works
Department/
Contractors
City of Pacifica
Planning
Department
City of Pacifica
Planning
Department
BIO-1d: Prior to
the start of
construction
activities.

BIO-1e: Prior to the
start of and during
construction
activities.

14.c
Packet Pg. 677 Attachment: Attachment C - Final Environmental Impact Report (Includes MMRP) (5680 : FEIR - 310-330 310-330 Esplanade Infrastructure Preservation Project City of Pacifica MMRP 10 May 2024
being used at the site.
• All applicable construction materials
used on site, such as straw wattles,
mulch, and fill material, will be
certified weed free.
• The Project will follow a Stormwater
Pollution Prevention Plan as per the
NPDES General Permit for Storm
Water Discharges Associated with
Construction and Land Disturbance
Activities (Construction General
Permit; Water Board Order No. 2009-
0009- DWQ) if applicable.
• All disturbed soils will be stabilized
and planted with a native seed mix
from a local source following
construction.
• If excavating, soil and vegetation
removed from weed-infested areas will
not be used in general soil stockpiles
and will not be redistributed as topsoil
cover for the newly filled areas. All
weed-infested soil will be disposed of
off-site at a landfill or buried at least

2.5 feet below final grade.

Cultural Resources
Impact CUL-1: The
Project could
inadvertently encounter
cultural resources. (Less
than Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated).

Mitigation Measure CUL-1: Inadvertent
Discovery of Resources.

In the event that historical, archaeological,
tribal cultural, or paleontological resources
are accidentally discovered during
construction, grading activity in the
immediate area shall cease and materials and
their surroundings shall not be altered or
collected. A qualified archaeologist or
paleontologist must make an immediate
evaluation, and avoidance measures or
City of Pacifica
Public Works
Department/
Contractors
City of Pacifica
Planning
Department
During Construction

14.c
Packet Pg. 678 Attachment: Attachment C - Final Environmental Impact Report (Includes MMRP) (5680 : FEIR - 310-330 310
-330 Esplanade Infrastructure Preservation ProjectCity of Pacifica MMRP 11 May 2024
appropriate mitigation should be completed,
according to CEQA Guidelines. The State
Office of Historic Preservation has issued
recommendations for the preparation of
Archaeological Resource Management
Reports that may be used as guidelines.

In the event that archaeological resources are
discovered, the site should immediately be
considered archaeologically sensitive and
subject to the following conditions:
development on archaeologically sensitive
sites requires on-site monitoring by Native
American consultant(s) if resources are
Native American in origin in addition to a
qualified archaeologist of all grading,
excavation, and site preparation activities
that involve earth-moving operations.

It is recommended that if a newly discovered
resource is, or is suspected to be, Native
American in origin, the resource shall be
treated as a significant Tribal Cultural
Resource, pursuant to California Public
Resources Code 21074, until USACE has
determined otherwise with the consultation
of a qualified archaeologist and local tribal
representative.

California laws and regulations state that if
human remains are unearthed during
construction, the County Coroner will be
notified immediately, and no further
disturbance shall occur until the County
Coroner has made the necessary findings as
to origin and disposition pursuant to PRC
Section 5097.98. If the remains are
determined to be of Native American
descent, the coroner has 24 hours to notify
the Native American Heritage Commission
(NAHC). The NAHC shall then identify the

14.c
Packet Pg. 679 Attachment: Attachment C - Final Environmental Impact Report (Includes MMRP) (5680 : FEIR - 310-330 310-330 Esplanade Infrastructure Preservation Project City of Pacifica MMRP 12 May 2024
person(s) thought to be the Most Likely
Descendent.

Title to all archaeological sites and historic
or cultural resources on or in the tide and
submerged lands of California is Vested in
the State under the jurisdiction of the State
Lands Commission (Public Resources Code,
§6313). If any cultural resources are
discovered on State lands during
construction, the City shall consult with the
State Lands Commission Staff Attorney,
Jamie Garrett. Final disposition of
archaeological, historical, and
paleontological resources recovered on State
lands under the jurisdiction of the State
Lands Commission must be approved by the
Commission.

Noise
Impact NOI-1: The
construction of the Project
could result in the
generation of a substantial
temporary increase in
ambient noise levels in
excess of applicable
standards established in the
City’s General Plan and
Municipal Code (Less than
Significant with Mitigation
Incorporated).

Mitigation Measure NOI-1a: Provide
Notification of Construction Activities.

To ensure receptors in the vicinity of the
Project are aware of the Project and its planned
construction activities, the City and/or its
designated contractors, contractor’s
representatives, or other appropriate personnel
shall:

1. Notify Residential and Commercial
Land uses of Planned Construction
Activities. This notice shall be provided at
least 14 calendar days prior to the start of
any construction activities, describe the
planned schedule of construction
activities, describe the noise control
measures to be implemented by the
Project, and include the name and phone
number of the designated contact for the
City of Pacifica
Public Works
Department/
Contractors
City of Pacifica
Planning
Department
NOI-1a: 14-
Calendar Days Prior
to Construction

14.c
Packet Pg. 680 Attachment: Attachment C - Final Environmental Impact Report (Includes MMRP) (5680 : FEIR - 310-330 310-330 Esplanade Infrastructure Preservation Project City of Pacifica MMRP 13 May 2024
City of Pacifica and its construction
contractor responsible for handling
construction-related noise complaints (per
Section 3 of Mitigation Measure NOI-1b).

This notice shall be provided to the
owner/occupants of all residential dwelling
units within 1,000 feet of construction
work areas and the owner/occupants of
commercial buildings within 500 feet of
construction work areas.

2. Notify Trail and Beach Users of
Construction Activities. The City shall post
signs along overlook trails and trails
leading to publicly accessible beaches
within 500 feet of work areas warning of
potential temporary elevated noise levels
during construction. Signs shall remain
posted throughout the duration of all sea
wall installation activities.

Mitigation Measure NOI-1b: Reduce
Construction Equipment Noise Levels. To
reduce potential noise levels associated with
Project construction activities, the City and/or
its designated contractors, contractor’s
representatives, or other appropriate personnel
shall:
a. Control Construction Traffic and Site
Access. Construction truck traffic,
including soil and debris and riprap
hauling, equipment deliveries, and
concrete and other vendor deliveries
shall follow City-designated truck
routes. Pursuant to City Municipal
Code Section 4-7.1601, current
designated truck routes in the City
include Skyline Boulevard and State
Highway Route 1. Pursuant to
Municipal Code Section 4-7.1402(b),
ingress and egress for the purpose of
City of Pacifica
Public Works
Department/
Contractors
City of Pacifica
Planning
Department
NOI-1b: During
Construction

14.c
Packet Pg. 681 Attachment: Attachment C - Final Environmental Impact Report (Includes MMRP) (5680 : FEIR - 310-330 310
-330 Esplanade Infrastructure Preservation Project City of Pacifica MMRP 14 May 2024
picking up or delivering construction-
related materials shall occur via a
direct route between the designated
truck route and the Project site.

Construction truck traffic shall avoid
routes that contain residential
dwelling units to the maximum extent
feasible given specific Project
location and access needs.
b. Construction Equipment Selection,
Use, and Noise Control Measures.

The following measures shall apply to
Project construction equipment:
c. Contractors shall use the smallest size
equipment capable of safely
completing work activities.
d. Construction staging activities such as
receipt of deliveries, equipment and
material storage, etc. shall occur as far
away from residential land uses as
possible.
e. All stationary noise-generating
equipment such as pumps,
compressors, and welding machines
shall be shielded and located as
far from sensitive receptor locations
as practical. Shielding may consist of
trailers, stored materials, or a three- or
four-sided enclosure
f. provided the structure/barrier breaks
the line of sight between the
equipment and the receptor and
provides for proper ventilation and
equipment operations.
g. Heavy equipment engines shall be

14.c
Packet Pg. 682 Attachment: Attachment C - Final Environmental Impact Report (Includes MMRP) (5680 : FEIR - 310-330 310-330 Esplanade Infrastructure Preservation Project City of Pacifica MMRP 15 May 2024
equipped with standard noise
suppression devices such as mufflers,
engine covers, and engine/mechanical
isolators, mounts, etc. These devices
shall be maintained in accordance
with manufacturer’s recommendations
during active construction activities.
h. Pneumatic tools shall include a noise
suppression device on the compressed
air exhaust.
i. The applicant/project representative
and/or their contractor shall connect to
existing electrical service at the site to
avoid the use of stationary power
generators (if feasible).
j. No radios or other amplified sound
devices shall be audible beyond the
property line of the construction site.

Mitigation Measure NOI-1c: Install
Temporary Noise Barrier along Esplanade
Avenue.

To reduce potential construction noise levels at
receptors on the east side of Esplanade
Avenue, the City and/or its construction
contractor shall install a temporary, six-foottall noise barrier along the eastern perimeter of the northern staging area. To the maximum
extent feasible given site constraints and
existing road/curb conditions, vehicular access
to this staging area shall occur at the northern
terminus of the barrier at Beaumont Avenue.

The barrier shall consist of nominal 0.5-inch
plywood with a minimum material density of

1.7 pounds per square foot installed at grade
(or mounted to structures located at-grade, such
as a K-Rail) and free of openings or gaps other
City of Pacifica
Public Works
Department/
Contractors
City of Pacifica
Planning
Department
NOI-1c: Prior to
Construction

14.c
Packet Pg. 683 Attachment: Attachment C - Final Environmental Impact Report (Includes MMRP) (5680 : FEIR - 310-330 310-330 Esplanade Infrastructure Preservation Project City of Pacifica MMRP 16 May 2024
than weep holes). Alternatively, commercially
available acoustic panels or other products
such as acoustic barrier blankets that have a
minimum sound transmission class or
transmission loss value of 20 dB may be
attached to a chain link or other security fence.

The noise barrier may be removed following
the completion of sea wall installation (i.e., it is
not necessary during restoration or riprap
removal phases).

Mitigation Measure NOI-1d: Prepare
Construction Noise Complaint Plan.

To prepare for unanticipated or unexpected
construction noise issues, the City and/or its
designated contractors, contractor’s
representatives, or other appropriate personnel
shall prepare a Construction Noise Complaint
Plan that shall:

1. Identify the name and/or title and
contact information (including phone
number and email) for designated City
and construction contractor
representatives responsible for
addressing construction-related noise
issues.

Include procedures describing how the
designated Project representative will receive,
respond, and resolve construction noise
complaints. At a minimum, upon receipt of a
noise complaint, the designated representative
shall notify the City, verify and determine the
nature of the complaint (e.g., identify the noise
source generating the complaint), and take
steps to resolve the complaint, such as, but not
limited to, changing equipment operations,
installing a temporary noise shield, etc.

City of Pacifica
Public Works
Department/
Contractors
City of Pacifica
Planning
Department
NOI-1d: Prior to
Construction

14.c
Packet Pg. 684 Attachment: Attachment C - Final Environmental Impact Report (Includes MMRP) (5680 : FEIR - 310-330 Appendix
B: New Information

14.c
Packet Pg. 685 Attachment: Attachment C - Final Environmental Impact Report (Includes MMRP) (5680 : FEIR - 310-330 Esplanade Seawall)

CSA MEMORANDUM
Project: 310 – 330 Esplanade Dr.

Project No.: E5158
Date: March 30, 2020
Re: Impacts on Sand Supply Calculations

CSA calculated the potential impacts of the proposed seawall on the sand supply using the following equation provided in MIG’s 310‐330 Esplanade Avenue Infrastructure Preservation Project, Supplemental Information, dated March 2020:

Vb = (S x W x L) x [(R x hs) + (1/2hu x (R + (Rcu – Rcs)))]/27 Vb =   Volume of beach material that would have been supplied to the beach if natural erosion continued (this is equivalent to the long‐term reduction in the supply of beach quality bluff material to the beach resulting from the armoring): 2,145 yards S =   Fraction of beach quality material in the bluff material: 1% W =   Width of property to be armored: 625 feet
L =   Design life of the structure: 30 years
R =   Long term average annual erosion rate: 2.7 ft/yr (74 years) hs =   Height of the armoring structure: 30 feet
hu =   Height of the unprotected upper bluff: 60 feet
Rcu =   Predicted rate of retreat of the crest of the bluff during the period that the armoring structure would be in place assuming no armoring were installed (this value can be assumed to the same as R unless site‐specific geotechnical information is provided that supports a different value): 5.4 ft/yr (13 years)
Rcs =   Predicted rate of retreat of the crest of the bluff during the period that the armoring would be in place assuming armoring has been installed (this value will be assumed to be zero unless site‐specific geotechnical information is provided that supports a different value):

0.5 ft/yr

Based on the values provided in bold for each above variable, we calculated a volume of beach quality sand (Vb) that would have been supplied to the beach if natural erosion continued of 2,145 yards.  Note that based on comparisons of bluff material sieve analysis and beach sand sieve

14.c
Packet Pg. 686 Attachment: Attachment C - Final Environmental Impact Report (Includes MMRP) (5680 : FEIR - 310-330 Esplanade Seawall) analysis (Figure 1), the bluff material is significantly finer than the beach sand material.

Consequently, we concluded that the bluff materials compose zero or a very small fraction of the beach sand, and we therefor used 1% for the variable S.  We understand that the neighboring projects used 20% for this variable (S); however, no justification was provided.

Figure 1

14.c
Packet Pg. 687 Attachment: Attachment C - Final Environmental Impact Report (Includes MMRP) (5680 : FEIR - 310-330 Esplanade Seawall)

CSA MEMORANDUM
Project: 310 – 330 Esplanade Drive Infrastructure Preserve Project Project No.: E5158
Date: November 15, 2023
Re: Applicability of Using 2‐D Limit Equilibrium Slope Stability Analysis to Analyze Bluff Retreat The purpose of this email is to address a portion of the California Coastal Commission’s (CCC) November 2, 2023, Comment No. 2 under Geology and Soils, specifically the comment indicates:
“Commission staff strongly recommends providing additional detail and analysis to this end, to include: . . . as well as a quantitative slope stability analysis to determine the factor of safety for the infrastructure the project is intended to protect.”
A typical computer aided 2‐D Limit Equilibrium Slope Stability Analysis is used to analyze the factor of safety of a slope based on resisting forces divided by driving forces. The algorithms in the program divide the hypothetical landslide into vertical slices, and calculate internal forces for each slice, and interslice forces transferred to the adjacent slices. Simplified methods such as Bishop’s or Janbu’s method only solve for the sum of moments or sum of forces, respectively.

More complete methods, such as Morgenstern‐Price and Spencer’s method, solve for both moment and force equilibrium, and introduce a parameter “lambda,” that is varied until the two sum of forces result in the same factor of safety.   The computer programs have “problems” including they don’t converge, provide warning notices and error messages when interslice angles exceed certain thresholds, the lambda value is exceedingly high or low (typically in the range of 0 to 1), and when the hypothetical failure surface and the base of slices become too steep.

Most programs cannot compute the factor of safety for slopes with overhanging geometries.

Therefore, the slope needs to be modified by either modelling an overhanging slope as vertical, or introducing a “void” material in the case of undermining (sea caves).  This will impact the critical slip surfaces because the slip surface has to extend to the ground surface, which is now potentially altered by a void material, and in some cases the critical slip surfaces passes through this void material and back into underlying material, which is not a realistic scenario.

The documented mechanism for the on‐going bluff retreat at 310‐330 Esplanade Blvd. is characterized by wave action eroding the toe of the bluff, which results in near‐vertical, vertical, and undermined bluff faces. The lower portion of the bluff face then calves off like a glacier, followed a while later by the mid bluff portion, and then upper bluff portion. Typically, these calving events are only about 2 to 10 feet thick.

14.c
Packet Pg. 688 Attachment: Attachment C - Final Environmental Impact Report (Includes MMRP) (5680 : FEIR - 310-330 Esplanade Seawall) This type of calving failure is not a typical landslide event, and based on our experience does not lend itself to tradition slope stability analysis due to the near vertical failure surface the calving material mobilizes and the void at the base of the bluff caused by undermining.

We can undertake a quantitative slope stability analysis and extend a hypothetical failure surface to the Esplanade Blvd. infrastructure as the CCC has recommend; however, this analysis will not be modelling the bluff retreat hazard the proposed project is designed to arrest or a hazard that has been observed at this site.

14.c
Packet Pg. 689 Attachment: Attachment C - Final Environmental Impact Report (Includes MMRP) (5680 : FEIR - 310-330 Esplanade Seawall)

CITY OF PACIFICA

COUNCIL AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT
6/10/2024
1 SUBJECT:

Fiscal Year 2024-25 Proposed Budget Program Options
RECOMMENDED ACTION:

Review and discuss the Fiscal Year 2024-25 Proposed General Fund and Other Funds Budget and provide additional policy direction on the desired budget options and strategies for the upcoming budget.

STAFF CONTACT:

Kevin Woodhouse, City Manager
650-738-7409
[email protected]
Yulia Carter, Assistant City Manager
650-738-7301
[email protected]
BACKGROUND:

Each year, the City of Pacifica adopts an annual operating budget that reflects the planned activities for the next fiscal year based on the best information available at the time of adoption.

At mid-year, staff revisits the projections and reports to the Council any changes needed to reflect new information and keep the City budget on track.

The City Council adopted the current FY 2023-24 Budget on June 26, 2024. On March 25, 2024, staff presented the FY2023-24 Midyear Budget review, which showed some reductions in general revenues, but overall the budget was still on track. During the mid-year budget review, the Council authorized additional adjustments to the FY 2023-24 Budget that were incorporated into the new FY2024-25 proposed budget.

On April 8, 2024, in the first budget study session, staff presented the Narrative Budget report outlining the planning process, methodology, timeline, and preliminary budget strategies.

On May 13, 2024, the City Council reviewed the FY 2024-25 Base Budget, long-term financial outlook, and the recommended Capital Improvement Program. The Base Budget included some strategies previously presented to the Council, including built-in salary savings of 5% to help project a balanced budget that can achieve a number of critical service enhancements to meet the Council’s Strategic Priorities. There is an approximately $0.7 million preliminary projected surplus available to address ongoing service needs and meet Council priorities for the upcoming Budget.

The 10-year financial forecast highlights the City's long-term fiscal challenges, projecting a structural deficit starting in FY 2026-27 and continuing until FY 2030-31, with the unassigned fund balance falling below recommended guidelines by FY 2028-29 without future revenue 15 Packet Pg. 690
Pacifica City Council 2
June 10, 2024
measures, service-level changes, or budget balancing strategies like building-in salary savings beyond FY 2024-25. These strategies all together emphasize the need for careful strategic planning to ensure long-term financial sustainability.

As part of this year’s budget process, the City also launched The Pacifica Discussion initiative to gather input from residents and the Pacifica community on specific City service needs and priorities. Over 700 responses were received, highlighting priorities such as maintaining storm drains, ensuring timely emergency response, repairing potholes, improving street conditions, preserving beach cleanliness and coastal areas, and reducing the risk of flooding and mudslides.

Residents also emphasized the importance of preserving Pacifica's parks, beaches, coastline, trails, and recreation opportunities. Addressing road repair remains a top concern due to the city's backlog of repairs and poor road ratings, which pose safety risks and worsen traffic congestion. Safety improvements at school intersections and enhancing infrastructure such as sidewalks, bike lanes, crosswalks, and lighting were also highlighted, indicating the need for additional funding.

The ongoing discussion will continue to engage the community in shaping the city's long-term budget priorities and planning, as reflected in the recommended Capital Improvement Program.

At the past budget study sessions, staff received feedback from the City Council on developing the Recommended Budget options, which is the subject of this report. Since the last meeting, staff has prepared the Proposed FY 2024-25 Budget for all city funds.

The primary focus of today’s discussion is to provide Council with the recommended program options for the FY 2024-25 Proposed Budget and get additional policy direction for any additional inclusions in, or changes to, the budget prior to the adoption at the next meeting.

FY 2024-25 Budget Strategies
During the Budget Study session on April 8, 2024, City Council approved the following Budget Strategies:

Strategy #1: Utilize funding strategies to augment professional staffing while minimizing 15 Packet Pg. 691
Pacifica City Council 3
June 10, 2024
the General Fund impact (Supports Goal #1).

A number of the City Manager’s budget recommendations below serve this strategy. These include new staffing recommendations, funding interns and fellows and additional contract planning services, allocating staff to other funds as appropriate to ensure the General Fund’s cost recovery from other funds, and building a sustainable salary savings rate into the operating budget to be able to fund the recommended service enhancements as further described in Attachments 4-6.

