Pacifica City Council
January 13, 2025

CITY OF PACIFICA

CITY COUNCIL AGENDA
Council Chambers
2212 Beach Blvd
Pacifica, CA 94044
Mayor Sue Beckmeyer
Mayor pro Tem Mary Bier
Councilmember Christine Boles
Councilmember Mayra Espinosa
Councilmember Greg Wright
City Council Regular Meeting 1 January 13, 2025
January 13, 2025 (MONDAY)
www.cityofpacifica.org
Off-street parking is allowed by permit for attendance at official public meetings.

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

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

The primary method for observing and participating in the meeting is in-person at the meeting location published in the meeting agenda. However, there are alternative ways to observe and participate:
• Join Zoom Webinar: https://pacifica-gov.zoom.us/j/81156158241 • Watch on TV on Comcast channel 26
• Watch a Live Stream of the meeting by following https://www.cityofpacifica.org/LiveStream or www.pacificcoast.tv
• Live Remote Public Comments (offered on a pilot basis):
• Join Zoom Webinar: https://pacifica-gov.zoom.us/j/81156158241 • OR Dial-in: 1-669-900-6833 | Webinar ID: 811 5615 8241 o Press * 9 to raise your hand to request to speak.
o Press * 6 to unmute when called upon to speak by the last 4-digits of your phone #. • When the Mayor announces the Agenda Item on which you would like to comment, raise your hand in Zoom. You will be called upon my screenname or last 4-digits of phone number if dialing in. Please mute any background sound and state your full name at the start of your comment.

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

BEFORE THE MEETING: Written public comments may be submitted in advance by 12:00 p.m. on the meeting date by email to: [email protected]. Written public comments submitted by email should adhere to the following:
• Clearly indicate the Agenda Item No. or specify “Public Comment on Item Not on Agenda” in the Subject Line
• Include the submitter’s full name
Written public comments received by 12:00 p.m. on the meeting date will be provided in their entirety to the City Council and posted to the City’s website prior to the meeting but will not be read verbally at the meeting.

AT THE MEETING: Materials in writing provided at the meeting should provide seven (7) copies to provide for each Councilmember, City Clerk and City staff.

City Council Regular Meeting 2 January 13, 2025
CLOSED SESSION - NONE.
7:00 PM OPEN SESSION
Call to Order
Roll Call
Reading of Land Acknowledgment
The City of Pacifica acknowledges that we occupy the unceded ancestral homeland of the Ramaytush Ohlone peoples, who are the original inhabitants of the San Francisco Peninsula. We honor the Ramaytush Ohlone peoples for their enduring commitment to Mother Earth. As the Indigenous protectors of this land and in accordance with their traditions, the Ramaytush Ohlone have never ceded, lost, nor forgotten their responsibilities as the caretakers of this place, as well as for all peoples who reside in their traditional territory. We affirm their sovereign rights as First Peoples and wish to pay our respects to the ancestors, elders, and relatives of the Ramaytush Ohlone peoples.

Salute to the Flag led by Mayor Beckmeyer

SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS
A. Special Presentation - HIP Housing Annual Calendar
B. Proclamation - Police Captain Chris Clements - Retirement C. Special Presentation - Introduction of New Department Directors / New City Staff

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

Public meetings are a limited public forum, meaning that there are rules for commenting at these meetings. Comments on consent agenda items must relate to that specific item.

If comments do not relate to a specific agenda item, then City will provide you with an initial warning to stay on topic. If the warning is not followed, the Mayor will direct the City Clerk to cut off the microphone.

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

1. Approval of Disbursements for 12/01/24 through 12/31/24.

PROPOSED ACTION: Receive and file the Monthly Check Register Report for the month of December 2024.

2. Approval of Minutes
PROPOSED ACTION: Move to approve the minutes for the December 5, 2024 City City Council Regular Meeting 3 January 13, 2025
Council Special Meeting and the December 9, 2024 City Council Special and Regular Meeting.

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

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

4. Adopt a Resolution Adopting a New Administrative Policy No. 84, "Guidelines for Issuing Proclamations, Commendations and Ceremonial Documents" to Establish Criteria and Procedures for Official City Council Recognition in the form of Proclamations and Ceremonial Documents
PROPOSED ACTION: Adopt a Resolution titled, “A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Pacifica Adopting Administrative Policy No. 84 ‘Guidelines for Issuing Proclamations, Commendations and Ceremonial Documents’”.

5. Eighth Amendment to Consultant Services Agreement for On-Call Planning Services Between the City of Pacifica and Consulting Firm Good City Company PROPOSED ACTION: Move to adopt the attached resolution to approve the Eighth Amendment to the Agreement for Consultant Services between the City of Pacifica and Good City Company, by increasing the contract amount by $32,500 with a total not to exceed amount of $672,500 and, to authorize the City Manager to execute the amendment.

6. Resolution Accepting Grant Award from the Partnership for the Bay’s Future Policy Fund PROPOSED ACTION: Move to adopt a resolution accepting a grant award from the Partnership for the Bay’s Future Policy Fund and authorize the City Manager to execute all necessary documents, including the Memorandum of Understanding.

7. Esplanade & Palmetto Bicycle and Pedestrian Improvements Project PROPOSED ACTION: Approve the following actions for the Esplanade & Palmetto Bicycle and Pedestrian Improvements Project

1. Adopt a Resolution entitled "A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Pacifica Approving the Construction Contract between the City of Pacifica and Dryco Construction Inc. for the Esplanade and Palmetto Pedestrian and Bicycle Improvements Project in an amount of $1,171,750.60; Authorize a budget authority in the amount of $1,288,758.00 which includes contingencies in an amount of approximately ten percent (10%) of the Construction Contract amounts; Authorize staff to Execute Future Change Orders and Task Orders within the contingency amount;

2. Authorize City Manager to Execute an amendment to the City’s existing project design contract with Fehr and Peers (F&P), on a time and materials basis in an amount not to exceed $15,000 for construction engineering support, bringing the total contract cost ceiling to $117,500;

3. Authorize the City Manager to Sign Contract Documents for the Project; and

4. Execute Budget Amendment Appropriating $465,354.50 from Available Fund Balance In Fund 13 - Street Improvement Fund”

8. Sharp Park PDA Pedestrian Improvements Project
PROPOSED ACTION: Approve the following actions for the Sharp Park PDA Pedestrian City Council Regular Meeting 4 January 13, 2025
Improvements Project

1. Adopt a Resolution entitled "A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Pacifica Approving the Construction Contract between the City of Pacifica and JJR Construction Inc. for the Sharp Park PDA Pedestrian Improvement Project in an amount of $1,639,478.21; Authorize a budget authority in the amount of $2,049,347.76 which includes contingencies in an amount of twenty five percent (25%) of the Construction Contract amounts; and Authorize staff to Execute Future Change Orders and Task Orders within the contingency amount;

2. Authorize City Manager to Execute an amendment to the City’s existing arborist contract with Tree Management Experts Inc., on a time and materials basis in an amount not to exceed $20,000 for arborist services during construction, bringing the total contract cost to $40,000;

3. Authorize City Manager to Execute an amendment to the City’s existing design services contract with Nichols Consulting Engineers, on a time and materials basis in an amount not to exceed $9,700 for construction engineering support, bringing the total contract cost ceiling to $218,100;

4. Authorize the City Manager to Sign Contract Documents to the Project; and

5. Execute Budget Amendment Appropriating $188,737.05 from Available Fund Balance In Fund 11 Measure W”.

9. Annual and Five-Year Impact Fee Report 2023-2024 Mitigation Fee Act Development Fee Review
PROPOSED ACTION: Adopt a resolution entitled "A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Pacifica Approving 2023-2024 Annual and Five-Year Impact Fee Report for the Fiscal Year Ending June 30, 2024.”

PUBLIC COMMENTS ON ITEMS NOT ON THE POSTED AGENDA
This portion of the Agenda is available for the public to address the City Council on any issue that is not on the Agenda. Any person wishing to address the Council shall be recognized by the Mayor during this time, provided, however, that only items not on the Agenda for that meeting may be addressed. Comments on non-agendized items must address matters within the subject matter jurisdiction of the City. If comments do not address matters within the subject matter jurisdiction of the City, the City will provide you with an initial warning to stay within the subject matter jurisdiction of the City. If the warning is not followed, the Mayor will direct the City Clerk to cut off the microphone.

Councilmembers shall not enter into debate with speakers under Public Comments on Items Not on the Posted Agenda. A maximum of three minutes will be allowed for any speaker.

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

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

City Council Regular Meeting 5 January 13, 2025
PUBLIC HEARINGS - NONE.

CONSIDERATION

10. Potential extension of public comment period for Draft Environmental Impact Report for Targeted General Plan Amendments, Rezoning, and Objective Development Standards Program for the Housing Element.

PROPOSED ACTION: Discuss and consider whether to extend the Draft Environmental Impact Report public comment period to longer than 45-days.

11. Process for Annual Mayor and Mayor pro Tem selection and Section 7, Deliberations and Voting, and Section 8, Motions, of City Council Rules and Code of Ethics.

PROPOSED ACTION: Discuss the process for annual Mayor and Mayor pro Tem selection and the City Council Rules and Code of Ethics Sections 7 and 8 pertaining to Deliberations, Motions, and Voting and provide direction to the City Manager regarding next steps on this matter.

12. Receive Update on City Council Workplan Item for Review of City Committee / Commission Charters and Provide Direction to Staff to Confirm this Workplan Item and Provide Updated Timeline; Establish Ad-Hoc City Council Subcommittee to Provide Input for Charter Reviews; Adopt Resolution to Amend the Charter for the Library Advisory Committee to Designated Two Positions for Youth Members PROPOSED ACTION: It is recommended that the City Council take the following actions:
• Provide Direction to Staff to Confirm the City Council Workplan Item to Complete the Review and Update to Council Advisory Committee / Commission Charters and Updated Timeline; and
• Establish Ad-Hoc City Council Subcommittee Consisting of Two Councilmembers to Provide Input to Staff for Questions to Pose to the Members of Specific Committees / Commissions to Facilitate Review and Staff Recommendations Regarding Charter Reviews for the Remaining Bodies: Beautification Advisory Committee; Emergency Preparedness & Safety Commission; and Parks, Beaches & Recreation Commission; and

3. Move to adopt the attached resolution titled, “A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Pacifica Rescinding Resolution No. 67-2023 and Amending the Charter of the Library Advisory Committee”.

13. 2025 City Council Liaison and Committee Assignments PROPOSED ACTION: Review the list of City Council Liaison and Committee Assignments, make any modifications for the calendar year 2025, and approve the final list.

ADJOURN
NOTICE: If you challenge a city's zoning, planning or other decision in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the City Council at, or prior to, the public hearing. Judicial review of any city administrative decision may be had only if a petition is filed with the court not later than the 90th day following the date upon which the decision becomes final. Judicial review of environmental determinations may be subject to a shorter time period for litigation, in certain cases 30 days following the date of the final decision City Council Regular Meeting 6 January 13, 2025
The City of Pacifica will provide assistance for disabled citizens upon at least 24 hours advance notice to the City Manager’s Office (650) 738-7301, or send request via email to:
[email protected] if you need sign language assistance or written material printed in a larger font or taped, advance notice is necessary. All meeting rooms are accessible to the disabled.

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

HOW TO OBTAIN CITY COUNCIL AGENDAS
Posted agendas:

Agendas are posted no later than Friday prior to the City Council meeting date, at the entrance to the City Hall location at 170 Santa Maria Avenue, Pacifica.

View on the Internet:

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

Send a request to Sarah Coffey, at [email protected] City Clerk’s Office/City Manager’s Office
City Hall, 170 Santa Maria Ave.

Council meetings:

Agendas are available at the City Council meeting

HOW TO REACH YOUR GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS
• Governor Gavin Newsom, State Capitol Building, Sacramento CA 95814 (916) 445-2841 • State Senator Josh Becker, 1528 So. El Camino Real, Suite 303, San Mateo CA 94402 (650) 212-3313 • Assembly Member Marc Berman, 721 Colorado Ave, Suite 101, Palo Alto CA 94303 (650) 324-0224 • Congressman Sam Liccardo, 1117 Longworth House Office Building, Washington DC 20515 (202) 225-8104
• Senator Alex Padilla, 331 Hart Senate Office Building, Washington DC 20510 (202) 224-3553 • Senator Adam Schiff, SD-B40B Dirksen Senate Office Building, Washington DC 20510 (202) 224-3841 • President Donald J. Trump, 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington DC 20500

CITY COUNCIL
• Mayor Sue Beckmeyer, [email protected]
• Mayor pro Tem Mary Bier, [email protected]
• Councilmember Christine Boles, [email protected]
• Councilmember Mayra Espinosa, [email protected]
• Councilmember Greg Wright, [email protected]

CITY OF PACIFICA

COUNCIL AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT
1/13/2025
1 SUBJECT:

Approval of Disbursements for 12/01/24 through 12/31/24.

RECOMMENDED ACTION:

Receive and file the Monthly Check Register Report for the month of December 2024.

STAFF CONTACT:

Lucy Xie, Deputy Finance Director
(650) 738-7395
[email protected]
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION:

Staff has submitted the following Monthly Check Register Report per California Government Code, Title 4, Division 3, Part 3, Chapter 3, Section 41004:
• Disbursements dated 12/1/24 through 12/31/24 are in the amount of $3,735,544.79 (Attachment 1).

FISCAL IMPACT:

There is no fiscal impact associated with acceptance of the Monthly Check Register Report.

ORIGINATED BY:

Finance Department
ATTACHMENT LIST:

Attachment A: Disbursements -FY 24-25 - 12-01 to 12-31-24 TYLER (PDF) 1 Packet Pg. 7
City of Pacifica

AP CHECK RECONCILIATION REGISTER
Report generated: 01/03/2025 09:39
User: 5234vsahay
Program ID: apchkrcn

FOR CASH ACCOUNT: 101 10001 FOR: Cleared and Uncleared
CHECK # CHECK DATE TYPE VENDOR NAME UNCLEARED CLEARED BATCH CLEAR DATE 1381 12/04/2024 PRINTED 000175 CALIFORNIA MUNICIPAL STAT 650.00 1382 12/04/2024 PRINTED 000192 CDW GOVERNMENT, INC. 50,064.01 1383 12/04/2024 PRINTED 000587 OFFICE DEPOT 58.93
1384 12/04/2024 PRINTED 000691 RICE LAKE WEIGHING SYSTEM 100.00 1385 12/04/2024 PRINTED 000766 STERICYCLE 1,302.32
1386 12/04/2024 PRINTED 000827 TYLER TECHNOLOGIES 4,736.00 1387 12/04/2024 PRINTED 000844 US FOODS, INC 2,043.40
1388 12/04/2024 PRINTED 000877 WESTERN TRUCK FAB 12,330.62 1389 12/06/2024 PRINTED 000052 ALAMEDA COUNTY SHERIFFS O 324.00 1390 12/06/2024 PRINTED 000056 ADAM-HILL COMPANY, THE 2,419.73 1391 12/06/2024 PRINTED 000062 ALERT PEST CONTROL COMPAN 41.35 1392 12/06/2024 PRINTED 001139 ALLYSON AYONG 67.67
1393 12/06/2024 PRINTED 000074 AMAZON.COM SALES, INC. 3,650.76 1394 12/06/2024 PRINTED 000096 AT&T 758.91
1395 12/06/2024 PRINTED 000098 ATLAS PLUMBING & ROOTER I 1,000.00 1396 12/06/2024 PRINTED 000120 BAY AREA TREE SPECIALISTS 3,000.00 1397 12/06/2024 PRINTED 000124 BAY POWER LLC GENERATOR S 17,719.00 1398 12/06/2024 PRINTED 000147 BLUE RIBBON SUPPLY COMPAN 5,209.70 1399 12/06/2024 PRINTED 000906 BRISA RANCH LLC 1,291.00 1400 12/06/2024 PRINTED 000166 BURKE WILLIAMS AND SORENS 196,976.36 1401 12/06/2024 PRINTED 000190 CALIFORNIA DIESEL & POWER 601.54 1402 12/06/2024 PRINTED 000201 CHILDCARE CAREERS 799.00 1403 12/06/2024 PRINTED 001160 CHRIS MARTIN 373.55
1404 12/06/2024 PRINTED 000203 CINTAS CORPORATION #464 1,466.76 1405 12/06/2024 PRINTED 000203 CINTAS 1,173.03
1406 12/06/2024 PRINTED 000224 COMCAST 20.00
1407 12/06/2024 PRINTED 000931 CORODATA RECORDS MANAGEME 537.28 1408 12/06/2024 PRINTED 000240 COTTON, SHIRES & ASSOCIAT 28,893.42 1409 12/06/2024 PRINTED 000248 CSG CONSULTANTS, INC. 56,329.74 1410 12/06/2024 PRINTED 000260 DAILY JOURNAL CORPORATION 1,346.78 1411 12/06/2024 PRINTED 000265 DAVEY TREE EXPERT COMPANY 7,685.00 1412 12/06/2024 PRINTED 000265 DAVEY TREE EXPERT COMPANY 8,290.00 1413 12/06/2024 PRINTED 001157 EMSL ANALYTICAL, INC 1,272.00 1414 12/06/2024 PRINTED 000320 ENID ANSGARIUS 210.38
1415 12/06/2024 PRINTED 000928 EVA TONG 207.76
1416 12/06/2024 PRINTED 000365 GHIRARDELLI ASSOCIATES, I 3,418.76 1417 12/06/2024 PRINTED 000377 GRAINGER 804.35
1418 12/06/2024 PRINTED 000955 HD SUPPLY FORMERLY HOME D 465.32 1419 12/06/2024 PRINTED 000398 HDL SOFTWARE, LLC 54,531.18 1420 12/06/2024 PRINTED 000947 K.F. HOWELL ELECTRIC, INC 1,620.00 1421 12/06/2024 PRINTED 000427 INTERSTATE TRAFFIC CONTRO 820.32 1422 12/06/2024 PRINTED 000446 JOHN THE SIGN GUY LLC 240.36 1423 12/06/2024 PRINTED 000979 KENNEDY/JENKS CONSULTANTS 11,572.00 1424 12/06/2024 PRINTED 000462 KIMBALL MIDWEST 826.12
1425 12/06/2024 PRINTED 000523 METROPOLITAN PLANNING GRO 90,931.25 1426 12/06/2024 PRINTED 000529 MILLER & O'BRIEN 175.00
1427 12/06/2024 PRINTED 000561 NICHOLS CONSULTING ENGINE 46,850.13 1428 12/06/2024 PRINTED 001161 NIGEL MULGREW PLUMBING IN 1,799.00 1429 12/06/2024 PRINTED 000592 O'REILLY AUTO PARTS 2,811.58 1430 12/06/2024 PRINTED 000603 PACIFIC MANOR HARDWARE, I 10.98 1431 12/06/2024 PRINTED 000604 PACIFIC NURSERIES 2,328.17 1432 12/06/2024 PRINTED 000605 PACIFIC OFFICE AUTOMATION 4,033.23

1.a
Packet Pg. 8
Attachment: Attachment A: Disbursements -FY 24-25 - 12-01 to 12-31-24 TYLER (5820 : Disbursements - City of Pacifica

AP CHECK RECONCILIATION REGISTER
Report generated: 01/03/2025 09:39
User: 5234vsahay
Program ID: apchkrcn

FOR CASH ACCOUNT: 101 10001 FOR: Cleared and Uncleared
CHECK # CHECK DATE TYPE VENDOR NAME UNCLEARED CLEARED BATCH CLEAR DATE 1433 12/06/2024 PRINTED 000629 PATINO, JOE 142.00
1434 12/06/2024 PRINTED 000647 PACIFIC GAS & ELECTRIC CO 203,823.32 1435 12/06/2024 PRINTED 000679 QUILL CORPORATION 194.24 1436 12/06/2024 PRINTED 000683 RANEY PLANNING AND MANAGE 7,712.42 1437 12/06/2024 PRINTED 001159 RELIABLE TRANSLATIONS, IN 222.30 1438 12/06/2024 PRINTED 001153 RUSSEL ARELLANO 119.00
1439 12/06/2024 PRINTED 000982 S.R. ROSE ENGINEERING, IN 7,040.00 1440 12/06/2024 PRINTED 000021 COUNTY OF SAN MATEO 2,005.75 1441 12/06/2024 PRINTED 000021 SAN MATEO COUNTY SHERIFF' 2,375.00 1442 12/06/2024 PRINTED 000717 SAN MATEO DAILY JOURNAL 4,320.00 1443 12/06/2024 PRINTED 001004 SLOAN SAKAI YEUNG & WONG 10,329.00 1444 12/06/2024 PRINTED 000744 SMART & FINAL 399.01
1445 12/06/2024 PRINTED 000766 STERICYCLE 1,267.94
1446 12/06/2024 PRINTED 001136 SUZANNE CUNANAN 100.29
1447 12/06/2024 PRINTED 000014 TOWN OF HILLSBOROUGH 220.00 1448 12/06/2024 PRINTED 000828 U.S. BANK EQUIPMENT FINAN 449.42 1449 12/06/2024 PRINTED 000829 UNIVERSAL BUILDING SERVIC 1,170.00 1450 12/06/2024 PRINTED 000835 UNITED ROTARY BRUSH CORP 652.67 1451 12/06/2024 PRINTED 000837 UNIVAR SOLUTIONS USA INC 1,130.28 1452 12/06/2024 PRINTED 000840 UPS STORE #1906 448.00
1453 12/06/2024 PRINTED 000844 US FOODS, INC 6,238.54
1454 12/12/2024 PRINTED 000001 ALAMEDA COUNTY FIRE DEPAR 1,334.26 1455 12/12/2024 PRINTED 001182 DALY CITY POST OFFICE 7,000.00 1456 12/12/2024 PRINTED 000375 GOVINVEST INC. 7,000.00
1457 12/13/2024 PRINTED 000039 AVINA, ANGEL 400.00
1458 12/13/2024 PRINTED 000041 A-1 RHINO LININGS 559.38 1459 12/13/2024 PRINTED 000056 ADAM-HILL COMPANY, THE 275.40 1460 12/13/2024 PRINTED 000060 AIRGAS USA, LLC 238.48
1461 12/13/2024 PRINTED 000062 ALERT PEST CONTROL COMPAN 400.00 1462 12/13/2024 PRINTED 000064 ALHAMBRA 55.15
1463 12/13/2024 PRINTED 001139 ALLYSON AYONG 26.13
1464 12/13/2024 PRINTED 000067 ALPINE AWARDS ACCOUNTING 37.16 1465 12/13/2024 PRINTED 000074 AMAZON.COM SALES, INC. 3,344.85 1466 12/13/2024 PRINTED 001084 AMERICAN RED CROSS 276.00 1467 12/13/2024 PRINTED 000080 AMERICAN TEXTILE & SUPPLY 1,404.54 1468 12/13/2024 PRINTED 001104 ANVIL BUILDERS 23,750.00 1469 12/13/2024 PRINTED 000096 AT&T 2,306.27
1470 12/13/2024 PRINTED 000108 VWR INTERNATIONAL 4,431.36 1471 12/13/2024 PRINTED 000134 BEECHER ENGINEERING, INC. 220.00 1472 12/13/2024 PRINTED 000143 BIG ED'S CRANE SERVICE, I 1,552.50 1473 12/13/2024 PRINTED 001114 BLUE FLAMINGO 6,250.00
1474 12/13/2024 PRINTED 000147 BLUE RIBBON SUPPLY COMPAN 2,689.76 1475 12/13/2024 PRINTED 000166 BURKE WILLIAMS AND SORENS 3,642.60 1476 12/13/2024 PRINTED 000169 CALED 1,040.00
1477 12/13/2024 PRINTED 000187 CAROLLO 17,822.75
1478 12/13/2024 PRINTED 000190 CALIFORNIA DIESEL & POWER 10,656.82 1479 12/13/2024 PRINTED 000191 CREATIVE DIGITAL AGENCY I 7,969.50 1480 12/13/2024 PRINTED 000201 CHILDCARE CAREERS 639.20 1481 12/13/2024 PRINTED 000203 CINTAS CORPORATION #464 4,222.47 1482 12/13/2024 PRINTED 000203 CINTAS 722.40
1483 12/13/2024 PRINTED 000205 CITY AUTO SUPPLY 136.09
1484 12/13/2024 PRINTED 000012 CITY OF FOSTER CITY 4,078.00

1.a
Packet Pg. 9
Attachment: Attachment A: Disbursements -FY 24-25 - 12-01 to 12-31-24 TYLER (5820 : Disbursements - City of Pacifica

AP CHECK RECONCILIATION REGISTER
Report generated: 01/03/2025 09:39
User: 5234vsahay
Program ID: apchkrcn