Strategy #2: Addressing financial uncertainties concerning the Vehicle License Fee InLieu payments from the state (Supports Goal #1).

At the Midyear Budget review, staff discussed the ongoing VLF In-Lieu funding issue and recommended a one-time reduction of the General Fund emergency reserve to cover the state's $1.7 million shortfall for FY2023-24. The City Manager also recommended budgeting these revenues for FY 2024-25, including a full shortfall of $1,452,355 from FY 2022-23 that is due to the City in the upcoming year. At the time, staff shared that another reserve reduction may be needed during the FY 2024-25 Midyear budget review if the state fails to meet its obligations.

On May 29th, staff learned that both houses of the legislature included the County’s FY 2022-23 $70m VLF shortfall in their two-party deal on the 2024-25 state budget. This promising development, made possible by strong advocacy and state delegation support, could help mitigate local financial uncertainties despite the state budget’s projected shortfall. The Legislature is expected to finalize the budget by June 15th. In the meantime, San Mateo County agencies will continue advocating with the Governor to ensure our reimbursement remains, as he can line-item veto areas of the budget. Nevertheless, this is certainly a positive development.

Strategy #3: Maintaining the “status quo” for annual funding of non-profit organizations (Supports Goal #1).

During the budget study session on April 8th, the Council discussed the annual funding of nonprofit organizations and directed staff to increase the allocation to the Pacific Beach Coalition to $10,000. The Council also discussed potential one-time funding for FogFest at $25,000 and Pride at $5,000. The Recommended FY 2024-25 Budget includes placeholder funding for these three organizations from projected ERAF revenues, pending the City Council’s discussion and approval.

Strategy #4: Capital Improvement Program funding for unfunded infrastructure projects (Supports Goals #1 and #2)
The complete FY 2024-29 CIP Program was presented to Council on May 13, 2024, when staff received Council direction and is now preparing the CIP budget document. The City Manager also recommended issuing a request for proposals for a Development Impact Fee, Cost Allocation, and Master Fee Study in FY 2024-25 to study potential future funding for infrastructure and other critical projects.

This project has not been conducted in decades, although the best practices suggest reviewing fee-related services and user fees every 5-7 years and using a cost allocation model to accurately account for the cost of services. The Development Impact Fee nexus study will assess mitigation fees for new development, potentially enhancing the City's capacity to fund critical infrastructure. This project aligns with AB 1600, the Mitigation Fee Act, which allows cities to impose fees, ensuring new developments contribute fairly to community infrastructure.

This significant project requires careful scheduling and substantial resources to ensure its success.
15 Packet Pg. 692
Pacifica City Council 4
June 10, 2024
Given other critical priorities in Finance and Public Works, this consultant selection will occur in the second half of FY 2024-25. The Development Impact Fee study will begin in the last quarter of FY 2024-25, followed by the Cost Allocation Plan and Master Fee Study update in FY 2025-

26. Given this schedule, the existing FY 2024-25 Budget can absorb the limited initial costs, with the majority of this project expected to be funded in FY 2025-26. This strategy will align the budget and staff resources for the project, better equipping staff to negotiate the consulting contract and execute the project’s complex scope.

Strategy #5: Continue allocating a portion of Excess Educational Revenue Augmentation Funding (Excess ERAF) toward funding for affordable housing (Supports Goal #3).

Excess ERAF revenue is not considered a stable ongoing source of annual revenue and is therefore allocated as one-time funding every year it is received. Last year, the Council approved the City Manager’s recommendation to split the Excess ERAF remaining balance of $3.2 million, following allocation to two NGOs (PRC and PBC), between the Disaster Accounting Fund (fund 38) and the Housing In-Lieu Fund (fund 24) to fund future potential affordable housing projects.

After further discussions with the Planning Director and City Attorney’s Office, it was recommended to create a new Housing Action Fund to develop affordable housing programs.

This would prevent the potential comingling of legally restricted development-based revenues in the Housing in-Lieu Fund with unrestricted ERAF revenues allocated towards housing programs by Council policy. Staff created the new Housing in Action (Fund 21) and transferred previously allocated ERAF funds in there.

For the upcoming FY 2024-25 Budget, the City Manager recommends allocating Excess ERAF funds as follows (pending Council discussion and confirmation of the non-profit funding):
• $100,000 toward the Pacifica Resource Center
• $10,000 toward the Pacific Beach Coalition
• $25,000 towards the FogFest
• $5,000 towards Pride
• 50% ($1.65m) of the remaining balance toward Fund 38 (Disaster Accounting Fund) • 50% ($1.65m) of the remaining balance toward new Fund 21 (Housing Action Fund) The City Manager is seeking the Council’s confirmation of all these budget strategies or any additional related changes to be incorporated in the FY 2024-25.

Staffing Review and Organizational Capacity
Staff has shared with the Council on several occasions the challenging labor market conditions in the Bay Area. Like many Bay Area agencies, the City has been experiencing critical recruitment and retention challenges, having to conduct multiple recruitments for the most critical professional and management positions.

This is partially due to the fact that more than one-third of City classifications remain below market in total compensation, with some classifications falling more than 20% below market compared to other San Mateo County agencies.

Although the City does not have the resources to bring all classifications to the market median, during the last round of labor negotiations, the City Council approved an unprecedented multimillion-dollar package for Pacifica employees. This package introduced a citywide multi-year 15 Packet Pg. 693
Pacifica City Council 5
June 10, 2024
and multi-phased equity adjustment scale providing targeted salary adjustments of an additional 1-4% by position, depending on how far a classification is below market. The FY 2024-25 Budget is the second year of the two-year labor agreement that will honor these increases.

Given that the labor agreements are closed until FY 2025-26, the City Manager’s focus this year was on fulfilling the Council’s goal of increasing organizational capacity to be able to fulfill the robust workplan identified in the Council’s Strategic Plan.

Staffing Comparison Study
In addition to the ongoing recruitment and retention challenges, staff has consistently referenced a staffing study that showed Pacifica had historically been staffed approximately 23% lower on average across departments than comparable full-service public agencies of the same size. This study was conducted a few years ago by Management Partners, an independent consulting firm specializing in organizational studies. Since the study was outdated, the City Manager engaged the same consulting team (now Raftelis) to update the study by doing a quick analysis of Pacifica’s staffing in comparison to similar agencies.

The Pacifica Staffing Comparison memo, prepared by Raftelis, compares the staffing levels in the City of Pacifica to eight similar cities in Northern California (Attachment 8). The peer cities were selected based on criteria such as population, median household income, general fund budget, and total FTE staff, ensuring a relevant comparison for understanding how Pacifica’s staffing stands in relation to similar municipalities.

The study reveals that Pacifica still has 17% lower overall citywide staffing level than its peer cities. This trend is particularly evident in the Administrative Services, Police, and Planning departments, where the number of staff per population unit is considerably less.

One of the primary reasons for Pacifica's lower staffing levels is its smaller General Fund budget, which is the second smallest among the peer cities. This limited budget restricts the city’s ability to allocate resources for hiring more staff, which in turn affects the city’s capacity to deliver services. Adequate staffing is crucial for maintaining high standards of service provision, as also highlighted in the study.

While Pacifica's staffing levels are generally lower than those of its peers, there are nuanced differences in departmental structures, service provisions, and other factors that must be considered. Further, in-depth analysis at the departmental level may be needed to draw more precise conclusions and inform specific staffing decisions, especially when it comes to complex operations that are particularly challenging to compare, as they differ significantly from one municipality to another, such as those in the Public Works department.

Overall, the study provides valuable insights, showing that Pacifica operates with fewer full-time equivalents (FTE) than peer agencies while delivering similar public services with less support.

The findings highlight areas where Pacifica can proactively plan and prepare for future staffing needs, considering the context of rising labor and benefit costs and increasing service demands.

The FY 2024-25 Recommended Budget attempts to address some of these staffing shortages by strategically aligning Pacifica’s limited financial resources with staffing requirements and service expectations from the community.

Position Control Changes to Date:

Last year’s FY 2023-24 Budget included 186.25 FTE. Since the adoption of the budget in June 15 Packet Pg. 694
Pacifica City Council 6
June 10, 2024
2023, the City Council authorized the following additional service enhancements by adding the following staffing resources and bringing the total FTE count to 193.25.

The position control changes also include converting previously approved ARPA-funded limited -term positions into permanent roles as described below.

Finance and Administrative Services:
• Restored Senior Accountant Position
• Converted a Limited-Term HR Analyst position into a permanent position Police Department:
• Converted a Limited-Term Community Services Officer to a permanent position • Converted a Limited-Term Records Clerk to a permanent position • Added Two Overhire (i.e., Limited-Term) Police Officer Positions Planning Department:
• Converted a Limited-Term Assistant Planner to a permanent position Public Works:
• Added a permanent Maintenance Worker I position
• Added an Operator III position (Wastewater)
• Restored a Project Manager position
Parks, Beaches, and Recreation:
• Added a full-time Recreation Coordinator position
The FY 2024-25 Recommended Budget continues to focus on increasing the City’s organizational capacity, and service delivery, as reflected in the City Manager’s recommended budget options listed below.

City Manager’s Recommendations for the FY 2024-25 Budget The goal of any budget process is to develop the City's Budget by completing a full analysis of the City's revenue structure and current service levels. This analysis aims to identify necessary service increases and/or reduction options, which, when combined, will achieve a balanced and sustainable budget.

Since the last meeting, each City Department has been given an opportunity to submit their prioritized budget requests with reference to the Council’s specific goals and strategies in the newly adopted Strategic Plan. The Recommended Budget is balanced and includes prioritized programs and services recommended for funding in the FY 2024-25.

In developing budget recommendations for service changes, the City Manager had to balance the future financial sustainability with the Council’s strategic vision, staffing, organizational capacity, and impacts on the City operations and services provided to the community. The budget recommendations also fulfill the above-mentioned five budget strategies recommended by the City Manager and supported by the City Council during the April 8, 2024, budget session.

The goal of this budget process was to identify necessary and required service change options, which, in combination, maintain a balanced and sustainable budget.

To this end, the City Manager has reviewed department requests and is presenting the following budget recommendations for the Council’s consideration, as outlined below and in Attachments 1 and 4-6. Each budget option form in the attachment demonstrates how the recommendation aligns with the Strategic Plan. Out of 26 Budget options recommended for FY 2024-25, 21 of 15 Packet Pg. 695
Pacifica City Council 7
June 10, 2024
them directly impact the General Fund at a total cost of $1.6 million. This includes eight programmatic changes that will result in an additional ongoing cost of $0.7 million and 13 onetime budget recommendations (including multi-year limited-term or pilot programs) budgeted at $0.9 million.

General Fund Program Options
At the last Council meeting, staff reported that the FY 2024-25 Base Budget had a General Fund surplus of $725,900 available for the City’s ongoing service enhancements. The City Manager’s recommendations include eight ongoing service requests with a total estimated cost of $694,000 to the FY 2024-25 General Fund Budget. Taking into account the additional resource option requested below, this leaves approximately $62,500 in remaining surplus, providing additional security for any unanticipated fluctuations in budget projections or assumptions for these programmatic changes that may become necessary throughout the year.

Ongoing Service Enhancements:

Additional Revenues:
• Reopening Community Center Programming after employees move back to the renovated Civic Center projects to generate a net $30,600 in revenues.

Expenditure Requests:

1. Convert (2) Overhire Police Officer Positions added at Mid-Year to (2) Permanent FullTime Police Officer Positions - No additional FY 2024-25 Impact to the General Fund as already included in the Base budget

2. Adding a Finance and Administrative Services Director Position with included savings from a potential reorganization of the Finance and Admin Services Department - General Fund $110,407

3. Adding one Assistant Civil Engineer to the Public Works Engineering Division allocated between the General Fund, Street Maintenance Fund, FEMA CIP, and the Esplanade projects in the General Capital Fund - General Fund $48,335

4. Implementation of an Automated License Plate Reader (ALPR) Program - General Fund $45,000

5. Adding (1) Deputy Community Development Director Position - General Fund $126,324

6. Reinstate (1) Crime Prevention Officer (a.k.a. Community Policing Officer) as a Police Corporal Position - General Fund $146,228

7. Adding (1) Permanent full-time Senior Human Resources Analyst position - General Fund $147,648

8. Converting (2) part-time IT Support Assistant positions into a full-time Systems Analyst position - General Fund $70,032
It is important to note that the cost estimate for each new position includes a 25% salary savings in the first year. This assumption is based on the expectation that new employees will be onboarded no earlier than the end of September (an average estimate with some potentially earlier and some potentially later), allowing for the necessary time to complete the recruitment process. It is anticipated that future year budgets will be able to absorb the full annual cost of these new positions through ongoing salary savings from vacant positions (the City has been 15 Packet Pg. 696
Pacifica City Council 8
June 10, 2024
experiencing a 10-15% vacancy rate in recent years) combined with the anticipated implementation of the cost allocation plan in the next couple of years that is expected to account for updated and more refined General Fund cost-recovery from other funds.

These ongoing service enhancement recommendations align with the Council’s Goal #1 to Enhance Organizational Stability and building capacity. They are also tied to the previously approved budget strategies above and are well within the current operational surplus.

One-time Service Enhancements
During the FY 2024-25 Base Budget presentation at the last meeting, staff also reported that, as an exception, the annual debt service payment will be covered from the excess cash balance in the Debt Service Fund in FY 2024-25.

This decision freed up approximately $2 million for the upcoming year to fund critical one-timeonly service enhancement needs. The City Manager recommends 13 such one-time service enhancements, with a total estimated cost of $947,425, as listed below:

1. Municipal Election Expenses for the November 2024 Election that include cost for 2 Council seats, one ballot measure, and additional election-related expenses in City Clerk’s Office - General Fund $175,000

2. Adding a three-year limited-term Senior Building Maintenance Specialist to help facilitate and coordinate maintenance, repair, and upgrades to aging facilities in the Public Works Department - General Fund $133,252

3. Purchase of fifty new Smith & Wesson handguns and twenty Smith & Wesson patrol rifles to replace current handguns that are approximately sixteen years old in the Police Department - General Fund $90,000

4. Interim Staffing Support in Planning Department - General Fund $100,000

5. Local Coastal Land Use Plan (LCLUP) Certification budget in Planning Department - General Fund $60,000

6. Short-Term Rental Ordinance Update in Planning Department - General Fund $35,000

7. Climate Action Update - Part-Time Program Manager & Consultant Support for Community Engagement in Planning Department - General Fund $75,000

8. State Law Ordinance Updates. Legal cost to update various City land use planning ordinances to implement changes in state law in Planning Department - General Fund $50,000

9. Contractual Services to conduct a storm drain study near 600 Brighton Road to address flooding that occurs due to storm flows from streets in Public Works - General Fund $50,000

10. Weed Abatement augmentation services to timely respond to an increase in service requests from the public in the Public Works Department - General Fund $70,000

11. Citywide Professional Development Training Program for Staff in Human Resources Division - General Fund $25,000
15 Packet Pg. 697
Pacifica City Council 9
June 10, 2024

12. Employee Wellness Program in Police Department - General Fund $34,173

13. Pacifica Libraries Modernization Project Outreach funding in City Clerk’s Office - General Fund $50,000
Additional information related to these programmatic options is presented in budget forms listed in Attachments 4 through 6 to this staff report.

Projected Fund Balance Structure and Budgetary Reserves The Proposed FY 2024-25 Operating Budget is being presented as a balanced budget, meaning that the City’s operating expenditures do not exceed general revenues.

If all program options identified in this report are approved by the City Council, the General Fund will project an ending surplus of about $1.15 million, mainly created by a one-time debt service payment relief to the General Fund, as discussed during the Base Budget presentation.

Additionally, the General Fund will maintain all previously approved reserves necessary for long-term fiscal and operational sustainability.

After factoring in the above-mentioned budget options, the General Fund Proposed Budget revenues and transfers in are projected at $48.1 million. The total General Fund operating expenditures and transfers out are budgeted at $46.8, and capital transfer out of $75,000.

The table below demonstrates the Net change to the General Fund balance.

After applying all the changes described above, the Proposed General Fund Budget will have a $1.15 million surplus, leaving $10.6 million in the Unassigned General Fund Balance, which is about 23% of the City’s Operating expenditures in addition to 10% or $4.6 million in the 15 Packet Pg. 698
Pacifica City Council 10 June 10, 2024
minimum policy reserve.

The City’s Fund Balance Policy identifies fund balances (or reserves) that fall into the following categories: non-spendable items or portions of fund balance that cannot be liquidated, restricted amounts for use by outside agencies, committed amounts by Council action such as emergency /contingency reserves and assigned balances to pay off unfunded liabilities and to fund infrastructure improvements.

In accordance with GASB Statement No. 54 requirements and the City policy, the Council established the following designations or contingencies of the General Fund Committed Balance.
➢ Budget Shortfall Policy Reserve of 10% of Expenditures ($4.7 million) ➢ Facilities Maintenance & Replacement (restored back to $0.2 million) ➢ Compensated Absences Reserve ($0.2 million)
➢ Child Care Reserve ($0.5 million)
➢ Legal Reserves ($0.1 million)
The General Fund balances for the FY 2024-25 Recommended Budget are detailed in the table below. If all options presented in this report are approved by the Council, the City will have a balanced FY 2024-25 Budget with an undesignated General Fund Balance of approximately $10.6 million.

Maintaining a sufficient level of the projected ending fund balance is necessary for fiscal and operational sustainability. After factoring in the restricted reserves and operating contingency, the ending undesignated General Fund balance is projected to be close to $10.6 million or 23% of the General Fund operating expenditures (excluding one-time capital transfers), which 15 Packet Pg. 699
Pacifica City Council 11 June 10, 2024
equates to slightly less than three months of regular operating expenditures and is slightly above the Government Finance Officers Association of the US and Canada (GFOA) minimum recommendation for government entities of no less than two months of regular general fund operating expenditures (approx. $7.8 million for the City of Pacifica in FY2024-25).

Other Funds Program Options
The City Manager’s FY 2024-25 Budget recommendations for other funds are shown below and further described in Attachment 7.

Other funds include three one-time expense amendment recommendations at an additional cost of $1.2 million and two ongoing expense amendment options for $0.2 million.

The complete list of Recommended Budget Options across all funds is presented below and in Attachment 1 to this report:

One-time Programs

1. Adding (1) Project Manager Position for Public Works Wastewater. The Project Manager's time will be charged to already funded capital projects in the Sewer Capital Fund - Sewer Facility Construction Fund (Fund 34), $153,887 (Ongoing).

2. Adding (1) Part-Time Maintenance Assistant position - Sewer Operating Fund (Fund 18), $30,000 (On-going)

3. Housing Element Program Implementation - Housing Action Fund (Fund 21), $423,000 (One-time)

4. Additional allocation in vehicle replacement fund towards the purchase of ten new vehicles and equipment citywide in accordance with the City’s vehicle replacement schedule. - Motor Pool Replacement (Fund 72), $750,000 (One-time).

5. Civic Spark Fellow and Partnership for Bay's Future Interns - Housing Action Fund (Fund 21), $50,000 (One-time)
Additional information about these budget options can be found in Attachment 6 to this report.

ALTERNATIVE ACTION:

The City Council is asked to provide input and direction on the FY2024-25 Proposed Budget. No alternative action is identified.

RELATION TO CITY COUNCIL GOALS AND WORK PLAN:

A balanced and structurally sustainable budget is consistent with all City Council strategic goals and to ensure that City-wide revenue meets the cost of providing City-wide services.