FOR CASH ACCOUNT: 101 10001 FOR: Cleared and Uncleared
CHECK # CHECK DATE TYPE VENDOR NAME UNCLEARED CLEARED BATCH CLEAR DATE 1485 12/13/2024 PRINTED 000217 COAST COUNTIES PETERBILT 463.74 1486 12/13/2024 PRINTED 001013 CONSENSUS CLOUD SOLUTIONS 101.97 1487 12/13/2024 PRINTED 000931 CORODATA RECORDS MANAGEME 558.61 1488 12/13/2024 PRINTED 000241 CPRS 145.00
1489 12/13/2024 PRINTED 000244 CRESCO EQUIPMENT RENTALS 1,568.22 1490 12/13/2024 PRINTED 000248 CSG CONSULTANTS, INC. 2,113.10 1491 12/13/2024 PRINTED 000253 C.W.E.A. 239.00
1492 12/13/2024 PRINTED 000255 DARRYL PANG 750.00
1493 12/13/2024 PRINTED 000260 DAILY JOURNAL CORPORATION 667.09 1494 12/13/2024 PRINTED 001051 DAN PATTEN 120.88
1495 12/13/2024 PRINTED 000265 DAVEY TREE EXPERT COMPANY 14,265.00 1496 12/13/2024 PRINTED 000277 DIAL GLASS AND WINDOW CO 256.00 1497 12/13/2024 PRINTED 000280 DISCOUNT PLUMBING, INC. 9,400.00 1498 12/13/2024 PRINTED 000282 DISH 62.99
1499 12/13/2024 PRINTED 001036 EMILY LA 1,342.68
1500 12/13/2024 PRINTED 000335 FASTRAK VIOLATION PROCESS 100.50 1501 12/13/2024 PRINTED 000335 FASTRAK INVOICE PROCESSIN 35.00 1502 12/13/2024 PRINTED 000339 FEDEX 259.42
1503 12/13/2024 PRINTED 000346 FISHER SCIENTIFIC 6,104.27 1504 12/13/2024 PRINTED 000350 FLYERS ENERGY, LLC 3,933.06 1505 12/13/2024 PRINTED 000365 GHIRARDELLI ASSOCIATES, I 1,692.44 1506 12/13/2024 PRINTED 000371 GOLDEN STATE LUMBER 1,229.27 1507 12/13/2024 PRINTED 001129 GOVERNMENT FINANCE SERVIC 11,082.50 1508 12/13/2024 PRINTED 000375 GOVINVEST INC. 3,500.00
1509 12/13/2024 PRINTED 000377 GRAINGER 1,263.46
1510 12/13/2024 PRINTED 000378 GRANICUS, INC. 819.00
1511 12/13/2024 PRINTED 000380 GRANITE ROCK COMPANY #265 1,183.08 1512 12/13/2024 PRINTED 000392 HALF MOON BAY BUILDING & 1,215.16 1513 12/13/2024 PRINTED 000399 HERC RENTALS INC. 398.52 1514 12/13/2024 PRINTED 000405 HI-TECH EMERGENCY VEHICLE 504.48 1515 12/13/2024 PRINTED 000415 IDEXX LABORATORIES 1,069.99 1516 12/13/2024 PRINTED 000446 JOHN THE SIGN GUY LLC 199.79 1517 12/13/2024 PRINTED 000451 JWC ENVIRONMENTAL INC 26,704.03 1518 12/13/2024 PRINTED 000457 KBA DOCUSYS 188.82
1519 12/13/2024 PRINTED 000462 KIMBALL MIDWEST 1,919.47 1520 12/13/2024 PRINTED 000468 KONE, INC. 635.38
1521 12/13/2024 PRINTED 001173 LEXI MACARIO 360.72
1522 12/13/2024 PRINTED 000497 LARRY WALKER ASSOCIATES 537.25 1523 12/13/2024 PRINTED 001025 MATT KELLY 338.65
1524 12/13/2024 PRINTED 000519 MC MASTER-CARR SUPPLY COM 5,778.69 1525 12/13/2024 PRINTED 000520 MCMILLAN ELECTRIC 4,551.45 1526 12/13/2024 PRINTED 001171 MK PRIVATE INVESTIGATION 1,400.00 1527 12/13/2024 PRINTED 000536 MUNICIPAL MAINTENANCE EQU 2,638.34 1528 12/13/2024 PRINTED 001163 NAFCO, INC 371.71
1529 12/13/2024 PRINTED 000015 NORTH COAST COUNTY WATER 23,443.11 1530 12/13/2024 PRINTED 000561 NICHOLS CONSULTING ENGINE 49,240.65 1531 12/13/2024 PRINTED 000586 OCEANA SMOG TEST ONLY CEN 270.00 1532 12/13/2024 PRINTED 000587 OFFICE DEPOT 204.46
1533 12/13/2024 PRINTED 001165 ORIGINAL WATERMEN, INC 952.11 1534 12/13/2024 PRINTED 001167 PACIFIC BEACH COALITION 500.00 1535 12/13/2024 PRINTED 000604 PACIFIC NURSERIES 2,201.72 1536 12/13/2024 PRINTED 000642 PET FOOD EXPRESS 604.21

1.a
Packet Pg. 10
Attachment: Attachment A: Disbursements -FY 24-25 - 12-01 to 12-31-24 TYLER (5820 : Disbursements - City of Pacifica

AP CHECK RECONCILIATION REGISTER
Report generated: 01/03/2025 09:39
User: 5234vsahay
Program ID: apchkrcn

FOR CASH ACCOUNT: 101 10001 FOR: Cleared and Uncleared
CHECK # CHECK DATE TYPE VENDOR NAME UNCLEARED CLEARED BATCH CLEAR DATE 1537 12/13/2024 PRINTED 001059 PRODUCTIVE PRINTING & GRA 82.03 1538 12/13/2024 PRINTED 000679 QUILL CORPORATION 273.75 1539 12/13/2024 PRINTED 000680 R & H WHOLESALE SUPPLY, I 334.35 1540 12/13/2024 PRINTED 001050 RANGER PIPELINES 509,306.40 1541 12/13/2024 PRINTED 000690 REGIONAL GOVERNMENT SERVI 167.38 1542 12/13/2024 PRINTED 000021 SAN MATEO COUNTY INFORMAT 164.51 1543 12/13/2024 PRINTED 001024 SCHAAF & WHEELER 7,665.00 1544 12/13/2024 PRINTED 000729 SEAVIEW TIRE & BRAKE CENT 3,349.86 1545 12/13/2024 PRINTED 000025 SAN MATEO COUNTY MOSQUITO 78.08 1546 12/13/2024 PRINTED 000029 SWRCB 18,196.00
1547 12/13/2024 PRINTED 001137 STEVEN MANSKER 534.82
1548 12/13/2024 PRINTED 000776 SYNAGRO WEST, LLC 10,056.70 1549 12/13/2024 PRINTED 000805 T-MOBILE CORPORATION 1,015.26 1550 12/13/2024 PRINTED 001099 TANNER PACIFIC, INC 249,998.12 1551 12/13/2024 PRINTED 000791 TERMINIX PROCESSING CENTE 182.00 1552 12/13/2024 PRINTED 000802 THOMSON WEST 445.12
1553 12/13/2024 PRINTED 000009 COLMA POLICE DEPARTMENT 1,200.00 1554 12/13/2024 PRINTED 000813 U.S. TELEPACIFIC CORP. 23,682.66 1555 12/13/2024 PRINTED 000816 MOBILE-TECH AUTOMOTIVE IN 2,390.91 1556 12/13/2024 PRINTED 000828 U.S. BANK EQUIPMENT FINAN 263.23 1557 12/13/2024 PRINTED 000830 ULINE SHIPPING SUPPLY SPE 130.61 1558 12/13/2024 PRINTED 000844 US FOODS, INC 5,808.58
1559 12/13/2024 PRINTED 000855 VERIZON WIRELESS 5,563.50 1560 12/13/2024 PRINTED 000855 VERIZON WIRELESS 1,170.30 1561 12/13/2024 PRINTED 000863 CALTEST ANALYTICAL LAB 3,024.00 1562 12/13/2024 PRINTED 000977 V S S INTERNATIONAL INC. 375,458.35 1563 12/13/2024 PRINTED 000871 WEST COAST CONTRACTORS SE 108.63 1564 12/13/2024 PRINTED 001169 WHENTOWORK, LLC 650.00
1565 12/19/2024 PRINTED 001101 A BETTER GARAGE DOOR 27,457.53 1566 12/19/2024 PRINTED 000055 AD BRAKES 624.58
1567 12/19/2024 PRINTED 000056 ADAM-HILL COMPANY, THE 6,406.14 1568 12/19/2024 PRINTED 000062 ALERT PEST CONTROL COMPAN 147.00 1569 12/19/2024 PRINTED 000066 ALL INDUSTRIAL ELECTRIC S 679.50 1570 12/19/2024 PRINTED 000074 AMAZON.COM SALES, INC. 1,307.21 1571 12/19/2024 PRINTED 000078 AMERICAN DEBRIS BOX SERVI 1,798.96 1572 12/19/2024 PRINTED 000085 AP TECHNOLOGY LLC 995.00 1573 12/19/2024 PRINTED 000096 AT&T 5,946.41
1574 12/19/2024 PRINTED 001156 BAYSIDE STRIPE & SEAL, IN 52,587.25 1575 12/19/2024 PRINTED 000130 BEARING AGENCIES INC 804.44 1576 12/19/2024 PRINTED 001114 BLUE FLAMINGO 6,250.00
1577 12/19/2024 PRINTED 000147 BLUE RIBBON SUPPLY COMPAN 835.78 1578 12/19/2024 PRINTED 000152 BOOTZIN, ALEX 250.00
1579 12/19/2024 PRINTED 000177 CALIFORNIA SEWER ENGINEER 943.00 1580 12/19/2024 PRINTED 000190 CALIFORNIA DIESEL & POWER 900.00 1581 12/19/2024 PRINTED 000201 CHILDCARE CAREERS 958.80 1582 12/19/2024 PRINTED 000203 CINTAS CORPORATION #464 43.47 1583 12/19/2024 PRINTED 000203 CINTAS 309.11
1584 12/19/2024 PRINTED 000011 CITY OF DALY CITY 15,476.95 1585 12/19/2024 PRINTED 000240 COTTON, SHIRES & ASSOCIAT 57,855.31 1586 12/19/2024 PRINTED 000244 CRESCO EQUIPMENT RENTALS 1,568.22 1587 12/19/2024 PRINTED 000248 CSG CONSULTANTS, INC. 782.00 1588 12/19/2024 PRINTED 001154 CSMFO 150.00

1.a
Packet Pg. 11
Attachment: Attachment A: Disbursements -FY 24-25 - 12-01 to 12-31-24 TYLER (5820 : Disbursements - City of Pacifica

AP CHECK RECONCILIATION REGISTER
Report generated: 01/03/2025 09:39
User: 5234vsahay
Program ID: apchkrcn

FOR CASH ACCOUNT: 101 10001 FOR: Cleared and Uncleared
CHECK # CHECK DATE TYPE VENDOR NAME UNCLEARED CLEARED BATCH CLEAR DATE 1589 12/19/2024 PRINTED 000335 FASTRAK INVOICE PROCESSIN 19.00 1590 12/19/2024 PRINTED 000350 FLYERS ENERGY, LLC 10,672.76 1591 12/19/2024 PRINTED 001107 FRANK AND GROSSMAN LANDSC 14,400.00 1592 12/19/2024 PRINTED 000355 FREYER & LAURETA, INC. 107,964.53 1593 12/19/2024 PRINTED 001148 GFOA 445.00
1594 12/19/2024 PRINTED 000377 GRAINGER 192.92
1595 12/19/2024 PRINTED 000398 HDL SOFTWARE, LLC 5,330.16 1596 12/19/2024 PRINTED 000405 HI-TECH EMERGENCY VEHICLE 100.91 1597 12/19/2024 PRINTED 000427 INTERSTATE TRAFFIC CONTRO 559.18 1598 12/19/2024 PRINTED 000433 JACK DOHENY COMPANIES, IN 2,106.13 1599 12/19/2024 PRINTED 000446 JOHN THE SIGN GUY LLC 229.44 1600 12/19/2024 PRINTED 000452 JOHN W. HOWELL 11,099.00 1601 12/19/2024 PRINTED 000462 KIMBALL MIDWEST 96.18
1602 12/19/2024 PRINTED 000978 LASHLEY, MARK 75.00
1603 12/19/2024 PRINTED 000519 MC MASTER-CARR SUPPLY COM 1,698.42 1604 12/19/2024 PRINTED 000522 METRO MOBILE COMMUNICATIO 6,371.60 1605 12/19/2024 PRINTED 000592 O'REILLY AUTO PARTS 698.33 1606 12/19/2024 PRINTED 000586 OCEANA SMOG TEST ONLY CEN 50.00 1607 12/19/2024 PRINTED 000587 OFFICE DEPOT 137.54
1608 12/19/2024 PRINTED 001002 OIL CHANGERS 32.00
1609 12/19/2024 PRINTED 000588 OLIVER PACKAGING AND EQUI 828.34 1610 12/19/2024 PRINTED 000647 PACIFIC GAS & ELECTRIC CO 187.90 1611 12/19/2024 PRINTED 001178 POLIMORPHIC, INC 13,883.33 1612 12/19/2024 PRINTED 000656 POLYDYNE INC. 26,534.82
1613 12/19/2024 PRINTED 000982 S.R. ROSE ENGINEERING, IN 7,225.60 1614 12/19/2024 PRINTED 000725 SCAPES, INC. 17,220.84
1615 12/19/2024 PRINTED 001024 SCHAAF & WHEELER 14,694.98 1616 12/19/2024 PRINTED 000742 SIGILLO SUPPLY, INC. 731.78 1617 12/19/2024 PRINTED 000004 CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF 49.00 1618 12/19/2024 PRINTED 000029 SWRCB 4,508.00
1619 12/19/2024 PRINTED 000768 STEVEN MICHAEL EVANS JR 120.00 1620 12/19/2024 PRINTED 000776 SYNAGRO WEST, LLC 9,773.84 1621 12/19/2024 PRINTED 000805 T-MOBILE CORPORATION 16.00 1622 12/19/2024 PRINTED 001179 TAILOR-MAKE DEVELOPMENT, 3,750.00 1623 12/19/2024 PRINTED 000827 TYLER TECHNOLOGIES 14,060.00 1624 12/19/2024 PRINTED 000837 UNIVAR SOLUTIONS USA INC 1,378.39 1625 12/19/2024 PRINTED 000844 US FOODS, INC 2,080.22
1626 12/19/2024 PRINTED 000854 VERITIV OPERATING COMPANY 365.48 1627 12/19/2024 PRINTED 000900 ZEP SALES & SERVICE 1,166.66 1628 12/20/2024 PRINTED 000166 BURKE WILLIAMS AND SORENS 210,985.52 1629 12/20/2024 PRINTED 000166 BURKE WILLIAMS AND SORENS 1,585.48 1630 12/31/2024 PRINTED 000051 ACHIEVEIT ONLINE, LLC 25,380.00 1631 12/31/2024 PRINTED 000069 ALTA LANGUAGE SERVICES, I 72.00 1632 12/31/2024 PRINTED 001023 ANGELA BOELDT 294.00
1633 12/31/2024 PRINTED 001038 BADAWI & ASSOCIATES 32,370.75 1634 12/31/2024 PRINTED 000166 BURKE WILLIAMS AND SORENS 7,768.80 1635 12/31/2024 PRINTED 001192 CLINT ESRICK 500.00
1636 12/31/2024 PRINTED 000248 CSG CONSULTANTS, INC. 6,500.00 1637 12/31/2024 PRINTED 000257 D.W. NICHOLSON CORPORTATI 130,751.88 1638 12/31/2024 PRINTED 000332 EXPERIAN 100.00
1639 12/31/2024 PRINTED 000335 FASTRAK VIOLATION PROCESS 12.00 1640 12/31/2024 PRINTED 000335 FASTRAK INVOICE PROCESSIN 7.00

1.a
Packet Pg. 12
Attachment: Attachment A: Disbursements -FY 24-25 - 12-01 to 12-31-24 TYLER (5820 : Disbursements - City of Pacifica

AP CHECK RECONCILIATION REGISTER
Report generated: 01/03/2025 09:39
User: 5234vsahay
Program ID: apchkrcn

FOR CASH ACCOUNT: 101 10001 FOR: Cleared and Uncleared
CHECK # CHECK DATE TYPE VENDOR NAME UNCLEARED CLEARED BATCH CLEAR DATE 1641 12/31/2024 PRINTED 000344 ROCKWELL AUTOMATION INC. 4,941.84 1642 12/31/2024 PRINTED 001177 FRAMES FROM THE HEART 889.41 1643 12/31/2024 PRINTED 000363 GHD INC. 59,356.80
1644 12/31/2024 PRINTED 000365 GHIRARDELLI ASSOCIATES, I 5,135.68 1645 12/31/2024 PRINTED 001164 GINO ASSERETO 1,191.51
1646 12/31/2024 PRINTED 000377 GRAINGER 506.26
1647 12/31/2024 PRINTED 000486 THE LEW EDWARDS GROUP 6,500.00 1648 12/31/2024 PRINTED 000492 CAPITAL ONE TRADE CREDIT 4,477.65 1649 12/31/2024 PRINTED 000523 METROPOLITAN PLANNING GRO 65,146.25 1650 12/31/2024 PRINTED 000587 OFFICE DEPOT 189.02
1651 12/31/2024 PRINTED 000633 PACIFICA COMMUNITY TELEVI 27,266.30 1652 12/31/2024 PRINTED 000647 PACIFIC GAS & ELECTRIC CO 227,915.56 1653 12/31/2024 PRINTED 000693 RIGHT-HAND CYBER SECURITY 3,200.00 1654 12/31/2024 PRINTED 000747 SMCPCSA 1,250.00
1655 12/31/2024 PRINTED 000029 SWRCB 32,665.00
1656 12/31/2024 PRINTED 000791 TERMINIX PROCESSING CENTE 303.00 1657 12/31/2024 PRINTED 001185 COLMA FIREMEN'S SOCIAL CL 540.00 277 CHECKS CASH ACCOUNT TOTAL 3,735,544.79 .00

1.a
Packet Pg. 13
Attachment: Attachment A: Disbursements -FY 24-25 - 12-01 to 12-31-24 TYLER (5820 : Disbursements - City of Pacifica

AP CHECK RECONCILIATION REGISTER
Report generated: 01/03/2025 09:39
User: 5234vsahay
Program ID: apchkrcn

UNCLEARED CLEARED
277 CHECKS FINAL TOTAL 3,735,544.79 .00
** END OF REPORT - Generated by Vivika Sahay **

1.a
Packet Pg. 14
Attachment: Attachment A: Disbursements -FY 24-25 - 12-01 to 12-31-24 TYLER (5820 : Disbursements -

CITY OF PACIFICA

COUNCIL AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT
1/13/2025
1 SUBJECT:

Approval of Minutes
RECOMMENDED ACTION:

Move to approve the minutes for the December 5, 2025 City Council Special Meeting and the December 9, 2025 City Council Special and Regular Meeting.

STAFF CONTACT:

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

Move to approve the minutes for the December 5, 2025 City Council Special Meeting (Attachment A) and the December 9, 2025 City Council Special and Regular Meeting (Attachment B).

FISCAL IMPACT:

Within budgeted operational expenses.

ORIGINATED BY:

City Clerk
ATTACHMENT LIST:

Attachment A: Minutes of 12-05-2024 Special Meeting (PDF) Attachment B: Minutes of 12-09-2024 Special and Regular Meeting (PDF) 2 Packet Pg. 15

CITY OF PACIFICA

CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
Council Chambers
2212 Beach Blvd
Pacifica, CA 94044
Mayor Sue Vaterlaus
Mayor pro Tem Sue Beckmeyer
Councilmember Mary Bier
Councilmember Tygarjas Bigstyck
Councilmember Christine Boles
City Council Special Meeting 1 December 05, 2024

SPECIAL MEETING
December 05, 2024 (THURSDAY)
www.cityofpacifica.org
Mayor Sue Vaterlaus called the meeting to order on December 5, 2024 at 6:15 PM 6:00 PM - OPEN SESSION
Call to Order
Mayor Vaterlaus called the meeting to order at 6:15 p.m.

Attendee Name Title Status Arrived
Sue Vaterlaus Mayor Present
Sue Beckmeyer Mayor pro Tem Present
Mary Bier Councilmember Present
Tygarjas Bigstyck Councilmember Present
Christine Boles Councilmember Present
City Clerk Coffey took a verbal roll call.

Staff Present: Kevin Woodhouse, City Manager; Denise Bazzano, Asst, City Attorney; Alan Cohen, Asst. City Attorney; Kavitha Kumar, Interim Director of Community Development (Zoom); Mike Janusek, Contract Planner; Sarah Coffey, City Clerk; Emily La, Dep. City Clerk.

Reading of Land Acknowledgment
Mayor Vaterlaus read the Land Acknowledgment.

Salute to the Flag led by Mayor pro Tem Beckmeyer

CONSIDERATION

1. Direction on Potential Revisions to the City’s Short-Term Rental Regulations PROPOSED ACTION: Receive updates on the Short-Term Rental Program and provide direction on potential revisions to the City’s Short-Term Rental regulations based on City staff’s consultation with Coastal Commission staff.

2.a
Packet Pg. 16
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of 12-05-2024 Special Meeting (5822 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Special Meeting 2 December 05, 2024
City Manager Woodhouse stated he was assisted by Contract Planner Mike Janusek for the presentation, alongside Interim Community Development Director Kumar via Zoom as well as Asst. City Attorneys for discussion. He began the staff report.

Contract Planner Janusek continued the staff report.

City Manager Woodhouse completed the staff report.

Councilmember Bigstyck asked if it was possible that certain provisions that will go in effect during the rollover period would not be able to go into effect in the coastal zone until after the Coastal Commission heard them and, if approved, then take effect in late 2026.

Asst. City Attorney Bazzano stated, when we draft the ordinance, we will have to consider which provisions we think can go into effect immediately and what provisions we think will need to wait until the renewal and either craft that into the ordinance or not and figure out some other way to bring those into the fold. She thought he was asking if we can take into account those provisions in the coastal zone that are dependent on approval of LCP amendments into the timing so we do not have to wait for that process once the LCP amendment is approved. In other words, when the LCP amendment is approved, those provisions that had to wait can go into effect immediately. She thought it could happen, but we need to craft it in a way that says that.

Councilmember Bigstyck stated, as he is hearing that there are certain provisions that might take up to a year to go into effect, he considers that certain neighbors in certain residences might think that is a very long time and that some STR permits may remain for additional time.

Asst. City Attorney Bazzano thought the argument could be made that they had, at the time that their renewal comes up, they will have known that the ordinance has been adopted and the LCP amendment is in process and they will be on notice that these provisions will change the permit once the LCP amendment is approved. She thinks we can make an argument that they would not be entitled to another waiting period essentially once the LCP amendment is adopted, if adopted by the Coastal Commission.

Councilmember Bigstyck assumed his worst-case scenario might not be as dire as he thought.

Asst. City Attorney Bazzano agreed and emphasized that we need to think about it and try to draft it in a way that makes sense so everyone is aware of timing and constraints; when the renewals come up and, if the LCP amendment has not been approved, we may be able to include some sort of requirement that they acknowledge that the LCP amendment is in process and they are taking the permit as soon as the LCP amendment is approved, those provisions go in to effect in the coastal zone at that point and there will not be a second waiting period for those provisions to apply in the coastal zone. She asked if that is addressing his concern.

Councilmember Bigstyck agreed.

Councilmember Boles asked the City Manager if he talked about the strikes provision.

City Manager Woodhouse stated he did not mention that specifically but acknowledged the correction from the staff report. Staff know from past experiences that Coastal Commission staff will not be concerned about two strikes versus three strikes in a provision.

2.a
Packet Pg. 17
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of 12-05-2024 Special Meeting (5822 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Special Meeting 3 December 05, 2024
Councilmember Boles clarified for the public that it is a two strikes provision.

City Manager Woodhouse agreed, stating that the Council majority direction was a two strikes violation revocation.

Councilmember Boles added an immediate revocation if someone is found to be lying on their application or fraudulent information they shared.

City Manager Woodhouse responded affirmatively.

Councilmember Boles stated Council directed 90 days unhosted and the Coastal Commission staff was asking why not 60.

City Manager Woodhouse agreed that they had asked and did not have a problem with 90 days unhosted and said the Coastal Commission might be supportive of 60 days unhosted but Council directed 90 days unhosted.

Councilmember Boles asked if HdL is available.

City Manager Woodhouse stated that HdL is not present for this meeting. He stated that any questions Council have can be asked of him and anything we need to follow up on we will.

Councilmember Boles stated that one thing she is curious about now that they have gone through the new cycle of permits is how many are hosted and how many are not.

City Manager Woodhouse thought that was part of the system that was going to rely on selfreporting and other verifications. The current process does not have that. He stated that it is a question in the registration form that she is referring to and staff can follow up on that. He stated that, generally, a very small percentage is hosted STRs in Pacifica.

Councilmember Boles stated we were given a list of the 132 that are permitted and she has a number of questions on this list. She stated that it is important for us to understand how many units are in multi-family buildings.

City Manager Woodhouse stated that HdL is not going to be able to answer that question as the multi-family related information is from research by City staff based on North County Fire multifamily dwelling inspection database, as well as county records. As he said in response to Council questions, the only way to validate the number of units in a building would be an inspection because it is not as readily available and verifiable.

Councilmember Boles stated that this list is from HdL. She understands the additional information that he sent them about number of units for a few of the addresses was prepared by staff. She appreciates that, but this list with the apartment numbers is from HdL’s list of 132 STRs that are permitted.

City Manager Woodhouse responded affirmatively. He stated that is the current compliant list of STRs, as of November 14, when that list was made.

Councilmember Boles stated she would give him an example. She stated that 1581 Beach Boulevard is listed just once as Apartment 1. She stated that the staff report lists four units at

2.a
Packet Pg. 18
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of 12-05-2024 Special Meeting (5822 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Special Meeting 4 December 05, 2024
that address that are STRs.

Mayor pro Tem Beckmeyer stated 1581 Beach Boulevard, Apartment 1, but there are four units in that building based on the staff report.

City Manager Woodhouse sees that and he will offer the caveat that this Figure No. 1 is from the August and September reports, so he would look at the current list that HdL provided as the current status, more than the Figure 1 list of multi-family. He stated that we can verify that in case there is a discrepancy.

Councilmember Boles stated that there are others. She wanted to make sure we are okay with our total numbers and she wanted to be sure that we are permitting one permit per unit and that one building, even if they have multiple units, would get a permit per unit.

City Manager Woodhouse agreed, one unit per STR permit.

Councilmember Boles stated that is why she is trying to understand how many units are affected. She stated that 423 Northup is a duplex and it is listed as one unit when it is two.

Asst. City Attorney Bazzano reminded Council that this information about STRs, as they said before at different meetings, changes fairly frequently because units come on as STRs and they come off as STRs. Some of this information, as City Manager Woodhouse mentioned, the Figure 1 list of STR properties with multiple units is not as current as the list that he provided of compliant STRs in Pacifica for this Council meeting.