FISCAL IMPACT:

Because the recommendation is to review and discuss budget options, no direct fiscal impact is associated with this item. City Council direction on the proposed budget options will be factored in the FY 2024-25 Budget document that will be brought forward for adoption on June 24, 2024. 15 Packet Pg. 700
Pacifica City Council 12 June 10, 2024
ORIGINATED BY:

City Manager's Office
ATTACHMENT LIST:

Attachment 1 - FY2024-25 Recommended Budget Options (PDF) Attachment 2 - FY 2024-25 Recommended Budget General Fund Revenues NEW (PDF) Attachment 3 - FY 2024-25 Recommended Budget General Fund Expenditures (PDF) Attachment 4 - FY 2024-25 Recommended Revenue Amendment Options - Budget Forms (PDF)
Attachment 5 - FY 2024-25 Recommended Expenditure Amendment Options - Budget Forms (PDF)
Attachment 6 - FY 2024-25 Recommended Other Funds Budget Options - Budget Forms(PDF) Attachment 7 - FY 2024-25 Projected Fund Balance Schedule (PDF) Attachment 8 - Pacifica Staffing Comparison(PDF)
15 Packet Pg. 701
Attachment 1
City of Pacifica
FY 2024-25 GENERAL FUND PROGRAM OPTIONS

GENERAL FUND
FY 2024-25

GENERAL FUND
FY 2024-25
Base Recommended
Beginning Fund Balance 18,616,311 18,616,311
Operating Revenue $46,551,000 $46,646,300
Operating Expenditures (43,547,373) (45,253,471)
Operating Transfers In 1,422,000 1,422,000
Operating Transfers Out (1,587,600) (1,587,600)
Capital Transfer Out (75,000) (75,000)
Putting Back Debt Service Transfer (2,037,131) -
Adjusted Surplus/(Deficit) 725,896 1,152,229
Ending Fund Balance 19,342,207 19,768,540
Ending Fund Balance as % of Operating Expenses 43% 42%
Undesignated Fund Balance as % of Operating Expenses 23% 22% Dept
CM
PR
Dp
PR
Onetime Description
Program Change
Increase to GF
Budget
Impact to
General Fund
PBR Y 1 1 Re-opening Community Center Programming - Post Civic Center $ 64,700 (30,600) Total $ 64,700 $ (30,600)
Dept
CM
PR
Dp
PR
Onetime Description
Ongoing Program
Change Increase to
GF Budget
Total Impact to
General Fund
City Clerk Y 1 1 x Municipal Election Expenses Nov 2024 Election $ 175,000 Police Y 2 2 Convert (2) Police Officer Overhire Positions Added at Midyear to Permanent FT - - Admin. - Finance Y 3 1 Adding Finance and Administrative Services Director Position 180,543 110,407 PW Y 4 1 Adding (1) Assistant Civil Engineer for Public Works Engineering Division $ 173,102 48,335 Police Y 5 5 Implementation of an Automated License Plate Reader (ALPR) Program 45,000 45,000 Planning Y 6 1 Reinstating (1) Deputy Director of Planning Position 252,647 126,324 PW Y 7 2 x Adding (1) Limited-Term Senior Building Maint. Specialist - 3-year Temp Position 133,252 Police Y 8 3 Reinstate (1) Crime Prevention Officer (a.k.a. Community Policing Officer) as a Police Corporal Position 194,970 146,228
Admin. - HR Y 9 2 Adding (1) Permanent Full-Time Position as a Senior Human Resources Analyst 196,865 147,648 Admin. - IT Y 10 3 Adding (1) FT Info Systems/Tech Analyst - Converted from (2) PT IT Positions 93,376 70,032 Police Y 11 1 x Purchase of (50) hangduns & (20) rifles 90,000 Planning Y 12 2 x Interim Staffing Support for the Planning Department 100,000 Planning Y 13 6 x Local Coastal Land Use Plan (LCLUP) Certification 60,000 Planning Y 14 5 x Short Term Rental Ordinance Update 35,000 Planning Y 15 7 x Climate Action Update - Program Manager & Consult support for Community Engagement - 75,000 Planning Y 16 8 x State Law Ordinance Updates: Update various City land use planning ordinances to implement changes in state law - 50,000
PW Y 17 5 x Contractual Services Storm Drain Design 50,000 PW Y 18 3 x Weed Abatement 70,000
Admin. - HR Y 19 4 x Citywide Professional Development Training Program for Staff - 25,000 Police Y 20 4 x Employee Wellness Program - 34,173
City Clerk Y 21 2 x Pacifica Libraries Project Outreach Budget 50,000 Total $ 1,136,503 $ 1,641,399
Dept
CM
PR
Dp
PR
Onetime Description Fund Impact to Other
Funds
Public Works Y n/a Other funds impact of adding a Civic Engineer Position above (CM priority #4) 13/22 $ 108,655 Public Works - WW Y 1 1 Adding (1) Project Manager Position for Public Works Wastewater 34 153,887 Public Works - WW Y 2 2 Adding (1) Maintenance Assistant Part-Time position 18 30,000 Planning Y 3 3 x Housing Element Program Implementation 21 423,000 Public Works Y 4 4 x Vehicle Replacements 72 750,000
Planning Y 5 4 x Civic Spark Fellow and Partnership for Bay's Future 21 50,000 Total $ 1,515,542
FY 2024-25 REVENUE FUND PROGRAM OPTIONS
ADDITIONAL RESOURCE REQUESTS:

ADDITIONAL RESOURCE REQUESTS:

ADDITIONAL RESOURCE REQUESTS:

FY 2024-25 OTHER FUNDS PROGRAM OPTIONS
FY 2024-25 EXPENDITURE FUND PROGRAM OPTIONS

15.a
Packet Pg. 702 Attachment: Attachment 1 - FY2024-25 Recommended Budget Options (5684 : FY 2024-25 Budget Study Session 3) Attachment 2
Description FY 2022-23
Actual
FY 2023-24
Revised Budget
FY 2024-25 Base
Budget 5/13/24
FY 2024-25
Proposed
Budget 6/10/24
% of FY
2024-25
Proposed
Budget
$ Change
Proposed
over Base
%Change
Proposed
over Base
Taxes $ 35,046,917 $ 34,162,000 $ 35,819,200 $ 35,819,200 75% $ - 0% Property Tax 15,836,463 16,204,900 16,751,000 16,751,000 35% - 0% Vehicle License Fees 6,551,610 3,819,100 4,590,000 4,590,000 10% - 0% Business License Tax 542,974 570,700 591,000 591,000 1% - 0% Cannabis tax 993,849 950,000 987,000 987,000 2% - 0%
Sales Tax 3,319,862 3,231,000 3,279,200 3,279,200 7% - 0% Measure Y 557,966 2,500,000 2,512,000 2,512,000 5% - 0% Transient Occupancy Tax 3,155,960 2,919,500 2,978,000 2,978,000 6% - 0% Utility Users Tax 3,312,376 2,700,000 2,800,000 2,800,000 6% - 0% Other Taxes 775,857 1,266,800 1,331,000 1,331,000 3% - 0% Intergovernmental 5,390,223 2,431,700 2,440,000 2,440,000 5% - 0% Other Revenue 1,016,539 835,000 875,000 875,000 2% - 0% Charges for Services 7,554,413 7,975,000 7,416,800 7,512,100 16% 95,300 1% Sub-total $ 49,008,092 $ 45,403,700 $ 46,551,000 $ 46,646,300 97% $ 95,300 1% Transfers In 1,130,900 1,291,900 1,422,000 1,422,000 3% - 0% Total $ 50,138,992 $ 46,695,600 $ 47,973,000 $ 48,068,300 100% $ 95,300 1% City of Pacifica
General Fund Revenue Detail
FY2024-25 Proposed Base Budget

15.b
Packet Pg. 703 Attachment: Attachment 2 - FY 2024-25 Recommended Budget General Fund Revenues NEW (5684 : FY Attachment 3
Expenditure By Category
FY 2022-23 Actual
FY 2023-24
Revised Budget
FY 2024-25 Base
Budget 5/13/24
FY 2024-25
Proposed Budget
6/10/24
% of FY
2024-25
Proposed
Budget
$ Change
Proposed over
Base
%Change
Proposed
over Base
Salaries & Benefits $ 30,561,013 $ 31,029,061 $ 32,722,250 $ 33,996,358 72% $ 1,274,108 4% Salary Savings (5%) (1,228,777) (1,607,069) -3% $ (378,292) 31% Contract Services 8,010,498 9,083,400 8,232,100 8,766,582 19% $ 534,482 6% Material/Supplies/Maintenance 4,351,854 3,800,100 3,821,800 4,097,600 9% $ 275,800 7% Sub-Total 42,923,365 43,912,561 43,547,373 45,253,471 96% 1,706,098 4% Transfers/Allocations Out 2,305,381 3,376,200 1,587,600 1,587,600 3% - 0% Transfers Out - Capital 655,000 1,338,000 75,000 75,000 0% - 0% Total $ 45,883,746 $ 48,626,761 $ 45,209,973 $ 46,916,071 100% $ 1,706,098 4% Expenditure By Deparment FY 2022-23 Actual FY 2023-24
Revised Budget
FY 2024-25 Base
Budget 5/13/24
FY 2024-25
Proposed Budget
6/10/24
% of FY
2024-25
Proposed
Budget
$ Change
Proposed over
Base
%Change
Proposed
over Base
General Government $ 7,304,997 $ 7,155,341 $ 6,635,264 $ 6,767,029 14% $ 131,765 2% Police Dept 11,461,011 12,003,588 11,859,797 12,175,197 26% 315,400 3% Fire Dept 8,284,717 7,687,367 7,890,064 7,890,064 17% - 0% Planning 3,080,138 5,031,717 3,992,927 4,439,250 9% 446,323 11% Public Works 5,009,431 5,032,522 4,601,004 4,902,591 10% 301,587 7% PB&R 5,648,905 5,862,626 6,237,990 6,302,690 13% 64,700 1% Non Departmental 5,094,547 5,853,600 3,992,927 4,439,250 9% 446,323 11% Total $ 45,883,746 $ 48,626,761 $ 45,209,973 $ 46,916,071 100% $ 1,706,098 4% City of Pacifica
General Fund Expenditures
FY2024-25 Proposed Base Budget

15.c
Packet Pg. 704 Attachment: Attachment 3 - FY 2024-25 Recommended Budget General Fund Expenditures (5684 : FY FY 2024-25 BASE BUDGET

REVENUE ADJUSTMENT FORM
PROGRAM: General Ledger Account – Multiple General Fund Accounts REQUEST TITLE: Reopening Community Center Programing - Post Civic Center Request Summary
With the Civic Center returning to the updated City Hall location, the Community Center is now available for additional recreational activities, including dance, exercise, and art contract classes, as well as community rentals. The utilization of this space for recreation will generate additional revenue from class fees and rentals. Correspondingly, there will be increased expenditures to pay part-time staff to monitor the building, maintain the recreation space, and compensate contractors for their share of the class fees.

Factors Driving the Request for Change
There continues to be strong community interest in signing up for recreation classes. With the return of significant programmable space in the Community Center, we can now meet this demand. Many previous contract class providers are eager to return, and the public remains enthusiastic about enrolling in arts, dance, and exercise classes.

Alternatives
The alternative would be to not offer recreation classes or community rentals in the Community Center that are currently being used by City Hall staff after the Civic Center employees return to their renovated offices.

Cost Summary
Line Item Description Fund Dep/Org Number Object Code Total Amount Revenue (list detail description below)
COMMUNITY CENTER RENTALS 01 000000 44504 11,100.00
CONTRACT PROGRAMS 01 000000 46840 84,200.00
Total Revenue $ 95,300.00
Offsetting Expenses
SALARIES - PART-TIME 01 800805 51300 (30,000.00)
DEPARTMENTAL EXPENSE 01 800805 52300 (10,800.00)
CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 01 800850 52800 (23,900.00)
Net Revenue Adjustment $ 30,600.00
Priority Tracking Council Strategic Goal
Department Priority 1 Enhance Organizational & Fiscal Stability ☒ City Manager Priority 1 Improve / steward City infrastructure, streets and facilities ☐ Prioritize protection and development of affordable housing ☐ Council Accepted Pursue climate change adaptation and mitigation. ☐ Council Rejected Broaden public communications and collaboration ☒ ☒ On-going (Annual) ☐ One-time

15.d
Packet Pg. 705 Attachment: Attachment 4 - FY 2024-25 Recommended Revenue Amendment Options - Budget Forms (5684 : FY 2024-25 Budget Study Session FY 2024-25 BASE BUDGET
EXPENSE AMENDMENT – PROGRAM CHANGE FORM
PROGRAM: General Ledger Account - 01.200210.52331.0000.000 REQUEST TITLE: Municipal Election Expenses Projected November 2024 Election Request Summary
November 2024 represents a regular general municipal election cycle for the City of Pacifica. There will be two City Council district seats up for election (Districts 1 and 4) and the City may place one measure on the ballot. Based on estimated election costs received from the San Mateo County Elections Division, the cost for 2 Council seats and one ballot measure may be in the range of $157,000 for the County to conduct election services. Additional expenses will be necessary for elections materials and publication of elections notices, translations, etc. The total budget request for elections related expenses for FY 2024- 25 is $175,000. While the City has some discretion on placing city-initiated measures on the ballot, the election for City Council seats is a mandated cost that must be borne in the regular even-year election cycles.

Factors Driving the Request for Change
 Regular City Council municipal election cycle.
 Placement of a proposed revenue measure on the ballot to Improve City Infrastructure is aligned with City Council Strategic Plan and priorities.

Alternatives
Alternative options include City Council direction to not place a city-initiated measure on the ballot for the November 2024 election. This would require a deviation from recommendations to Council that staff is pursuing to align with Council strategic plan for Improve / steward City infrastructure, streets, and facilities. There is no alternative to the regular election for City Council district seats, as that is a mandated action.

Cost Summary
The elections expense request for FY 2021-22, which was the previous regular municipal election in November 2022, was for $160,000. The estimated additional expenses above the FY 2021-22 base budget is an increase of $15,000.

Line Item Description Fund Org Number Object Code Total Amount Operating Expense (list detail description below)
Election Expense 01 200210 52331 175,000
Total Operating Costs $ 175,000
Offsetting Cost Savings or Revenues
Net Operating Costs $ 175,000
Priority Tracking Council Strategic Goal
Department Priority 1 Enhance Organizational & Fiscal Stability ☒ City Manager Priority 1 Improve / steward City infrastructure, streets, and facilities ☒ Prioritize protection and development of affordable housing ☐ Council Accepted Pursue climate change adaptation and mitigation. ☐ Council Rejected Broaden public communications and collaboration ☐ ☐ On-going (Annual) ☒ One-time

15.e
Packet Pg. 706 Attachment: Attachment 5 - FY 2024-25 Recommended Expenditure Amendment Options - Budget Forms (5684 : FY 2024-25 Budget Study FY 2024-25 BASE BUDGET
EXPENSE AMENDMENT – PROGRAM CHANGE FORM
PROGRAM: General Ledger Account – General Fund
REQUEST TITLE: Convert (2) Police Officer Over-hire Positions added at Mid-Year to Permanent FullTime Police Officer Positions Request Summary
The police department is requesting to convert (2) over-hire police officer positions that were added during the FY2023-24 Mid-Year and convert those positions to (2) permanent full-time police officer positions to keep pace with the six eligible retirements in FY2024-25. We are experiencing a recruitment crisis and must prepare the organization before these vacancies result in the inability to provide public safety services.

Factors Driving the Request for Change
 The reduction in overtime expenditures ($656,761 in 2023).  Six sworn personnel are eligible for retirement in FY2024-25.  It takes approximately one year from date of hire for employee to serve as a solo patrol officer.  Inability to provide public safety services requiring additional mutual aid requests.  Threat to staff retention due to excessive mandated overtime (one officer resigned in March 2024 with more anticipated).

Impact of Change
 Anticipated 15% reduction in patrol overtime costs.
 Increased capacity to accommodate attrition rates.
 A self-reliant independent operating police department.  Retain valued staff.

Alternatives
The city can deny this request or authorize the police department to be budgeted for two permanent positions in FY2024-25 - increasing our authorized positions from 33 sworn personnel to 35 sworn personnel. Our current staffing levels are 38% lower than in 1989. A 2018 study reflected that PPD was 29% lower than (5) similar sized agencies in San Mateo County. Our current minimum staffing and mandated overtime has resulted in the resignation of one officer and three workman’s compensation injuries stemming from mental health issues and physical injuries.

Our minimum staffing jeopardizes the health and safety of our officers and does not properly address contemporary public safety issues (i.e. traffic, substance abuse, rising property crimes) as we lack high visibility patrols and the opportunity to be proactive in impactful ways. Our staffing levels cannot accommodate a sick call, vacation, comp-time, court, or training. Any and all absences must be backfilled with mandated overtime. This is an unacceptable staffing model for a police agency.

Cost Summary
There is no cost or fiscal impact to the general fund as the request is to add two over-hire Police Officer positions approved at the Mid-Year Budget review and therefore included in the FY2024-25 base budget. Staffing was costed based upon the top step, fully burdened annual cost for the position at the Priority Tracking Council Strategic Goal
Department Priority 2 Enhance Organizational & Fiscal Stability ☒ City Manager Priority 2 Improve / steward City infrastructure, streets, and facilities ☐ Prioritize protection and development of affordable housing ☐ Council Accepted Pursue climate change adaptation and mitigation. ☐ Council Rejected Broaden public communications and collaboration ☐ ☒ On-going (Annual) ☐ One-time

15.e
Packet Pg. 707 Attachment: Attachment 5 - FY 2024-25 Recommended Expenditure Amendment Options - Budget Forms (5684 : FY 2024-25 Budget Study FY 2024-25 Base Budget Expense Amendment Page 2 of 2
monthly salary rate of $9,989. Therefore, there is no additional cost to FY2024-25, but the request is listed for budget position control purposes.

Line Item Description Fund Org Number Object Code Total Amount Operating Expense (list detail description
below)
Total Operating Costs $ -
Offsetting Cost Savings or Revenues
Net Operating Costs $ -

15.e
Packet Pg. 708 Attachment: Attachment 5 - FY 2024-25 Recommended Expenditure Amendment Options - Budget Forms (5684 : FY 2024-25 Budget Study FY 2024-25 BASE BUDGET
EXPENSE AMENDMENT – PROGRAM CHANGE FORM
PROGRAM: General Ledger Account – Finance & Administration 01.240220.51200.0000.000 REQUEST TITLE: Adding a Finance and Administrative Services Director Position Request Summary
This recommendation is to add a standalone Finance and Administrative Services Director position within the Administrative Services Department to provide strong finance oversight and management support for other administrative functions. The proposal arises from the critical need for oversight and support in the Finance Department due to staff turnover and newer staff members requiring more support and training to perform critical day-to-day operational and management functions. This action would also create a standalone Assistant City Manager position, significantly increasing the capacity of this role by separating the Finance & Administrative Services Director and Assistant City Manager duties into two separate positions.

Factors Driving the Request for Change
Historically, the City of Pacifica’s Assistant City Manager role has always been combined with other department head responsibilities depending on the incumbent’s area of expertise. The current Assistant City Manager also holds responsibilities for Economic Development, Risk Management, and all administrative functions, including Finance, Human Resources, and Information Technology. Not only is this workload unsustainable for one position, but the ACM currently has limited capacity for other critical general functions, ongoing programs, and special projects within the City Manager’s Office, Additionally, due to recent turnovers in the Administrative Services Department, there are many new and less experienced staff members, especially in the Finance Division, who require a lot of attention, training, and mentorship. This places significant constraints on the ACM’s time across all areas of responsibility, making it challenging to ensure the smooth daily operation of the department.

Furthermore, the Human Resources Manager announced her upcoming retirement in September and based on preliminary conversations with peer agencies and the Bay Area’s top public sector recruitment firms, this position will be extremely hard to fill. Creating a department director-level position over the administrative services could expand the pool of qualified and experienced potential candidates who are currently Finance or Human Resources Directors interested in expanding their career to a broader administrative role.

Depending on the area of expertise that the prospective incumbent brings to the City, it would provide the City Manager with more options for future reorganization of the Administrative Services Department to leverage staff knowledge, expertise, and fit to achieve the additional savings target, listed on this form, by un-funding and/or reclassifying other positions in the department.

Impact of Change
The addition of the Finance & Administrative Services Director would equip the Administrative Services Department with needed management oversight while freeing up the Assistant City Manager capacity to take on additional ongoing programs and special projects within the City Manager’s Office, such as ongoing short-term program administration and ordinance revision, development and implementation of the affordable housing programs, comprehensive risk management assessment and development of the Priority Tracking Council Strategic Goal
Department Priority 1 Enhance Organizational & Fiscal Stability ☒ City Manager Priority 3 Improve / steward City infrastructure, streets, and facilities ☐ Prioritize protection and development of affordable housing ☐ Council Accepted Pursue climate change adaptation and mitigation. ☐ Council Rejected Broaden public communications and collaboration ☐ ☒ On-going (Annual) ☐ One-time

15.e
Packet Pg. 709 Attachment: Attachment 5 - FY 2024-25 Recommended Expenditure Amendment Options - Budget Forms (5684 : FY 2024-25 Budget Study FY 2024-25 Base Budget Expense Amendment Page 2 of 2
ongoing risk mitigation program and implementation of the risk management operational best practices, managing the new cost allocation plan, development impact fees and user fee study, development of the 2212 Beach Blvd Site, subject to the surplus Land Act process, feasibility assessment for special tax increments financing districts, such as Climate Resilience District (CRD) or Enhanced Infrastructure Financing District (EIFD), managing the H-BID program, and other. .

Alternatives
Not approving this request would reinforce the unsustainable workload and may result in additional delays in several projects and the implementation of the Council’s Strategic Plan.

Cost Summary
Staffing is costed based upon the top step, fully burdened annual cost for the position at the monthly salary rate of $18,234, which is below market for this classification but is internally aligned with other executive salaries within the City. Based on the City’s current practices, most appointments are made at the midrange salary scale, and the actual annual cost is likely to be lower in the first few years of the position being filled.

The proposed cost is based on a preliminary market compensation analysis of similar classifications of neighboring cities in San Mateo County. Once the Council provides direction, staff will bring the recommended classification and salary schedule for approval prior to commencing the recruitment. All new positions also include an assumed 25% savings in year one, representing the time required to complete the recruitment process.

Line Item Description Fund Org Number Object Code Total Amount Operating Expense (list detail description below)
Salary and Benefits 01 240220 51200 280,543
Total Operating Costs $ 280,543
Offsetting Cost Savings - 25% savings in year one 01 300320 51999 (70,136) Additional Savings from future reorganization (one-tim 01 240220 51200 (100,000) Net Operating Costs $ 110,407

15.e
Packet Pg. 710 Attachment: Attachment 5 - FY 2024-25 Recommended Expenditure Amendment Options - Budget Forms (5684 : FY 2024-25 Budget Study FY 2024-25 BASE BUDGET
TRANSFER REQUEST – PROGRAM CHANGE FORM
PROGRAM: Public Works Engineering – Multiple accounts
REQUEST TITLE: New Assistant Civil Engineer for Public Works Engineering Division Request Summary
The Public Works Engineering Division proposes creating a new Assistant Civil Engineer position to manage Coastal Projects, Capital Improvement Projects (CIPs), permits, grant applications, and other administrative reporting. 5% of the position’s salary can be paid by reimbursements from the HMGP grant on the 310-330 Esplanade Project.

Factors Driving the Request for Change
The city’s staffing is 25% less than other agencies. The City is also experiencing a greater amount of storm damage and needs staffing in order to fulfill the required disaster-related reporting to receive reimbursements. There is currently $150 million in unfunded Capital Improvement Program projects that can be carried out further by adding this new position. The impact can be measured by the number of CIP’s that are completed annually.

Alternatives
The alternative is not to hire a new Assistant Civil Engineer. This would result in limiting the CIP’s, permitting, grant applications, and other administrative reporting carried out by the division.

Cost Summary
Staffing is costed based upon the top step, fully burdened annual cost for the position at the monthly salary rate of $10,145. Based on the City’s current practices, most appointments are made at the midrange salary scale, and the actual annual cost is likely to be lower in the first few years of the position being filled.

The proposed cost is based on an existing salary schedule of similar classifications of neighboring cities in San Mateo County. All new positions also include an assumed salary savings in year one, representing the time required to complete the recruitment process.

Priority Tracking Council Strategic Goal
Department Priority 1 Enhance Organizational & Fiscal Stability ☒ City Manager Priority 4 Improve / steward City infrastructure, streets and facilities ☒ Prioritize protection and development of affordable housing ☐ Council Accepted Pursue climate change adaptation and mitigation. ☒ Council Rejected Broaden public communications and collaboration ☐ ☒ On-going (Annual) ☐ One-time

15.e
Packet Pg. 711 Attachment: Attachment 5 - FY 2024-25 Recommended Expenditure Amendment Options - Budget Forms (5684 : FY 2024-25 Budget Study FY 2024-25 Base Budget Transfer Request Page 2 of 2
Line-Item Description Fund Org Number Object Code Total Amount Operating Expense
Estimated salary for the addition of a fulltime Assistant Civil Engineer position 01 700723 51200 64,447 Esplanade Project funding to cover 5% of
salary expenditure 38 860000 51200-S011 8,655
Street Improvement 13 900000 51200 50,000
Capital Improvement Program 22 900723 51200 50,000
Total Operating Costs $173,102
Offsetting Cost Savings
Year one salary savings 01 700723 51999 (16,112)
Net Operating Costs $156,990

15.e
Packet Pg. 712 Attachment: Attachment 5 - FY 2024-25 Recommended Expenditure Amendment Options - Budget Forms (5684 : FY 2024-25 Budget Study FY 2024-25 BASE BUDGET
EXPENSE AMENDMENT – PROGRAM CHANGE FORM
PROGRAM: Police Department - Patrol Division
REQUEST TITLE: Request Implementation of an Automated License Plate Reader (ALPR) program Request Summary
The Pacifica Police Department is requesting the implementation of an Automated License Plate Reader (ALPR) program. This program will incorporate (10) fixed ALPR cameras throughout the city, which will help our staff to respond to crim impacting our community. ALPR technology provide real time information to police officers on patrol by providing onscreen alerts for license plates which might be associated with criminal activity, such as retail theft, stolen vehicles and even help locate missing persons or persons experiencing a mental health crisis.

We anticipate upon implementation of this program additional monies may be available through grants and will allow for this program to grow, by adding more cameras.

We also request that our Axon in-car camera system be allowed to utilize ALPR/Flock in our patrol vehicles. Our new In-car camera system allows for this technology to be turned on from our camera system, allowing our patrol cars to also receive alerts.

Factors Driving the Request for Change
 Public safety technology that will augment and support low staffing in our agency.  Decrease and help investigate a large amount of retail theft occurring in the city.  Real time alerts to reduce crime and increase efficiency in investigating crimes.  Increases our chances of locating persons who are wanted for criminal activity.  One of the only cities remaining in San Mateo County, who have yet to implement this program.

Impact of Change
 The use of this public safety technology will allow for more tools to investigate crimes and trends.  Will result in a stronger partnership with our businesses in town.  Sends a message to “would be” criminals that Pacifica has this technology and will utilize it to make persons responsible for their actions.
 A rather low-cost investigative tool that will cut down on time investigating crimes. Currently officers must reach out to surrounding agencies who already have this valuable public safety technology and request information, which could take several days.

Alternatives
No alternatives available currently to assist law enforcement in combating retail theft.

Cost Summary
The implementation of this program would cost approximately $45,000 a year. We would have to enter into a contract with Axon (5years) and Flock (2years) to utilize the (10) designated locations and all (13) Priority Tracking Council Strategic Goal
Department Priority 5 Enhance Organizational & Fiscal Stability ☐ City Manager Priority 5 Improve / steward City infrastructure, streets, and facilities ☒ Prioritize protection and development of affordable housing ☐ Council Accepted Pursue climate change adaptation and mitigation. ☐ Council Rejected Broaden public communications and collaboration ☐ ☒ On-going (Annual) ☐ One-time

15.e
Packet Pg. 713 Attachment: Attachment 5 - FY 2024-25 Recommended Expenditure Amendment Options - Budget Forms (5684 : FY 2024-25 Budget Study FY 2024-25 Base Budget Expense Amendment Page 2 of 2
patrol vehicles to be activated. This cost includes installation of the fixed cameras, maintenance and activation of ALPR on our in-car cameras system.

Line Item Description Fund Org Number Object Code Total Amount Operating Expense (list detail description below)
Axon/Flock contract estimate per year 01 500560 52800 45,000 Total Operating Costs $ 45,000
Offsetting Cost Savings or Revenues
Net Operating Costs $ 45,000

15.e
Packet Pg. 714 Attachment: Attachment 5 - FY 2024-25 Recommended Expenditure Amendment Options - Budget Forms (5684 : FY 2024-25 Budget Study FY 2024-25 BASE BUDGET
EXPENSE AMENDMENT – PROGRAM CHANGE FORM
PROGRAM: General Ledger Account – 01.660711.51200.0000.000 REQUEST TITLE: Reinstating the Deputy Director of Planning Position Request Summary
Hire one new Planning Department staff at the Deputy Director of Planning classification (on-going request); The new permanent staff position is necessary to significantly increase Planning Department staff capacity in light of the numerous, major work plan items assigned to the Planning Department over the next several years, including, but, not limited to the Housing Element program implementation, shortterm rental program updates, Climate Action and Adaptation implementation actions (after plan adoption), comprehensive zoning updates, Sharp Park Specific Plan LCP Amendment certification, and major development projects in the pipeline. The permanent staff hire is intended to remain in place for the ongoing years.

Factors Driving the Request for Change
Major City Council Strategic Plan assignments to the Planning Department, along with significant external factors requiring major staff resource commitments including major development project applications, Coastal Commission LCP amendment certification efforts, ordinance updates triggered by the 2040 General Plan adoption, ordinance updates and program development/implementation triggered by Housing Element adoption, and ordinance updates to comply with state law changes.

The Planning Department will be able to more effectively support implementation of the City Council’s Strategic Plan priorities while also complying with the City’s legal obligations to process development projects and amend its ordinances to comply with state law and achieve General Plan consistency.

The impact would be measured by quarterly progress made on City Council Strategic Plan implementation as well as the timely processing of development projects.

Alternatives
The need could be partially met by contracting for Deputy Director-level consultant services. Although familiarity and institutional knowledge that would be developed by hiring City staff is advantageous.

Cost Summary
Staffing is costed based upon the top step, fully burdened annual cost for the position at the monthly salary rate of $15,968. Based on the City’s current practices, most appointments are made at the midrange salary scale, and the actual annual cost is likely to be lower in the first few years of the position being filled.

The proposed cost is based on an existing salary schedule of similar classifications of neighboring cities in San Mateo County. All new positions also include an assumed salary savings in year one, representing the time required to complete the recruitment process.

Priority Tracking Council Strategic Goal
Department Priority 1 Enhance Organizational & Fiscal Stability ☒ City Manager Priority 6 Improve / steward City infrastructure, streets, and facilities ☐ Prioritize protection and development of affordable housing ☒ Council Accepted Pursue climate change adaptation and mitigation. ☐ Council Rejected Broaden public communications and collaboration ☐ ☒ On-going (Annual) ☐ One-time

15.e
Packet Pg. 715 Attachment: Attachment 5 - FY 2024-25 Recommended Expenditure Amendment Options - Budget Forms (5684 : FY 2024-25 Budget Study FY 2024-25 Base Budget Expense Amendment Page 2 of 2
Line Item Description Fund Org Number Object Code Total Amount Operating Expense (list detail description below)
Annual salary cost for one Deputy Director of
Planning position 01 660711 51200 $252,647
Total Operating Costs $252,647
Offsetting Cost Savings or Revenues
Year one salary savings 01 660711 51999 ($126,324)
Net Operating Costs $126,324

15.e
Packet Pg. 716 Attachment: Attachment 5 - FY 2024-25 Recommended Expenditure Amendment Options - Budget Forms (5684 : FY 2024-25 Budget Study FY 2024-25 BASE BUDGET
EXPENSE AMENDMENT – PROGRAM CHANGE FORM
PROGRAM: General Ledger Account - 01.700770.51200.000
REQUEST TITLE: Adding (1) Limited-term Senior Building Maintenance Specialist - 3-Year Temporary Position
Request Summary
This is a temporary position that will remain and have a salary cost for three years only.

Factors Driving the Request for Change
Public Works/Field Services is proposing to add a permanent full time Senior Building Maintenance position to help facilitate and coordinate maintenance, repair and upgrades to our aging facilities. The position is needed due to the increasing number of repairs needed to keep our facilities operating safely.

The reasons driving this request are: 1) The increased workload of current personnel, 2) The need to have a singular person overseeing the workorders and ensuring work is completed in a timely manner, 3) The need to have reports, records of repairs and scheduled maintenance performed when items are due, 4) The need to estimate repairs and order materials correctly to save funds, 5) The addition of this position will also help with facility enhancement and the oversite of subcontractors for quality repairs and upgrades and because 6) The City building facilities are in need of significant repair due to deferred maintenance over the years.

Alternatives
This is a necessary staff addition.

Cost Summary
Staffing is costed based upon the top step, fully burdened annual cost for the position at the monthly salary rate of $10,463. Based on the City’s current practices, most appointments are made at the midrange salary scale, and the actual annual cost is likely to be lower in the first few years of the position being filled.

The proposed cost is based on an existing salary schedule of similar classifications of neighboring cities in San Mateo County. All new positions also include an assumed 25% savings in year one, representing the time required to complete the recruitment process.

Line Item Description Fund Org Number Object Code Total Amount Operating Expense (list detail description below)
Annual salary cost to add one full-time Senior
Building Maintenance Specialist position 01 700770 51200 177,669 Total Operating Costs $ 177,669
Offsetting Cost Savings or Revenues
25% of savings in year one 01 700723 51999 (44,417)
Net Operating Costs $ 133,252
Priority Tracking Council Strategic Goal
Department Priority 2 Enhance Organizational & Fiscal Stability ☒ City Manager Priority 7 Improve / steward City infrastructure, streets, and facilities ☒ Prioritize protection and development of affordable housing ☐ Council Accepted Pursue climate change adaptation and mitigation. ☐ Council Rejected Broaden public communications and collaboration ☐ ☐ On-going (Annual) ☒ One-time

15.e
Packet Pg. 717 Attachment: Attachment 5 - FY 2024-25 Recommended Expenditure Amendment Options - Budget Forms (5684 : FY 2024-25 Budget Study FY 2024-25 BASE BUDGET
EXPENSE AMENDMENT – PROGRAM CHANGE FORM
PROGRAM: Police Department - Investigative Services Division 01.500560.51200.0000.000 REQUEST TITLE: Reinstate Crime Prevention Officer as a Full-time Permanent Police Corporal Request Summary
The Pacifica Police Department is requesting the reinstatement of the Crime Prevention Officer position.

This integral position will oversee all community outreach events and programs, code enforcement (cannabis/tobacco), PIO/social media engagement, grant applications, and the implementation of police volunteer programs (VIPS, explorers). The position will also serve as a liaison with the school district, business community, and neighborhood watch groups. The Crime Prevention Officer will also coordinate all special events in Pacifica.

Factors Driving the Request for Change

1. We do not have positions that can manage this workload. Utilizing the Professional Standards Supervisor and command staff to perform these duties is a tremendous burden that jeopardizes organizational efficiency and effectiveness.

2. We need a position that can recruit and manage a cadre of police volunteers to perform a variety of functions in both divisions to offset low staffing levels and high demand for public safety services.

3. The City cut a crucial School Resource Officer position in 2008 and the school district has asked the police department be more present and engaged on campus to meet with students, parents, and faculty.

Duties would include faculty education, threat assessments, parent education meetings, and offering drug and violence prevention curriculum to students.

4. Manage staff workloads to accommodate new and existing community outreach programs and events which are labor intensive. This includes the Community Academy, Teen Academy, department open house, Red Ribbon Week, National Night Out, Whalefest, FogFest, Pride Parade etc.

Impact of Change

1. Implement new and maintain existing community outreach programs to include the Community Academy, Teen Academy, department open house, Red Ribbon Week, NNO, and special events.

2. Supplement low staffing by leveraging a volunteer corp. to relieve officers and professional staff of ancillary duties and subsequently reduce response times.

3. Strengthen partnerships with the Pacifica Unified School District and business community.

4. Increase digital engagement and followership and promote timely and transparent messaging.

5. Take advantage of grant funding for specialized community programs.

Priority Tracking Council Strategic Goal
Department Priority 3 Enhance Organizational & Fiscal Stability ☐ City Manager Priority 8 Improve / steward City infrastructure, streets, and facilities ☐ Prioritize protection and development of affordable housing ☐ Council Accepted Pursue climate change adaptation and mitigation. ☐ Council Rejected Broaden public communications and collaboration ☒ ☒ On-going (Annual) ☐ One-time

15.e
Packet Pg. 718 Attachment: Attachment 5 - FY 2024-25 Recommended Expenditure Amendment Options - Budget Forms (5684 : FY 2024-25 Budget Study FY 2024-25 Base Budget Expense Amendment Page 2 of 2
Alternatives
No alternatives available currently to accommodate this workload.

Cost Summary
If this position is approved, the police department will apply for a federal DOJ grant awarding $125,000 for the implementation of a Crime Prevention Officer. There are state and federal grants that support tobacco ordinance enforcement and other youth-related initiatives that require programmatic interventions that a Crime Prevention Officer will perform.

Due to the nature of this position, we are requesting it be filled with a supervisor at the rank of Corporal.

This position requires an employee with extensive experience and city-wide perspective that requires a higher level of knowledge and understanding of City goals and priorities.

Staffing is costed based upon the top step, fully burdened annual cost for the position at the monthly salary rate of $11,222. Based on the City’s current practices, most appointments are made at the midrange salary scale, and the actual annual cost is likely to be lower in the first few years of the position being filled.

The proposed cost is based on an existing salary schedule of similar classifications of neighboring cities in San Mateo County. All new positions also include an assumed 25% savings in year one, representing the time required to complete the recruitment process.

Line Item Description Fund Org Number Object Code Total Amount Operating Expense (list detail description below)
(1) Police Corporal Position (salary and benefits) 01 500560 51200 194,970 Total Operating Costs $ 194,970
Offsetting Cost Savings or Revenues
25% savings in year one 01 500560 51999 (48,743)
Net Operating Costs $ 146,228

15.e
Packet Pg. 719 Attachment: Attachment 5 - FY 2024-25 Recommended Expenditure Amendment Options - Budget Forms (5684 : FY 2024-25 Budget Study FY 2024-25 BASE BUDGET
EXPENSE AMENDMENT – PROGRAM CHANGE FORM
PROGRAM: General Ledger Account – 01.240220.51200.0000.000 REQUEST TITLE: Adding (1) Permanent Full-Time Senior Human Resources Analyst Position Request Summary
Human Resources is proposing to add a permanent full-time Senior Human Resources Analyst position to the Human Resources Division. The proposal stems from the critical need for enhanced support across all departments for the upcoming labor negotiations, which will require developing costing and modeling complex analyses. Additionally, with the recently announced retirement of the Human Resources Manager, maintaining the status quo becomes essential to achieving the City’s human resources priorities and ensuring operational efficiency for day-to-day operations, including recruitments and on/off-boarding, labor relations, and benefits administration, as well as high-level projects, including completing the Human Resources Management Systems ERP implementation and classification study.

Factors Driving the Request for Change
During the last 2 1/2 years, Human Resources has built a strong foundation, and the HR team has provided stability to the entire city and will continue to be proactive in recruiting, retention, and development of staff in addition to preparation for labor negotiations beginning in January 2025. Having this additional support will help normalize the current workload and assist with higher-level project work in support of the city manager’s office. Adding another position will prevent the HR team from experiencing burnout, which can lead to absenteeism, loss of productivity, and, eventually, resignation. The human resources infrastructure that is currently in place has provided stability to the entire city workforce. The human resources team faces significant capacity constraints due to several factors.

The small Human Resources team of three is now responsible for managing 193 full-time equivalent positions, not including any future positions that may get approved for the upcoming budget, which is an unsustainable workload. Additionally, with recent enhancements to year-round childcare, senior, aquatics, and recreation programs, as well as increased summer programs, the staffing level of part-time personnel has significantly increased throughout the organization, surpassing the pre-COVID level, now exceeding 100 part-time employees. The HR division handles all recruitment, employee relations, risk management, labor relations, and compliance reporting. Unfortunately, this workload significantly exceeds the staffing capacity, and the City’s HR staffing appears to be significantly below that of comparable agencies.

Impact of Change
In summary, the addition of this higher-level classification would elevate HR services and ensure the implementation of the Council’s Strategic Plan, as relates to Goal 1: Enhance Organizational and Fiscal Stability. It is crucial to consider the city’s requirements when assessing the potential impact on the City’s HR programs if this proposal is not approved. This change will also ensure a seamless transition to a new Human Resources Manager in the upcoming year. The HR team requires backfill support during labor negotiations, the ongoing implementation of the new ERP system, and the preservation of institutional knowledge that currently exists within the team.

To sustain this trajectory and continue to be effective for the City, we must maintain the support staff so that we can continue to provide further support to management to assist in employee engagement and Priority Tracking Council Strategic Goal
Department Priority 2 Enhance Organizational & Fiscal Stability ☒ City Manager Priority 9 Improve / steward City infrastructure, streets, and facilities ☐ Prioritize protection and development of affordable housing ☐ Council Accepted Pursue climate change adaptation and mitigation. ☐ Council Rejected Broaden public communications and collaboration ☐ ☒ On-going (Annual) ☐ One-time

15.e
Packet Pg. 720 Attachment: Attachment 5 - FY 2024-25 Recommended Expenditure Amendment Options - Budget Forms (5684 : FY 2024-25 Budget Study FY 2024-25 Base Budget Expense Amendment Page 2 of 2
retention. Ensuring adequate staffing and knowledge retention aligns with our strategic goal of enhancing organizational stability.