Councilmember Boles stated she sees discrepancies on this list that was provided today. She stated what she counted, and adding the ones that seem to be missing, we seem to have about 50 in multi-family units now and there are at least four of those that were on a different list that are not permitted.

Mayor pro Tem Beckmeyer asked, in terms of contacting HdL to go over the verification of the list, who ordinarily does that work in our city staff.

City Manager Woodhouse stated that the whole team communicates with HdL with Asst. City Manager Carter as the lead but Code Enforcement is working with them as well. He stated that, if there are discrepancies in this information, please send them to him and staff will confirm with HdL what the status of those addresses are. As of November 14, this list of 132 compliant is what we are working with.

Councilmember Boles stated that he mentioned that the Coastal Commission staff is looking to apply this to condominiums also. She asked if any of staff’s numbers or theirs define which are condominiums on top of these 50 multi-family units. She stated that, before, Council was looking at these in apartment buildings and she thought Council’s direction had been not to include condominiums and now she is hearing that the Coastal Commission staff wants us to consider condominiums, along with multi-unit buildings. She is trying to understand, in addition to these 50 units, how many more units might we be talking about in terms of this ordinance.

City Manager Woodhouse does not have an immediate answer to that unless condominium complexes from the data staff looked at in the last day are categorized on the Fire Department’s multi-family inspection list.

2.a
Packet Pg. 19
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of 12-05-2024 Special Meeting (5822 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Special Meeting 5 December 05, 2024
Mayor pro Tem Beckmeyer asked how that works in terms of APN.

Mayor Vaterlaus stated that they are individually owned. She asked how you can limit one person in a condominium complex when they are individually owned. Terra Nova and Rosita are not townhouses, as they are planned unit developments. If you look on a preliminary title report, they come out as a single-family home.

Asst. City Attorney Bazzano thinks the question was, for purposes of fire inspections, are they considered multi-family dwelling units and that was the information that city staff was given to identify multi-family dwelling units. She understands that they are individually owned but what staff are not sure of is whether Fire considers them to be multi-family dwelling units for purposes of fire inspection and thus identified as multi-family dwellings for purposes of STRs.

City Manager Woodhouse stated the reason he mentioned that is that is the database on which this additional information about the multi-family dwelling data, like how many multi-family complexes are there that just have one STR in them. He mentioned it related to condominium complexes because, if it is included, this applies to those as well. He cannot look at this list and tell Council how many of them are condominiums versus single-family homes. He stated that Council should keep in mind what is on the table when talking about multi-family is whatever you want to define. Council’s direction has currently been to apply the 10% rule to condominiums.

Councilmember Boles stated that what she remembers is that we were not counting condominiums at all.

City Manager Woodhouse stated, related to condominiums and townhomes, etc., what would be good at this time is when we talk about multi-family that Council gives clear direction about that.

Mayor Vaterlaus stated she has a question about parking. She asked if the PowerPoint mentioned one on-street parking spot.

Mayor pro Tem Beckmeyer thought it said that in the report.

Councilmember Boles stated that was one of the things Council directed where there was not enough parking as there could be one in the driveway and one on the street.

Mayor Vaterlaus stated that you cannot protect an on-street parking spot.

City Manager Woodhouse stated it was not a designated spot on the street.

Asst. City Attorney Bazzano agreed that it would not be designated as there was no way to reserve a spot. She thinks Council’s concern was allowing some variation and reliance on onstreet parking, if there was on-street parking available in the neighborhood.

Councilmember Boles was hoping we can see the map before public comments.

Mayor Vaterlaus thought they can put up the maps before public comment.

City Manager Woodhouse introduced the interactive map related to the neighborhood density discussion, which was a way of showing graphically in Pacifica where these 132 STRs are in the coastal zone and outside the coastal zone.

2.a
Packet Pg. 20
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of 12-05-2024 Special Meeting (5822 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Special Meeting 6 December 05, 2024
Mayor Vaterlaus called for a break. She then reconvened the meeting and stated we would open public comments after we put up the maps showing properties in and outside the coastal zone and the amounts in each area which are the compliant STRs from their list.

Council reviewed the map and made observations on STR neighborhood density, alongside any differences between the map and the list of 132 permitted STR units.

City Manager Woodhouse reminded Council that Figure 1 is old from August/September.

Mayor pro Tem Beckmeyer asked if he meant Figure 1 in the staff report.

City Manager Woodhouse responded affirmatively.

Councilmember Boles stated she would like to have the maps and be able to study them and look in her district where she knows the houses and knows if something is missing. She stated that these are important ones as it is where low-income tenants have been evicted and it was important to know things are changing and permits are being granted.

Councilmember Bigstyck asked which specific items are we thinking may be a concern.

Councilmember Boles stated that it is about having information and she would like to have them to be able to study them.

Councilmember Bigstyck suggested that we look at the map as much as we would like now and have deliberation after public comment such as about density and for some of them, the considerations may have less to do with the data points.

Councilmember Boles asked is this just Airbnb data or another platform data.

City Manager Woodhouse stated this is all STRs as HDL scrubs all the databases and it can be constantly changing. It is not a perfect system and there are legal operations out there, as well as noncompliant ones that are being worked on to bring into compliance. The ones on this map are all the compliant ones.

Mayor Vaterlaus thanked the person who put the map together very quickly with the information they got this afternoon.

Mayor pro Tem Beckmeyer stated it can be refined.

Mayor Vaterlaus opened public comment.

Gary Chinca, Pacifica, stated there has been discussion about the distance between STRs, such as 250 feet apart, and expressed concerns about overcrowding and loopholes. He asked Council to consider a distance of 250 feet in any direction between any STR.

Bob O’Donnell, Pacifica, explained that there were unintended consequences from the 2017 effort to establish an STR ordinance. He added that citizens of Pacifica feel that STRs have been foisted on them. He stated that Pacificans felt like they were collateral damage as a result of this issue. He encouraged Council to work with staff to do the right thing.

2.a
Packet Pg. 21
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of 12-05-2024 Special Meeting (5822 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Special Meeting 7 December 05, 2024
Bryan Reinero, Pacifica, shared his thoughts on Building Codes, platform accountability, density restrictions, and one parking spot per bedroom to help Council in their discussions. He expressed concern that STRs are not suitable in some neighborhoods due to capacity.

Cindy Abbott, Pacifica, shared her thoughts on discussions between staff and Coastal Commission staff and emphasized that STRs have negatively impacted affordability, character, and quality of life in Pacifica neighborhoods. She shared her thoughts on parking, affordability, and neighborhood density, and expressed support of the Coastal Commission staff’s feedback.

Lyla Reinero, Pacifica, stated support for proof of residence, automatic reasons for disqualification, fines for false advertisement, Coastal Commission staff recommendation of 60 days unhosted, platform accountability, and publicly available STR information.

Stephanie Robbins, Pacifica, emphasized the importance of quality of life and reducing requirements, i.e. parking, would reduce qualify of life and property value. She also voiced support of 60 days unhosted instead of 90 days unhosted.

Caitlin Quinn, Pacifica, stated support of one parking spot per bedroom and reducing 90 days unhosted to 60 day unhosted. She also suggested a possible amnesty period for compliance of permit ordinance requirements that may go in effect after Coastal Commission approval.

Joanne Gold, Pacifica, expressed her gratitude to Council for listening to the community and encouraged them to follow their instincts, take more control, and give the community guardrails.

Gary Furlong, Pacifica, thanked them for hearing the community’s concerns and what they do will make a difference in Pacifica for decades, and shared his thoughts on reducing the number of unhosted nights of STRs from 90 to 60 and not adding off-street parking to requirements.

Leo Leon, Pacifica, stressed the need for updating the map and sharing the public resources with the community. He shared his thoughts on limits for districts and for streets, homing in on the physical reality of street layouts in Pacifica.

Mayor Vaterlaus closed public comments.

Councilmember Bigstyck referred to the primary residence requirement and stated a utility bill may not adequately provide residency. He thought we could make it three or more documents or provide more stringent criteria.

Councilmember Boles agreed about the utility bills and would like to strike that. She stated one public comment letter shared what the school district requires, such as a driver’s license with a current address and then other documents.

Asst. City Attorney Bazzano stated, regarding the primary residence requirement, what types of evidence is submitted to prove primary residency can be worked out in the draft of the ordinance. Those examples for evidence that can be used to show primary residence are examples and not meant to be an exclusive list. She hears that some types of evidence may not be as valuable as others but that would be worked out in the draft of the ordinance, and it may be better for Council to focus on the topics that staff has requested direction on. She stated we can then circle back to the issues that staff have gotten direction on but Council may want to add a couple of other notes or comments.

2.a
Packet Pg. 22
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of 12-05-2024 Special Meeting (5822 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Special Meeting 8 December 05, 2024
Councilmember Bigstyck thanked the City Manager for clarifying that the two strikes provision.

Council began review of the four items submitted to the Coastal Commission.

Councilmember Boles stated, regarding off-street parking, she agreed with the Coastal Commission staff that we should not be making an exception for substandard lots.

Councilmember Bigstyck stated he thought he spoke to that at the original meeting. He stated that we have a history of allowing variances for substandard lots because we want people to live there and, because of a long history of Pacifica allowing those lots, we now have to make them work. At that time, he suggested that it was fine if someone was living there, but he was opposed to it in terms of STRs.

Mayor pro Tem Beckmeyer and Councilmember Bier concurred.

Councilmember Boles stated that the question is that, if someone applies, they are supposed to have a certain number of parking spaces per bedroom. If they have three bedrooms and one parking space, are they allowed to apply and just rent one bedroom or are they not allowed to have a permit at all. She asked if that becomes too hard to verify compliance.

Councilmember Bigstyck thought it becomes too hard to verify compliance. He is aware of what our staffing looks like now. He referred to Coastal Commission staff’s input of one parking space per bedroom, and he asked if that goes beyond what our code says if we eliminate the variance language. He is comfortable eliminating the variance language and he could go along with the Coastal Commission staff, but he has also been fairly outspoken in terms of his desire to limit STRs in general.

Mayor Vaterlaus states she originally proposed two per house only. She thinks one per bedroom is a lot and that can be worked around with a 16-person van.

Mayor pro Tem Beckmeyer stated assuming they can fit on the designated parking spot.

Mayor Vaterlaus stated no one else thought two parking spots.

Mayor pro Tem Beckmeyer remembers that Council got into this conversation about variances.

She thinks this meeting’s goal is to think about getting this thing resolved and submitted so it can be approved. If Coastal Commission feels strongly about one per bedroom, she supposes they would like it even more if it was more restrictive. She is hearing Council say, if it is more restrictive, maybe STRs are less plentiful.

Councilmember Bier agrees with Coastal Commission’s comments.

Councilmember Bigstyck asked if there is consensus regarding the Coastal Commission staff’s recommendation of one per STR bedroom. He asked if this applies to hosted STRs.

Mayor pro Tem Beckmeyer stated it says at least one space available for hosted rentals.

Councilmember Bigstyck stated that we have a consensus to go with the Coastal Commission staff recommendation and he asked for clarity if the recommendation is related to hosted STRs.

Asst. City Attorney Bazzano stated the staff report says they recommended a provision

2.a
Packet Pg. 23
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of 12-05-2024 Special Meeting (5822 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Special Meeting 9 December 05, 2024
requiring one parking space per STR bedroom as a requirement that would be more likely to be supported by the LCP amendment approval; thus, if it is a hosted unit that has two bedrooms, they would only need to have one parking space for the STR bedroom.

Councilmember Bigstyck wondered about a circumstance in which there are three bedrooms, one with the owners, two of the rooms being rented out as hosted STRs.

Asst. City Attorney Bazzano stated, if two bedrooms are used as STRs, they would have to have two parking spaces according to this recommendation.

Mayor pro Tem Beckmeyer stated it is not differentiating between hosted and unhosted but focusing on the bedrooms.

Asst. City Attorney Bazzano stated that you would have to have one room for the host so whatever bedrooms being used for the STR would be the requirement, whether hosted or not.

Councilmember Bigstyck is comfortable with language that aligns with our code minus the variance. He thinks that, given that the language also applies to hosted, he is becoming more uncomfortable with that. He feels the direction we have given is that, for unhosted STRs, we are trying to clamp down on it and, for hosted STRs, it is not necessarily something we are trying to reign in as robustly.

Councilmember Bier stated that it is still about parking spaces in our neighborhood and the lack of parking in our neighborhood.

Councilmember Bigstyck stated he is comfortable with that.

Councilmember Bier asked if she can talk about the multi-family properties.

Councilmember Boles stated she is fine but she wants to ask for a definition of a legal bedroom somewhere in the ordinance and for that to be added.

Mayor pro Tem Beckmeyer asked if the phrase would be “legally permitted bedroom”.

Councilmember Boles suggested “legal per Building Code”.

Mayor Vaterlaus asked today’s Building Code or the Building Code when the building was built.

Mayor pro Tem Beckmeyer thought that is why they are getting into variance.

Councilmember Boles stated that we can say “legally permitted bedrooms” and that would cover previous codes.

Asst. City Attorney Bazzano thought, by permitted, Council meant the STR permit.

Councilmember Boles stated no, a bedroom and a house that is being used as an STR and to confirm what is a legal bedroom with a definition in our ordinance. She stated that the Building Code defines a certain minimum size, it needs to be heated, etc.

Asst. City Attorney Bazzano stated staff would need to confirm that.

2.a
Packet Pg. 24
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of 12-05-2024 Special Meeting (5822 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Special Meeting 10 December 05, 2024
Councilmember Boles concluded a legal room.

Asst. City Attorney Bazzano stated a legal room is different than a bedroom and asked if the Building Code says bedroom and define bedroom.

Councilmember Boles stated we do not need to say exactly what it is here was asking if it would be possible to include it.

Asst. City Attorney Bazzano understands and, to be clear, we have a consensus on going with the Coastal Commission staff’s recommendation of one parking space per STR bedroom and she has direction on defining what a legally permitted bedroom is. She wants to be clear that this would be different than the City’s parking standards in the Zoning Code. She stated that it is within Council’s discretion to do something different to define the parking requirements as different for STR permit.

Mayor pro Tem Beckmeyer stated that was what Councilmember Bigstyck was alluding to.

Asst. City Attorney Bazzano agreed.

City Manager Woodhouse asked if we had clarity on hosted requirement.

Mayor pro Tem Beckmeyer stated that they said it is the same with no differentiation, even though the last time Council did say differentiation. She stated it was based on the feedback from the Coastal Commission staff. She stated that Council knows parking is a big item for the Coastal Commission and complying with what they suggested is a sensible strategy.

Mayor Vaterlaus concluded we are done with parking and the next item is multi-family.

Councilmember Bier stated she would like to start with this one because she has felt so passionately about this topic from the very beginning. She stated that we can see on the maps that there are full buildings with all the units that are being rented, and units she has rented in the past. She stated that it is not easy to live in the City.

Mayor pro Tem Beckmeyer agreed many cannot afford to rent and live in and raise your child.

Councilmember Bier stated that she did not think there should be any STRs in multi-family properties. She is happy that the Coastal Commission staff feels the same way.

Mayor Vaterlaus stated she likes the 10% as it means one in any building. Thus, she thinks it means between one and 19 units, there is one STR allowed.

Mayor pro Tem Beckmeyer asked what is it about including them in multi-family, such as is it an equity issue around the type of building, the configuration, the built form, etc.

Councilmember Boles stated that we have to remember that they also have the primary residency requirement. She stated that wealthy owners are not living in their 10-unit buildings.

Mayor Vaterlaus stated that they are not necessarily wealthy owners.

Councilmember Bigstyck stated one of the recommendations is one per multi-family residential.

He isn’t comfortable with the 10% but more comfortable with the one.

2.a
Packet Pg. 25
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of 12-05-2024 Special Meeting (5822 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Special Meeting 11 December 05, 2024
Mayor Vaterlaus stated one on any piece of property because any legal property makes it one any time.

Councilmember Boles stated even if it is just two.

Mayor pro Tem Beckmeyer stated like a duplex.

Mayor Vaterlaus stated that is what the 10% would be also.

Councilmember Bier implored Council to think about what it would be like to go out in Pacifica and try to rent a space and you go to the property and one of them is an STR. She stated that is not keeping the naturally affordable unit.

Councilmember Bigstyck agreed as someone who has lived here for over four decades and could not afford to buy a house here.

Mayor pro Tem Beckmeyer stated she would reiterate what she said about the parking. She sat in the room with Councilmember Bigstyck at Coastal Commission meetings when the issue of affordable housing has come up in various forms and fashions and specifically in regard to short-term rentals. She stated her takeaway from that is that this matters to the Coastal Commission as she heard them say, i.e., going into this STR ordinance process, you have expectations or assumptions that informed what is happening. It was clear for many years that the Coastal Commission liked STRs and it was a consideration as their view was it provided more affordable accommodations to more people to enjoy the coast, but the assumption was that it was affordable and that was valuable to them, and then they found out that many times it is not affordable at all and the counter impact of reducing affordable housing. Having heard from the public, the likelihood of getting this approved is strengthened by agreeing with this point. She wonders if there is a counterargument that she is not thinking about.

Mayor Vaterlaus mentioned owner occupancy, i.e., how many owner occupants are occupying their four-unit buildings. She stated that her point is usually personal property rights to take into consideration and she felt that was a hard one.

Mayor pro Tem Beckmeyer agreed and thought it was our goals for creating more housing in our City, including the requirement from RHNA allocation. She thought it was counterintuitive to be wanting to create housing and taking away housing at the same time. She stated that Councilmember Bier stated that a few meetings ago.

Mayor Vaterlaus stated it would not contribute to their RHNA numbers.

Mayor pro Tem Beckmeyer agreed.

Councilmember Bier stated it will contribute to someone who would like to come to Pacifica and live here with their child in our schools and shop at our stores.

Councilmember Boles stated that they are smaller units and more affordable and what we are learning now in terms of construction market is that it is very hard to build. She thought this was not the time to be losing those units and she is okay with the recommendations.

Councilmember Bier stated that was exactly the conversation at the HEART meeting on how

2.a
Packet Pg. 26
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of 12-05-2024 Special Meeting (5822 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Special Meeting 12 December 05, 2024
extremely hard it is to build.

Mayor pro Tem Beckmeyer asked if this issue has come up in HEART meetings at all.

Councilmember Bier stated not STRs.

Mayor Vaterlaus asked if there is a consensus.

Asst. City Attorney Bazzano stated she is hearing a majority of Council wants to go with the Coastal Commission staff recommendation of prohibiting STRs in multi-family properties, but she wants to be clear on what Council means by multi-family properties and whether or not that includes condominiums. She stated that the Zoning Code does define multiple dwelling as “a building or portion thereof, used and designed as a residence for three or more family living independently of each other and doing their own cooking in such a building, including apartment houses, apartment hotels, and not including automobile courts, motels, hotels or boarding houses”. She stated that is for context and Council can use whatever definitions in the STR ordinance but she wants to be clear about how Council wants to define multi-family dwelling units, whether more than two units or more than three units, and whether condominiums should be included or excluded.

Councilmember Bier did not think it was a good idea to have a duplex and not allow it to be affordable rent and affordable place to live. She would cover the two units, but she does not know how she feels about condominiums.

Mayor pro Tem Beckmeyer stated that we have heard a couple of different things about whether that is multi-family housing or not in the Building Code and our standards. She would look to staff in Planning to help with that, regarding the definition if there is one, with condominiums.

Councilmember Bigstyck stated asked if we are talking about unhosted and hosted.

Councilmember Boles thought that was a good question.

Councilmember Bigstyck stated he is comfortable with someone who lives in the unit hosting out their second bedroom.

Councilmember Boles stated that was a distinction Council did not give staff before. She clarified that none in multi-family is related to unhosted, not hosted. If someone is living there and wants to rent a bedroom in the place where they are, that would be okay.

Asst. City Attorney Bazzano assumed in a multi-family property.

Mayor Vaterlaus stated, if they have a four-unit building, they live in one and they want to rent out one unit, but they are still owner-occupied.

Councilmember Boles stated not if they are not in that unit.

Mayor Vaterlaus stated that was not specific.

Councilmember Bigstyck asked Asst. City Attorney Bazzano if we need to address the definition of hosted in such a scenario for a four-unit building where it is owner-occupied in one of the units. He would think hosted would mean that the unit that the owner is occupying would be the

2.a
Packet Pg. 27
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of 12-05-2024 Special Meeting (5822 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Special Meeting 13 December 05, 2024
unit that could house a hosted STR and the other three units could not.

Asst. City Attorney Bazzano stated he is saying the definition of hosted STR, which we can draft in whatever ordinance is prepared, is a resident who is the operator and is acting as a host and is in the unit itself that is being rented as the STR. She stated, in his example, where he has an apartment with four units, a host would have to live in the unit that is being rented as the STR in order for it to be a hosted rental.

Councilmember Boles added that they have to be there during the rental.

Asst. City Attorney Bazzano agreed. She stated that it sounds like a majority of Council supports a prohibition on multi-family STRs for unhosted rentals. In terms of the units, she heard one Councilmember say multi-family is anything above a single-family residence.

Councilmember Bier agreed.

Asst. City Attorney Bazzano asked if there are any other Councilmembers who support that definition or interpretation.

Mayor Vaterlaus did not.

Mayor pro Tem Beckmeyer thought differently when it came to duplexes. She imagines it is someone who owns a duplex and lives in one half of it and would be renting out the other half as a rental or operating as a STR. She asked about the difference between two and three.

She is trying to think about our built environment in Pacifica, not the built form of the building so much as how many duplexes do we have and what is the character of the people in general.

She remembers previous Councils talking about mom and pops with regard to apartments and she thinks about duplexes that way.

Asst. City Attorney Bazzano stated, to address her comments, there is a middle ground. In Half Moon Bay’s ordinance, there are different tiers for single-family residential condominium dwelling unit: “One short-term vacation rental may operate as an accessory use to single-family unit for residential condominium dwelling units for duplexes and triplexes. Short-term vacation rentals may operate under limited conditions which requires at least one unit within the duplex or triplex as a primary residence for the property owner and no more than one unit in a duplex or triplex may be registered and operated for short-term vacation rental use.” They also have mixed use development restrictions but they ultimately prohibit short-term vacation rentals in multi-family developments with four or more units. She stated that Council can craft something like that which has different tiers to allow short-term rentals in duplexes or triplexes if that is Council’s desire.

Mayor Vaterlaus stated she likes it.

Councilmember Boles stated that there are a lot in her neighborhood and the people she knows who live in them live in a half of a duplex because that is what they can afford.

Mayor pro Tem Beckmeyer concluded that it is not that they own the building and live in half of it, but that someone else owns the building and they rent from that person. She stated that is what she was saying before, i.e., the nature and characterization.

Councilmember Bier still feels the same way as she always did.

2.a
Packet Pg. 28
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of 12-05-2024 Special Meeting (5822 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Special Meeting 14 December 05, 2024
Councilmember Boles thinks it is easier to be consistent. She stated that there are still affordable units that are more affordable than a single-family home.

Councilmember Bigstyck had a similar consideration where he could envision someone buying a duplex and then trying to make it work with the other half, but he would agree with Councilmember Bier. His bottom line is, if you just bought it without being able to afford it, and if you have had it for a while, you probably do not need to make it an STR. If there is a middle ground somewhere, rent it out at market rate and try and get there through your investment.

Mayor Vaterlaus sees it as a way for people to get into the housing market that would not normally be able to do it because they can live in one and rent the other. She stated she had a short-term rental because she wanted to go there sometimes and it was open for her to go there when she wanted to go there. She could see it in the duplex also.

Councilmember Bigstyck struggles between the mentality of trying to get into the housing market and trying to afford a place to live.

Mayor Vaterlaus stated you still have to afford it, as you cannot move in if you cannot afford it.

Councilmember Bigstyck added that one version is a mindset where you are using the system to attain the aim. There is another mindset that they need a place to live and would like to be able to afford one. He understands that mindset quite well and would agree with that side.

Councilmember Boles stated that there is no stopping someone from buying half of a duplex who is struggling to pay the rent and renting a bedroom, either long term or STR, or building an ADU in the garage to get more income with a full-time rental.

Mayor pro Tem Beckmeyer stated her point about being able to make it an affordable purchase is just possible for them to get into a housing environment when there is this rental opportunity and that can be that you are renting it at market rate and collecting that rent and using that toward their payment.

Asst. City Attorney Bazzano stated it sounds like a majority supports unhosted multi-family prohibitions and the multi-family definition would be two or more units.

Mayor Vaterlaus stated she is looking at the County record now for a property at 1424 Terra Nova which is in the Terra Nova townhomes. The land use with the County says single family and, if she gave them a copy of the preliminary title report on that property, it would say a single-family dwelling, not a multi-unit.

Councilmember Boles stated that, if that is the case, it is a primary residency requirement and you can only rent it 90 days and only if you live there. She stated she is okay with that.

Mayor Vaterlaus stated, in a building on Terra Nova, if there are eight units in that building, each individually owned by individual owners, and if one person has a short-term rental in that whole block as an owner occupant, then you start to go to the restrictions on density and then they are out, even though they are all individual owners, which is not the same as the multi-family where one owner owns all units.

Councilmember Boles stated that we have not gotten to the densities so she suggested putting

2.a
Packet Pg. 29
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of 12-05-2024 Special Meeting (5822 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Special Meeting 15 December 05, 2024
a pin on that.

Mayor Vaterlaus stated just, in general, it is not a multi-unit because, if it is called a multi-unit, we are eliminating them altogether.

Councilmember Bigstyck stated, if it is a unit owned by one person, it becomes a hosted STR, and what we are talking about is unhosted. In the case of condominiums, it is de facto hosted STR.

Councilmember Bier stated, when we studied any kind of rent control or stabilization, it did not include condominiums in the discussions we had.

Mayor Vaterlaus agreed that they are not multi-family buildings.

Councilmember Boles thinks Council is in agreement. She would like to point out again that Council talked about putting a question on the application as many condominiums are in an HOA and are you in an HOA.