Approving the addition of the Senior HR Analyst classification and funding this position will not only mitigate immediate risks but also set up the HR function for success during the transition to a new HR Manager next year. Investing in the Human Resources team will pay dividends in terms of efficiency, employee satisfaction, and overall organizational performance.

Alternatives
An alternative to this request would be approving a Senior HR Analyst classification to allow for promotional opportunities and succession planning within the organization. However, without funding an additional position the workload of the HR Division will remain unsustainable.

Cost Summary
Staffing is costed based upon the top step, fully burdened annual cost for the position at the monthly salary rate of $11,845. Based on the City’s current practices, most appointments are made at the mid-range salary scale, and the actual annual cost is likely to be lower in the first few years of the position being filled.

The proposed cost is based on a preliminary market compensation analysis of similar classifications of neighboring cities in San Mateo County. Once the Council provides direction, staff will bring the recommended classification and salary schedule for approval prior to commencing the recruitment. All new positions also include an assumed 25% savings in year one, representing the time required to complete the recruitment process.

Line Item Description Fund Org Number Object Code Total Amount Operating Expense (list detail description below)
Estimated Cost Difference Including Benefits 01 240220 51200 196,865 Total Operating Costs $ 196,865
Offsetting Cost Savings - 25% savings in year one 01 300320 51999 (49,216) Net Operating Costs $ 147,649

15.e
Packet Pg. 721 Attachment: Attachment 5 - FY 2024-25 Recommended Expenditure Amendment Options - Budget Forms (5684 : FY 2024-25 Budget Study FY 2024-25 BASE BUDGET
EXPENSE AMENDMENT – PROGRAM CHANGE FORM
PROGRAM: General Ledger Account – 01.300345.51200.0000.000 REQUEST TITLE: Converting (2) Part-Time Positions to (1) Full-Time Info Systems/Tech Analyst Position
Request Summary
The Administrative Services Department - IT Division has two part-time positions: one for 30 hours per week, including all benefits, and the other for 20 hours per week, including limited benefits. Due to our ongoing technology improvements, such as the Cloudization project for all departments and divisions city-wide, and the need for additional cybersecurity measures, we require more hands-on assistance in the IT department. Given the priority of data and network security, we believe in-house experienced employees are ideal for this position. Therefore, we are requesting to convert the two existing part-time positions into one full-time Info Systems/Tech Analyst position.

Factors Driving the Request for Change
As part of enhancing cybersecurity, all city-related accounts, including those of commissioners, committee members, part-time employees, temporary employees, and contractors, will be moved to cloud accounts. This means IT will need to maintain and be responsible for the security of approximately 700 accounts. Therefore, converting the two part-time positions to one full-time position within the IT department would have a significant impact on increasing the quality of customer service in our city. Not only would this be a more cost-effective way to implement and maintain IT projects, but it would also be a more secure way to meet the current IT needs for customer service, infrastructure, and daily operations. IT employees can access all city facilities and data, including confidential databases, making in-house IT employees more ideal than contractors. Additionally, the hourly rate for a contractor in the Info Systems/Tech Analyst position is significantly higher than the cost of an in-house Info Systems/Tech Analyst. To be specific, the hourly range for an Info Systems/Tech Analyst is between $53 to $63 according to the FY2024-25 Salary Schedule, while hiring a consultant for the same position would cost $220/$375 for regular/overtime hours, based on a quote from a former MSPs (managed service providers) in June 2023. Furthermore, the pool of experienced part-time IT workers is very limited compared to the pool of experienced full-time IT workers.

Impact of Change
The impact of the change would be only an increase in hours and salary as benefits are already included in the current part-time position.

Alternatives
Consider using consultant services for IT as an alternative but this will lead to higher costs and potential challenges in finding a reliable IT engineer due to the lack of a proper internal interview process. This is mainly because the managed services provider (MSP) will assign one of their employees, which could create cybersecurity issues and require additional training due to their high labor turnover. Therefore, converting internal City part-time position to a full-time Info Systems/Tech Analyst position in the IT Division would be a less costly and long-term Priority Tracking Council Strategic Goal
Department Priority 3 Enhance Organizational & Fiscal Stability ☒ City Manager Priority 10 Improve / steward City infrastructure, streets, and facilities ☐ Prioritize protection and development of affordable housing ☐ Council Accepted Pursue climate change adaptation and mitigation. ☐ Council Rejected Broaden public communications and collaboration ☐ ☒ On-going (Annual) ☐ One-time

15.e
Packet Pg. 722 Attachment: Attachment 5 - FY 2024-25 Recommended Expenditure Amendment Options - Budget Forms (5684 : FY 2024-25 Budget Study FY 2024-25 Base Budget Expense Amendment Page 2 of 2
solution compared to hiring contractors for a limited time. It would be a very costly and temporary solution, if the current part-time positions are not converted.

Cost Summary
Staffing is costed based upon the top step, fully burdened annual cost for the position at the monthly salary rate of $10,884. Based on the City’s current practices, most appointments are made at the mid-range salary scale, and the actual annual cost is likely to be lower in the first few years of the position being filled.

The proposed cost is based on an existing salary schedule of similar classifications of neighboring cities in San Mateo County. All new positions also include an assumed 25% savings in year one, representing the time required to complete the recruitment process.

Line Item Description Fund Org Number Object Code Total Amount Operating Expenditure
Salary cost for a full-time Info Systems/Tech
Analyst position 01 300345 51200 173,376
Total Operating Costs $ 173,376
Offsetting Cost Savings
Cost of two part-time positions that will result in
one-time salary savings 01 300345 51300 (80,000)
25% savings in year one 01 300320 51999 (23,344)
Net Operating Costs $ 70,032

15.e
Packet Pg. 723 Attachment: Attachment 5 - FY 2024-25 Recommended Expenditure Amendment Options - Budget Forms (5684 : FY 2024-25 Budget Study FY 2024-25 BASE BUDGET
EXPENSE AMENDMENT – PROGRAM CHANGE FORM
PROGRAM: Police Department - Patrol Division 01.500560.53000.0000.000 REQUEST TITLE: Purchase of (50) Smith & Wesson Handguns and (20) Smith and Wesson Rifles Request Summary
The police department is requesting the purchase of (50) new Smith & Wesson handguns and (20) Smith & Wesson patrol rifles. Our current handguns are approximately 16 years old and in need of replacement. Locating parts to fix our current handguns are becoming difficult as these parts are now obsolete and the manufacturer no longer able to replace this aging equipment.

We also request the purchase of (20) additional Smith & Wesson patrol rifles. This will allow for each member to have their own patrol rifle unique to them. Equipping each officer with their patrol rifles holds paramount importance in enhancing effectiveness and officer safety. A personalized rifle equips officers with a familiar and customized tool, tailored to their shooting style and preferences. This familiarity translates into improved accuracy, target acquisition, and enhanced confidence during high-stress incidents. With their own rifle, officers can maintain consistent proficient through training and practice, optimizing their readiness to respond swiftly and decisively. Also, issuing personalized rifles fosters a sense of ownership and responsibility among officers, encouraging proper maintenance and care. This approach not only prolongs the lifespan of the equipment, but also mitigates the risk of malfunctions during high-stress incidents.

Factors Driving the Request for Change

1. Current firearms are 15 years old and becoming obsolete.

2. Providing our officers with new public safety equipment.

3. Newer firearms often offer improved features such as better accuracy, ergonomics, and safety mechanism.

4. Firearms laws and regulations may change over time, making it necessary to replace older firearms to remain in compliance and keeping up with best practices.

Impact of Change

1. Conveys to the officers that the agency is willing to invest in them by obtaining any all equipment necessary to protect them and our community.

2. Is in line with our departments strategic plan of updating equipment and technology.

Alternatives
The authorization of purchasing (50) new handguns is extremely important, and no other alternatives could be offered. As noted already our current firearms are becoming obsolete and replacement is vital to officer safety and keeping our citizens safe.

As it relates to the purchase of (20) additional rifles, so each officer is equipped with their own could be denied. We would continue with our practice of providing each patrol car with a rifle.

Priority Tracking Council Strategic Goal
Department Priority 1 Enhance Organizational & Fiscal Stability ☒ City Manager Priority 11 Improve / steward City infrastructure, streets, and facilities ☐ Prioritize protection and development of affordable housing ☐ Council Accepted Pursue climate change adaptation and mitigation. ☐ Council Rejected Broaden public communications and collaboration ☐ ☐ On-going (Annual) ☒ One-time

15.e
Packet Pg. 724 Attachment: Attachment 5 - FY 2024-25 Recommended Expenditure Amendment Options - Budget Forms (5684 : FY 2024-25 Budget Study FY 2024-25 Base Budget Expense Amendment Page 2 of 2
Cost Summary
Line Item Description Fund Org Number Object Code Total Amount Operating Expense (list detail description below)
(50) S&W handguns, holsters, and attachments 01 500560 52300 65,000 (20) S&W patrol rifles, magazines and attachments 01 500560 52300 25,000 Total Operating Costs $ 90,000
Offsetting Cost Savings or Revenues
Net Operating Costs $ 90,000

15.e
Packet Pg. 725 Attachment: Attachment 5 - FY 2024-25 Recommended Expenditure Amendment Options - Budget Forms (5684 : FY 2024-25 Budget Study FY 2024-25 BASE BUDGET
EXPENSE AMENDMENT – PROGRAM CHANGE FORM
PROGRAM: General Ledger Account – Multiple Accounts
REQUEST TITLE: Temporary Staff Backfill for the Planning Department Request Summary
Seeking temporary consultant services to fill in during anticipated future needs. Interim staff support is essential to ensure a reduction in service level does not occur. The cost may vary depending on the billing rate of the consultant, but estimated budget totals $100,000.

Factors Driving the Request for Change
Ongoing service levels will be maintained. Without this approval, service levels are likely to drop considerably in the Building Division and Planning Division during periods when staff backfill is needed, impacting building permit and discretionary permit processing times, as well as other key program implementation from the City Council Strategic Plan. The impact will be measured by the ability to maintain services levels at status quo. Not having staffing backfill will adversely affect service levels.

Cost Summary
Line Item Description Fund Org Number Object Code Total Amount Operating Expense (list detail description below)
Cost for contractual services to fulfill temporary
staffing backfill 01 660711 528000 50,000
Cost for contractual services to fulfill temporary
staffing backfill 01 660713 528000 50,000
Total Operating Costs $ 100,000
Offsetting Cost Savings or Revenues
Net Operating Costs $ 100,000
Priority Tracking Council Strategic Goal
Department Priority 2 Enhance Organizational & Fiscal Stability ☒ City Manager Priority 12 Improve / steward City infrastructure, streets, and facilities ☐ Prioritize protection and development of affordable housing ☐ Council Accepted Pursue climate change adaptation and mitigation. ☐ Council Rejected Broaden public communications and collaboration ☐ ☐ On-going (Annual) ☒ One-time

15.e
Packet Pg. 726 Attachment: Attachment 5 - FY 2024-25 Recommended Expenditure Amendment Options - Budget Forms (5684 : FY 2024-25 Budget Study FY 2024-25 BASE BUDGET
EXPENSE AMENDMENT – PROGRAM CHANGE FORM
PROGRAM: General Ledger Account – 01.660.711.52800.0000.000 REQUEST TITLE: Local Coastal Land Use Plan
Request Summary
Local Coastal Land Use Plan (LCLUP) certification may potentially occur by the end of 2024. Various post-Council approval and post-Coastal Commission certification actions are needed to update the LCLUP in response to City Council direction, including but not limited to processing minor amendments after certification to update Coastal Vulnerability Zone (CVZ) maps to use the best available science.

Factors Driving the Request for Change
Ocean Protection Council release and anticipated adoption of updated sea level rise projects which may cause the CVZ Maps to change makes this change desirable. The impact to the program if the changes are approved is that the CVZ Maps in the LCLUP will reflect the best available science; this would also measure the impact to the program.

Alternatives
There are no reasonable alternatives to state currently.

Cost Summary
Line Item Description Fund Org Number Object Code Total Amount Operating Expense (list detail description below)
Consultant support for CVZ Map updates and
community outreach 01 660711 52800 60,000
Total Operating Costs $ 60,000
Offsetting Cost Savings or Revenues
Net Operating Costs $ 60,000
Priority Tracking Council Strategic Goal
Department Priority 6 Enhance Organizational & Fiscal Stability ☐ City Manager Priority 13 Improve / steward City infrastructure, streets, and facilities ☐ Prioritize protection and development of affordable housing ☐ Council Accepted Pursue climate change adaptation and mitigation. ☒ Council Rejected Broaden public communications and collaboration ☐ ☐ On-going (Annual) ☒ One-time

15.e
Packet Pg. 727 Attachment: Attachment 5 - FY 2024-25 Recommended Expenditure Amendment Options - Budget Forms (5684 : FY 2024-25 Budget Study FY 2024-25 BASE BUDGET
EXPENSE AMENDMENT – PROGRAM CHANGE FORM
PROGRAM: General Ledger Account – Multiple Accounts
REQUEST TITLE: Short-Term Rental Ordinance Update
Request Summary
Work towards updating and improving Short-Term Rental (STR) Ordinance, submitting LCP Amendment to California Coastal Commission (CCC), and improving overall STR program implementation/ongoing monitoring. This will achieve a refined Ordinance and program practices to monitor STR’s in the City. The estimated one-time cost is $35,000. Potential on-going annual costs for inspections, third-party monitoring services, or other program components may be part of a future budget request.

Factors Driving the Request for Change
 What’s happening that makes this change needed or desirable? o City Council Strategic Plan priority to update STR Ordinance and improve enforcement.  What would be the impact to the program if your change is approved? o It may improve quality of life for the residents near STRs.  How would you measure the impact of this change?
o Adoption of appropriate STR operating standards that are certified for applicability in the Coastal Zone.

Alternatives
Continue operating under current STR ordinance.

Cost Summary
Line Item Description Fund Org Number Object Code Total Amount Operating Expense (list detail description below)
Community/STR Operator Outreach 01 660711 52800 $5,000
Third-party Technical Assistance with Ordinance
Update 01 660711 52800 $20,000
Legal Fees During Ordinance Review 01 660711 52828 $10,000 Total Operating Costs $ 35,000
Offsetting Cost Savings or Revenues
Net Operating Costs $ 35,000
Priority Tracking Council Strategic Goal
Department Priority 5 Enhance Organizational & Fiscal Stability ☐ City Manager Priority 14 Improve / steward City infrastructure, streets, and facilities ☐ Prioritize protection and development of affordable housing ☒ Council Accepted Pursue climate change adaptation and mitigation. ☐ Council Rejected Broaden public communications and collaboration ☐ ☐ On-going (Annual) ☒ One-time

15.e
Packet Pg. 728 Attachment: Attachment 5 - FY 2024-25 Recommended Expenditure Amendment Options - Budget Forms (5684 : FY 2024-25 Budget Study FY 2024-25 BASE BUDGET
EXPENSE AMENDMENT – PROGRAM CHANGE FORM
PROGRAM: General Ledger Account – General Fund Multiple Accounts REQUEST TITLE: Climate Action Update – Program Manager and Consult Support for Community Engagement
Request Summary
Funding to support staff augmentation needed for the Climate Action & Adaptation Plan (CAAP) update, including hiring a part-time program manager and consultant support for focused community engagement.

Factors Driving the Request for Change
The CAAP Task Force has determined that specialized assistance is needed to conduct successful outreach to hard-to-engage segments of the population. Additionally, continuity of part-time staff support to the CAAP update would be enhanced by City funding of a dedicated part-time program manager position for this update rather than potential annual reassignment of a new Civic Spark fellow. The impact if this is approved would be that the Planning department would be able to achieve completion of CAAP update.

Alternatives
There are no alternatives at this time.

Cost Summary
Line Item Description Fund Org Number Object Code Total Amount Operating Expense (list detail description below)
Climate Action Plan part-time Program Manager
position 01 660711 51300 45,000
Contractual services for consulting support 01 660711 52800 30,000 Total Operating Costs $ 75,000
Offsetting Cost Savings or Revenues
Net Operating Costs $ 75,000
Priority Tracking Council Strategic Goal
Department Priority 7 Enhance Organizational & Fiscal Stability ☐ City Manager Priority 15 Improve / steward City infrastructure, streets, and facilities ☐ Prioritize protection and development of affordable housing ☐ Council Accepted Pursue climate change adaptation and mitigation. ☒ Council Rejected Broaden public communications and collaboration ☐ ☐ On-going (Annual) ☒ One-time

15.e
Packet Pg. 729 Attachment: Attachment 5 - FY 2024-25 Recommended Expenditure Amendment Options - Budget Forms (5684 : FY 2024-25 Budget Study FY 2024-25 BASE BUDGET
EXPENSE AMENDMENT – PROGRAM CHANGE FORM
PROGRAM: General Ledger Account – 01.660711.52828.0000.000 REQUEST TITLE: State Law Ordinance Updates
Request Summary
Update various City land use planning ordinances to implement changes in state law other than those already required for Housing Element program implementation.

Factors Driving the Request for Change
The California Legislature has enacted new laws that affect the City’s local control over land use planning issues. The impact to the program if this is approved would be compliance with state law and maximum local control over land use decision making.

Alternatives
There currently aren’t any reasonable alternatives to state.

Cost Summary
Line Item Description Fund Org Number Object Code Total Amount Operating Expense (list detail description below)
City Attorney's Office support 01 660711 52828 50,000
Total Operating Costs $ 50,000
Offsetting Cost Savings or Revenues
Net Operating Costs $ 50,000
Priority Tracking Council Strategic Goal
Department Priority 8 Enhance Organizational & Fiscal Stability ☐ City Manager Priority 16 Improve / steward City infrastructure, streets, and facilities ☐ Prioritize protection and development of affordable housing ☐ Council Accepted Pursue climate change adaptation and mitigation. ☐ Council Rejected Broaden public communications and collaboration ☐ ☐ On-going (Annual) ☒ One-time

15.e
Packet Pg. 730 Attachment: Attachment 5 - FY 2024-25 Recommended Expenditure Amendment Options - Budget Forms (5684 : FY 2024-25 Budget Study FY 2024-25 BASE BUDGET
EXPENSE AMENDMENT – PROGRAM CHANGE FORM
PROGRAM: General Ledger Account - 01.700723.52800.0000.000 REQUEST TITLE: Contractual Services Storm Drain Design
Request Summary
Engineering Division needs a storm drain study near 600 Brighton Road to address the flooding that is occurring due to some of the storm flows from our streets onto the backyards.

Factors Driving the Request for Change
This funding will contract a consultant to study the amount of flow coming from the street and drainage basins near 600 Brighton Road. The study will allow us to see the amount of flow going onto private property and eventually come up with a design in order to address the flooding going onto the properties.

Impact of Change
The complaints regarding the flooding in the private property will continue to escalate until we determine if the cause is due to the runoff from the right of way. The impact would be measured by less calls for to mitigate the flood. This is a one-time cost ask but there may be additional consultant fees needed depending on the results of the storm drain study. The impact to the general fund will be $50,000 and the impact to the community will address the runoff from the right of way onto private property.

Alternatives
This work must be completed to minimize public complaints.

Cost Summary
Line Item Description Fund Org Number Object Code Total Amount Operating Expense
Consultant services to study street and drainage
basins 01 700723 52800 50,000
Total Operating Costs $ 50,000
Offsetting Cost Savings or Revenues
Net Operating Costs $ 50,000
Priority Tracking Council Strategic Goal
Department Priority 5 Enhance Organizational & Fiscal Stability ☐ City Manager Priority 17 Improve / steward City infrastructure, streets, and facilities ☒ Prioritize protection and development of affordable housing ☐ Council Accepted Pursue climate change adaptation and mitigation. ☐ Council Rejected Broaden public communications and collaboration ☐ ☐ On-going (Annual) ☒ One-time

15.e
Packet Pg. 731 Attachment: Attachment 5 - FY 2024-25 Recommended Expenditure Amendment Options - Budget Forms (5684 : FY 2024-25 Budget Study FY 2024-25 BASE BUDGET
EXPENSE AMENDMENT – PROGRAM CHANGE FORM
PROGRAM: General Ledger Account - 01.700751.52800.0000.000 REQUEST TITLE: Weed Abatement
Request Summary
Field Services needs service augmentation to continue the level of service provided to the city and the residents. The augmentation of services is due to staff shortages related to illness and vacancies as well as the increase in service requests.