Mayor Vaterlaus stated that our rules take precedence over HOA rules.

Asst. City Attorney Bazzano stated that the City enforces its own code and ordinances and the HOA would enforce whatever CCNRs are developed for that condominium association. The City does not defer to those rules or regulations of the HOA.

Mayor Vaterlaus stated that one of the HOAs in Pacifica decided there could be no ADUs, but they cannot do that. She asked if the City’s laws preempt the HOA.

Asst. City Attorney Bazzano stated that the City’s ordinances and code regulations apply to the properties within the HOAs regardless of what the CCNRs say or the HOA says. She stated that the same for the state as the state develops laws and they can decide if it is going to apply to HOAs the way they did for the ADUs and they preempt any type of agreements that condominium associations have with their owners.

Councilmember Bigstyck stated, with an HOA, you own the unit and again it is de facto hosted STR and the HOA may say they do not want STRs in their HOA and that would be in addition to what we are saying.

Mayor Vaterlaus stated she has not looked to see if they have any regulations in any of the HOA documents.

Councilmember Boles stated she talked to three and they have them but we are still granting permits for them.

Asst. City Attorney Bazzano stated to clarify, we can have an ordinance that says you can have an STR and you just need a permit and someone in a condominium HOA can come and get a permit but, if their CCNR says that everyone agrees that there are no STRs in their association, that homeowner has to abide by those CCNRs and they can be held accountable for violation of those CCNRs.

Councilmember Bigstyck agreed and in the questions on the application they lied.

2.a
Packet Pg. 30
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of 12-05-2024 Special Meeting (5822 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Special Meeting 16 December 05, 2024
Asst. City Attorney Bazzano stated she is hearing from Council that there is a desire of the majority to exclude condominiums from the definition of multi-family dwellings and, to clarify, the majority wanted to prohibit multi-family STRs in unhosted but to clarify and confirm that hosted STRs in multi-family dwellings of more than one unit are acceptable to Council. She saw a majority for owner-occupied hosted.

Mayor pro Tem Beckmeyer referred to the application form.

Councilmember Boles read one question, i.e., will the host be onsite during the STR activity.

City Manager Woodhouse asked for clarification regarding unhosted STRs in condominiums.

Mayor Vaterlaus stated we are allowing single-family dwellings.

Councilmember Boles stated it is okay but with the primary residency requirements.

City Manager Woodhouse added with the other things that apply.

Mayor pro Tem Beckmeyer read from the application, i.e., is the applicant the owner of the property. If no, attach written consent of the landlord and/or agent, authorizing approval of the STR operations with the owner’s signature. She asked where we are going with that piece, and is it in their current one.

Councilmember Boles stated that was one of her questions about the application, as Council specifically said the last time it is not anybody who can apply but just the owner who can apply.

Mayor Vaterlaus stated we are moving on as we finished multi-family.

Councilmember Boles asked if there is no interest in having an HOA question on there even though we cannot enforce it.

Councilmember Bigstyck did have an interest.

Mayor pro Tem Beckmeyer asked if it is a trap for getting a lie out of them.

Councilmember Boles stated no, just hoping that people see the application and see that they have to get permission. She stated that there are some large condominium associations and some small ones. She stated that this is what happened with Pacific View Villas. She stated that we were encouraging people to do the right thing even though we cannot enforce it.

Mayor Vaterlaus stated she did not mind if there is a question asking that.

City Manager Woodhouse asked if, on the full page two on the application, there is a question about HOAs.

Councilmember Boles stated no.

Mayor pro Tem Beckmeyer responded that there was not.

Asst. City Attorney Bazzano stated that staff will make that notation.

2.a
Packet Pg. 31
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of 12-05-2024 Special Meeting (5822 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Special Meeting 17 December 05, 2024
Mayor Vaterlaus stated next is density but moved to rental duration first.

Councilmember Boles stated that we can say two nights in unhosted and no minimum in hosted.

She stated that, if someone is renting a bedroom, it can just be for one night, but if someone is renting a whole place, it would be two nights. She stated that is not what the Coastal Commission is suggesting. She stated, from a person who rents short-term rentals quite often, she never stays for less than one night as all the fees can be expensive.

Councilmember Bigstyck appreciated differentiating hosted and unhosted. He agreed in terms of hosted.

Mayor pro Tem Beckmeyer stated hosted can be one and unhosted a minimum of two.

Councilmember Boles stated we can leave it at one, knowing that there is a disincentive financially for people to just rent one night. She stated that the reason we did it was because of so much disruption for the people whose house is right next to them.

Mayor Vaterlaus stated that people can do one night and have a party and leave. If they have two nights, then it makes them bound to do the right thing.

Councilmember Bier thinks the Coastal Commission needs to hear that as one of the biggest problems we have been having is the disruption from the parties.

Asst. City Attorney Bazzano stated she is hearing a majority wanted to distinguish between hosted and unhosted and allow for a minimum of one night stay for hosted and a minimum for unhosted of two nights.

Councilmember Bigstyck stated, for the hosted, a minimum of one night stay is fine for him but he is curious what Mayor pro Tem Beckmeyer’s opinion is of the considerations for Coastal. He is curious what the calculations look like if you are renting an unhosted STR on the coast, and is it going to be low income serving amenity, providing coastal access. If one night is not low-cost serving to begin with, does it matter whether we are saying one night or two nights, or is there a version of this where one night really is considered low-income serving.

Mayor pro Tem Beckmeyer agrees with that, but relative to Malibu, our area is cheap. She asked if there would be some interest on the part of the Coastal Commission to require there be specific rates for low income to make more accessibility as we are seeing that happening with the hotels being brought forward and approved in the coastal zone.

Mayor Vaterlaus asked if it is for new hotels.

Mayor pro Tem Beckmeyer responded affirmatively.

Councilmember Bigstyck thought he asked a question at the last meeting as to whether or not we can dictate if there is a price cap and what prices they could have and now we are talking about the makings of a tiered system. It sounds complex for a premise based on the fact we cannot tell people how much they are renting it out for to begin with.

Mayor pro Tem Beckmeyer agreed.

Councilmember Bigstyck stated that, if we cannot tell people how much they can charge, he

2.a
Packet Pg. 32
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of 12-05-2024 Special Meeting (5822 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Special Meeting 18 December 05, 2024
thought Coastal Commission also cannot tell people how much they can charge.

City Manager Woodhouse stated parameters around hotel rates relates to mostly new hotel development, which has to go through a permitting and negotiation process with the Coastal Commission, but STR regulations would not go through that. He stated that it was a good question and they could pin it. He has not heard of Coastal Commission going in that direction.

Mayor pro Tem Beckmeyer asked if this has come up in staff’s work with Coastal Commission staff on this other than the affordability piece.

Mayor Vaterlaus asked about rent control as they are renting the property for one night and the City has passed has a no rent control ordinance.

Contract Planner Janusek stated, for the record, he can clarify that setting rates was not discussed with the Coastal Commission staff in terms of a potential provision. Staff only discussed the provisions that were directed previously by Council. He stated that the affordability piece was more the basis for their concern regarding the two-night stay.

Councilmember Bier asked what will make our community safer.

Councilmember Bigstyck stated, compared to Malibu, we are far less expensive but compared to what low income could mean, in our area, a worker at Safeway would not be able to afford a one-night stay and consider it low-income serving. He thinks, given the nature of our STRs, not necessarily lowering to the point of low income serving, it is in those terms that he might be willing to push back a little on Coastal Commission and stick to the two-night.

Councilmember Bier assumed two nights for unhosted.

Councilmember Boles stated that the Coastal Commission can always tell them it is not acceptable and then it comes back.

Mayor pro Tem Beckmeyer stated that they could approve with conditions.

Councilmember Bier stated two nights unhosted, and if we add in the hosted, one night.

Councilmember Bigstyck asked City Manager or staff, if we were to stick with the two night minimum for unhosted, is it still recommended that we define “event” to more specifically target.

City Manager Woodhouse agreed that we need to define events.

Mayor Vaterlaus stated to define events.

City Manager Woodhouse asked where we landed on the two nights versus one night.

Mayor Vaterlaus stated two nights.

Mayor pro Tem Beckmeyer stated unhosted.

Asst. City Attorney Bazzano stated one night for hosted.

Councilmember Boles asked if any other cities have definitions of “event” we can take from.

2.a
Packet Pg. 33
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of 12-05-2024 Special Meeting (5822 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Special Meeting 19 December 05, 2024
Mayor Vaterlaus suggested listing them and saying “these events are not limited to…”.

Councilmember Boles stated that we also defined how many people can visit.

Councilmember Bier stated that it goes to noise too.

Mayor pro Tem Beckmeyer asked if this is in the category of good neighbor policies.

Councilmember Boles thought one of our ordinances said no parties specifically.

City Manager Woodhouse asked if we are talking about definition of events.

Mayor pro Tem Beckmeyer and Councilmember Bier responded affirmatively.

City Manager Woodhouse thought, in yesterday’s meeting, we talked about a definition, i.e., special events from Half Moon Bay ordinance.

Councilmember Boles asked if staff can read that.

Asst. City Attorney Bazzano stated that there is a definition in the Half Moon Bay ordinance that describes special events as follows: “Short-term vacation rentals shall not be concurrently used for any commercial purpose such as corporate retreat or conference or any event that is likely to result in violation of traffic, parking, noise or other standards regulating the residential use and character of the neighborhood. Such events include most weddings, concerts, and parties.

Home occupations conducted by the primary resident, compliant with subsection F of the section, are allowed, provided parking and all other requirements for both short term vacation rental and home occupation are met.” She stated that it is less definition and more regulations for special events. She stated that they do not have a definition of special events and that would be their regulations of special events which is applicable to the discussion now.

Councilmember Boles asked if they mention classes.

Mayor pro Tem Beckmeyer thought it said no commercial.

Asst. City Attorney Bazzano agreed, stating it says “shall not be concurrently used for any commercial purpose such as corporate retreat or conference”.

Councilmember Boles suggested someone may want to teach a class of 20 people.

Mayor Vaterlaus asked in a short-term rental.

Councilmember Boles did not know and sometimes they gather and they might go to the beach.

Mayor pro Tem Beckmeyer mentioned the home occupation permit.

Councilmember Boles stated that we also limited the number of people who can visit during the day, half the number that are allowed to stay there. She stated we have not limited children and asked if we can make it half the number of adults who are allowed to stay there.

Mayor pro Tem Beckmeyer stated that we had some public comment mentioning the number of

2.a
Packet Pg. 34
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of 12-05-2024 Special Meeting (5822 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Special Meeting 20 December 05, 2024
children, such as if you are thinking of a soccer tournament and the whole team is going to stay there, i.e., bringing their sleeping bag and will be sleeping in the living room, on the floor, etc.

She knows Council spent a lot of time on that number of children but that example stopped her because we have sports and there is an interest in bringing more sports activities like that.

Councilmember Bier stated maybe we need an Embassy Suite.

City Manager Woodhouse stated that the existing direction from Council is that soccer tournament that serves under 12 would work in that situation but age 12 is the cutoff point.

Mayor pro Tem Beckmeyer asked as many of children as you want under the age of 12.

City Manager Woodhouse stated that the existing Council direction is a maximum of two occupants per bedroom, and the max does not apply to children under the age of 12.

Mayor pro Tem Beckmeyer stated then you can have as many kids as you want as long as they are under the age of 12.

Councilmember Boles stated she had issues with that before.

Mayor pro Tem Beckmeyer asked if she was correct. She stated that we have had public comment that there are loopholes. She asked what is worse for our community, per Councilmember Bier’s question, i.e., bringing sporting events or tournaments. She asked about the noise level when they had 10 softball players in the hotel room.

Councilmember Bier stated it was absolutely crazy.

Councilmember Boles stated we have limited the number of people for events.

Mayor Vaterlaus asked about limiting the numbers under 12.

Councilmember Bier asked what Half Moon Bay’s ordinance said about children.

Mayor pro Tem Beckmeyer stated that another aspect of this, which is currently an issue, is we have noise ordinances in other parts of our code. She asked how we tie what is in other parts of our code to this ordinance so that it is an infraction, tracked if there is a write-up, a strike, etc.

Mayor Vaterlaus stated that most of these things staff cannot track and it has to be done by the neighbors because there is no way staff can track any of these things, the nights, etc.

Mayor pro Tem Beckmeyer suggested platform accountability.

Councilmember Bigstyck thinks that what this all hinges on is that we have the tools to bust the bad actors. He is saying that, when it comes to quality of life issues, we have the tools to address them when they come up as opposed to now where our toolset is limited compared to what we are putting in motion. He stated that the other consideration is trying to save our housing stock. He thinks this targets ultimate quality of life and, for him, is a helpful way to frame it.

Mayor Vaterlaus stated, if there are 12 under 12 in the place with six adults, it is going to be loud and the garbage is going to be overflowing, which is another problem.

2.a
Packet Pg. 35
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of 12-05-2024 Special Meeting (5822 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Special Meeting 21 December 05, 2024
Councilmember Bigstyck thought they directed to come back with noise monitor nomenclature and other tools. He had no problem with a limit on children but the STR may be so difficult to live next to that there are going to be enforcement mechanisms to take care of it, irrespective of who is there.

Councilmember Bier agreed.

Mayor Vaterlaus asked if we are going to leave it up to noise and not limit the children.

Councilmember Bigstyck stated that this can also come back to Council if it is not working.

Councilmember Bier stated it is like the number of people and unlimited children.

Mayor Vaterlaus stated that is what it says, i.e., 12 and under unlimited.

Asst. City Attorney Bazzano stated that we are trying to confirm what Council would want. She thinks her understanding from the previous direction from Council was that the occupancy limits would not apply to the children. Half Moon Bay just limited it to two persons per bedroom.

Councilmember Boles stated a child is a person.

Asst. City Attorney Bazzano stated there is no definition of person.

Councilmember Bier thinks that is fine to do it like that.

Mayor pro Tem Beckmeyer stated two persons per bedroom without mention of people under a certain age. She recalls City Manager Woodhouse’s previous point about infants.

City Manager Woodhouse stated that Council did discuss this, and if you add together some of the various restrictions that Council is directing, a two-bedroom STR requires two off-street parking spaces, and if you are a family of four, with two kids that are not driving to the STR, you only need one off-street parking space, but it is a two-bedroom place so you have to have that parking. He stated that there will be loopholes.

Councilmember Bigstyck stated, if you have two families of four that are staying in those two bedrooms, then you have two cars, that is more likely than having a soccer team in your house every weekend.

Asst. City Attorney Bazzano added that, to expand on City Manager Woodhouse’s example, if you have a family of four with two young children, a baby and a two-year-old, you could usually fit all squeezed into one bed in the unit you are renting but, because there are four, you would have to rent two bedrooms, with two persons per bedroom. She stated that you are forcing that four person family to get a two-bedroom STR.

Councilmember Bier asked if we can limit the number of kids to the number of adults.

Asst. City Attorney Bazzano stated you may not even need that.

Councilmember Bigstyck stated, put another way, legislating to the extreme, he does not know the best way to create policy. He thinks that we can remedy that simply enough down the road

2.a
Packet Pg. 36
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of 12-05-2024 Special Meeting (5822 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Special Meeting 22 December 05, 2024
and that is when it is easy to bring back.

City Manager Woodhouse added, regarding kids and families, this is likely to spin to the other Coastal Commission concern about affordability. If you have a family of four that is coming, the only way they can afford an STR is to come with a friend and rent a two-bedroom place but they would not be allowed to do that. He stated that it could be an issue that Coastal Commission raises as a concern related to affordability for families and environmental justice as part of that.

Mayor Vaterlaus asked if we leave it alone with what we originally said, two per bedroom, children under 12 not included. She asked if that is correct.

Mayor pro Tem Beckmeyer thinks the issue of environmental justice is going to factor in here.

Coastal Commission spent a lot of time increasing sea level rise adaptation guidance by having a whole chapter on social justice and environmental justice. On the topic of events, she stated she liked the definition from Half Moon Bay.

Councilmember Bigstyck agreed.

Mayor Vaterlaus stated it is a non-exclusive list.

City Manager Woodhouse stated that the details of the definition of “event” can be drafted in the ordinance using Half Moon Bay’s definition as the baseline and then bring it for Council review.

Mayor pro Tem Beckmeyer agreed.

Mayor Vaterlaus stated it is “including, but not limited to, the following”. She stated that the last item is neighborhood density.

City Manager Woodhouse explained that with the multi-family restrictions that Council has directed that is about 40-50 STRs that will be eliminated when it goes into effect, meaning they would no longer apply and be able to participate in the program. He stated that one of the concerns we heard from Coastal Commission staff is where are these impacts occurring, where is the limitation to visitor-serving options occurring. Many of those multi-family ones are in West Sharp Park and the baseline density is going to change based on multi-family. Additionally in West Sharp Park, with the parking restrictions, the baseline is going to change even more; there will be many STRs in West Sharp Park that will not comply with the parking requirement. He stated that whole baseline changes and, as Council thinks about this and talks about density, when staff presents estimates about the final numbers to Coastal Commission staff in highly desired coastal visitation areas, that is a question and viewpoint that they will ask.

Mayor Vaterlaus asked how we regulate and decide if four people apply on one day and they are all in the same neighborhood, who gets preference.

Councilmember Boles stated that there are two coastal cities that have done that through a lottery and it is not a matter of when you apply but all the buckets together and only if there is conflict. Without conflict, it does not happen. She stated those seem to be things the Coastal Commission has approved in other jurisdictions.

Mayor pro Tem Beckmeyer stated we had to do similar things with the union at work as often, with the school year, it is efficient to hire a bunch of people on the same day to staff up for paraprofessionals. That means everyone has the same starting date and, if you end up in a

2.a
Packet Pg. 37
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of 12-05-2024 Special Meeting (5822 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Special Meeting 23 December 05, 2024
layoff situation, who has the offer letter at noon versus 5 p.m. the same day.

Councilmember Bier mentioned like cannabis with the lottery overlay zone.

Mayor pro Tem Beckmeyer did not remember the specifics of that.

Councilmember Bier stated it was staff-intensive.

Councilmember Boles stated that is why she wished we had a good map that showed the information of what is multi-family and what is going to change. She suggested that Council talk about what they might want that staff can draft and then when it comes back for approvals, there can be maps and they can decide if they think it is necessary to include that or not.

Mayor Vaterlaus stated that the Coastal Commission regulated the number of days that people can stay there because they want more people to stay there and they want it available for a lot of people and now they are saying, if we do density, how many people can stay there. She did not think that made sense.

Mayor pro Tem Beckmeyer reiterated that, if we have a lot of density constraints, it limits the number of STRs that are possible in a given area, such as the coast where people might want to come. She added that the idea is neighborhoods and quality of life that we are seeking to preserve.

Mayor Vaterlaus added quiet enjoyment.

Councilmember Bier stated there were some public comments that mentioned limiting by district or 1% per neighborhood.

Mayor pro Tem Beckmeyer stated 1% of all dwelling units or 1% of what.

Councilmember Bier stated each neighborhood.

Councilmember Boles did not think that solves the problem as the problem is that there are too many next to each other. She thinks that would be harder to define what the regions are.

Councilmember Bier thought we could define the radius.

Councilmember Boles stated that we could define a radius. She stated that it was Pacific Grove and Seaside that had 55 feet and their ordinance was clear about the policies and how they go about their lottery and staff could look at that. She did not think we need to go to 55 feet as it could be bigger than that.

Councilmember Bigstyck asked how many vacancies we have in the Community Development Department now.

City Manager Woodhouse stated that the department is at 50% staffing now.

Councilmember Bigstyck asked how many people that is.

City Manager Woodhouse stated that there are four people in the department, adding that we are using interim and contract staff.

2.a
Packet Pg. 38
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of 12-05-2024 Special Meeting (5822 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Special Meeting 24 December 05, 2024
Councilmember Bigstyck asked what the descriptions of the four that are here, i.e., their titles.

He asked if two of them are Code Enforcement officers.

City Manager Woodhouse stated that we do have Code Enforcement.

Councilmember Bigstyck asked if that is considered outside of the four.

Mayor pro Tem Beckmeyer asked if the Code Enforcement positions are counted in the four.

City Manager Woodhouse stated no.

Councilmember Bigstyck stated, out of eight that we should have, we have four currently.

City Manager Woodhouse stated that there are four vacancies for planners: two Sr. Planners, Dep. Director, and Director.

Councilmember Bigstyck hears our community and he also feels, if we are going to plan in terms of what density means, we also need to think in terms of the resources we have to implement that. If we had the new Community Development Director in front of them, that would be a good start to having this conversation to have a more robust understanding of what implementation of this will take.

Councilmember Boles stated she is not saying we are committing to anything today. She stated that we did not make that deliberation when we were talking about the LCP and staff work for that either. She is not convinced that we need this right now because she does not know what is happening on the maps and what we are losing with the multi-family. She would hate to not do it and find we have a problem when we come back again.

Councilmember Bier stated with the maps it was obvious where the density issues are.

Councilmember Boles stated in Sharp Park.

Mayor pro Tem Beckmeyer stated we have been hearing from our community for many years on that point. She mentioned Seaside.

Councilmember Bier stated Pacific Grove.

Mayor Vaterlaus stated it was interesting that the Coastal Commission could not locate those.

Mayor pro Tem Beckmeyer stated we are the North Central District, not the Central District.

Councilmember Bigstyck thought Monterey County was our district.

Mayor pro Tem Beckmeyer stated no. She stated there is not 100% consistency from region to region and maybe that us why they would not know.

Councilmember Bier stated Seaside is Monterey.

Mayor pro Tem Beckmeyer thought Seaside is a little different and more inland.

2.a
Packet Pg. 39
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of 12-05-2024 Special Meeting (5822 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Special Meeting 25 December 05, 2024
Councilmember Bier stated that it is not, but right on Highway One.

Mayor Vaterlaus stated she stayed in an STR there.

Councilmember Bier thought it might be on the other side of Highway One, however.

Councilmember Boles stated that they also mention Marin and she asked if we have any information on what they do.

Councilmember Bier stated, even with Seaside, there is only a little bit of it on the west side of Highway One.

Councilmember Boles stated that, during the staff report, it might mention that Marin had a neighborhood-based policy and she asked if we know anything about their policy.

Mayor pro Tem Beckmeyer stated they just did it.

City Manager Woodhouse stated that they established caps for townships or areas. He stated that the point of the neighborhood density is, from his perspective, if Council wants to go down that path and provide some broad parameters, there is a significant research and analysis and justification workload that staff will need to undertake. He stated that staff will not be able to do that and get to the Planning Commission with a draft ordinance in January. It is going to delay this ordinance development and may need to come back to Council. When staff look at how all of these restrictions are going to limit the program, we will start running into concern and need to consult with Coastal Commission staff again about what is happening in West Sharp Park with a number of alternative lodging options as there is only one hotel in West Sharp Park.

When we put all the data together, they are going to start understanding what the dynamic is in Pacifica. They made a recommendation about the parking standard they would like to see, and staff will go out, look at all the units in West Sharp Park, do an inspection and conclude 80% of those will not be able to meet this parking standard and, if it comes to ten STRs in West Sharp Park, City staff will have to consult with Coastal Commission staff and come back to Council and say this might be a concern from Coastal Commission. He is saying that there is a lot of work relating to development and that is just analyzing what should a density requirement be in a particular neighborhood and there is a lot of work to figure out how this will be implemented annually and how are we going to afford the staff or contractors needed to hire to implement that system annually. He stated, based on the cannabis lottery system, there is a significant amount of work to undertake that for six shops in three zones and that was just once, but this is annually to implement a lottery or to develop a rigorous and detailed time stamping application completeness review process that will not be subject to legal challenge; that is another operational aspect of implementing a neighborhood density program.

Councilmember Bier thinks all that information would be important for her to understand and have in front of her before she makes a decision about this. She thinks it will be necessary at some point for Council to look at density but she does not understand all of what he just said.

Councilmember Bigstyck stated that the part that came through clearly to him is that, for Council to have that information in front of them, it is going to extend this process by several months.

Councilmember Bier asked if we can move forward with what we have and then work on whatever this is in the future.

2.a
Packet Pg. 40
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of 12-05-2024 Special Meeting (5822 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Special Meeting 26 December 05, 2024
Mayor pro Tem Beckmeyer thinks that is what the City Manager is saying.

City Manager Woodhouse clarified that Council can make, in the future, any revisions they want to the STR ordinance after they see how the new regulations settle or not. He stated that the question is whether they want to frontload this more complicated provision and the work required to bring the information. He stated that there will never be perfectly accurate maps in an STR program as they change all the time.

Councilmember Boles stated that is why they should be updated regularly and be on a website where we can look at them, as well as the public.

Mayor pro Tem Beckmeyer agrees.

City Manager Woodhouse stated that is one thing the Council has already directed. Looking at that from a staffing perspective, he is looking at an STR operator staff member as well as significant operating revenue reduction to the City. He asked if we are going to prioritize STR operator staff member over police officer.

Councilmember Boles stated that where we charge enough for the permit fees to cover that person and charge more in fines so we are making up for those costs.

Mayor Vaterlaus stated that is one of the things we did not discuss today was the income to the city. That is part of Council’s obligation to help the public, but we need to look after the City, also. We have already removed 44 known units that we had in the multi-units, and that is quite a hit already on the budget.

City Manager Woodhouse stated, on the fiscal impact, there are many moving variables. It is complicated, and when staff have the final ordinance direction, we will do our best to develop a range of fiscal impacts ranges and estimates for limiting to 90 days compared to the amount STRs currently rent, in addition to cuts to the TOT revenue by half or two-thirds. He says that we are looking at a significant revenue impact to the City and Council will have to work on that during budget deliberations and we will make cuts where we need to make cuts to balance the budget. He stated that, to the Mayor’s point, that will impact services citywide.

Councilmember Bigstyck thought it may further complicate Coastal Commission review and, while it could take upwards of a year, it does not necessarily need to, but on top of the analysis that City staff would need to bring back to Council in order to make that determination on this particular point, presumably Coastal Commission staff would also need to do analysis to be able to bring this in fullness to the Coastal Commission. Given the breadth and scope of what Council has requested, it may be prudent to stick this on the backburner until we see how all the rest fairs and determine whether or not it is worth it to spend the time to fit in this piece.

Mayor pro Tem Beckmeyer understands and she will pursue looking at what the other buffers are that they could not find. From the Coastal Cities Group point of view, the inconsistency of two cities within 100 miles having it and they cannot find it surprises her and their inability to understand the notion of buffer restrictions is surprising when they do not have a problem when it comes to wetlands; they know what buffers are when it comes to wetlands and mitigation easily. We have to take care of our neighborhood but also have to take care of our budget and fiduciary responsibility to the city and, in doing that, taking care of our neighborhoods to a degree.

2.a
Packet Pg. 41
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of 12-05-2024 Special Meeting (5822 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Special Meeting 27 December 05, 2024
Mayor Vaterlaus thought many restrictions we placed on hosted and unhosted will limit much of the income already.

Councilmember Bier added the restrictions will also change the density.

Mayor Vaterlaus added the parking part of it and it will change the density altogether.

Councilmember Boles asked, if we do not put this in the ordinance now, would it be possible when staff comes back to the Planning Commission and Council that we have a better map where we have crossed out all the multi-family units and we see the impacts. Perhaps at that point we can say at what point we want to work on it and not wait another year necessarily and not wait until the whole renewal period again in the fall to determine, as a point to touch base, if it is something we want to pursue even if it is not the immediate ordinance we are submitting.

Mayor pro Tem Beckmeyer thought, at some point, we have to put the project to bed and she wonders if it then becomes goalsetting again. She stated that we have had fixing the STR ordinance on our goalsetting for two years, alongside zoning, Housing Element, etc.

Councilmember Boles stated she is not opposed to making the decision at that point but it would be nice to have more information presented to Council. Right now she does not feel she has enough information to know if this is needed or not. She stated that it is mostly the map so we know what is getting crossed out because they do not have parking or it is a multi-family.

Councilmember Bigstyck stated that what we will not know is how it reconfigures from that point and where new ones will pop up because we are not as saturated and maybe others want to get into the market. He also feels that what a Councilmember could do independent of staff is start investigating those ordinances in other places.

Councilmember Boles stated that she has read a couple herself but, until she has a map she can look at, she cannot do that research.

Councilmember Bigstyck thought the map she is looking for will be formed after we put all this into motion.

Mayor pro Tem Beckmeyer stated it is a version of the map we saw at this meeting.

City Manager Woodhouse stated he can guarantee that one of the information requests Coastal Commission staff will ask is what do we predict that all these regulations as Council has adopted in the ordinance will do to the existing STR stock. He stated that we will have to develop maps to the best of our ability, such as parking requirements, number of bedrooms in each STR, etc. Staff will have to do significant work in finalizing the ordinance to take it to the Planning Commission and have a better map that says here is what the package does currently to the STR program, as we have a certain number permitted for this year and estimate we may have 60 or another number. Staff will have to do that related to trying to estimate the fiscal or revenue impact of the program. He stated that we will develop more maps but the trick would be that we adopt an ordinance and then we start working on the Local Coastal Plan submittal to the Coastal Commission which will take a long time. We do not know what their decision will be about that for a long time and would it be prudent to be working in parallel on more revisions to the program at that time, given all the other priority work plans and strategic plan items that Council has directed. He thought that could be a goalsetting discussion at that time.

2.a
Packet Pg. 42
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of 12-05-2024 Special Meeting (5822 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Special Meeting 28 December 05, 2024
Mayor pro Tem Beckmeyer asked, in light of what he said about what Coastal Commission will want to see, if it was possible to do an overlay, i.e., parking restriction layer or multi-family layer.

City Manager Woodhouse stated that there are two major things we will not be able to estimate, such as who will stay in business with a 90-day limitation versus the current no limitation and who will stay in business with the primary residency requirements. He stated that we will not be able to estimate those, but they will both have a real impact and reduce the number of STRs from the current allotment that will be able to operate.

Councilmember Boles stated that we cannot estimate the primary residence but we know who the owners are that hold the permit.

City Manager Woodhouse stated he does not know the data and his guess is that it is a very low percentage that are primary residents. He asked how are they going to react to the new regulation, what loophole are they going to create to be a primary resident or not or are they going to do that, etc. It will take a year or two to see how the new regulations play out in reality and what new players might want to come into the game because they meet all these criteria.

Mayor pro Tem Beckmeyer knows there are a few people in Sharp Park and in town that are already operating hosted and there may be people who want to join. She asked what Council’s decision is for today on this.

Mayor Vaterlaus did not think we can go forward with the density issue today and we do not have the staff to go through all the nuances that it would create.

Mayor pro Tem Beckmeyer asked if Council agrees.

Councilmember Boles agreed as she does not have enough information.

Councilmember Bier agreed also.

Councilmember Bigstyck stated that there is much to work on to see what the result is and then we reconfigure and he thinks a lot will get better as a result of this and we will see if we need to do more work at that point.

Mayor pro Tem Beckmeyer stated she is okay with that.

Councilmember Bier stated she is fine.

City Manager Woodhouse asked if there were any other final clarifications on other matters that Council wanted to direct at this point that seemed ambiguous or not. He stated staff has clear direction to move forward and stated, for small details, those can be adjusted as the ordinance is reviewed by Planning Commission and Council as it rolls forward.

Mayor pro Tem Beckmeyer referred to maps, and she thought about the way the maps look and the way they are created. She stated they look like the map we have for our voting district and some other map about parking an oversized vehicle on the streets. She asked if we will have a dynamic map available on the City’s website.

City Manager Woodhouse stated that it is up to Council if they want to direct that as part of the program. He stated it is a staff workload item that is constantly changing with Planning

2.a
Packet Pg. 43
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of 12-05-2024 Special Meeting (5822 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Special Meeting 29 December 05, 2024
managing the map.

Mayor Vaterlaus added unless we only update it once a month and indicate that the map is as of a specific date and we will not change the map for another 30 days so it is not a current map.

City Manager Woodhouse agreed, but stated it will not prevent the people saying that the map is inaccurate.

Councilmember Boles stated people could be giving information about something not on the map. She stated it is helpful to get HdL enforcing and collecting TOTs if they can bring them in line. She added we are trying to empower our community which is what they want to do.

Mayor pro Tem Beckmeyer stated she was thinking about it in terms of other examples with complaint-driven enforcement that we have in the City and this is along that line. We had a public comment at this meeting from someone active in the community and was disheartened to realize, based on this map, which might be inaccurate, that the STR causing great pain in their family is not a licensed registered STR. She stated that the pain is happening and zero dollars and zero cents is going to the city to help defray all the costs. She emphasized having access to some kind of information that allows our residents in neighborhoods to validate. She knows it will be a workload but, with some of our automated systems, there will be ways of reporting that do not necessarily require an instantaneous response from staff but can collect the information in a form that gets reviewed by someone at some point in time.

City Manager Woodhouse stated that one of the items is posting of information, including a sign with a QR code at the building for contact person and license at the STR location, that will be available. He stated that information being on a website, with or without an interactive map, will be a constant workload item and we will have to figure out how to manage that as part of the new short-term rental program manager that we will have to hire.

Councilmember Bigstyck stated that it sounds like a moving target when we have directed to put an actual QR code on a house.

Mayor pro Tem Beckmeyer asked what he means by a moving target, i.e. having a map.

Councilmember Bigstyck responded affirmatively, as the map will constantly be changing which he thinks is what the City Manager is saying.

Mayor pro Tem Beckmeyer agreed.

Councilmember Boles stated, whether it is a map or not, it is a link to check to see if an address is licensed.

Councilmember Bigstyck asked, if a resident currently sends us an email and asks if this is an STR, if there was any reason why we would not answer that. He stated that he feels like we have directed many tools and we should see what those tools accomplish and Council can direct more tools.

Mayor pro Tem Beckmeyer asked if he was saying no map.

Councilmember Bigstyck responded affirmatively.

2.a
Packet Pg. 44
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of 12-05-2024 Special Meeting (5822 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Special Meeting 30 December 05, 2024
Asst. City Attorney Bazzano stated, as City Manager pointed out, we have received prior directions to add a requirement to the ordinance about signage. She stated that a sign in front of a property is much more valuable in identifying whether it is a permitted STR or not than a constantly changing map on the internet. From her perspective, a sign in front of the property is an invaluable tool to identify whether or not it is permitted as an STR location.

Mayor pro Tem Beckmeyer stated illegal ones will not have a sign.

Asst. City Attorney Bazzano stated that, without a sign, you know it is illegal.

Councilmember Bigstyck stated that we have enforcement tools available to enforce.

Councilmember Boles stated we will not have any signs until late next year because this is not something we are asking people to do now.

Mayor Vaterlaus stated that we should also have the contact information on the sign to avoid calling the City for issues.

Councilmember Bier thought the map was valuable at this meeting.

Mayor pro Tem Beckmeyer agreed and thought, when you give people what they ask for, they are happy and stop asking for more things.

Councilmember Bigstyck thought people will always be asking for more things. He also thinks we have given so much that people have been asking for. In terms of the snapshot we were looking at earlier, we were looking at three things that did not align and three things that were not today. He thinks we are looking at a snapshot in every instance, and a real time updated map is fine but who is doing the updating.

Mayor pro Tem Beckmeyer stated HdL, as they handle the business license and verify with the City.

Councilmember Bigstyck asked, with the work they are doing in map form, how often are they going to need to update the map and will there be additional staff needed to update that map on a regular basis.

Councilmember Boles stated to post it and occasionally update it. Having something now would be helpful.

Councilmember Bigstyck agrees that a touchstone is helpful.

Mayor pro Tem Beckmeyer stated it may be an interim tool as we will not have the ordinance with the requirement ready and being implemented for months to come. Creating the map could take time and work as well.

Councilmember Boles stated that they have done it and they are updating it.

Mayor pro Tem Beckmeyer agreed, adding it was a very useful tool and helped having it. She thanked staff for bringing the map forward as it was helpful, although imperfect.

Mayor Vaterlaus stated it will never be perfect.

2.a
Packet Pg. 45
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of 12-05-2024 Special Meeting (5822 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Special Meeting 31 December 05, 2024
Councilmember Bigstyck stated that he has a final comment and an item he wanted to bring up regarding the STR cap specifically. As we implement these things, it occurred to him that there may suddenly be substantially fewer STRs in general and, as that number falls, it might be prudent on occasion to reassess whether or not the current cap is the right fit. He stated, if suddenly this falls to 80 STRs in town, and is consistent for six months, it might be prudent to revisit the 150 number and lower it to 100 so we do not wind up with an aggravated and unintended result in the future. He wanted to put that out there for consideration of future Councilmembers dealing with this item, i.e., that it might be worth it to consider whether or not we should lower the cap as we go along.

Mayor pro Tem Beckmeyer stated through attrition. She stated that it did occur to her.

Councilmember Boles stated people brought up again today platform accountability and it was her understanding is that is something the City Attorneys will be working on, i.e. trying to get the platforms to take illegal STRs off, making sure they look at the license numbers, and whatever we can do so City staff do not have to do the enforcement that the platforms do. She thought San Francisco has a good model that we talked about before.

Asst. City Attorney Bazzano clarified that it was discussed at previous meetings and the comment the City Attorney made was that we can do what Council directs in terms of including or not including some sort of platform accountability in the ordinance, but it was the enforcement of that requirement may be difficult because Pacifica does not have the same leverage that San Francisco or some other big cities do. She thinks there was also discussion about working voluntarily with platforms like Airbnb and VRBO and some of the others to get them to buy into compliance. She knows that the City has had numerous discussions with Airbnb so that was where it was left. She did not think there was any consensus on including that in the ordinance itself. She stated that staff can do what Council directs, but it might be something that we may not be able to use as efficiently as Council would like.

Councilmember Bier stated that it would be there in case we needed it.

Asst. City Attorney Bazzano agreed.

Mayor pro Tem Beckmeyer stated that we need all the tools we can have and, to the point about San Francisco has more leverage, if she is not mistaken, some of their accountability requirements were legally derived either through a settlement or judgment.

Councilmember Boles added some of that case law could be applied to us.

Mayor pro Tem Beckmeyer asked if that is what Councilmember Boles is referring to, i.e., the analysis of case law as to whether it can be utilized as a tool.

Asst. City Attorney Bazzano stated that we can look at that and if there was a settlement there is not going to be any clear case law on that particular issue as both sides will argue.

Councilmember Boles thought we were looking for Asst. City Attorney Bazzano’s recommendations of the most that we can put on platforms so we are saving staff time and they do that for us. She will bring up the point of the license numbers, which is on their application now that they have to post their license numbers. She checked five around her and four had it and one did not, so who is following up. She asked if Airbnb should be checking now to see

2.a
Packet Pg. 46
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of 12-05-2024 Special Meeting (5822 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Special Meeting 32 December 05, 2024
that they all have a license number, and is that their responsibility or HdL’s to go back and look at all the listings to make sure they include the license number.

City Manager Woodhouse stated it is not HdL’s. He stated another cost to the program is that we will have to redo the contract with HdL and it will be more expensive in the future. Staff could look at them playing that role but staff have had a good working relationship with Airbnb, as Asst. City Manager Carter has worked with them and Airbnb removed ones that had been revoked. However, we are going to get much less attention with much less leverage with Airbnb moving into the future as it is not a significant market for them.

Mayor pro Tem Beckmeyer stated they have so little attention to it and the impacts can be so great for our community.

Mayor Vaterlaus stated this whole thing is hard altogether, weighing people, the money, the visitors, etc.

Councilmember Boles thought, to that point, Councilmember Bigstyck brought up the high fines for noise, starting at $1,500, and one of the things in the Pacific Grove ordinance is that they have a $2,500 fine per day to someone who lists the property that does not have the proper permit. She thought that may be something we can look into and we could be recouping that money.

Councilmember Bigstyck thought we directed staff to look into the fines that we could get.

Councilmember Boles stated that staff wrote about noise and did not know if it was about whether you are listed and have all your proper permits.

Asst. City Attorney Bazzano stated that there are state law constraints on what the maximum the City can charge for a fine and she can look at Pacific Grove. She stated that one thing distinguishable between Pacifica and other cities is that this is not a charter city so we have to stick with the constraints of state law.

Mayor Vaterlaus mentioned our $1,000 fireworks fine.

Asst. City Attorney Bazzano stated that we talked previously about at least reviewing the fines as there have been some changes to state law that allow for increased fines for STR violations specifically, but they have to relate to health and safety violations, not licensing violations.

Councilmember Boles wanted to confirm with Council that we are doing inspections of unhosted STRs. She stated staff is under the impression that we are not doing inspections of hosted STRs and she thinks we should. She stated that we can decide about how often an inspection goes, but this is to make sure that there are not building safety issues. When you get your permit at the beginning, you are doing your diagrams and you have an inspection from Building and Code Enforcement. She does not know why we would be trusting someone who is renting a room in their house more than someone who is renting a full house. She thinks it would still be helpful to do an inspection of anything we are renting out to the public.

City Manager Woodhouse clarified that staff went back and looked these other discussion items, and regarding inspections, there was not a clear Council majority about the inspections for hosted; therefore, unhosted has an inspection and there was not majority direction from Council that hosted STRs should be required to have more than a self-inspection requirement and

2.a
Packet Pg. 47
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of 12-05-2024 Special Meeting (5822 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Special Meeting 33 December 05, 2024
permit checklist to confirm compliance with regulations. He stated that Council discussed that but did not provide direction, but if they want to discuss now and change that to require inspections for hosted, staff will add that to the workload.

Councilmember Boles stated that we are not charging any different fees or application fees.

Mayor pro Tem Beckmeyer stated she was going to ask that there are some inspections that there is fee, such as fire inspection. She asked if we were thinking that would be rolled into the overall STR fee.

Councilmember Boles stated if it is a yearly inspection. She stated other cities she looked at do not do it yearly.

Mayor pro Tem Beckmeyer understood and she was going to question yearly.

Councilmember Boles stated she did not think it was necessary for the others.

Councilmember Bigstyck asked if the other cities she was looking at doing inspections on hosted STRs.

Councilmember Boles responded affirmatively.

Mayor pro Tem Beckmeyer stated we know there are properties in our city that, over many years, have evolved spaces that are occupied and we have no idea how they were done. In many cases now, we have two bedrooms and a bathroom and living spaces that have been created and it is not clear if it was permitted work or not. She has wondered, on the issue of housing, about some kind of amnesty program, as it concerns her that there may be unsafe conditions that have persisted because it has been that way for 40 years. She stated that people can have an STR and an unsafe space could be used as a hosted STR. She is looking for safety and if there is a cost to send someone to do that inspection, what is that cost and is that an additional fee the first time you do your application. She stated, if you meet your inspection, you self-report after that.

Councilmember Boles stated that it is also catching people who put in a tiny home in their backyard so they are living there hosted, but it is not something that’s legal. She stated it is an opportunity to catch things before it becomes an enforcement issue which becomes harder to pull back if you do that before a permit is issued.

Mayor pro Tem Beckmeyer stated it sounds like we are creating a big workload.

Councilmember Boles did not know if it was for City staff. She stated some other cities have a list of who you can hire so you can hire somebody yourself and the City can always audit it.

Mayor pro Tem Beckmeyer stated like when you are buying your house.

Mayor Vaterlaus stated that when you are getting an inspection, you pay for it.

Councilmember Boles stated it is only a few hundred dollars.

Mayor Vaterlaus thought $700.

2.a
Packet Pg. 48
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of 12-05-2024 Special Meeting (5822 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Special Meeting 34 December 05, 2024
Councilmember Bigstyck stated that the idea of $700 is not very much is a spectrum. He stated he does not disagree but he thinks that an unhosted STR in terms of safety is different than someone who is living in their own house and has concerns for their own safety. He thinks that is an important distinction between the two. He added, in an ideal circumstance, we would have inspections across the board, but he feels, if we are setting up a house with no oversight, he would like to be sure that whoever owns that house has set up their new guests to habit it safely.

Councilmember Bier thought, to get a license, you need an inspection.

Councilmember Boles stated that a host could have a legal bedroom, but that does not mean he is renting a legal bedroom. She stated staff could come back with an estimate of what it costs.

She stated that it is like looking at the bedrooms and the exiting, not looking at the structure of the house.

Councilmember Bigstyck agreed, but the more we are adding things on, the more it costs as the more work there is. He did not know if we all have a similar sense of how much has been directed at this point, but he gets the sense it is quite a lot and will make quite a difference. At the point in time when there is an issue, we can deal with that. He does not disagree that there should be inspections, but what it means on top of everything we have already directed, he feels like it is exponential, not additive.

Councilmember Boles does not think it is exponential but a tiny thing that keeps people safe.

Mayor pro Tem Beckmeyer stated that this is the exact point we got to at the last meeting and why there was not clear direction in the record as Council did not come to consensus.

City Manager Woodhouse stated, regarding the hosted inspections, there is on the permit application and the self-inspection part of that a checklist that they comply and the risk, if they lied, that their permit will be revoked. Then, if the violation comes to the City’s attention from a guest at the hosted STR, they would have to go and inspect it via a Code Enforcement case and the permit would be revoked. There is that motivation to be compliant even when you are self-reporting.

Councilmember Boles asked if we are still requiring them to do a diagram of the house and the parking as we did not make a distinction about that.

City Manager Woodhouse thought that was part of the requirements.

Councilmember Boles stated that, as part of that, staff can check the building permit records.

She stated that we talked about that being part of the review before you issue a permit and you are checking the permit records that we have so they have not built anything illegally. She stated that an inspection helps where you cannot see.

Mayor pro Tem Beckmeyer thinks we did talk about this and we agreed that checking the permit records is another workload issue.

Councilmember Boles stated that reminds her one thing not on the application that Council directed was asking people if they were aware of unpermitted work or incomplete permits so they have to self-report that.

2.a
Packet Pg. 49
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of 12-05-2024 Special Meeting (5822 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Special Meeting 35 December 05, 2024
City Manager Woodhouse stated Council discussed that a bit as it is fairly complex to ask that from an applicant.

Councilmember Boles stated that we are asking if they are aware.

Councilmember Bier thought we did talk about that.

Mayor Vaterlaus stated that there two people with different opinions on this and the other three have not weighed in on the inspection. She thinks the inspection is a great idea but she does not think we can get into that now, but to later add on.

Councilmember Bier thinks so as well and she is tending to agree with Councilmember Bigstyck on that, but she agrees with the question on the application.

City Manager Woodhouse wanted to clarify the question about being aware of code violations or unpermitted work talked about by Council previously. He stated that we would have to go back and look at the record but he did not get the sense that staff were directed to add that and he thinks that it is a tricky and complicated question to ask. He wants to get clear Council direction regarding what that question should be.

Councilmember Boles is thinking of 315 Esplanade where people got STR permits and business licenses. They were doing work without permits, including major electrical work. She stated they knew they needed a permit and they did not get one and it was not until it was complained and red-tagged that they got that, but they should not be able to get a permit if they are doing work that is unpermitted. There has to be a way to check that.

Asst. City Attorney Bazzano asked how does the question on the application address that particular issue.

Councilmember Boles stated that it is a place if we catch them.

Asst. City Attorney Bazzano stated that they could say they were not aware and the City would not have any evidence to contradict that because awareness is subjective. She understands what Council is trying to get at, but the reality is that the City has that information and we should know if they have been receiving notices, citations, etc., so we have that within our documentations system. Staff do not need an applicant to confirm or deny that as we know whether their property is in the subject of enforcement action or violations.

Councilmember Boles stated, in this case, it was not until a next door neighbor who was afraid of being evicted made a complaint. The City did not find that themselves. Staff issued all the permits even though the space was all opened up and not habitable. She stated that makes her think of one of the buildings on the list that is permitted for four units and someone in the audience was telling her that it was one that has had open construction permits for a number of years. She stated that we should not be giving STR permits for places that are under construction.

Asst. City Attorney Bazzano stated you can have an outstanding permit for many reasons but the work is completed or it could have nothing to do with the STR on the property. She hears what she is saying that it should be looked at, but it is not necessarily a determinate factor.

Councilmember Boles stated that is where an inspection comes in. If you are seeing a place

2.a
Packet Pg. 50
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of 12-05-2024 Special Meeting (5822 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Special Meeting 36 December 05, 2024
under construction that is not habitable, you are not getting a permit. She stated that is important to her, but she understands.

Mayor pro Tem Beckmeyer understands why it is important to her because it is her work and what she does and knows. She concurs about her public safety concerns and she believes there are many instances where unpermitted work has gone on. She is struggling with the mushrooming impact of the additional regulations and concepts we are bringing forward at a late stage in terms of giving staff direction and getting the ordinance passed. She worries that she does not understand what the workload impact of what Councilmember Boles is saying is.

Councilmember Boles stated that she sees a lot of work being done illegally because permits are so hard to get. She stated that we do not want that to happen; if people are not getting permits, they are not paying the City fees or increased property taxes on their houses.

Mayor pro Tem Beckmeyer thinks we are getting into a whole realm of concern that she agrees with. She mentioned earlier could there be an amnesty program and could we design a program in the world where we would have an inspection and we could bring things into compliance and we could expand our housing, the same way ADUs expand our housing. She stated that we do not have that program and she does not know what it would take to create such a program and how it would be paid for. She does not know that we can invent that now and attach it to this process.

Councilmember Boles stated we do not necessarily need the other ordinances or affidavit but a simple inspection would tell us a lot. She stated that is where she is afraid that we are missing information that would be easy to get in an inspection but then makes the enforcement hard and getting the City Attorney involved and revoking something later on which is much more difficult or it could be informing someone that they have an unsafe condition and they might want to fix it and they cannot get their permit until they do.

Mayor Vaterlaus took consensus with 4 no’s and one yes.

Councilmember Bier stated she does not understand it.

Councilmember Boles hopes the Planning Commission can opine when they hear the ordinance.

Mayor pro Tem Beckmeyer stated that was a reasonable place to bring it. She thinks she does not have enough information to make a decision affirmatively that we need to do as she does not know the cost implications.

ADJOURN
Mayor Vaterlaus adjourned the meeting at 10:55 p.m.

Transcribed by Barbara Medina, Public Meeting Stenographer.

Respectfully Submitted,
Sarah Coffey, City Clerk

2.a
Packet Pg. 51
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of 12-05-2024 Special Meeting (5822 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Special Meeting 37 December 05, 2024
__________________________
Sue Beckmeyer, Mayor

2.a
Packet Pg. 52
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of 12-05-2024 Special Meeting (5822 : Approval of Minutes)

CITY OF PACIFICA

CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
Council Chambers
2212 Beach Blvd
Pacifica, CA 94044
Mayor Sue Vaterlaus
Mayor pro Tem Sue Beckmeyer
Councilmember Mary Bier
Councilmember Tygarjas Bigstyck
Councilmember Christine Boles
City Council Regular Meeting 1 December 09, 2024

SPECIAL AND REGULAR MEETING
December 09, 2024 (MONDAY)
www.cityofpacifica.org
Mayor Sue Vaterlaus called the meeting to order on December 9, 2024 at 6:07 PM 6:00 PM OPEN SESSION
Call to Order
Mayor Vaterlaus called the meeting to order at 6:07 p.m.

Attendee Name Title Status Arrived
Sue Vaterlaus Mayor Present
Sue Beckmeyer Mayor pro Tem Present
Mary Bier Councilmember Present
Tygarjas Bigstyck Councilmember Present
Christine Boles Councilmember Present
City Clerk Coffey took a verbal roll call.

Staff Present: Kevin Woodhouse, City Manager; Michelle Kenyon, City Attorney; Denise Bazzano, Asst. City Attorney; Yulia Carter, Asst. City Manager; Maria Sarasua, Police Chief; Scott Leslie, PB&R Director; Ron Myers, Fire Chief; Kavitha Kumar, Interim Community Development Director; John Mullins, Interim PW Director; Louis Sun, PW Dep. DirectorWastewater Div.; Roland Yip, PW Dep. Director-Field Services/Engineering; Bill Glasgo, Police Captain; Chris Clements, Police Captain; Vicente Romero, Police Corporal, Bill Amable, Dep.