Factors Driving the Request for Change
This funding will assist with service augmentation due to increase in service request volume and staff shortages. The service augmentation minimizes deferred maintenance and allows for continued health of the city’s infrastructure, streets and facilities. The measurables would be the continued health of the city’s infrastructure, streets, and facilities will continue in good standing.

Impact of Change
Weed complaints from the public will escalate. The impact would be measured by less calls for weed abatement. This is a one-time cost ask but the need for on-going funding will be evaluated at the end of the fiscal year. The impact to the General Fund will be $70,000 and the impact to the community will be to have adequate weed control on City maintained property.

Alternatives
This work must be completed to minimize public complaints.

Cost Summary
Line Item Description Fund Org Number Object Code Total Amount Operating Expense
Cost for weed abatement services 01 700751 52800 70,000 Total Operating Costs $ 70,000
Net Operating Costs $ 70,000
Priority Tracking Council Strategic Goal
Department Priority 3 Enhance Organizational & Fiscal Stability ☐ City Manager Priority 18 Improve / steward City infrastructure, streets, and facilities ☒ Prioritize protection and development of affordable housing ☐ Council Accepted Pursue climate change adaptation and mitigation. ☐ Council Rejected Broaden public communications and collaboration ☐ ☐ On-going (Annual) ☒ One-time

15.e
Packet Pg. 732 Attachment: Attachment 5 - FY 2024-25 Recommended Expenditure Amendment Options - Budget Forms (5684 : FY 2024-25 Budget Study FY 2024-25 BASE BUDGET
EXPENSE AMENDMENT – PROGRAM CHANGE FORM
PROGRAM: General Ledger Account – 01.240220.51700.0000.000 REQUEST TITLE: Citywide Professional Development Program for Staff Request Summary
The City Manager’s Office Administrative Services Department/HR Division proposes the implementation of a comprehensive city-wide professional development program tailored specifically for new and aspiring managers and supervisors within the city. This initiative aims to enhance their skills, boost confidence, and improve overall capabilities. During this FY2023-24, the City started a limited pilot training program.

The program included just three training modules that were very well received:
• Basic Business Writing: Equipping supervisors with essential communication skills; • Tools for New Supervisors: Enhance Your Skills and Confidence, Enhancing skills and building confidence for effective leadership; and
• Managing Multiple Demands, Time, and Priorities, which will provide practical strategies for handling complex workloads (scheduled for June 18th).

This pilot program received enthusiastic participation, with over 60 staff members who attended the training. Building on the success of this pilot program, this proposal is to continue this pilot for the upcoming year fiscal year and re-evaluate it at the end of the year to potentially make it an ongoing program in the future. The program will include additional workshops designed to address specific managerial challenges:

Advanced Business Writing, Leadership, and Emotional Intelligence, Performance Evaluations Tools and Techniques, and DISC Assessment tool to Enhance Self-Awareness and Promote Better Collaboration Among Teams.

Factors Driving the Request for Change
Investing in this training program will not only benefit individual managers and supervisors and prepare future aspiring leaders to grow into that role but will also contribute to improving managerial effectiveness, leading to better decision-making and team performance. It will also increase employee satisfaction and retention due to investment in their professional growth, which aligns with organizational goals, especially related to enhancing organizational stability. The training workshops will be offered once a quarter during the FY2024-25. The workshops are essential for creating a positive work environment and motivating our staff, as well as providing practical tools and techniques that ultimately contribute to employee satisfaction and growth and serve the Council’s strategic goal to enhance organizational stability.

Impact of Change
The approval of this city-wide professional development training program would benefit the entire organization by helping employees develop leadership and emotional intelligence skills and empower them to lead more effectively, inspire their teams, and create a positive work environment. Offering advanced business writing training will enhance clear and concise communication, which is crucial for conveying ideas, instructions, and feedback within the city, in addition to practical tools for the preparation of staff reports, memos, presentations, etc. Introducing “DiSC” assessment component into teams will promote self-awareness among managers and supervisors, which will provide a better understanding of their behavioral styles and preferences to improve collaboration, conflict resolution, and team dynamics.

Priority Tracking Council Strategic Goal
Department Priority 4 Enhance Organizational & Fiscal Stability ☒ City Manager Priority 19 Improve / steward City infrastructure, streets, and facilities ☐ Prioritize protection and development of affordable housing ☐ Council Accepted Pursue climate change adaptation and mitigation. ☐ Council Rejected Broaden public communications and collaboration ☐ ☐ On-going (Annual) ☒ One-time

15.e
Packet Pg. 733 Attachment: Attachment 5 - FY 2024-25 Recommended Expenditure Amendment Options - Budget Forms (5684 : FY 2024-25 Budget Study FY 2024-25 Base Budget Expense Amendment Page 2 of 2
Overall, the program would contribute to shaping a positive organizational culture, fostering professional growth, and enhancing productivity and managerial effectiveness.

Alternatives
An alternative approach would be to rely on the Executive team to provide necessary training to staff, which would be time-consuming and likely conflict with other priorities. The city would continue to participate in the Regional Training Consortium, which may not be sufficient to address all training needs required to make a meaningful impact within the city.

Cost Summary
Line Item Description Fund Org Number Object Code Total Amount Operating Expense (list detail description below)
Estimated Cost Difference Including Benefits 01 240220 51700 25,000 Total Operating Costs $ 25,000
Offsetting Cost Savings or Revenues
Net Operating Costs $ 25,000

15.e
Packet Pg. 734 Attachment: Attachment 5 - FY 2024-25 Recommended Expenditure Amendment Options - Budget Forms (5684 : FY 2024-25 Budget Study FY 2024-25 BASE BUDGET
EXPENSE AMENDMENT – PROGRAM CHANGE FORM
PROGRAM: Police Department - Operations Division
REQUEST TITLE: Employee Wellness Program
Request Summary
The Pacifica Police Department is requesting a budget to support an employee wellness program Policing is a stressful profession, characterized by long shifts, challenging interactions with people in trouble or crisis, difficult work environments, and exposure to high-stress and occasionally lifethreatening circumstances. The prospect of encountering situations that can become volatile, dangerous, and traumatic can take a toll on officer wellness, despite the rarity of such events. Programs focused on improving the mental and physical wellness of police officers aim to enhance participants’ mindfulness about when they experience stress, improve their ability to navigate difficult scenarios, and boost their resiliency to recover from traumatic events. These improvements, in turn, will improve officer performance. The request is to add this as a one-time pilot program; however, this Employee Wellness Program will be re-assessed to be added on an on-going basis.

Factors Driving the Request for Change

1. Employee wellness initiatives support City’s strategic planning goals.

2. Resignation of valued employee and need to focus on retention efforts.

3. 4850 claims for PTSD and other injuries resulting in crisis staffing levels.

3. Police officer suicide in neighboring jurisdiction.

4. Long shifts, sleep deprivation, and overtime hours contribute to stress and compromised wellness, increasing the risk of use of force, accidents, and injuries.

Impact of Change

1. Employee retention and improved employee physical and mental health

2. A well-trained and certified peer support program

3. Suicide prevention

4. Reduced sick leave and absenteeism

5. Reduce insurance costs and claims.

6. Increase in safety of employees and higher level of service to the community.

Alternatives
The City does not currently have an employee wellness program outside of EAP Concern which has proven to be inadequate for our personnel.

Priority Tracking Council Strategic Goal
Department Priority 4 Enhance Organizational & Fiscal Stability ☒ City Manager Priority 20 Improve / steward City infrastructure, streets, and facilities ☐ Prioritize protection and development of affordable housing ☐ Council Accepted Pursue climate change adaptation and mitigation. ☐ Council Rejected Broaden public communications and collaboration ☐ ☐ On-going (Annual) ☒ One-time

15.e
Packet Pg. 735 Attachment: Attachment 5 - FY 2024-25 Recommended Expenditure Amendment Options - Budget Forms (5684 : FY 2024-25 Budget Study FY 2024-25 Base Budget Expense Amendment Page 2 of 2
Cost Summary
Line Item Description Fund Org Number Object Code Total Amount Operating Expense (list detail description below)
Cordico Wellness App 01 500560 52800 5,582
Lexipol Peer Support Certification Course/Training 01 500560 51700 3,591 Peer Support Annual Conference 01 500560 51700 3,000
Wellness Coaching from certified instructors 01 500560 52800 5,000 TacMobility Mindfulness/Resiliency Training 01 500560 51700 7,000 First Responder Clinician Services 01 500560 52800 10,000 Total Operating Costs $ 34,173
Offsetting Cost Savings or Revenues
Net Operating Costs $ 34,173

15.e
Packet Pg. 736 Attachment: Attachment 5 - FY 2024-25 Recommended Expenditure Amendment Options - Budget Forms (5684 : FY 2024-25 Budget Study FY 2024-25 BASE BUDGET
EXPENSE AMENDMENT – PROGRAM CHANGE FORM
PROGRAM: General Ledger Account - 01.200210.52800.0000.000 REQUEST TITLE: Pacifica Libraries Project Outreach Budget Request Summary
The City of Pacifica has engaged public relations firm BergDavis to assist with strategy, outreach, messaging and project webpage hosting for the City of Pacifica Libraries Modernization Project. At the May 13, 2025 City Council meeting, the City Council adopted the FY 2024-25 Strategic Plan; one of the major City Council goals/strategies adopted under “2. Improve and steward City infrastructure, streets, and facilities” is strategy “2C. Broaden community awareness of Library projects”. For FY 2023-24, the City has been expensing invoices related to BergDavis engagement in the library projects outreach effort to expense account 31.900000.52800.0229.000 (Pacifica Library Project – Contractual Services) that is related to the revenue account 31.900000.45649.0229.000 (Miscellaneous Grants-Pacifica Library).

Additional ongoing expenses will be necessary to continue these efforts in alignment with the Council Strategy “2C – Broaden community awareness of Library projects”. The total budget request for these ongoing related expenses for FY 2024-25 is $50,000 to be budgeted under expense account

01.200210.52800.0000.000 (City Manager Office – Contractual Services).

Factors Driving the Request for Change
 Need for ongoing contractual services related to a major City Council goal / strategy for FY 2024-25.  Additional outreach and consultant services needed to broaden community awareness related to the Pacifica Library Projects.

Alternatives
Alternative options include not budgeting this amount or adjusting the budget for this purpose to a lower amount.

Cost Summary
 The total estimated expenses are $50,000.

Line Item Description Fund Org Number Object Code Total Amount Operating Expense (list detail description below)
Contractual Services used for the purpose of
continuing engagement with BergDavis for public
outreach regarding library projects.
01 200210 52800 50,000
Total Operating Costs $50,000
Offsetting Cost Savings or Revenues
Net Operating Costs $50,000
Priority Tracking Council Strategic Goal
Department Priority 2 Enhance Organizational & Fiscal Stability ☐ City Manager Priority 21 Improve / steward City infrastructure, streets, and facilities ☒ Prioritize protection and development of affordable housing ☐ Council Accepted Pursue climate change adaptation and mitigation. ☐ Council Rejected Broaden public communications and collaboration ☒ ☐ On-going (Annual) ☒ One-time

15.e
Packet Pg. 737 Attachment: Attachment 5 - FY 2024-25 Recommended Expenditure Amendment Options - Budget Forms (5684 : FY 2024-25 Budget Study FY 2024-25 BASE BUDGET
EXPENSE AMENDMENT – PROGRAM CHANGE FORM
PROGRAM: Wastewater Enterprise Account- Operations – Salaries - Regular REQUEST TITLE: New Project Manager Position for Public Works Wastewater Request Summary
The Public Works Wastewater Section uses consultant construction engineering staff to oversee construction of important City Capital Improvement projects (CIP) including the City’s annual Collection System projects, Rockaway Pump Station R&R project and numerous other CIP and utility projects that required project management/inspection oversight. The City’s currently proposed Capital Improvement Program for FY 2024-29 includes costs to pay for consultant project management services. These funds would be used to support a permanent Project Manager position. Consultant project management/inspection services cost the City in excess of what will be paid for this position and consequently, this new position will be more cost effective for the City than using consultant services.

Factors Driving the Request for Change
This will be a more cost-effective way to manage the construction of the City’s Capital Improvement Program rather than only using consultant construction management services. This change will also allow the City to use higher-level staff for project management delivery as many consultant services offer staff with minimal project management experience. Higher-level construction experience for project managers also minimizes construction change orders on CIP projects lowering project overall costs. This will also offer opportunities for lower-level City Engineering/Wastewater staff to move into this higher-level classification with experience, allowing for succession planning in Engineering/Wastewater.

Alternatives
The alternative is to continue using consultant services for management of the construction on every City CIP project. This would result in paying higher costs for construction management staff with (likely) less project management experience. Additionally, this could lead to greater project change orders making City projects more expensive.

Cost Summary
Staffing is costed based upon the top step, fully burdened annual cost for the position at the monthly salary rate of $12,572. Based on the City’s current practices, most appointments are made at the midrange salary scale, and the actual annual cost is likely to be lower in the first few years of the position being filled.

The proposed cost is based on an existing salary schedule of similar classifications of neighboring cities in San Mateo County. All new positions also include an assumed 25% savings in year one, representing the time required to complete the recruitment process.

Priority Tracking Council Strategic Goal
Department Priority 1 Fiscal Sustainability ☐
City Manager Priority 1 An Engaged Community ☐
Stewardship of City Infrastructure ☒
Healthy & Compassionate Community ☐
Council Accepted Environmental Sustainability ☒
Council Rejected Strong City Workforce ☒
☒ On-going (Annual) ☐ One-time

15.f
Packet Pg. 738 Attachment: Attachment 6 - FY 2024-25 Recommended Other Funds Budget Options - Budget Forms (5684 : FY 2024-25 Budget Study Session FY 2024-25 Base Budget Expense Amendment Page 2 of 2
Line Item Description Fund Org Number Object Code Total Amount Operating Expense
Cost of salary for permanent full-time
Project Manager position 34 900000 51200 205,182
Total Operating Costs $205,182
Offsetting Cost Savings or Revenues
25% savings in year one 01 700723 51999 (51,295)
Net Operating Costs $153,887

15.f
Packet Pg. 739 Attachment: Attachment 6 - FY 2024-25 Recommended Other Funds Budget Options - Budget Forms (5684 : FY 2024-25 Budget Study Session FY 2024-25 BASE BUDGET
EXPENSE AMENDMENT – PROGRAM CHANGE FORM
PROGRAM: Wastewater Enterprise Account
REQUEST TITLE: Adding (1) Maintenance Assistant Part-time Position to Public Works Wastewater Request Summary
The Public Works Wastewater Section uses part-time staff to augment and support maintenance projects for both Collection System and Plant Operation. This type of support to maintenance workload is crucial to the overall operation. This request is on-going annually and staff is requesting one part-time maintenance assistant for both Collection System and Plant Operation respectively.

The cost for one part-time maintenance assistant for the fiscal year is estimated at $30,000.

Factors Driving the Request for Change
This will be a more cost-effective way to manage the maintenance program rather than only using consultant maintenance services. This change will also allow the city to free up the use of higher-level experienced staff for projects requiring higher skill sets. Part-time maintenance assistant can help support labor intensive projects.

Alternatives
The alternative is to use consultant services for supporting maintenance projects, and this would result in paying higher costs.

Cost Summary
Staffing is costed based upon the top step, fully burdened annual cost for the position at the monthly salary rate of $1,933. Based on the City’s current practices, most appointments are made at the midrange salary scale, and the actual annual cost is likely to be lower in the first few years of the position being filled.

The proposed cost is based on an existing salary schedule of similar classifications of neighboring cities in San Mateo County. All new positions also include an assumed 25% savings in year one, representing the time required to complete the recruitment process.

Line Item Dsecription Fund Org Number Object Code Total Amount Operating Expense
Part-time salary cost for a Maintenance
Assistant position 18 940741 51300 30,000
Total Operating Costs $ 30,000
Offsetting Cost Savings
Net Operating Costs $ 30,000
Priority Tracking Council Strategic Goal
Department Priority 2 Fiscal Sustainability ☐
City Manager Priority 2 An Engaged Community ☐
Stewardship of City Infrastructure ☒
Healthy & Compassionate Community ☐
Council Accepted Environmental Sustainability ☒
Council Rejected Strong City Workforce ☒
☒ On-going (Annual) ☐ One-time

15.f
Packet Pg. 740 Attachment: Attachment 6 - FY 2024-25 Recommended Other Funds Budget Options - Budget Forms (5684 : FY 2024-25 Budget Study Session FY 2024-25 BASE BUDGET
EXPENSE AMENDMENT – PROGRAM CHANGE FORM
PROGRAM: General Ledger Account – Housing Action Fund (Fund 21) REQUEST TITLE: Housing Element Program Implementation
Request Summary
Implementation of programs identified in the Housing Element. The programs to be implemented include a combination of implementation actions already in-progress and additional actions for which implementation will start in FY 2024-2025. Program implementation will achieve compliance with the City’s Housing Element obligations as required by state law with an estimated cost of $423,000. This is the first request of several additional requests anticipated over the duration of the current Housing Element which covers the period 2023-2031. The amount requested will vary annually.

Factors Driving the Request for Change
What is happening that makes this change needed is the Mandatory Housing Element program implementation, including but not limited to:
 Ongoing work to achieve certification by the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD)
 Rezoning Program (required for certification)
 Zoning Updates/Modernization – major update to zoning code to improve practices within Pacifica
 Other Program Implementation Items – Many other housing related programs that should contribute to maintaining adequate housing.
 ADU Resource Center – Required to maintain approved set of plans/other monitoring requirements for ADUs, thus, City is collaborating with jurisdictions within 21 Elements and 21 Elements to have a robust webpage and monitoring of ADU’s  Shared Housing Staff for Additional Assistance
The impact to the program if this is approved would be:
 Housing Element Certification
 Compliance with HCD requirements and RHNA
 Improvements to housing production, planning practices and functions within the department The impact would be measured by the Housing Element certification as well as substantial progress implementing Housing Element programs scheduled for action in FY 2024-2025.

Alternatives
There are no reasonable alternatives to state at this time.

Priority Tracking Council Strategic Goal
Department Priority 3 Enhance Organizational & Fiscal Stability ☐ City Manager Priority 3 Improve / steward City infrastructure, streets, and facilities ☐ Prioritize protection and development of affordable housing ☒ Council Accepted Pursue climate change adaptation and mitigation. ☐ Council Rejected Broaden public communications and collaboration ☐ ☐ On-going (Annual) ☒ One-time

15.f
Packet Pg. 741 Attachment: Attachment 6 - FY 2024-25 Recommended Other Funds Budget Options - Budget Forms (5684 : FY 2024-25 Budget Study Session FY 2024-25 Base Budget Expense Amendment Page 2 of 2
Cost Summary
Line Item Description Fund Org Number Object Code Total Amount Operating Expense (list detail description below)
Rezoning Program (one-time) 21 660712 52800 $24,000
Zoning Updates/Modernization (one-time) 21 660712 52800 $170,000 Program Implementation (one-time) 21 660712 52800 $120,000 Unanticipated further Housing Element adoption work
after HCD review (one-time) 21 660712 52800 $35,000
Shared Housing Staff Annual Contribution (on-going
until end of FY 2025-2026) 21 660712 52800 $40,000
ADU Resource Center (on-going) 21 660712 52800 $34,000
Total Operating Costs $ 423,000.00
Offsetting Cost Savings or Revenues
Net Operating Costs $ 423,000.00

15.f
Packet Pg. 742 Attachment: Attachment 6 - FY 2024-25 Recommended Other Funds Budget Options - Budget Forms (5684 : FY 2024-25 Budget Study Session FY 2024-25 BASE BUDGET
EXPENSE AMENDMENT – PROGRAM CHANGE FORM
PROGRAM: General Ledger Account - 72.920760.55110.0000.000 REQUEST TITLE: Vehicle Replacements
Request Summary
The Public Works Motor Pool Section is seeking to replace vehicles/equipment from the City’s Vehicle Replacement Fund 72. All the vehicles and equipment have mileage over 100k and need to be replaced due to high maintenance costs and deterioration. The recommended vehicles include 4 Parks maintenance vehicles, 1 Streets maintenance vehicle, 1 Parks Excavator, 1 WWTP service truck, 1 WWTP administrative vehicle, 1 PB&R Van and 1 Motor Pool service truck. The estimated cost of the vehicles is $750,000.