Fire Chief; Sarah Coffey, City Clerk; Emily La, Dep. City Clerk.

Reading of Land Acknowledgment
Mayor Vaterlaus read the Land Acknowledgment.

Salute to the Flag led by Mayor Vaterlaus

2.b
Packet Pg. 53
Attachment: Attachment B: Minutes of 12-09-2024 Special and Regular Meeting (5822 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 2 December 09, 2024

CONSENT CALENDAR
Mayor Vaterlaus asked if anyone wanted to pull any item from the consent agenda.

City Manager Woodhouse made a brief correction to the Consent Calendar. He stated that with Item No. 5, Pacifica Spindrift Players’ Third Amendment to Lease Agreement, there has been a minor revision to the contract amendment. The current version includes Exhibits A, B, and C at the end of the contract, but only Exhibit B should remain part of the amendment; Exhibits A and C will be removed and Exhibit B pertains to the temporary use area established during COVID19 in the second amendment to the contract and this third amendment formally terminates that temporary use.

There were no public comments.

Councilmember Boles stated she has a few corrections to the minutes of September 23, 2024 meeting on the Rockaway Quarry reclamation hearing. On packet page 36, it should say, Mr.

Gurnsey stated that they have approved reclamation plans in the coastal zone,” not that they have “improved” reclamation plans in the coastal zone. She stated that on page 38, which starts “Councilmember Bier thought she read in the EIR…” and she said it should state Councilmember Boles, not Councilmember Bier. She stated, on page 46, there are two minor things: “Councilmember Bigstyck added traffic plan under the circulation period” should be “under the Circulation Element” and the sentence after that “our Municipal Code” says 902-5 when it should be 9-205. She stated that the last one, on page 47, after the statement from Mr.

Stinson about the traffic analysis, there are two places where it says “BMT” and that should be “VMT”. She stated that one thing she mentioned that did not get put in the minutes that she wanted to add was about the traffic analysis being accurate; she would like to add, “She said she was not sure she agrees with that, but she does not think we are getting into the EIR tonight,” and she wanted to clarify that she had an objection to the traffic analysis. She stated that it is right after the paragraph about Mr. Stinson and the next sentence said “Councilmember Boles would like to hear about that 2013 letter” so it should be just before that sentence. She stated the last page says what the vote was and it says “deny the appeal,” but there were two appeals so that should be plural.

Mayor pro Tem Beckmeyer stated that, since their minutes are not action minutes but summary minutes, and in third person, she asked if it would be possible if we could say Councilmember Boles stated she did not agree with this instead of direct quote in first person.

Councilmember Boles stated that it does not need to be verbatim but she wanted to get it in the record that there was something she objected to in the EIR.

Mayor pro Tem Beckmeyer moved to approve the consent calendar with amendments as stated; seconded by Councilmember Bier.

CONSENT CALENDAR (ITEMS #2 AND #3 AS AMENDED)
RESULT: ADOPTED AS AMENDED [UNANIMOUS]
MOVER: Sue Beckmeyer, Mayor pro Tem
SECONDER: Mary Bier, Councilmember
AYES: Vaterlaus, Beckmeyer, Bier, Bigstyck, Boles

1. Approval of Disbursements for 11/01/24 through 11/30/24.

2.b
Packet Pg. 54
Attachment: Attachment B: Minutes of 12-09-2024 Special and Regular Meeting (5822 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 3 December 09, 2024
PROPOSED ACTION: Receive and file the Monthly Check Register Report for the month of November 2024.

2. Approval of Minutes
PROPOSED ACTION: Move to approve the minutes for the September 23, 2024 City Council Special and Regular Meeting; October 14, 2024 City Council Special and Regular Meeting; November 12, 2024 City Council Special and Regular Meeting; November 18, 2024 City Council Special Meeting; and the November 25, 2024 City Council Special and Regular Meeting.

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

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

4. Annual Part-Time Salary Schedule Update
PROPOSED ACTION: Move to adopt the resolution approving the annual parttime salary schedule update that will be going into effect January 1, 2025.

5. Resolution Approving the Third Amendment to the Lease Agreement between the City of Pacifica and the Pacifica Spindrift Players for the premises located at 1050 Crespi Dr. (also known as the Pacifica Cultural Arts Center and Spindrift Theater) PROPOSED ACTION: Move to adopt the resolution approving the Third Amendment to the Lease Agreement between the City of Pacifica and the Pacifica Spindrift Players for the premises located at 1050 Crespi Dr. (also known as the Spindrift Theater and formerly known as the Pacifica Cultural Arts Center); authorizing the City Manager to execute the Third Amendment to the Lease Agreement.

6. Adoption of Resolution Declaring the Canvass of Returns and Results of the General Municipal Election of November 5, 2024
PROPOSED ACTION: Move to adopt the resolution declaring the canvass of returns and results of the general municipal election held on November 5, 2024.

PUBLIC COMMENTS ON ITEMS NOT ON THE POSTED AGENDA
Suzanne Moore, Pacifica, referred to the issues we face in 2025, such as homelessness, climate change, and harassment of vulnerable populations, and shared her thoughts on how the City can address all those issues.

Anita Rees, Pacifica, shared happenings at the Pacifica Resource Center, including their schedule and accomplishments for Thanksgiving, and reported on their Christmas program and other regular programs.

COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS
Councilmember Bigstyck loved attending the tree lighting in the Civic Center. He stated that we had a tsunami warning and much consternation afterwards in terms of which organizations were talking to whom and how things were coordinated as people expected sirens going off but they did not. He mentioned some of the processes and thought there will be a thorough review of that after the fact. He stated that our County Supervisor has been coordinating with City staff to

2.b
Packet Pg. 55
Attachment: Attachment B: Minutes of 12-09-2024 Special and Regular Meeting (5822 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 4 December 09, 2024
reserve a space in the City and on December 13 there will be a meeting held by Supervisor Mueller’s office to go over what happened and they can hear directly from the public what their experience was and coordinate a better response should we have such an event in the future.

He thanked the PCT’s telethon and thanked them for making sure our democracy is constantly broadcast and every second of Council meetings are available because of them. He referred to the epilogue of his Council story and Mayor Vaterlaus’. He stated that they will be the representatives for CCAG for one more meeting and CCAG wrote into their by-laws at their last meeting as they will be able to be the representative. He will be attending the California League of Cities Clerks group to participate in a session about how to deal when neo-Nazis call in. He stated that our Asst. City Attorney Bazzano who was present at our happening will be there to give her experience as well as legal information, as well as Walnut Creek Councilmember Kevin Wilk and the City Manager of Ventura Bill Ayub.

Councilmember Bier stated he is the perfect person to sit on that panel because he handled it so well. She thanked him for doing that. She had fun again at the Rockaway Tree Lighting and was able to be in the parade in Half Moon Bay. She thanked PRC as everybody is working hard now taking care of our families.

Mayor pro Tem Beckmeyer stated she sat down with incoming Councilmember Mayra Espinosa and led into having her join her at the HIP Housing calendar reveal. We have a student from Ocean Shore School who has the November month and we will be having her and her family in January at the Council meeting. She stated that she made a fast run around Polar-palooza and the next day was exciting with so many events happening, such as the Historical Society event.

It was a day of a celebration with our community and was so much fun which she loved.

Councilmember Boles stated the weekend was packed with so many wonderful community groups. She had a meeting with the Airport Roundtable and they are still discussing the impacts of the new quadcopter vehicles. The FAA has said that there will not be new noise policies for those as they will go under the umbrella of the regular planes which is concerning as they are going to fly much lower. She is learning that we will not have much control over where they fly but cities have control over where they can take off and land. She stated that all the cities and counties should be working together as we are all going to need these new ordinances in our codes quickly. She announced that, on January 15, there is a great group of people in town including former Planning Commissioner George Domurat, Bob Battalio, Tom Kendall, and other Army Corps people who have been working on a concept for an offshore lease in Sharp Park beyond the pier giving a presentation at the Pedro Point Fire House; this is to help with the impacts of the greater waves and storms and try to keep the sand in place on the beaches to help our resilience in addition to the work we are doing on the sea wall. She asked City Manager Woodhouse if he could give them an update on the Housing Element as she knows the Environmental Impact Report for that was supposed to be issued last month and might be happening over the holidays.

Mayor Vaterlaus stated that we are planning to continue the Rockaway Tree Lighting event next year, even though the Chamber will not be active in a location. She also went to the Labor Lunch and all the other things over the weekend mentioned by Council.

Mayor pro Tem Beckmeyer stated she was not available to go to Small Business Saturday but she was proud to see her community all over Bay Area media. She shared a map that has been put together by the Seaside Business Merchants Association and you can pick it up in the stores on Palmetto. She stated it was fantastic work and exactly what they need because it helps people know better what we have and to make sure the word is getting out.

2.b
Packet Pg. 56
Attachment: Attachment B: Minutes of 12-09-2024 Special and Regular Meeting (5822 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 5 December 09, 2024

STAFF COMMUNICATIONS
City Manager Woodhouse stated, in response to Councilmember Boles’ question regarding the Housing Element, we received an additional comment letter last week from HCD and we are actively reviewing that and are close to the release of the draft EIR.

PUBLIC HEARINGS - NONE.

CONSIDERATION - NONE.

SPECIAL ORDER OF BUSINESS - CITY COUNCIL REORGANIZATION A. Presentations to Outgoing Councilmember and Mayor
Mayor Vaterlaus read a proclamation in honor of outgoing Councilmember Bigstyck. She then stated that she is going to miss him when they are gone. She appreciated him all these four years and thanked him for calling her and asking her if she was okay.

Councilmember Bier stated that it has been an honor to serve with Councilmember Bigstyck and witness him do what he does best which is listen with the intent to hear. She stated that he is so good with the way he has networked and brought people in and connecting people to their issues and thus connecting resources. She thanked him for making some of the difficult conversations we had so fruitful such as the difficult discussions with NCCWD. She felt he gracefully moved through everything and she feels like they have a sibling type relationship and she appreciates that. She was so happy he has the opportunity to live, love, and create a family and there is nothing more important than that. She thanked him for showing her what it means to be a kind, determined Councilmember.

Councilmember Boles stated that she was new two years ago and he taught her the importance of relationship building and Councilmember Bier described that regionally. She stated he reached out to her and came to her house shortly after she was elected. She stated that there was tension in the beginning and they had the ability to have conversations and get to know each other on a human level and know what their goals and intentions are and what gifts they each bring to the Council. She stated that it is coming together and being able to respect each other even when we disagree. She was talking to incoming Councilmember Greg Wright and having the debate and deliberations are part of Council’s job and sorting through what is best for Pacifica. She stated that sometimes that is hard, but that is important and part of the work. The ability to maintain a positive relationship and respect each other beyond any disagreement about any policy is important to be able to continue this work and improve Pacifica. She stated he has shown her that and he did a great job as mayor and supporting her during her first year.

She appreciated that and hoped to be that example for the new councilmembers. She had dinner with Katrina Rill from Congresswoman Anna Eshoo’s office at the Pacific Beach Coalition holiday party, who told her that, when he got elected, he wanted to meet with her and she thought he wanted to meet with stated elected officials as she was their staff member; however, he was persistent and he was at an event together and suggested that they go for a walk afterwards. Councilmember Boles stated Katrina Rill appreciated him taking the time to get to know her and getting a sense of who he was which is so important for the work we are doing for the City that is beyond the work Council does on the dais in trying to build those relationships and bring in funds. She stated, in the past year, when we start deliberations, he is ready to go with what he wanted to say and start Council’s conversations. She appreciated that as it is

2.b
Packet Pg. 57
Attachment: Attachment B: Minutes of 12-09-2024 Special and Regular Meeting (5822 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 6 December 09, 2024
important to get the work rolling. She added that he is a voice for the marginalized and hurting and listen to them which is important in this role. She stated that they will miss him, but she knows he will still be watching and participating because the care he has for the City is not going away. She congratulated him and his family.

Mayor pro Tem Beckmeyer thanked him for being her brother. She stated that family is interesting as they do not always get along and sometimes they play and laugh and have inside stories and jokes. She has that relationship with him and thanks him for his four years of service and he got an amazing amount of work done and that proclamation summarizes it but does not capture everything he has done. She stated that he was here for years before that with years of studying and learning how Council works. She stated he was ready to sit in the chair and serve as he was watching and knew from watching different people what worked and what he wanted to emulate. He brought all that knowledge with him when he came in and even before that he had that knowledge. She was already serving on Council and there were many evenings where she would be intercepted at the door as they were leaving and she was given feedback and it was the building of the foundation of their working relationship. She agrees on the notion that it is not easy when those hard conversations need to happen but they persevere.

She stated that working with him on coastal issues has been a dream and so great to have his partnership. She will miss him.

Mayor Vaterlaus stated she and Councilmember Bigstyck were talking about their relationship previously and how much they cared about each other and how the teasing or more is because they do care about each other. She watched him sitting in the audience for many years, and being there from the minute the meeting started until the minute it ended and he was the only one left in the room so many times. She always appreciated him and wanted him on Planning Commission because that was his start to come to Council and it was important. She thanked him for everything.

Mayor Vaterlaus invited government officials to come up with their presentations.

Ray Mueller, San Mateo County Supervisor, stated that they say goodbye to two COVID-19 Councilmembers. Regarding Councilmember Bigstyck, he came into office in the middle of COVID-19 at a difficult time, but he signed up for this community and helped them during that time. He wanted to serve at that time which speaks to the character of who he is. County Supervisor Ray Mueller works with a lot of councilmembers throughout the County and sees that he did amazing at both the regional and city levels. He always did his homework and elevated the conversation and made sure that the decisions made were good for the region as well as Pacifica which speaks to his sincerity in every decision. Some people would say he is leaving early, but the sincerity and presence to know what is important to him and his family is also very uncommon in Councilmembers and speaks so much to who he is. They will miss him at all government levels. He then stated that Mayor Vaterlaus was so amazing, going back to the school board. He stated that it was unbelievable what she went through physically this year and she kept serving, while completely selfless, even working on things like the Local Coastal Plan and everyone respected each other as they went through it. He stated she is a powerlifter, and what she did this year puts all of that to shame. They will miss her so much. He thanked both of them on behalf of the County.

Councilmember Bigstyck stated he wanted to take the opportunity to express that the brotherhood he has felt with County Supervisor Mueller has been one of the most unexpected elements of his journey as a Councilmember. He stated his respect of County Supervisor Mueller’s integrity that encompasses the entirety of his being is a rare element and does not

2.b
Packet Pg. 58
Attachment: Attachment B: Minutes of 12-09-2024 Special and Regular Meeting (5822 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 7 December 09, 2024
bend or waiver and is what enables him to shoulder the burdens along his path.

Mayor Vaterlaus agreed and added that she feels she has known him forever. She appreciated what he has done.

Anthony Yoshida from State Senator Josh Becker’s office stated he will be presenting a resolution to Councilmember Bigstyck on behalf of Senator Becker and Assemblymember Berman and is joined by Elise Lester from Assemblyman Berman’s Office to present the resolution on behalf of the entire California State Legislature. He stated that Councilmember Bigstyck played an important part in making them such a welcoming Council.

Mayor Vaterlaus stated that Council will present the gifts to Councilmember Bigstyck. The first is a photo of Linda Mar Beach from local photographer Daniele Derenzi. The second gift was shirts, bags, and other items from Cotton Crustacean. There was also a picture of him on top of Sweeney Ridge.

Mayor Vaterlaus stated that outgoing Councilmembers will do their speeches later.

Mayor pro Tem Beckmeyer referred to public comments and asked if it is for everyone all at once.

Mayor Vaterlaus stated it is and she stated that we will do it later.

Mayor pro Tem Beckmeyer then began the presentation to the outgoing mayor and read a proclamation for Mayor Vaterlaus. She then referred to when they first met working with the Library Foundation in 2011 and she got to know her and their relationship has been solid since then. She shared that, in the last year, there has been continuous growth, and it was inspiring to work with her and she will miss serving with her.

Councilmember Boles stated she moved here in 2019 and it was interesting learning about the community and realized that the City is not that divided on the political spectrum. She got involved in the environmental issues; coming into Council, she did not know what to expect and Mayor Vaterlaus has been the biggest surprise to her on Council. She stated that she and Mayor Vaterlaus rode back and forth together and their meetings would go late and they would sit in the driveway at least another hour and got to be friends in that time. She stated that her relationship and ability to do the work needs to be based on understanding and respect.

Councilmember Boles was amazed to hear all the things Mayor Vaterlaus has done in her career and what she has done as Mayor and what it might mean for herself later as they still have a lot of work to do and they are looking out for each other. She knows Mayor Vaterlaus will not stop being involved and caring about the City but she hoped she takes time for herself.

Councilmember Bier stated almost 20 years ago her nephew died in a car accident and she met Mayor Vaterlaus three months after that in the Partnership for Safe and Healthy Pacifica. It was always so much fun for her to be around, and she was a strong presence. She thought about important moments between them, and she thought one was during Measure C where they had different views on what could and could not work in Pacifica; she listened to Mayor Vaterlaus who told her what we believe in what was true to us and that was enough and what we are supposed to be doing in the community. She stated Mayor Vaterlaus was strong and loving and, in the past year, they found out that they are kindred spirits. She was honored to serve with her, and they are lucky because they got to know her. She knows Mayor Vaterlaus loves her kids and how proud she is of her children. She will miss serving with her and thanked her

2.b
Packet Pg. 59
Attachment: Attachment B: Minutes of 12-09-2024 Special and Regular Meeting (5822 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 8 December 09, 2024
for teaching her that it is okay to bring what she has to the table.

Councilmember Bigstyck stated the Mayor’s service has been spectacular whether people know it or not. He thought, if she could be present for every event in representing our community, she would do so. He was happy that she will be given an opportunity to reconnect with herself, and he is grateful that she gets time to heal and discover parts of herself of which she may have been unaware. He does not think anyone realizes how loved she is countywide and her nature is she would wish to serve on every board if she could and have served with many and is deeply loved regionally which has been an asset to Pacifica. He shared that he prefers to get to know somebody by walking with them for several miles and he did that with her and then understood the complexity of her character rather than what is projected to the public.

Elise Lester from Assemblymember Marc Berman’s office stated she is representing Assemblymember Berman to recognize Mayor Vaterlaus for her remarkable years of service to Pacifica. She stated that public service is a unique calling and requires hard vision and unwavering commitment to the community she represents and often comes with sacrifices, long nights, and tough decisions but also a path where leaders create tangible lasting changes and what she has done for Pacifica. She stated her dedication has left an invaluable mark on the community as she engaged deeply with the residents in a way that makes Pacifica special, which is known for natural beauty as well as local government where everyone can feel heard.

Her leadership has embodied that spirit and she has ensured that the City’s policies and projects reflect the heart of the people and it is her honor to present the resolution on behalf of the California State Legislature along with her colleague, Anthony Yoshida, and it is not just an acknowledgement of her service but symbolized the respect and gratitude from her colleagues and constituents she served. She also recognized that the Council are all connectors and active in platforming the issues of importance to Pacifica and she thinks it represents a large part of the soul of the district as well as for Senate District 13. She thanked them all for their dedication and they wished Mayor Vaterlaus the very best in the next chapter of her life.

Mayor pro Tem Beckmeyer presented Mayor Vaterlaus a mounted gavel from the City. The second gift was a photo of the pier by local photographer Daniele Derenzi.

Councilmember Bier presented her with a collage they created of all the Councilmembers as well as a shirt from Cotton Crustacean.

Councilmember Boles presented her with a gift certificate from the Art Space on Palmetto and hopes that Mayor Vaterlaus will find a class she wants to take and invite Councilmembers to take it with her.

B. Outgoing Councilmember's Remarks
Councilmember Bigstyck was grateful to lend his voice to the path of Pacifica, grateful for a path in love, and grateful to transition between forming community and the place where he resides into a more proper home. His interest in joining Council had more to do with continuing the heartfelt work put into motions by past Councils to the point of fruition. He stated that, over the four years on Council, it has been his honor to see accomplishments of an updated General Plan, Sharp Park Specific Plan, a submitted version of the Local Coastal Land Use Plan fully supported by the Coastal Commission staff, approval of the Oddstad Workforce Housing, creation of a modern Tree Ordinance, installation of the Sanchez Library Outpost, successful negotiation of memoranda of understanding, an updated and safe Civic Center, and the passing of two tax measures. He has supported our Vision 2025 planning to hopefully deepen our

2.b
Packet Pg. 60
Attachment: Attachment B: Minutes of 12-09-2024 Special and Regular Meeting (5822 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 9 December 09, 2024
economic development journey and the Beach Boulevard Resiliency Infrastructure Project to protect the most vulnerable parts of our community to the point of seeking the Army Corps of Engineers assistance in a living shoreline to expand the life span of our community and City.

He has also participated in the City bolstering storm drainage infrastructure, progress with street improvements, working with County Supervisor Mueller for funding of Ohlone Trail signage, and creating relationships with government officials from City, State and Federal levels to have civility and compromise as the best interest for us to accomplish many projects. He loved all Councilmembers, as well as staff previously working for Pacifica and staff who currently are, and acknowledged what they did and continue to do in all our departments for the City’s future.

C. Outgoing Mayor's Remarks
Mayor Vaterlaus felt being Mayor was special to her, but it was more about the community than her. She cares about the community and thanked everyone for everything they do. She thanked each and every Councilmember specifically for caring and respecting each other even when not always in agreement, as well as thanking each staff specifically for their contribution to helping all of us and the City. She shared her feelings about her time on Council and looked forward to the future Council doing all the hard work. She thanked everyone for being present.

She then stated the outgoing councilmembers will leave the dais and invited the new Councilmembers to come forward.

D. Public Comment - City Council Reorganization
Suzanne Moore, Pacifica, stated that she had the privilege of supporting Mayra Espinosa and Mark Hubbell and shared her positive thoughts on Mayra Espinosa’s future as a councilmember.

Caitlin Quinn, Pacifica, thanked Mayor Vaterlaus and Councilmember Bigstyck for their service on Council and shared her thoughts on getting to know both of them and appreciating their work.

Chris Redfield, Pacifica, thanked Mayor Vaterlaus for her many years of service in numerous groups in Pacifica and mentioned her strength for the past year through her problems where she continued to be involved. He also thanked Councilmember Bigstyck for his success in cultivating relationships that were important for Pacifica with impressive contributions to the City, and he understands that family takes precedence over commitment to Council.

E. Oath of Office to Newly Elected Councilmembers
City Clerk Coffey invited Councilmember-Elect Mayra Espinosa up and District 1 Resident Betty Duran who administered the oath of office to Mayra Espinosa.

City Clerk Coffey presented Councilmember Espinosa with the certification of election presented to her from the County’s election office.

Councilmember Espinosa then took her seat on the dais.

City Clerk Coffey invited Councilmember-Elect Greg Wright and former Councilmember Tygarjas Bigstyck who administered the oath of office to Greg Wright.

City Clerk Coffey presented Councilmember Wright with the certificate of election presented to

2.b
Packet Pg. 61
Attachment: Attachment B: Minutes of 12-09-2024 Special and Regular Meeting (5822 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 10 December 09, 2024
him from the County’s election office.

Councilmember Wright then took his seat on the dais.

F. Comments from Elected Councilmembers
Councilmember Espinosa thanked God for guiding her on this path as a public servant, stating she is honored and humbled, and thanked everyone who voted for her and worked on her campaign. She also thanked her family for being her biggest cheerleaders and her friends for supporting her in this journey. She stated that she is a team player and loves learning new things, helping people achieve results, and improving community engagement. She stated she will serve everyone to the best of her ability. She thanked Mark Hubbell for running as well as volunteers for her campaign.

Councilmember Wright thanked former Councilmember Bigstyck for all his support and guidance in this process. He also thanked former Mayor Vaterlaus who is the person he has known the longest in this community and gave him the inspiration to do this. He stated that the remaining Councilmembers have set a great example and he hopes he can live up to that expectation and the trust of Pacificans. He thanked Mark Hubbell for joining him in running a positive campaign and he would like to continue a relationship and build their friendship. He also looks forward to working unified with staff and councilmembers, as well as gaining from their wisdom, insight, and experience to help taking care of Pacificans after the trust they placed in him to move Pacifica forward into the future.

G. Selection of New Mayor
Councilmember Bier moved to appoint Sue Beckmeyer as Mayor; seconded by Councilmember Boles.

City Clerk Coffey took a vote by verbal roll call.

RESULT: ADOPTED [UNANIMOUS]
MOVER: Mary Bier, Councilmember
SECONDER: Christine Boles, Councilmember
AYES: Beckmeyer, Bier, Boles, Espinosa, Wright
H. Selection of New Mayor pro Tem
Mayor Beckmeyer moved to nominate Mary Bier as Mayor pro Tem; seconded by Councilmember Wright.

Councilmember Boles noted for the new councilmembers that, if they want to discuss something, they can do that before the vote.

Mayor Beckmeyer asked if Councilmember Espinosa has comments she wants to make about the motion before the vote.

Councilmember Espinosa asked if Council has to make that decision now.

Mayor Beckmeyer stated that, when there is a motion and a second, Council can vote.

2.b
Packet Pg. 62
Attachment: Attachment B: Minutes of 12-09-2024 Special and Regular Meeting (5822 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 11 December 09, 2024
Councilmember Espinosa asked if she would be able to move to nominate Councilmember Boles as Mayor pro Tem.

City Attorney Kenyon stated that, at this point, there has been a motion and a second and that motion has to be voted upon, but if she would like to make any comment about that particular motion, she may do that at this time. If her comment is that she would prefer to have a different Mayor pro Tem, she can make those comments now and, after that, a vote will be taken. Thus, now is the time to make whatever comments she would like to make about who she thinks should be appointed as Mayor pro Tem.