Factors Driving the Request for Change
Replacement of vehicles and equipment when they have outlived their service life provides for lower maintenance costs and safer and more reliable vehicles to allow performance of City work.

Alternatives
The alternative is to continue using the old vehicles which may break down and not be usable preventing completion of important staff work.

Cost Summary
Line Item Description Fund Org Numbe Object Code Total Amount Operating Expense
Replacement of 10 City vehicles 72 920760 55110 750,000 Total Operating Costs $ 750,000
Offsetting Cost Savings or Revenues
Net Operating Costs $ 750,000
Priority Tracking Council Strategic Goal
Department Priority 4 Fiscal Sustainability ☒
City Manager Priority 4 An Engaged Community ☐
Stewardship of City Infrastructure ☒
Healthy & Compassionate Community ☐
Council Accepted Environmental Sustainability ☐
Council Rejected Strong City Workforce ☒
☐ On-going (Annual) ☒ One-time

15.f
Packet Pg. 743 Attachment: Attachment 6 - FY 2024-25 Recommended Other Funds Budget Options - Budget Forms (5684 : FY 2024-25 Budget Study Session FY 2024-25 BASE BUDGET
EXPENSE AMENDMENT – PROGRAM CHANGE FORM
PROGRAM: General Ledger Account – 21.660712.51300.0000.000 REQUEST TITLE: Civic Spark Fellow and Partnership for Bay’s Future Interns Request Summary
The Planning department proposes hiring interns through the Civic Spark and Partnership for the Bay’s Future (or comparable) internship programs (one-time requests). This will increase Planning Department staff capacity in light of the numerous, major work plan items assigned to the Planning Department over the next several years, including but not limited to Housing Element program implementation, short-term rental program updates, Climate Action and Adaptation implementation actions (after plan adoption), comprehensive zoning updates, Sharp Park Specific Plan LCP Amendment certification, and major development projects in the pipeline. Intern needs will be evaluated on an annual basis.

Factors Driving the Request for Change
Major City Council Strategic Plan assignments to the Planning Department, along with significant external factors requiring major staff resource commitments including major development project applications, Coastal Commission LCP amendment certification efforts, ordinance updates triggered by the 2040 General Plan adoption, ordinance updates and program development/implementation triggered by Housing Element adoption, and ordinance updates to comply with state law changes.

The Planning Department will be able to more effectively support implementation of the City Council’s Strategic Plan priorities while also complying with the City’s legal obligations to process development projects and amend its ordinances to comply with state law and achieve General Plan consistency.

Alternatives
Relying on existing staff to complete the work.

Cost Summary
Line Item Description Fund Org Number Object Code Total Amount Operating Expense (list detail description below)
Internship hires (Civic Spark fellow, Partnership for
Bay's Future, etc.) 21 660712 51300 50,000
Total Operating Costs $ 50,000
Offsetting Cost Savings or Revenues
Net Operating Costs $ 50,000
Priority Tracking Council Strategic Goal
Department Priority 4 Enhance Organizational & Fiscal Stability ☒ City Manager Priority 5 Improve / steward City infrastructure, streets, and facilities ☐ Prioritize protection and development of affordable housing ☒ Council Accepted Pursue climate change adaptation and mitigation. ☐ Council Rejected Broaden public communications and collaboration ☐ ☐ On-going (Annual) ☒ One-time

15.f
Packet Pg. 744 Attachment: Attachment 6 - FY 2024-25 Recommended Other Funds Budget Options - Budget Forms (5684 : FY 2024-25 Budget Study Session Fund Name
Projected
Fund Balance
6/30/2024
Revenues &
Transfers In
Revised Budget
Expenditures &
Transfers Out
Revised Budget
Revenue Over
(Under)
Expenditures
Projected
Fund Balance
6/30/2025
01 GENERAL FUND $ 18,616,311 $ 48,068,300 $ 46,152,606 $ 1,915,694 $ 20,532,005

ENTERPRISE FUNDS
18 Sewer Charge Fund 6,659,229 20,260,000 18,869,108 1,390,892 8,050,121 34 Sewer Facility Construction Fund 17,431,720 50,000 14,999,886 (14,949,886) 2,481,834 18/34 Sewer Fund 24,090,949 20,310,000 33,868,994 (13,558,994) 10,531,955 35 Beach Parking Fund 339,235 592,000 593,632 (1,632) 337,603 Total Enterprise Funds 24,430,184 20,902,000 34,462,626 (13,560,626) 10,869,558

SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS
07 SLES Fund 320,976 150,000 79,100 70,900 391,876
09 Measure A Fund 539,499 1,400,000 1,938,926 (538,926) 573 10 Gas Tax Maintenance Fund 259,111 2,442,000 2,128,400 313,600 572,711 11 Measure W Fund 302,005 560,000 862,000 (302,000) 5
12 Highway 1 Improvement Fund 573,346 5,000 35,966 (30,966) 542,380 13 Street Improvement Fund 771,053 655,000 882,947 (227,947) 543,106 14 Manor Drive Improvement Fund* (107,947) 107,947 - 107,947 - 16 NPDES Stormwater Fund 149,457 193,000 266,000 (73,000) 76,457 19 Planned Local Drainage Fund 319,773 25,000 2,100 22,900 342,673 21 Housing Action Fund 1,665,250 1,650,000 473,000 1,177,000 2,842,250 22 General Capital Improvement Fund 5,042,981 1,279,800 1,590,180 (310,380) 4,732,601 23 Frontierland Remediation 207,187 75,000 - 75,000 282,187 93 Housing Successor 382,513 - - - 382,513
24 Housing In-Lieu Fund 250,881 - - 250,881
25 Parking In-Lieu Fund 119,411 20,000 - 20,000 139,411 26 Park In-Lieu Capital Improvement 195,282 100,000 - 100,000 295,282 27 PB&R Roy Davies Trust 2,695,476 - 100,300 (100,300) 2,595,176 28 PB&R Special Revenue Fund 1,809,638 - 216,474 (216,474) 1,593,164 29 Tree Special Revenue Fund 1,748 - - - 1,748
31 Pacifica Library Fund 88,099 - - - 88,099
38 Disaster Accounting Fund 7,056,949 1,650,000 668,455 981,545 8,038,494 Total Special Revenue & Capital Funds 22,642,688 10,312,747 9,243,848 1,068,899 23,711,587

INTERNAL SERVICE FUNDS
65 Self Funded Dental Plan 302,701 255,000 184,800 70,200 372,901 66 Self-Insurance Fund W/C 856,648 1,112,000 1,112,000 - 856,648 67 Self-Insurance Fund Liability 333,758 2,808,400 2,808,400 - 333,758 71 Motor Pool Operations Fund 226,588 1,184,459 1,184,459 - 226,588 72 Motor Pool Replacement Fund 1,815,632 25,000 750,000 (725,000) 1,090,632 74 Fire Equipment Fund 34,297 133,000 - 133,000 167,297 Total Internal Service Funds 3,569,624 5,517,859 6,039,659 (521,800) 3,047,824

DEBT SERVICE FUNDS
40 Debt Service Fund 2,699,165 483,226 2,522,941 (2,039,715) 659,450 Total Debt Service Funds 2,699,165 483,226 2,522,941 (2,039,715) 659,450 Total Other Funds 53,341,661 37,215,832 52,269,074 (15,053,242) 38,288,419 Total All Funds $ 71,957,972 $ 85,284,132 $ 98,421,680 $ (13,137,548) $ 58,820,424 Attachement 7
City of Pacifica
FY2024-25 Proposed Base Budget
Summary of Fund Balances

15.g
Packet Pg. 745 Attachment: Attachment 7 - FY 2024-25 Projected Fund Balance Schedule (5684 : FY 2024-25 Budget 1 North Calle Cesar Chavez, Suite 102, Santa Barbara, CA 93103 www.raftelis.com
MEMO
To: Kevin Woodhouse, City of Pacifica, City Manager
Yulia Carter, Assistant City Manager
From: Nancy Hetrick, Raftelis, Project Director
Sam Lieberman, Project Manager
Polly Englot, Consultant
Date: June 3, 2024
Re: City of Pacifica Staffing Comparison
This memorandum summarizes citywide and departmental staffing comparisons between the City of Pacifica (City) and eight peer cities in Northern California. The peers were selected using objective criteria, with a focus on identifying cities with comparable features and services. After Pacifica approved the list of peers, our team gathered all publicly available staffing data for each city and aligned the full time equivalent (FTE) allocations with Pacifica’s departmental structures. Comparing total FTEs between peer cities provides a general understanding of how Pacifica stands relative to its peers. However, because of nuanced differences among these cities, this high-level evaluation has its limitations. More meaningful insights can be gained by examining staffing at the departmental level. We then normalized the data to ensure meaningful comparisons across jurisdictions by adjusting for differences in scale and population size. The results of our research and analysis are presented below. Key takeaways include:
• Pacifica’s staffing levels trend lower than its peers in terms of raw counts, averages, and normalized values. Pacifica’s total FTE per 1,000 residents is 17% lower than the peer average. • Pacifica has the fewest Administrative Services FTE per 100 employees among the peer group, largely due to having fewer finance staff.
• Pacifica has the fewest total Police and sworn Police FTE per 1,000 residents among the peer group. • Pacifica has the fewest Planning FTE per 1,000 residents among the peer group. • When the uniquely large childcare programs in Pacifica and Menlo Park are excluded from the comparison, Pacifica ranks in the bottom third for Parks, Beaches, and Recreation FTE per 10,000 residents.

While this analysis provides a comprehensive overview of staffing levels between the City of Pacifica and its peer cities, it is important to acknowledge certain limitations inherent in the high-level nature of this comparison. Variations in municipal services, departmental structures, and operational practices across different jurisdictions can introduce discrepancies that may affect the direct comparability of staffing data.

Additionally, differences in the scope and scale of services provided, local priorities, and financial constraints can impact staffing needs and allocations uniquely. As such, while the normalized ratios and averages offer valuable insights, they may not fully capture the nuanced operational realities and specific service demands of

15.h
Packet Pg. 746 Attachment: Attachment 8 - Pacifica Staffing Comparison (5684 : FY 2024-25 Budget Study Session 3) 2 each city. Further, in-depth analysis at the departmental level may be necessary to draw more precise conclusions and inform specific staffing decisions.

Examining Pacifica’s Staffing Relative to Its Peers
The City of Pacifica is facing rising labor and benefit costs in conjunction with increasing service demands. In this context, Raftelis sought to compare Pacifica’s staffing levels with those in comparable municipal agencies, building upon prior comparative work performed by City staff, to support the City in proactively planning and preparing for the future. Pacifica's staffing levels and budget allocations are directly linked to the city's capacity to deliver services effectively. Adequate staffing ensures that departments can meet community needs and maintain high standards of service provision. Conversely, budget constraints can limit staffing capabilities, leading to potential reductions in service levels and efficiency. Therefore, aligning the city's financial resources with its staffing requirements is crucial for sustaining quality services and meeting the expectations of Pacifica's residents.

Previously, Pacifica analyzed comparisons using fiscal year FY 2018–2019 FTE counts from nine peer cities.

At a high level, Pacifica’s staff counts were lower than the peers’ average, except for in the area of Parks and Recreation. This project confirmed that, as of FY 2023–2024, many of the overall trends were similar. Our research and analysis built on the work completed by the City and provides additional equivalency to the staffing comparisons by aligning peer departments to match Pacifica, identifying key differences in each peer city’s budget, and normalizing the data across the varying city characteristics. As such, this project is not a direct comparison to the FY 2018–2019 analysis.

When comparing normalized staffing ratios—such as employees per customer—between Pacifica and its peers, Pacifica generally remained below the peer average as shown in Table 1. The most significant staffing discrepancies were observed in the Planning, Administrative Services, and Human Resources Departments.

More modest gaps appeared in other departments such as Police, Finance, and General Government. In contrast, staffing levels for Public Works per 1,000 residents matched the peer average, and Pacifica slightly exceeded the average in IT and Parks and Recreation per 100 FTEs and per 10,000 residents, respectively.

While these figures help to quantify staffing levels, it’s crucial to recognize potential differences in service levels, especially in Public Works and Parks, Beaches, and Recreation, which may exist despite efforts to align department functions with those of peer cities.

Table 1: Peer Average Staffing Comparisons
Comparison Pacifica
Peer
Average Difference
Parks, Beaches, and Recreation FTE per 10,000 Residents 9.0 8.8 0.2 Information Technology FTE per 100 Citywide FTE 2.1 2.0 0.1 Public Works FTE per 1,000 Residents 1.5 1.5 0.0
Police FTE per 1,000 Residents 1.1 1.7 -0.6
General Government FTE per 10,000 Residents 1.8 2.5 -0.7 Finance FTE per 100 Citywide FTE 3.2 5.4 -0.7
Total FTE per 1,000 Residents 5.0 6.0 -1.0
Human Resources FTE per 100 Citywide FTE 1.6 2.1 -2.5
Administrative Services FTE per 100 Citywide FTE 6.9 9.4 -2.5 Planning FTE per 10,000 Residents 2.9 5.5 -2.6

15.h
Packet Pg. 747 Attachment: Attachment 8 - Pacifica Staffing Comparison (5684 : FY 2024-25 Budget Study Session 3) 3 Data Collection and Peer Selection
Raftelis began by establishing objective criteria to guide peer selection. This included city population, median household income, general fund budget, and total FTE staff. In addition, Raftelis ensured that potential peer organizations had similar service provision profiles, meaning they each provided a range of services directly to their communities, as opposed to contracting for services. A notable exception was Fire services, which in Pacifica are provided through a local joint powers authority agreement and were excluded from the analysis.

Raftelis gathered census data on 16 potential peer cities to determine comparability. Population size reflects the number of residents served by the city. Median household income is an important factor to understand the community’s ability to pay for services and the types of services a community may demand. The 16 cities included agencies used in the city’s salary surveys as well as those included in Pacifica’s 2019 staffing comparison and were chosen for their comparability to Pacifica across these factors. In our search for peer agencies, we reviewed several coastal communities to reflect Pacifica's unique coastal characteristics; however, none of these coastal communities matched Pacifica's population size closely enough to be considered suitable peers for this analysis.

The demographic and economic characteristics of the 16 cities were then cross-referenced with data from their most recently available adopted budgets, including General Fund resources, employee counts, and service types. Given variation across municipalities, such as for water and wastewater management, Raftelis looked for comparison opportunities at both citywide and department-specific levels. To illustrate, evaluating Pacifica’s public works staffing levels relative to peer cities required a more specific lens due to differing utility provision arrangements. At the same time, including public works FTE in the citywide staff count is important when evaluating administrative services levels because functions such as human resources, information technology, and finance support are needed across the entire organization.

The selection criteria and 16 potential peers were shared with the City, and with feedback, the final eight cities were selected. Table 2, shown in order of total FTE, lists the characteristic data gathered for the eight peer cities and Pacifica.

Table 2: Key Features of Pacifica and the Eight Peer Cities Jurisdiction
2023
Population1
Median Household
Income (2021)2 General Fund Budget Total FTE
Menlo Park 32,478 $179,913 $76,147,993 285.5
San Bruno 42,054 $117,747 $66,443,527 276.0
Rohnert Park 43,693 $82,808 $54,508,924 241.0
Burlingame 30,136 $150,182 $74,518,635 228.7
Campbell 42,713 $130,171 $69,110,503 210.5
Morgan Hill 45,892 $139,161 $54,586,429 200.2
Foster City 32,703 $173,721 $58,671,232 188.9
Pacifica 37,082 $138,548 $48,607,256 187.3
Martinez 36,543 $114,390 $41,572,174 151.0
1 Population as of January 1, 2023. Data from the California Department of Finance 2 Source: United States Census
Pacifica’s population and median household income rank near the middle, but the City’s General Fund budget—which represents the agency’s primary operating fund and reflects capacity to allocate resources to various services—is the second smallest. A variety of factors could drive the budget difference, but the

15.h
Packet Pg. 748 Attachment: Attachment 8 - Pacifica Staffing Comparison (5684 : FY 2024-25 Budget Study Session 3) 4 important consideration for this analysis is that service provision opportunities and staffing levels often mirror financial resources.

Comparative Analysis
Examining the total budget and FTE count offers some insight into how Pacifica compares to the peer cities but calculating the staffing per 1,000 residents normalizes the comparison across population sizes. Figure 1 details this comparison. Pacifica has 5.0 FTE per 1,000 residents, which is less than the peer average of 6.0.

Figure 1: Total FTE per 1,000 Residents
Comparing total FTE between peer cities contributes to a high-level understanding of Pacifica in relation to its peers. However, due to nuanced differences between the peers, it is important to remember that this level of evaluation is somewhat limited. More useful comparisons are possible when looking at the department level.

The first step of conducting the department level staffing comparison between Pacifica and the peer agencies was to delineate the organizational structure and functional responsibilities of each department. Using Pacifica as the benchmark, we examined the budgets of each peer agency to identify similarities and differences across service areas.

Next, we compiled FTE counts for each department and division in Pacifica, seeking alignment with available information from peer cities. This framework served as a reference for charting FTE counts across the peer agencies. Adjustments were made to align peer staff distributions with Pacifica’s departmental structure as needed.

Table 3 contains raw staff counts for the nine cities, organized by function to reflect Pacifica’s department structure. We verified the counts, including details on how staff were re-allocated for comparability (as shown in the table notes), with the peer cities.

7.6 4.9

5.8 4.1

8.8 4.4

5.5 6.6

5.0 Peer Average

6.0 0.0

2.0 4.0

6.0 8.0

10.0 Burlingame Campbell Foster City Martinez Menlo Park Morgan Hill Rohnert Park
San Bruno Pacifica

15.h
Packet Pg. 749 Attachment: Attachment 8 - Pacifica Staffing Comparison (5684 : FY 2024-25 Budget Study Session 3) 5 Table 3: Peer Agency Department Staffing
Jurisdiction
General
Government1
Administrative
Services2 Police Planning5
Public
Works6
Parks, Beaches
and Recreation8
Burlingame 9 16.73 60 18 68 34
Campbell 9 17 74.1 17.6 53.97 38.8
Foster City 9.8 18 55.5 17 48 40.7
Martinez 4 18 53 14 56 6
Menlo Park 14 27.8 69.5 35 72.3 52.8
Morgan Hill 12.3 17.5 72 26.1 57.8 14.7
Rohnert Park 9 28 944 22 49 11
San Bruno 8 22 70 14 52.7 28.6
Pacifica 6.5 13 39.5 10.8 57 33.5
Peer Average 9.4 20.6 68.5 20.5 57.2 28.3
1 Includes City Manager's Office, City Clerk, City Attorney, Economic Development. Some cities include Councilmembers in FTE counts but, because each has five, they are not included here.
2 Includes HR, Finance, and IT functions. To align with the structure in Pacifica, the staffing of these functions has been reallocated to the category of Administrative Services where needed.
3 Burlingame is the only city that fully contracts out IT services. 4Rohnert Park groups Police and Fire in a single FTE count. Two discernible Fire FTE were removed from this total, but others may remain. 5 Includes Building and Planning functions. Some cities call this department Community Development, Development Services, or something else similar. 6 For utilities, Pacifica directly manages wastewater, but other cities manage varying combinations of water, sewer, waste, etc. Non-comparable FTE were removed, when possible (Morgan Hill, Rohnert Park, San Bruno), but remain in totals when differentiation was not clear (Burlingame, Foster City, Martinez, Menlo Park).
7 Campbell administers utilities through JPA agreements. 8 Includes community spaces and programming for youth through seniors, with some variations. Designated Library FTE are removed for comparability (Burlingame, Menlo Park, San Bruno).

The FTE counts in Table 3 may not sum to equal totals relative to Table 2 because staff performing noncomparable services—such as Fire or Library, which Pacifica fulfills through regional agreements—were removed from department counts whenever possible. Similarly, certain functional or departmental totals will appear different in the associated cities’ budget documents; for example, all nine cities have five city Councilmembers, but they are not reflected in the table even if a particular city includes them in their general government FTE count. Menlo Park is somewhat of an outlier in staffing among this group of peers for most functions except Police. For Parks, Beaches, and Recreation, Martinez is a clear outlier.