Councilmember Espinosa stated that she believes both of them are wonderful ladies, but she wanted to nominate Councilmember Boles.

City Attorney Kenyon stated that she cannot make the nomination now because Council has to vote on this motion and see the result of this vote. She stated that she can vote no on the motion if she would prefer to do that.

Mayor Beckmeyer asked if there were any more comments.

Councilmember Boles stated that she is not opposed to Councilmember Bier taking this role as she has done a wonderful job as mayor previously. She stated that Council talked about this last time about not having a good protocol, and she does not know if that bears discussing now.

In previous years, before we went to district elections, it was based on the total number of votes and the conversation Council had at the last reorganization is that no longer really applies because the different districts vote differently and there are different numbers of people per district and Councilmember Bier ran unopposed. She is not opposed to Councilmember Bier taking that position. She knows that rotating over four years with the five of them means that she will not have an opportunity to serve as Mayor in her term. However, if that is something Councilmember Bier desires to do again, she is not opposed to allowing the opportunity and she does not want that to be between them, adding it is very difficult.

Councilmember Bier stated that it is difficult and it has been on her mind all day. For her, it is an honor and a privilege to serve her community and she feels like she has learned so much and she has an opportunity to serve again. She needed to let Councilmember Boles know how much she respects her. She stated having the honor to serve again is something she wants to do and she thanks them for the opportunity.

Mayor Beckmeyer thought that we do not have a clear protocol and this is the process we have, and, as she sees it, Councilmember Boles will be ready in the future. She looks forward to that opportunity for her and she suspects strongly she will be seated on this dais because they share the feeling there is still so much to be done for the community. That is why she made the motion.

Councilmember Wright stated that his second was based primarily on seniority and experience, and it has been his experience that people with the most experience are usually in the best position to serve and has seen the widest variety of different challenges and had the most opportunity. He was not aware, when he made his second that Councilmember Boles would not have an opportunity this time around, and it is his hope that she runs again and then would be the logical successor following, based on the same guiding principle. He stated that part of the way he operates is based on a set of principles and those hold true regardless of the

2.b
Packet Pg. 63
Attachment: Attachment B: Minutes of 12-09-2024 Special and Regular Meeting (5822 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 12 December 09, 2024
personalities in place.

Councilmember Espinosa believed that all of them should have the opportunity to be Mayor.

She stated that, if Councilmember Bier wants to be a Mayor, she has no problem either. She stated that everyone wants to be a good team player and get along, even if they do not agree on everything.

Councilmember Bier stated that it is an honor and privilege to serve. She cares so much about Councilmember Boles and knows how qualified she is, but she wants to accept the honor.

Mayor Beckmeyer stated, if no more discussion, she asked City Clerk Coffey to call the vote.

City Clerk Coffey took a vote by verbal roll call.

RESULT: ADOPTED [UNANIMOUS]
MOVER: Sue Beckmeyer, Mayor
SECONDER: Greg Wright, Councilmember
AYES: Beckmeyer, Bier, Boles, Espinosa, Wright
I. Incoming Mayor's Remarks
Mayor Beckmeyer thanked everyone for being here at this meeting. She stated that this is Pacifica and we are different. She stated that we have many leaders in our community and not everyone chooses to serve the community and contribute those leadership skills and leadership strength in gifts in the form of elected office. She believes that, when you make the decision to run for office, you are called. She stated that she was called, as she did not plan to run for office. She learned about how city government works and what else needs to happen in Pacifica. She learned so much with people telling you what things mean and how to do it and giving advice, trainings, seminars, etc. and she was honored that former Councilmember Mike O’Neill was her mentor, as he served for more than 24 years in elected office. She stated that it helped her to step into the role of Councilmember by having that support from the community and she has drawn on that since on Council when it has been hard to show up and do her work.

She mentioned her theme song when going back and forth with councilmembers was Bonnie Raitt’s “I Will Not Be Broken”. She mentioned that the pressure will never let up, as Council has to make decisions for the community for the future, and she has learned how to do that job.

She stated that Councilmembers Bier and Boles know how to do that and they will all work together in their job to lead Pacifica.

ADJOURN
Mayor Beckmeyer then adjourned the meeting at 8:45 p.m., in honor and memory of Helen Schembri. Transcribed by Barbara Medina, Public Meeting Stenographer.

Respectfully Submitted,
Sarah Coffey, City Clerk
__________________________
Sue Beckmeyer, Mayor

2.b
Packet Pg. 64
Attachment: Attachment B: Minutes of 12-09-2024 Special and Regular Meeting (5822 : Approval of Minutes)

CITY OF PACIFICA

COUNCIL AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT
1/13/2025
1 SUBJECT:

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

RECOMMENDED ACTION:

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

STAFF CONTACT:

Roland Yip, Deputy Director of Public Works/City Engineer 650-738-3767
[email protected]
Sarah Coffey, City Clerk
650-738-7307
[email protected]
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION:

On January 22, 2016, the Director of Emergency Services proclaimed the existence of a local emergency along the Pacifica coastline from Westline Drive to the end of Beach Boulevard due to El Nino storm activity. Extreme wave heights for extended periods of time caused top-of-bluff retreat at several locations along the Pacifica coast and damage to City infrastructure. Since this date, the Director of Emergency Services has proclaimed the existence of other local emergencies along this same stretch of coastline. These emergencies are described below:
• Failure of the sea wall and promenade on Beach Blvd. (in the vicinity of Santa Maria Avenue), which have been repaired, from the January 22, 2016 storm. • The 300 & 400 block of Esplanade experience episodic bluff erosion. In recent years (2016-2018), the bluff erosion has progressed to a point where the erosion is now threatening public infrastructure and utilities.
• Undermining of an eight-foot diameter storm drain outfall and concrete headwall for the discharge of Milagra Creek into the Pacific Ocean in the vicinity of 700 Palmetto Avenue from the January 22, 2016, storm. The project was completed on April 24, 2023. • A failure of the seawall and promenade on Beach Blvd. in the vicinity of Santa Rosa Avenue and the Pier was discovered on December 16, 2020. Ocean waves, king tides, and high swells undermined a portion of the sea wall and created a large void (25’x25”) between the pier abutment seawall connection, affecting the sidewalk and promenade.

City staff and contractors stabilized and repaired the large void on January 22, 2021.

The sidewalk and promenade restoration were completed on February 22, 2021.

Monitoring of the repaired area is on-going.
3 Packet Pg. 65
Pacifica City Council 2
January 13, 2025
• On December 29, 2020, another failure of the seawall occurred approximately 150-200 feet north of the intersection of Beach Blvd. and Santa Rosa Avenue. A void, approximately 10’ deep by 15’ long, was found behind the seawall and was repaired with geotextiles and concrete slurry on January 5, 2021. Full restoration of this section was complete in February 2021. Monitoring of the repaired area is on-going. • On January 14, 2021, a combination of high tides and large waves damaged a forty-foot section of the Pacifica Municipal Pier’s west facing deck and concrete railing. Following this event, the Pier was closed due to safety concerns. City staff requested a structural engineering assessment of the above deck pier elements and a proposed repair and associated cost from a local engineering consultant. This information was provided to the City at the end of March 2021. The pier was reopened on April 2, 2021, but the damaged portion was fenced off for safety reasons. The City is currently moving forward with a repair project and is designing the repair. Construction will be funded by grant money provided through a Senate Bill 129. The City Council approved a resolution on December 13, 2021, to approve the application of the state grant funds for the repair of the pier and the application has been sent to the State Department of Parks and Recreation for processing. On May 13, 2022, the City received a Coastal Development Permit waiver from the California Coastal Commission to perform this work. A bid opening for the repair was held on June 9, 2022, and the City received one bid, which was $2 million above the project budget. Council rejected the bid and authorized the project to be rebid. The rebid for replacing the guardrails in need of immediate repair came in over $1.4 million and all of the guardrails at $4 million. As the project was beyond what had been funded for the project, the City pivoted to do further inspections on the pier before a sizable investment is made in fixing the guardrails, since it was prudent for the City to understand the full needs of the pier. The 2023 Pier Condition Assessment Report has been finalized and is able to be viewed at www.cityofpacifica.org/pier. In summary, the 2023 report notes that the end of the main pier and L-section of the pier is in serious condition and should be fixed within the next two years. The remaining area of the main pier is considered in poor condition and should be repaired within four years. This report does not include the new damage sustained during the Dec. 28, 2023, high tide/big wave event. The structural engineers determined there was additional damage to the piles, handrails, and deck. The structural engineers recommended limiting public access on the pier to approximately half of the main pier deck until a complete assessment be made after the winter storms. • In November of 2023, a failure behind the seawall was discovered at the intersection of Beach Blvd. and Salada Ave. A void approximately 40’ long and 12’-15’ deep (2’-7’ in width) was found behind the seawall and was repaired with concrete and cement slurry.

The final sidewalk replacement was completed at the end of December 2023. • On Friday, December 29, 2023, another failure behind the seawall was discovered at Beach Blvd. and San Jose Ave. and was temporarily plugged. The final repair was completed on January 3, 2024, with the final sidewalk section and wall completed a week later. The total repair area was approximately 300 sf. This also caused damage to the Milagra storm drain outfall and left substantial sand deposits on the Beach Boulevard Prominade and on the southern Beach Boulevard rock revetment. • In March of 2024, City staff received an Emergency Coastal Development Permit (ECDP) from the California Coastal Commission (CCC) for removal of the substantial sand deposits left on Beach Boulevard Promenade and southern rock revetment as well 3 Packet Pg. 66
Pacifica City Council 3
January 13, 2025
as for the repair of the damage to the Milagra outfall. Repair to the outfall and removal of the sand on the Beach Boulevard Promenade was completed in late March/April 2024.

Removal of the sand from the southern Beach Boulevard Rock Revetment is expected to be completed by mid-May 2024, with work starting on May 9, 2024. • In May 2024, a sink hole (approx. 5’ w x 25’ l) was discovered behind the seawall on Beach Blvd. to the north of Santa Maria. The hole was repaired by an emergency contractor.
• In November 2024 a sink hole (approx. 8’ w x 30’ l) was discovered behind the seawall on Beach Blvd. between Carmel Ave and Santa Maria Ave. Another sink hole (approx. 9' w x 20' l) was discovered next to this sink hole while doing repairs. Both sink holes were repaired by an emergency contractor.

The City Council first ratified this proclamation (Attachment 1) at its regular meeting of January 25, 2016. Since that date, additional damage had occurred along Beach Boulevard and Esplanade Avenue as noted above.

Pursuant to Government Code section 8630(c), the City Council must review the need for continuing the local emergency at least every 60 days until the City Council terminates the local emergency. Conditions of local emergency still exist since the City Council first acted to declare a local emergency on January 25, 2016, and since that time staff has brought the continuance of Proclamation confirming the existence of local emergency exists within the Pacifica Coastline from Westline Drive to the end of Beach Boulevard every 30 days with November 12, 2024, being the most recent.

The City is using a combination of city staff, contractors, and consultants to manage the discussed emergency work. Staff will bring recommendations to the Council to end the emergency designation for projects on the list once conditions stabilize and the projects are no longer in need of the emergency designation.

The City Manager recommends that the City Council make a determination that conditions of local emergency continue to exist within the Pacifica Coastline from Westline Drive to the end of Beach Boulevard.

FISCAL IMPACT:

None
ORIGINATED BY:

Public Works
ATTACHMENT LIST:

Attachment 1: Proclamation of Local Emergency Regarding Pacifica Coastline from Westline Drive to End of Beach Blvd. (PDF)
3 Packet Pg. 67
"ATTACHMENT 1"

3.a
Packet Pg. 68
Attachment: Attachment 1: Proclamation of Local Emergency Regarding Pacifica Coastline from Westline Drive to End of Beach Blvd. (5826 :
"ATTACHMENT 1"

3.a
Packet Pg. 69
Attachment: Attachment 1: Proclamation of Local Emergency Regarding Pacifica Coastline from Westline Drive to End of Beach Blvd. (5826 :

CITY OF PACIFICA

COUNCIL AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT
1/13/2025
1 SUBJECT:

Adopt a Resolution Adopting a New Administrative Policy No. 84, "Guidelines for Issuing Proclamations, Commendations and Ceremonial Documents" to Establish Criteria and Procedures for Official City Council Recognition in the form of Proclamations and Ceremonial Documents
RECOMMENDED ACTION:

Adopt a Resolution titled, “A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Pacifica Adopting Administrative Policy No. 84 ‘Guidelines for Issuing Proclamations, Commendations and Ceremonial Documents’”.

STAFF CONTACT:

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

The City Council of the City of Pacifica issues Proclamations and Ceremonial Documents such as letters or certificates of recognition, commendation or congratulations on occasion. There are certain events or occasions that are recognized regularly by Proclamation issued at City Council meetings that are brought forth by City staff for recognition. Examples of such Proclamations include Wildfire Preparedness Month, Parks Make Life Better Month, Fire Prevention Week / Month, Arbor Day, City employee retirement as per Administrative Policy No. 81, public service of outgoing City Councilmembers, and public service of outgoing City Committee / Commission members who have served at least two full terms. The City also receives requests from individuals or outside organizations for recognitions by City Council in the form of Proclamations or other ceremonial documents such as letters or certificates of recognition, commendation or congratulations. The City has received an increasing number of requests for these types of recognitions and considers requests upon receipt on a case by case basis, subject to the Mayor’s and City Manager’s discretion. Proclamations and/or Ceremonial Documents may be presented at a City Council meeting, at an event or provided directly to a recipient and/or the requesting party.

In order to establish consistent guidelines and practice, to help manage the number of City Council agenda items, and help manage the staff work related to creating these recognition documents, the City Manager recommends establishing a new Administrative Policy No. 84, “Guidelines for Issuing Proclamations, Commendations and Ceremonial Documents” (Attachment A) for the purpose of establishing consistent criteria and procedures for official City Council recognition in the form of Proclamations and Ceremonial Documents, such as certificates or letters or recognition, commendation or congratulations. The proposed policy and guidelines set forth generally that the intent is to recognize noteworthy contributions and achievements of individuals and organizations, events of significant importance to the Pacifica community and occasions for public awareness, with an emphasis on achievements, contributions or activities which support the City Council’s adopted Strategic Plan goals and 4 Packet Pg. 70
Pacifica City Council 2
January 13, 2025
objectives. The proposed policy states that these forms of recognition are not intended for partisan, commercial or narrow individual purposes. It provides guidelines with categories for which recognitions in the form of Proclamations or Ceremonial Documents may be honored and categories for which these types of recognitions would not be considered. The proposed policy establishes criteria and information that must be submitted for requesting these types of recognition and a timeline for submission deadlines. Due to the staff time involved in reviewing the requests for Mayor and City Manager approval, City Clerk Office time for preparing the documents for Mayor’s approval and signature, scheduling of presentation / issuance of the documents and balancing of special presentations agendized for City Council meetings, the proposed policy recommends that all requests for Proclamations and Ceremonial Documents should be directed to the City Clerk’s Office at least 30 calendar days prior to the date requested for issuance and that requests received less than 14 days in advance will be denied.

The proposed policy provides that the City Manager or their designee, would review the request and determine whether the request is consistent with the proposed policy. If the request is consistent with the proposed policy the City Manager would grant the request. The City Manager, may, but is not required to, consult with the Mayor on any request the City Manager is reviewing.

The proposed Administrative Policy No. 84 (Attachment A) and Resolution for the adoption of this Policy are attached with this Staff Report for Council’s consideration.

ALTERNATIVE ACTION:

The City Council could decline to adopt the proposed Administrative Policy and provide different direction to staff. The City Council could also adopt the policy with any amendments discussed and approved by the Council.

RELATION TO CITY COUNCIL GOALS AND WORK PLAN:

Approval of the Administrative Policy is consistent with the following Council adopted Goals:
“Goal 1 - Enhance Organizational & Fiscal Stability”
“Goal 5 - Broaden Public Communication and Collaboration” Strategy “Ongoing, Non-Discretionary or Previously Initiated Projects and Services” under each of the above Goals.

FISCAL IMPACT:

There is no fiscal impact associated with this action.

ORIGINATED BY:

City Clerk
ATTACHMENT LIST:
4 Packet Pg. 71
Pacifica City Council 3
January 13, 2025
Attachment A: Proposed Administrative Policy No. 84 – Guidelines for Issuing Proclamations and Ceremonial Documents (PDF)
4 Packet Pg. 72
Pacifica City Council 4
January 13, 2025
RESOLUTION NO. ______

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PACIFICA ADOPTING ADMINISTRATIVE POLICY NO. 84 “GUIDELINES FOR ISSUING PROCLAMATIONS, COMMENDATIONS AND CEREMONIAL DOCUMENTS”
WHEREAS, the City desires to establish clear and consistent criteria and guidelines for official City Council recognition in the form of ceremonial acknowledgment such as Proclamations of the Mayor and certificates or Letters of Recognition, Commendation or Congratulations (collectively referred to as “Ceremonial Documents”); and WHEREAS, the City desires to recognize noteworthy contributions and achievements of individuals and organizations with an emphasis on achievements, contributions or activities which support the City Council’s adopted Strategic Plan goals and objectives; and
WHEREAS, the City wishes to bring public awareness to events, accomplishments and matters of significant importance to the Pacifica community that have local or regional appeal and/or promote the health and welfare of the community and citizens of the City; and WHEREAS, the City’s issuance of Proclamations and Ceremonial Documents are strictly honorary and not statements of policy and do not have any legal force or effect, nor do they constitute an endorsement by the City of Pacifica or the City Council; and WHEREAS, the City’s issuance of Proclamations and Ceremonial Documents are not intended to be a forum for free expression by the public; and WHEREAS, the City wishes to set forth clear guidelines for information and deadlines for submission of requests for Proclamations and Ceremonial Documents; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Pacifica hereby adopts Administrative Policy No. 84 “GUIDELINES FOR ISSUING PROCLAMATIONS, COMMENDATIONS AND CEREMONIAL DOCUMENTS” in Attachment A, which is attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. • • • • •
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Pacifica, California, held on the 13th day of January, 2025, by the following vote:

AYES, Councilmembers:

NOES, Councilmembers:

ABSENT, Councilmembers:

ABSTAIN, Councilmembers:
_________________________________
Sue Beckmeyer, Mayor
4 Packet Pg. 73
Pacifica City Council 5
January 13, 2025
ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
______________________________ _________________________________ Sarah Coffey, City Clerk Michelle Kenyon, City Attorney 4 Packet Pg. 74
Pacifica City Council 6
January 13, 2025

ATTACHMENT A
4 Packet Pg. 75
DRAFT
1 Administrative Policy No. 84

CITY OF PACIFICA

ADMINISTRATIVE POLICY
No.
84 GUIDELINES FOR ISSUING PROCLAMATIONS,

COMMENDATIONS AND CEREMONIAL DOCUMENTS
DATE ISSUED:
mm/dd/yyyy
PURPOSE:

The purpose of this policy is to establish consistent criteria and procedures for official City Council recognition in the form of ceremonial acknowledgment such as Proclamations of the Mayor (“Proclamations”) and Certificates or Letters of Recognition, Commendation or Congratulations (collectively “Ceremonial Documents”).

POLICY:

It is the policy of the City to recognize noteworthy contributions and achievements of individuals and organizations through Proclamations and Ceremonial Documents in accordance with the criteria contained in this policy, and at the discretion of the Mayor and City Manager. The Proclamations and Ceremonial Documents are not intended for partisan, commercial or narrow individual purposes, as those purposes are inconsistent with the overall policies of the City.

Proclamations are also reserved for public awareness, accomplishments and/or events of significant importance to the Pacifica community. The request for a Proclamation or Ceremonial Document should have local or regional appeal and/or promote activities taking place in the City of Pacifica, with an emphasis on achievements, contributions or activities which support the City Council’s goals and objectives. Only one request for Proclamation or Ceremonial Document will be granted per event. However, a single request may entail a certificate or Ceremonial Document for multiple honorees at an event, provided the request is made from a single requestor (e.g.

President of Pacifica Sports Club requesting certificates to multiple inductees into the annual Pacifica Sports Hall of Fame; a Scoutmaster requesting Ceremonial Documents to recognize multiple Scouts earning the Eagle Scout Award; or Pacific Beach Coalition requesting certificates to honor “Stars of the Sea” recipients for Earth Day event).

Proclamations and Ceremonial Documents are strictly honorary and not statements of policy and do not have any legal force or effect, nor do they constitute an endorsement by the City of Pacifica or the City Council. The City's Proclamations and Ceremonial Documents are not intended to serve as a forum for free expression by the public.

4.a
Packet Pg. 76
Attachment: Attachment A: Proposed Administrative Policy No. 84 – Guidelines for Issuing Proclamations and Ceremonial Documents DRAFT
2 Administrative Policy No. 84
Proclamations
Proclamations may be requested for the following:

A. Recognition of outgoing Mayor or Councilmember;
B. Recognition of outgoing City Committee / Commission members who have served at least two full terms;
C. Recognition of outgoing State Assemblymembers or Senators; D. Retiring City Employees per Administrative Policy No. 81; E. To call public attention to a Civic Celebration (e.g., City’s birthday or anniversary of incorporation, etc.) or Commemorative event (e.g., Civic Center ribbon cutting opening), which the City is participating in or a community service or program (e.g., Small Business Saturday), which is being carried out in the City for the benefit of residents;
F. Public awareness of significant local, county or state activities or issues, not of a political or partisan nature, which promote the health and welfare of the community and citizens of the City (e.g., Wildfire Preparedness Month, Parks Make Life Better Month, Fire Prevention Week / Month, Arbor Day, etc.);
G. Recognition of Pacifica residents on the occasion of their 100th birthday.

Proclamations will not be issued for:

A. For-profit businesses, as an advertisement or commercial promotion; B. Matters not within the subject matter jurisdiction of the City of Pacifica; C. Events with no direct relationship to the City of Pacifica; D. Events or Activities contrary to City policies or the City Council’s goals and objectives; E. Organizations that have no locally based chapters or specific connection to the City of Pacifica
F. Matters of ideological or religious beliefs; or
G. Matters of a political or partisan nature. For purposes of this Policy, “political” means relating to the ideas or strategies of a particular party or group in politics and would include promoting or taking a position relating to candidates or potential candidates for elected office, etc.

Ceremonial Documents
Ceremonial Documents may be issued for the following:

A. Acts of Heroism;
B. School or Sports Groups’ achievements (or individuals chosen for recognition by the school or Sports Group);
C. Eagle Scout / Gold Award Achievements; or
D. Outstanding achievements or contributions by local groups, businesses or non-profit organizations (or individuals chosen for recognition by the non-profit organization) within the City of Pacifica.

Ceremonial Documents will not be issued for:

A. For-profit businesses, as an advertisement or commercial promotion; B. Matters not within the subject matter jurisdiction of the City of Pacifica; C. Events with no direct relationship to the City of Pacifica; D. Events or Activities contrary to City policies or the City Council’s goals and objectives; E. Matters of ideological or religious beliefs;
F. Matters of a political or partisan nature. For purposes of this Policy, “political” means relating to the ideas or strategies of a particular party or group in politics and would include

4.a
Packet Pg. 77
Attachment: Attachment A: Proposed Administrative Policy No. 84 – Guidelines for Issuing Proclamations and Ceremonial Documents DRAFT
3 Administrative Policy No. 84
promoting or taking a position relating to candidates or potential candidates for elected office, etc.

Submitting Requests
All requests for Proclamations and Ceremonial Documents should be directed to the City Clerk’s Office for review at least 30 calendar days prior to the date requested for presentation/ issuance.

Exceptions to the deadline may be granted at the discretion of the City Manager in consultation with the Mayor, provided that sufficient time is permitted to prepare the item before the event; however, requests received less than 14 calendar days in advance will be denied. Individual Councilmembers and City Department Heads, or their designee, may request an appropriate Proclamation or Ceremonial Document through the City Clerk’s Office or City Manager. Requests for Proclamations or other Ceremonial Documents must be submitted to the City Clerk with the following information:
1) Contact person’s first and last name, daytime phone number, and email address; 2) Brief summary of the event or organization;
3) For Proclamations: Draft text of proclamation, including four to five “WHEREAS” clauses 4) Content must be typed in 12-point font and fit on a single 8 ½ x 11-inch page with wide

1.25-inch margins, providing 1 inch at the top for the City seal and 1 inch at the bottom for the Mayor’s signature;
5) Date by which the Proclamation/Ceremonial Document is needed; and 6) Location where the Proclamation/Ceremonial Document is requested to be presented (e.g., at a Council meeting or other special event and date preferred).

Each request shall provide sufficient background information to allow the City Clerk to determine whether the request is consistent with this Policy and to prepare an appropriate form of recognition. If insufficient information is provided, the City Clerk may request more information be provided.

Review of Requests
Submission of a request does not guarantee the issuance of a Proclamation or Ceremonial Document. Requests for Proclamations or Ceremonial Documents will be reviewed by the City Manager, or their designee. The City Manager, or their designee shall determine whether the request is consistent with this Policy. If a request is determined to be consistent with this Policy, then the Proclamation or Ceremonial Document will be prepared and issued as discussed below.

The City Manager, may, but is not required to, consult with the Mayor on any request the City Manager is reviewing.

If a request is not consistent with this Policy, the City Manager, or their designee, will notify the requestor of the determination but shall not be obligated to provide any explanation of the determination.

Issuance of Proclamations/Ceremonial Documents
If a Proclamation or Ceremonial Document is issued, the City retains the right to modify, edit or otherwise amend any proposed proclamation to meet its requirements, needs or policy determinations. The final wording or content of any Proclamation or Ceremonial Document is subject to the City Manager’s, or their designees’ discretion.