While FTE counts were re-allocated or removed to align to Pacifica, a number of key differences impacting comparability remain:
• Pacifica, along with five other cities, contracts for City Attorney services. • Burlingame, Campbell, and Morgan Hill have in-house City Attorney staff. • Burlingame, Foster City, and Martinez include economic development functions within their planning departments.
• A specific FTE for economic development was not identifiable for Martinez, so only the FTE from Burlingame and Foster City are included in their general government totals. • Menlo Park contracts for economic development services, and thus, their general government total of 14 FTE does not include this function.
• Public Works service provision varies significantly across peer cities: a prior third-party study found that Pacifica’s department has more functions than its peers, but for utilities the City manages only

15.h
Packet Pg. 750 Attachment: Attachment 8 - Pacifica Staffing Comparison (5684 : FY 2024-25 Budget Study Session 3) 6 wastewater, while other cities deliver varying combinations of water, wastewater, sewer, and stormwater services.
• Public Works and Parks, Beaches, and Recreation departments across the peer organizations operate with varying topography and environmental features, which can further differentiate infrastructure needs and services.
• Pacifica’s Parks, Beaches, and Recreation department’s FTE total was above the peer average, which is likely influenced by two factors: it is one of two cities examined that have a robust grant-funded childcare program, with over 20 FTE in each, and it is the only city with coast and beach areas.

Department by Department Comparisons
The following charts show the staffing comparisons by department. We have normalized the data where appropriate using per capita, often shown as per 10,000 population, for departments that provide services to residents. For departments that serve internal city functions, like Human Resources and Information Technology, we normalized the data using per 100 FTE to reflect the ratio of services to internal city customers. Pacifica’s staffing levels trend lower than its peers in terms of raw counts, averages, and normalized values. The variance is more significant for the raw numbers and averages, but the fact that Pacifica also trends lower on the normalized comparisons underscores the City’s particular resources-toservices ratio.

General Government
General Government includes staffing associated with the City Manager’s office, City Clerk, City Attorney, and Economic Development functions. The staffing comparison has been aligned to the structure utilized in Pacifica.

Figure 2 shows the staffing comparison for General Government, which in Pacifica includes the City Manager’s Office, City Clerk, and Economic Development. It should be noted that Pacifica, Foster City, Martinez, Menlo Park, Rohnert Park, and San Bruno all contract out for City Attorney services while Burlingame, Campbell, and Morgan Hill have this function staffed in-house. For this exercise we have included City Attorney staffing of the peer agencies in the General Government total. The peer average of General Government department staff per 10,000 residents is 2.5 FTE while Pacifica’s ratio is 1.8 FTE, which is 0.7 FTE lower than the average. While this fractional difference might seem minor, it is important to note that many cities employ part-time or cross-departmental roles in General Government functions. Given the increasing complexity of service administration with each additional 10,000 residents, Pacifica could significantly benefit from an equivalent of 28 more hours per week (70% of 1.0 FTE) of direct leadership or support each week.

15.h
Packet Pg. 751 Attachment: Attachment 8 - Pacifica Staffing Comparison (5684 : FY 2024-25 Budget Study Session 3) 7 Figure 2: General Government FTE per 10,000 Residents An additional consideration is the capacity of each City Manager’s second-in-command. Pacifica and the peer cities all have an Assistant City Manager, and Menlo Park also has a Deputy City Manager. For the purposes of our analysis these positions were reflected as a part of General Government. The roles commonly include interdepartmental oversight duties, but the staffing and sizes of the reporting departments can vary, which is discussed further below. As such, another comparative approach is to examine the Assistant City Manager (ACM) functions. In Pacifica, the ACM is budgeted across six cost centers, which include citywide support/oversight, supervising Economic Development, and acting as the Administrative Services Director.

The functional responsibilities of ACMs across cities clearly vary. As far as public documents indicate, though, Pacifica is the only city where the ACM has both citywide oversight and a direct departmental leadership role.

Administrative Services
Administrative Services includes the Human Resources (HR), Finance, and Information Technology (IT) functions. In Pacifica, these functions report to the Assistant City Manager. Figure 3 shows Administrative Services FTE per 100 citywide FTE using the total citywide staffing numbers because the department’s services are provided internally to all city staff. Accordingly, the number of staff relative to the total of city employees is a particularly meaningful ratio.

3.0 2.1

3.0 1.1

4.3 2.7

2.1 1.9 1.8
Peer Average

2.5 0.0

1.0 2.0

3.0 4.0

5.0 Burlingame Campbell Foster City Martinez Menlo ParkMorgan Hill Rohnert Park
San Bruno Pacifica

15.h
Packet Pg. 752 Attachment: Attachment 8 - Pacifica Staffing Comparison (5684 : FY 2024-25 Budget Study Session 3) 8 Figure 3: Administrative Services FTE per 100 Citywide FTE Pacifica has 6.9 Administrative Services FTE per 100 citywide employees. This is lower than the peer average of 9.4 Administrative Services FTE for the same number of employees and the fewest among all peer agencies. Burlingame has the next lowest ratio after Pacifica, but it is also the only city among the peers that contracts for IT support services. Following Pacifica’s budget alignment, all ACM roles are included in the General Government staff calculations. Even with that adjustment Pacifica also fell below the normalized average for Administrative Services.

Figures 4 through 6 show the staffing by function for the Administrative Services departments. These values are normalized per 100 FTE for each city. Figure 4 highlights that Pacifica’s 2.1 IT FTE per 100 citywide FTE is slightly above the peer average. The city has the same number (not-normalized) of staff as the peerwide median of 4, while Menlo Park is an outlier with 10 IT staff. More detailed information about specific IT services and capabilities would be needed to understand this discrepancy. It is interesting that despite varying populations, budgets, and employee counts, five of the seven cities with direct IT service provision have 4 IT FTE. Burlingame contracts for IT support and is therefore excluded from the graph. Aside from Burlingame and Morgan Hill, which has an IT Director leading the function, Pacifica and the other six peer cities all have an IT Manager.

7.3 8.1

9.5 11.9

9.7 8.7

11.6 8.0

6.9 Peer Average

9.4 0.0

2.0 4.0

6.0 8.0

10.0 12.0

14.0 Burlingame Campbell Foster City Martinez Menlo Park Morgan Hill Rohnert Park
San Bruno Pacifica

15.h
Packet Pg. 753 Attachment: Attachment 8 - Pacifica Staffing Comparison (5684 : FY 2024-25 Budget Study Session 3) 9 Figure 4: Information Technology FTE per 100 Citywide FTE Figure 5 illustrates the total number of Human Resources FTE per citywide FTE in each city. As of the FY 2023–2024 budget year, Pacifica had 1.6 Human Resources FTE per 100 city employees, which is below the peer average of 2.1. Pacifica and three of the other peers—Campbell, Martinez, and Menlo Park—have Managers as their most senior HR professional, while Burlingame, Foster City, Morgan Hill, Rohnert Park, and San Bruno have a director leading the function.

Figure 5: Human Resources FTE per 100 Citywide FTE

1.9 2.1

1.3 3.5

2.0 1.7 1.8

2.1 Peer Average

2.0 -

1.0 2.0

3.0 4.0
Campbell Foster City Martinez Menlo Park Morgan Hill Rohnert Park
San Bruno Pacifica

1.7 1.4

2.6 2.6

1.8 1.5

3.3 1.6 1.6
Peer Average

2.1 -

1.0 2.0

3.0 4.0
Burlingame Campbell Foster City Martinez Menlo Park Morgan HillRohnert ParkSan Bruno Pacifica

15.h
Packet Pg. 754 Attachment: Attachment 8 - Pacifica Staffing Comparison (5684 : FY 2024-25 Budget Study Session 3) 10 For the ratio of Finance FTE per 100 citywide FTE in each city, the chart below shows that Pacifica again has fewer FTE than the peer average, with 3.2 relative to the peer average of 5.4. A consideration for Burlingame is that the Finance staff manage the city’s IT hardware and software, and act as a liaison with the external IT support, however, city leadership confirmed that their roles are primarily serving Finance functions. Pacifica uniquely has a Deputy Director of Finance as the senior finance-specific role, reporting to the ACM. For the peer cities, Menlo Park has a Finance and Budget Manager, while the other seven cities all use a Finance Director.

Figure 6: Finance FTE per 100 Citywide FTE
Police
As shown Figure 7, Pacifica has 1.1 Police FTE for every 1,000 residents, which is lower than the peer average of 1.8 FTE per 1,000 residents. Further research into district areas and crime rates would be helpful in understanding the context of service needs relative to staffing, but the normalization removes variation due to population size. An additional metric that is helpful for understanding the staffing environment is a comparison of sworn Police FTE; Figures 8 and 9 show that Pacifica’s raw count and normalized sworn FTE per 1,000 residents both fall below the peer averages. Rohnert Park is excluded because they group together their Police and Fire staff in a Public Safety Department and separating the FTE using publicly available data was not feasible.

5.6 4.8 4.8

7.3 4.5

5.2 6.6

4.5 3.2
Peer Average

5.4 -

2.0 4.0

6.0 8.0
Burlingame Campbell Foster City Martinez Menlo ParkMorgan Hill Rohnert Park
San Bruno Pacifica

15.h
Packet Pg. 755 Attachment: Attachment 8 - Pacifica Staffing Comparison (5684 : FY 2024-25 Budget Study Session 3) 11 Figure 7: Police FTE per 1,000 Residents
Figure 8: Sworn and Non-Sworn Police FTE

2.0 1.7 1.7

1.5 2.1

1.6 1.7

1.1 Peer Average

1.7 0.0

0.5 1.0

1.5 2.0

2.5 Burlingame Campbell Foster City Martinez Menlo Park Morgan Hill San Bruno Pacifica 40 48.0

43.0 42.0

47.0 43.0

51.0 33.0
20 24.0

12.0 13.0

22.5 29.0

19.0 6.5
Sworn
Peer Average

44.9 Non-Sworn
Peer Average

19.9 0
10 20
30 40
50 60
Burlingame Campbell Foster City Martinez Menlo Park Morgan Hill San Bruno Pacifica Sworn
Non-Sworn

15.h
Packet Pg. 756 Attachment: Attachment 8 - Pacifica Staffing Comparison (5684 : FY 2024-25 Budget Study Session 3) 12 Figure 9: Sworn Police FTE per 1,000 Residents
Planning
The Planning departments across the cities often had different titles, such as Community Development or Development Services, but the functions were very similar throughout. For Pacifica, the department comprises the building, planning, and code enforcement functions. Each of the other cities’ equivalent departments performed the same roles, however, Campbell, Menlo Park, Morgan Hill, and Rohnert Park also provide housing assistance functions in this functional area. Only Menlo Park distinguishes which Planning FTE work on housing, and this level of detail was not listed by other peers, so that function is not removed here. Similarly, specific comparisons among the common Planning functions—building, planning, code enforcement—were not supported by the publicly available information. Figure 10 depicts the ratio of Planning department FTE per 10,000 residents. Pacifica has 2.9 FTE per 10,000 residents, which is below the peer average of 5.5 FTE and the fewest among all peer agencies.

In addition, the Planning department in Pacifica operates within a uniquely complex regulatory environment due to the city's coastal location. As a coastal community, Pacifica must navigate the additional layers of oversight from the Coastal Commission, which imposes more stringent regulations and permitting requirements. This necessitates a more robust planning framework to ensure compliance with both state and local coastal management policies, thereby adding complexity to the department's workload and staffing needs. When conducting further analysis in this area it may behoove the City to research agencies with a similar makeup, such as Pismo Beach, which wasn’t appropriate as a citywide staffing comparison peer because of its size but may provide valuable insights at the departmental level.

1.3 1.1

1.3 1.1

1.4 0.9

1.2 0.9
Peer Average

1.2 0.0

0.2 0.4

0.6 0.8

1.0 1.2

1.4 1.6
Burlingame Campbell Foster City Martinez Menlo Park Morgan Hill San Bruno Pacifica

15.h
Packet Pg. 757 Attachment: Attachment 8 - Pacifica Staffing Comparison (5684 : FY 2024-25 Budget Study Session 3) 13 Figure 10: Planning FTE per 10,000 Residents
Public Works
As mentioned earlier, Public Works is a difficult department to compare across peers, primarily because of the variation in utilities provided. Further research could compare this department with peer cities dependent on similar utility services and other relevant demands on the Public Works department; however, to do so would require additional work beyond the scope of this review (i.e., determining jurisdictions with aligned functions and service demands and then surveying those jurisdictions for specific staffing detail).

That being said, using the current peer group, Pacifica has 1.5 Public Works FTE per 1,000 residents, which is equal to the peer average (Figure 11). This comparison should be qualified, however, based on the types of utilities that each city provides. Table 4 below captures the utilities administered by each city’s Public Works department. Although Campbell, Menlo Park, and San Bruno do not administer any utilities, their FTE ratio does not seem to vary as might be expected from Pacifica.

Table 4: Utilities Administered by Public Works in Pacifica and the Eight Peer Cities City Wastewater Water Sewer
Recycled
Water
Solid
Waste None
Burlingame ✓ ✓
Campbell ✓
Foster City1 ✓ ✓
Martinez ✓ ✓
Menlo Park ✓
Morgan Hill ✓ ✓
Rohnert Park ✓ ✓ ✓
San Bruno ✓
Pacifica ✓
1 Foster City also has Public Works FTE administering Levee, Lagoon, and Stormwater, as well as Recycling.

6.0 4.1

5.2 3.8

10.8 5.7 5.0

3.3 2.9
Peer Average

5.5 0.0

2.0 4.0

6.0 8.0

10.0 12.0
Burlingame Campbell Foster City Martinez Menlo Park Morgan Hill Rohnert Park
San Bruno Pacifica

15.h
Packet Pg. 758 Attachment: Attachment 8 - Pacifica Staffing Comparison (5684 : FY 2024-25 Budget Study Session 3) 14 A previous third-party study of the Public Works department identified that, as of Fiscal Year 2018-2019, Pacifica had more functions housed in Public Works than its peers. When analyzing Public Works staffing levels, it is essential to quantify the department based on the range of utilities and functions each agency provides. Due to the complexity and variability in services such as street maintenance, park maintenance, water, wastewater, sewer, and stormwater management, and other functions that may be housed in a Public Works department. While not a part of the scope of this project, a more detailed and tailored analysis is necessary to accurately compare Public Works departments across different cities.

Three peer cities that overlap between the prior and current analysis—Burlingame, Foster City, and Morgan Hill—publicly share information that mirrors the format of the prior study sources. Without new in-depth analysis, comparing information from the prior study to FY 2023-2024 reveals that from FY 2019 to FY 2024:
• Burlingame grew their Engineering team 20% by adding an Engineering Technician and a Senior Civil Engineer.
• Foster City’s Engineering team grew 50%, with staff reporting to the Engineering Manager shifting from four Junior-Associate Engineers and one Senior Engineering Technician (five FTE) to three Senior Engineers, three Associate/Assistant Engineers, and two Senior Engineering Technicians (six FTE, with higher qualifications).
• San Bruno grew its Engineering team 45% from 11 to 16 FTE, added one street and two storms maintenance workers, added one administrative resource, and grew their fleet and facilities staffing to a full team within the department.
• Meanwhile, Pacifica’s department staffing only increased 4%, with the Field Services team adding two FTE and the Engineering team decreasing from six to five FTE.

Figure 11 presents the normalized staffing comparison for the department; however, it’s important to acknowledge the considerations outlined above, and while it appears that Public Works staffing in Pacifica is aligned with the peer average, that data is not conclusive without a more detailed analysis.

Figure 11: Public Works FTE per 1,000 Residents

2.3 1.3

1.5 1.5

2.2 1.3

1.1 1.3

1.5 Peer
Average

1.5 0.0

0.5 1.0

1.5 2.0

2.5 Burlingame Campbell Foster City Martinez Menlo Park Morgan Hill Rohnert Park
San Bruno Pacifica

15.h
Packet Pg. 759 Attachment: Attachment 8 - Pacifica Staffing Comparison (5684 : FY 2024-25 Budget Study Session 3) 15 Parks, Recreation and Beaches
Parks and Recreation poses another challenging comparison. As noted earlier, Pacifica is the only city among the peers that has beaches within their service portfolio. In addition, 21 of Pacifica’s 33.5 FTE in this department support a grant-funded childcare services division. These differences likely explain why Pacifica has 9.0 FTE per 10,000 residents, which is higher than the peer average of 8.8 FTE per 10,000 (Figure 12).

The only other peer city with a comparable childcare program is Menlo Park, which has 24.25 FTEs for their pre-school childcare division. Menlo Park has an additional 28.5 FTE for their other recreation functions, while Pacifica has 11. When the childcare programs are removed from FTE counts for these two cities, the peer average falls to 7.5 FTE and Pacifica has 4.1 fewer FTE per 10,000 residents, as shown in Figure 13.

Martinez, which has a very low number of Parks and Recreation staff relative to the peer cities, contracts for the management of their marina, which was not included in this comparison.

Figure 12: Parks, Beaches, and Recreation FTE per 10,000 Residents (all FTE)

11.3 9.1

12.4 16.2

3.2 2.5

6.8 9.0
Peer Average

8.8 0.0

2.0 4.0

6.0 8.0

10.0 12.0

14.0 16.0

18.0 Burlingame Campbell Foster City Menlo Park Morgan Hill Rohnert Park
San Bruno Pacifica

15.h
Packet Pg. 760 Attachment: Attachment 8 - Pacifica Staffing Comparison (5684 : FY 2024-25 Budget Study Session 3) 16 Figure 13: Parks, Beaches, and Recreation FTE per 10,000 Residents (excluding childcare program FTEs)
Conclusion
This analysis delivers a high-level city staffing comparison to Pacifica with sufficient detail to draw meaningful comparisons. After vetting potential peers with City staff, we mapped out peer city department functions to align them with Pacifica’s structure. Next, we used the map to create a comprehensive tracker for the department alignment, which facilitated data verification with peer agencies. While normalizing the peer comparisons based on their customer base helps reduce variances due to differing client bases across the region, certain comparisons—particularly for Public Works and Parks and Recreation—remain challenging due to service-provision variances.

Overall, our research reveals that Pacifica operates with, on average, fewer FTE than peer agencies. While there are pockets of parity, the City has managed to deliver similar public services with less support. On the upside, our analysis found that Pacifica had a nearly equal ratio of 0.1 above the peer average for IT staffing and Pacifica has a ratio 0.2 FTE higher than the normalized peer average of 8.8 for Parks, Beaches, and Recreation. When uniquely large childcare programs in Pacifica and Menlo Park are excluded from this departmental comparison, however, Pacifica had around 4 fewer FTE than the average 7.5 FTE per 10,000 residents among peer cities.

In addition, we found that Pacifica had an equal ratio for Public Works FTE per 1,000 residents; however, the services and functions within a Public Works department, such as utilities and maintenance, vary significantly among cities. Other factors, such as how services are provided (e.g., park maintenance being in Parks or Public Works), the geographical size of the jurisdiction (miles of sewer, streets, sidewalks, trails), infrastructure conditions, and the coastal climate's harsh influence on infrastructure, also impact staffing needs and should be considered for a more accurate comparison.

Pacifica had 0.6 fewer Police FTE per 1,000 residents and 0.7 fewer Finance FTE per 100 citywide FTE, which can be impactful gaps considering how service-delivery complexity grows alongside city population

11.3 9.1

12.4 7.5

3.2 2.5

6.8 3.4
Peer Average

7.5 0.0

2.0 4.0

6.0 8.0

10.0 12.0

14.0 Burlingame Campbell Foster City Menlo Park Morgan Hill Rohnert Park San Bruno Pacifica

15.h
Packet Pg. 761 Attachment: Attachment 8 - Pacifica Staffing Comparison (5684 : FY 2024-25 Budget Study Session 3) 17 and organizational size. For other functions, like HR and Planning, Pacifica had around 2.5 FTE fewer, on average, to serve the same size audience as its peers.

To further understand the staffing comparisons for Pacifica, additional research could focus on identifying peers based on specific departments’ alone. For example, identifying small California cities that have overlap with the utilities Pacifica provides, even if the potential peer has vastly different service-levels in other departments. As referenced earlier, each tenth of an FTE can make a difference in service delivery, particularly in a small city. The results of our research and analysis are intended to provide the City of Pacifica with information that provides context necessary to understand, and ultimately address, today’s staffing challenges.

As the next step in this analysis, we recommend conducting more focused deep dives into individual departments to gain a clearer understanding of their specific staffing needs and service levels. This should include a detailed examination of service provision models, workload metrics, and the unique challenges faced by each department. By analyzing these factors, Pacifica can develop more tailored strategies to address staffing disparities and enhance service delivery, ensuring that departmental resources are aligned with the city's goals and community needs.

15.h
Packet Pg. 762 Attachment: Attachment 8 - Pacifica Staffing Comparison (5684 : FY 2024-25 Budget Study Session 3)