4.a
Packet Pg. 78
Attachment: Attachment A: Proposed Administrative Policy No. 84 – Guidelines for Issuing Proclamations and Ceremonial Documents DRAFT
4 Administrative Policy No. 84
If a Proclamation or Ceremonial Document is issued, it may be presented either at a City Council meeting, a special event or directly to the requestor. If a Proclamation or Ceremonial Document is to be issued at a City Council meeting, it will be placed on the Agenda under “SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS”. A maximum of two Proclamations or Ceremonial Documents may be issued at each City Council meeting, unless otherwise approved by the City Manager. The City Manager, or their designee, will determine the timing of the presentations for the Proclamation or Ceremonial Document at specific City Council meetings based on the length of the agenda and availability of the Mayor or their designee. Consistent with the Council Rules and Ethics Section 6(1), there should be an attempt to limit all commendations, proclamations and special presentations to no more than 20 minutes.

Requests for Proclamations or Ceremonial Documents to be presented at a special event are subject to the availability of the Mayor, or their designee, or other City official.

Proclamations and Ceremonial Documents shall be issued on behalf of the City Council and signed by the Mayor only, or the Mayor pro Tem in the Mayor’s absence or by the Mayor’s designee. The Mayor’s signature may be in the form of a wet signature, electronic signature or signature stamp / image with the Mayor’s approval.

Proclamations and Ceremonial Documents must be picked up at the City Council meeting or special event at which it is scheduled for presentation or picked up from the City Clerk’s Office only after the requestor has been notified that it is ready at City Hall. Proclamations and Ceremonial Documents will not be mailed. Proclamations and Ceremonial Documents must be picked up within 30 calendar days of the event date or otherwise the receipt by requestor will be considered forfeited.

Nothing in this Policy shall prohibit individual Councilmembers from preparing individual notes of appreciation or congratulation to others. In this case, however, no staff support shall be provided and no presentation shall be made at a Council meeting.

4.a
Packet Pg. 79
Attachment: Attachment A: Proposed Administrative Policy No. 84 – Guidelines for Issuing Proclamations and Ceremonial Documents

CITY OF PACIFICA

COUNCIL AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT
1/13/2025
1 SUBJECT:

Eighth Amendment to Consultant Services Agreement for On-Call Planning Services Between the City of Pacifica and Consulting Firm Good City Company RECOMMENDED ACTION:

Move to adopt the attached resolution to approve the Eighth Amendment to the Agreement for Consultant Services between the City of Pacifica and Good City Company, by increasing the contract amount by $32,500 with a total not to exceed amount of $672,500 and, to authorize the City Manager to execute the amendment.

STAFF CONTACT:

Elizabeth Brooks, Management Analyst II
650-738-7341
[email protected]
Samantha Updegrave, Community Development Director
650-738-7341
[email protected]
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION:

The Community Development Department manages numerous development project applications and is leading City Council priority initiatives, including the Local Coastal Land Use Plan and Housing Element updates. To handle these tasks effectively, the department engages consulting firms such as Good City Company for project reviews, plan updates, and California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) analyses. Costs are typically applicant-funded; however, City-initiated activities rely on other funding sources, such as the General Fund or grants.

In September 2022, the City Council approved funding to begin the 6th Cycle Housing Element update, and the Department engaged Good City Company to assist. However, feedback from the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) revealed a need for more extensive analysis and revisions to ensure compliance with state law. This unexpected scope increase led to multiple agreement amendments with Good City Company over the past two years to extend the agreement and increase the budget as needed. Additional coordination with HCD has continued throughout the process, requiring further refinements and adjustments.

To finalize the 6th Cycle Housing Element update for public review and resubmission to HCD in early 2025, staff estimates that an additional $32,500 in funding will be required. This funding will cover necessary refinements to address HCD’s feedback and achieve certification.

The City Manager recommends approval of the additional $32,500 needed to complete the Housing Element update, ensuring compliance with state law and advancing this critical City Council priority.

ALTERNATIVE ACTION:
5 Packet Pg. 80
Pacifica City Council 2
January 13, 2025
Deny, or authorize a different amount for the proposed amendment to the Agreement. Denying or authorization of a reduced amount will require Community Development Department staff to shift direct staff resources to the Housing Element update and away from obligations such as reviewing building permits and processing private development agreements, and other City Council priority initiatives.

RELATION TO CITY COUNCIL GOALS AND WORK PLAN:

Good City Company’s support of the Housing Element Update furthers Goal 3 of Counciladopted 2023-2030 Strategic Plan - Prioritize protection and development of affordable housing, Strategy A - Complete the Housing Element Update, and Strategy C - Prioritize Housing Element program implementation.

FISCAL IMPACT:

The additional $32,500 will be allocated from the FY 2024-25 adopted budget for the Community Development Department's contractual services, which includes funding for on-call planning services that can be reallocated to support the Housing Element update.

ORIGINATED BY:

Community Development Department
ATTACHMENT LIST:

Attachment A: Resolution to Execute Eighth Amendment to Agreement with Good City Company (DOCX)
Attachment B: Amendment 8 to Good City Company Agreement to Provide On-Call Planning Services (PDF)
Attachment C: Original Good City Company Agreement to Provide On-Call Planning Services (PDF)
5 Packet Pg. 81
RESOLUTION NO. _______

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PACIFICA

AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE AN EIGHTH AMENDMENT TO THE

CONSULTANT SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH GOOD CITY COMPANY FOR

PROFESSIONAL PLANNING AND RELATED SERVICES
WHEREAS, consistent with the City of Pacifica’s Purchasing Policy (Administrative Policy No. 76), the City of Pacifica entered into an agreement with Good City Company for consulting services under the City Manager’s purchasing authority in October 2020; and WHEREAS, the City Council authorized amendments to the City’s agreement with Good City Company for consulting services in November 2021, June 2022, September 2022, January 2023, August 2023, April 2024, and June 2024; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Pacifica has considered the City Manager’s recommendation to approve an eighth amendment to the City’s agreement with Good City Company for consultant services on January 13, 2025;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Pacifica to authorize the City Manager to amend the agreement with Good City Company an eighth time for the purpose of increasing the cost ceiling amount by $32,500 with a total contract amount not to exceed $672,500.
• • • • •
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Pacifica, California, held on the 13th day of January, 2025, by the following vote:

AYES, Councilmembers:

NOES, Councilmembers:

ABSENT, Councilmembers:

ABSTAIN, Councilmembers:
_________________________________
Sue Beckmeyer, Mayor
ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
______________________________ _________________________________ Sarah Coffey, City Clerk Michelle Kenyon, City Attorney

5.a
Packet Pg. 82
Attachment: Attachment A: Resolution to Execute Eighth Amendment to Agreement with Good City Company (5824 : Good City Company 4891-5659-1477 v1 1

EIGHTH AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT FOR CONSULTANT SERVICES
This Eighth Amendment to Agreement for Consultant Services (the "Eighth Amendment") is made and entered into this 20th day of December 2024, by and between THE CITY OF PACIFICA, a municipal corporation (hereinafter referred to as "CITY") and Good City Company, a California Corporation (hereinafter referred to as "CONSULTANT").

RECITALS
WHEREAS, on October 16, 2020, CITY and CONSULTANT entered into that certain agreement entitled “Agreement for Consultant Services” (“Agreement”) to provide on-call planning services and related services; and
WHEREAS, on February 1, 2022, the City Council authorized CITY and CONSULTANT to enter into a First Amendment to that Agreement to increase the Cost Ceiling and extend the Term under the Agreement; and
WHEREAS, on June 27, 2022, the City Council authorized CITY and CONSULTANT to enter into a Second Amendment to that Agreement to increase the Cost Ceiling and extend the Term under the Agreement; and
WHEREAS, on October 5, 2022, the City Council authorized CITY and CONSULTANT to enter into a Third Amendment to that Agreement to increase the Cost Ceiling and extend the Term under the Agreement; and
WHEREAS, on January 9, 2023, the City Council authorized CITY and CONSULTANT to enter into a Fourth Amendment to that Agreement to increase the Cost Ceiling of the Agreement; and
WHEREAS, on August 14, 2023, the City Council authorized CITY and CONSULTANT to enter into a Fifth Amendment to that Agreement to restate the Scope of Work and to increase the Cost Ceiling of the Agreement; and
WHEREAS, on April 8, 2024, the City Council authorized CITY and CONSULTANT to enter into a Sixth Amendment to that Agreement to increase the Cost; and WHEREAS, on June 10, 2024, the City Council authorized CITY and CONSULTANT to enter into a Seventh Amendment to that Agreement to extend the Term under the Agreement; and
WHEREAS CITY and CONSULTANT now desire to enter into this Eighth Amendment to increase the Cost Ceiling in section 2.1 (“Compensation”) of the Agreement.

5.b
Packet Pg. 83
Attachment: Attachment B: Amendment 8 to Good City Company Agreement to Provide On-Call Planning Services (5824 : Good City Company 4891-5659-1477 v1 2

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

1. Section 2.1 of the Agreement, "Compensation" is hereby amended to read as follows:

Compensation. Rates charged for Services shall be in accordance with Exhibit A, attached hereto and incorporated herein. It is agreed that the compensation for the Services shall not exceed $672,500 (“Cost Ceiling”).

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

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

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

CITY OF PACIFICA
By: Date:

Kevin Woodhouse, City Manager
Approved As To Form
By:

Michelle Marchetta Kenyon, City Attorney

CONSULTANT
By: Date
Aaron Aknin, AICP
Principal Planner and Co-Owner
Good City Company
1/2/25

5.b
Packet Pg. 84
Attachment: Attachment B: Amendment 8 to Good City Company Agreement to Provide On-Call Planning Services (5824 : Good City Company

BILLING
RATES
Good City prides itself on being a cost-effective solution for public sector agencies. Staff retains detailed timesheets and works efficiently to ensure the client is getting the best value for the services.

TITLE
2025 Hourly
Rate
Principal/Partner $270
» Planning Director $240
» Principal Planner/Planning Manager/Lead $205
» Economic Development Director $240
» Public Policy Manager $225
» Chief Building Official $180
» Senior Planner/Project Manager $176
» Senior Economic Development Planner $176
» Housing Services Consultant $176
» Associate Planner $150
»
»
Economic Development Associate
Assistant Planner
$150
$135
» Planning Technician $105
» Marketing Specialist/Graphic Designer $105
» Administrative Specialist $95
Billing rates subject to annual cost of living increase Subconsultant Contracts Direct Billing + 10% oversight fee.

EXHIBIT
A
4891-5659-1477 v1

5.b
Packet Pg. 85
Attachment: Attachment B: Amendment 8 to Good City Company Agreement to Provide On-Call Planning Services (5824 : Good City Company

5.c
Packet Pg. 86
Attachment: Attachment C: Original Good City Company Agreement to Provide On-Call Planning Services (5824 : Good City Company

5.c
Packet Pg. 87
Attachment: Attachment C: Original Good City Company Agreement to Provide On-Call Planning Services (5824 : Good City Company

5.c
Packet Pg. 88
Attachment: Attachment C: Original Good City Company Agreement to Provide On-Call Planning Services (5824 : Good City Company

5.c
Packet Pg. 89
Attachment: Attachment C: Original Good City Company Agreement to Provide On-Call Planning Services (5824 : Good City Company

5.c
Packet Pg. 90
Attachment: Attachment C: Original Good City Company Agreement to Provide On-Call Planning Services (5824 : Good City Company

5.c
Packet Pg. 91
Attachment: Attachment C: Original Good City Company Agreement to Provide On-Call Planning Services (5824 : Good City Company

5.c
Packet Pg. 92
Attachment: Attachment C: Original Good City Company Agreement to Provide On-Call Planning Services (5824 : Good City Company

5.c
Packet Pg. 93
Attachment: Attachment C: Original Good City Company Agreement to Provide On-Call Planning Services (5824 : Good City Company Scope of Work
Good City Company can provide the City of Pacifica with the following on-call planning services:
• Prepare initial project summaries and route to City departments for comment. • Analyze projects for compliance with the City's General Plan, zoning ordinance, Local Coastal Plan, Subdivision Map Act, Design Guidelines, specific plans, Municipal Regional Stormwater Permit (i.e.

C.3 requirements), and other policies.
• Review projects and provide comments within timelines specified by the Permit Streamlining Act and the City (shorter timelines may be required for certain projects). • Prepare Initial Studies and CEQA documents or ability and expertise to work with a CEQA consultant. • Write staff reports, resolutions, conditions of approval, ordinances, and deliver oral presentations. • Draft detailed findings that withstand project appeals. • Attend Planning Commission and/or City Council meetings. • Conduct site visits.
• Be available during regular business hours to answer questions by phone or email. • Meet at the Planning Department as needed to meet with staff and applicants (all meetings are conducted virtually during COVID-19 health protocols).
• Interact with Coastal Commission – North Central Coast District staff to coordinate project review. • Process development and redevelopment of environmentally sensitive sites, former industrial sites, and hotel projects.
• Process annexation requests.
• Review building permit applications for entitlement projects processed by consultant.

5.c
Packet Pg. 94
Attachment: Attachment C: Original Good City Company Agreement to Provide On-Call Planning Services (5824 : Good City Company Eighth Good City Company | Statement of Qualifications 29
Good City prides itself on being a cost-effective solution for public sector agencies. Staff retains detailed timesheets and works efficiently to ensure the client is getting the best value for the services. • Director/Principal $225/hour
• Principal Planner
• Senior Planner
• Associate Planner
• Assistant Planner
• Planning Technician $80/hour
• Administrative Assistant $60/hour
Subconsultant Contracts Direct Billing + 10% oversight fee * Rates subject to adjustment January 1st of each year (typically 3-5% increases) Exhibit B: Compensation (Billing rates)
$195/hour
$160/hour
$125/hour
$100/hour

5.c
Packet Pg. 95
Attachment: Attachment C: Original Good City Company Agreement to Provide On-Call Planning Services (5824 : Good City Company Eighth

SHOULD ANY OF THE ABOVE DESCRIBED POLICIES BE CANCELLED BEFORE

THE EXPIRATION DATE THEREOF, NOTICE WILL BE DELIVERED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE POLICY PROVISIONS.

INSURER(S) AFFORDING COVERAGE
INSURER F :

INSURER E :

INSURER D :

INSURER C :

INSURER B :

INSURER A : NAIC #
NAME: CONTACT
(A/C, No): FAX
E-MAIL ADDRESS:

PRODUCER
(A/C, No, Ext): PHONE

INSURED
COVERAGES CERTIFICATE NUMBER: REVISION NUMBER:

IMPORTANT: If the certificate holder is an ADDITIONAL INSURED, the policy(ies) must have ADDITIONAL INSURED provisions or be endorsed.

If SUBROGATION IS WAIVED, subject to the terms and conditions of the policy, certain policies may require an endorsement. A statement on this certificate does not confer rights to the certificate holder in lieu of such endorsement(s).

THIS CERTIFICATE IS ISSUED AS A MATTER OF INFORMATION ONLY AND CONFERS NO RIGHTS UPON THE CERTIFICATE HOLDER. THIS

CERTIFICATE DOES NOT AFFIRMATIVELY OR NEGATIVELY AMEND, EXTEND OR ALTER THE COVERAGE AFFORDED BY THE POLICIES BELOW. THIS CERTIFICATE OF INSURANCE DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A CONTRACT BETWEEN THE ISSUING INSURER(S), AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE OR PRODUCER, AND THE CERTIFICATE HOLDER.

OTHER:
(Per accident)
(Ea accident)
$
$
N / A

SUBR WVDADDL
INSD

THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THE POLICIES OF INSURANCE LISTED BELOW HAVE BEEN ISSUED TO THE INSURED NAMED ABOVE FOR THE POLICY PERIOD INDICATED. NOTWITHSTANDING ANY REQUIREMENT, TERM OR CONDITION OF ANY CONTRACT OR OTHER DOCUMENT WITH RESPECT TO WHICH THIS

CERTIFICATE MAY BE ISSUED OR MAY PERTAIN, THE INSURANCE AFFORDED BY THE POLICIES DESCRIBED HEREIN IS SUBJECT TO ALL THE TERMS, EXCLUSIONS AND CONDITIONS OF SUCH POLICIES. LIMITS SHOWN MAY HAVE BEEN REDUCED BY PAID CLAIMS. $
$
$
$ PROPERTY DAMAGE
BODILY INJURY (Per accident)
BODILY INJURY (Per person) COMBINED SINGLE LIMIT

AUTOS ONLY

AUTOS ONLY AUTOS NON-OWNED OWNED SCHEDULED

ANY AUTO

AUTOMOBILE LIABILITY

Y / N WORKERS COMPENSATION
AND EMPLOYERS' LIABILITY OFFICER/MEMBER EXCLUDED?
(Mandatory in NH) DESCRIPTION OF OPERATIONS below
If yes, describe under

ANY PROPRIETOR/PARTNER/EXECUTIVE
$
$
$ E.L. DISEASE - POLICY LIMIT E.L. DISEASE - EA EMPLOYEEE.L. EACH ACCIDENT EROTH- STATUTE PER
(MM/DD/YYYY) LIMITS POLICY EXP(MM/DD/YYYY) POLICY EFFLTR TYPE OF INSURANCE POLICY NUMBER INSR
DESCRIPTION OF OPERATIONS / LOCATIONS / VEHICLES (ACORD 101, Additional Remarks Schedule, may be attached if more space is required)

EXCESS LIAB
UMBRELLA LIAB EACH OCCURRENCE $ AGGREGATE $
$
OCCUR
CLAIMS-MADE DED RETENTION $
PRODUCTS - COMP/OP AGG $ GENERAL AGGREGATE $ PERSONAL & ADV INJURY $ MED EXP (Any one person) $
EACH OCCURRENCE $ DAMAGE TO RENTED
PREMISES (Ea occurrence) $ COMMERCIAL GENERAL LIABILITY CLAIMS-MADE OCCUR GEN'L AGGREGATE LIMIT APPLIES PER: POLICY PRO- JECT LOC

CERTIFICATE OF LIABILITY INSURANCE DATE (MM/DD/YYYY)

CANCELLATION

AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE
ACORD 25 (2016/03)
© 1988-2015 ACORD CORPORATION. All rights reserved.

CERTIFICATE HOLDER
The ACORD name and logo are registered marks of ACORD
HIRED

AUTOS ONLY
10/16/2020
James E. McGovern, Inc.
1625 El Camino Real
Belmont, CA 94002 650-593-8216 x103 650-594-9130
www.jemins.com Sentinel Insurance Company, Ltd. A+ XV 11000 Evanston Insurance Company A XV 35378
A 57 SBA RI0706 7/6/2020 7/6/2021 2,000,000.
1,000,000.
✓
10,000.
✓
2,000,000.
4,000,000.
4,000,000.

Deductible 500.

A 57 SBA RI0706 7/6/2020 7/6/2021 2,000,000.
✓ ✓
Deductible 500.

B Professional Liability MPL1401718-20 1/5/2020 1/5/2021 Aggregate Limit: $2,000,000.

Each Claim: $2,000,000.

Steve Suissa
MaryAnn Worman
[email protected]
✓
Good City Company
2165 Carmelita Drive
San Carlos CA 94070
58185572
*30 day written Notice of Cancellation, except for non-payment of premium which is 10 days.

City of Pacifica
1800 Francisco Boulevard
Pacifica CA 94044
RE: Verification of Insurance
58185572 | MARTI-L | 20/21 GL, PL | MaryAnn Worman | 10/16/2020 2:30:45 PM (PDT) | Page 1 of 1

5.c
Packet Pg. 96
Attachment: Attachment C: Original Good City Company Agreement to Provide On-Call Planning Services (5824 : Good City Company Eighth

CITY OF PACIFICA

COUNCIL AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT
1/13/2025
1 SUBJECT:

Resolution Accepting Grant Award from the Partnership for the Bay’s Future Policy Fund RECOMMENDED ACTION:

Move to adopt a resolution accepting a grant award from the Partnership for the Bay’s Future Policy Fund and authorize the City Manager to execute all necessary documents, including the Memorandum of Understanding.

STAFF CONTACT:

Elizabeth Brooks, Management Analyst II
650-738-7341
[email protected]
Samantha Updegrave, Community Development Director
650-738-7341
[email protected]
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION:

The Partnership for the Bay’s Future (PBF) is a regional initiative managed by the San Francisco Foundation, focused on advancing housing affordability and equity across the Bay Area. The Policy Fund supports innovative local policies addressing housing production, preservation, and tenant protections, emphasizing racial equity and economic inclusion.

The City of Pacifica has been awarded a two-year PBF Policy Fund grant to support initiatives outlined in the City’s adopted 2023-2031 Housing Element. The grant will fund the placement of a PBF Fellow within the Community Development Department for two years, provide financial support to key community partners, and include access to technical assistance.

The Fellow will play a central role in advancing equitable housing policies, focusing on zoning reforms, objective design standards, and community engagement strategies that uplift the voices of Pacifica’s most vulnerable residents. This work aligns with Pacifica’s commitment to addressing housing insecurity, reducing displacement, and increasing affordable housing options.

The City will collaborate with the Pacifica Resource Center (PRC) and the Housing Endowment and Regional Trust (HEART) of San Mateo County to implement the grant’s objectives. PRC will focus on community engagement, ensuring low-income residents and marginalized groups are involved in shaping housing policies. HEART will provide technical expertise to support policy analysis, development, and implementation. Together, these partners will assist the Fellow in creating and executing zoning reforms and related housing initiatives.

This grant-funded collaboration will allow the City to achieve significant progress in advancing housing equity without requiring additional City funds. The Fellow’s efforts will include public workshops, stakeholder engagement, and technical analyses to ensure the success of these 6 Packet Pg. 97
Pacifica City Council 2
January 13, 2025
initiatives. Adoption of the Resolution to Accept the PBF Policy Fund Grant Award (Attachment A) will authorize the City Manager to execute the PBF Policy Fund Memorandum of Understanding (Attachment B) and initiate grant-funded activities.

A more detailed description of Pacifica’s work to be carried out through the PBF Policy Fund program can be found in the PBF Policy Fund 2024 Grant Application (Attachment C).

ALTERNATIVE ACTION:

The City Council could choose not to accept the grant award, forfeiting the associated resources and support for local housing initiatives.

RELATION TO CITY COUNCIL GOALS AND WORK PLAN:

This grant supports the City Council’s vision to be an inclusive and sustainable community, addressing environmental, economic, and social priorities holistically. By advancing equitable housing policies and promoting affordability, this initiative directly aligns with Goal 3 to prioritize protection and development of affordable housing.

The grant-funded activities foster public engagement and transparency through the placement of a PBF Fellow and collaboration with community partners. These efforts align with the City’s mission to provide exceptional services, maintain a small-town feel, and steward community resources. This supports Goal 5 to broaden public communications and collaboration, ensuring that the voices of residents, particularly those most vulnerable to displacement, are included in shaping housing policies.

Additionally, this initiative enhances organizational capacity by leveraging external expertise and funding, reducing the burden on existing City resources while achieving critical objectives outlined in the Housing Element. This reflects Goal 1 to enhance organizational and fiscal stability, ensuring resources are aligned to meet community needs through innovative means.

FISCAL IMPACT:

The PBF Policy Fund grant will fully fund the Fellow’s placement, community partner activities, and technical assistance over the two-year grant period. No City funds are required.

ORIGINATED BY:

Community Development Department
ATTACHMENT LIST:

Attachment A: Resolution to Accept the PBF Policy Fund Grant Award (DOCX) Attachment B: PBF Policy Fund Memorandum of Understanding (placeholder only-pending PBF signature) (PDF)
Attachment C: Pacifica’s PBF Policy Fund 2024 Grant Application (PDF) 6 Packet Pg. 98
RESOLUTION NO. ________

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PACIFICA

ACCEPTING A GRANT AWARD FROM THE PARTNERSHIP FOR THE
BAY’S FUTURE POLICY FUND AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO

EXECUTE ALL NECESSARY DOCUMENTS
WHEREAS, the Partnership for the Bay’s Future (PBF) Policy Fund is a regional initiative aimed at advancing affordable housing production, preservation, and tenant protections, with a focus on racial equity and economic inclusion; and
WHEREAS, the City of Pacifica has been selected as a recipient of a two-year PBF Policy Fund grant to support the implementation of equitable housing initiatives outlined in the City’s adopted 2023-2031 Housing Element; and
WHEREAS, the grant will fund the placement of a full-time PBF Fellow within the Community Development Department for two years to facilitate zoning reforms, implement objective design standards, and develop community engagement strategies; and WHEREAS, the City will collaborate with the Pacifica Resource Center to conduct community engagement, and the Housing Endowment and Regional Trust of San Mateo County to provide technical assistance and policy expertise, ensuring effective implementation of the grant-funded initiatives; and
WHEREAS, the City’s participation in this program will advance key objectives related to increasing affordable housing, reducing displacement, and fostering equitable housing policies, benefiting low-income and underserved residents of Pacifica; and WHEREAS, acceptance of this grant aligns with the City Council’s goals of enhancing housing affordability and equity without requiring additional City funds.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Pacifica that:

1. The City of Pacifica hereby accepts the Partnership for the Bay’s Future Policy Fund grant award.

2. The City Manager, or their designee, is authorized to execute all necessary documents, including the Memorandum of Understanding with the San Francisco Foundation and Coro Northern California, and to take any and all actions necessary to implement the grantfunded activities. • • • • •
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Pacifica, California, held on the 13th day of January, 2025, by the following vote:

AYES, Councilmembers:

NOES, Councilmembers:

6.a
Packet Pg. 99
Attachment: Attachment A: Resolution to Accept the PBF Policy Fund Grant Award (5825 : Reso Accepting Grant Award from PBF Policy Fund) ABSENT, Councilmembers:

ABSTAIN, Councilmembers:
_________________________________
Sue Beckmeyer, Mayor
ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
______________________________ _________________________________ Sarah Coffey, City Clerk Michelle Kenyon, City Attorney

6.a
Packet Pg. 100 Attachment: Attachment A: Resolution to Accept the PBF Policy Fund Grant Award (5825 : Reso Accepting Grant Award from PBF Policy Fund) 4931-6932-0457 v1

PBF POLICY FUND MEMORANDUM OF

UNDERSTANDING
This Memorandum of Understanding (“MOU”), effective as of January 14, 2025, is entered by the City of Pacifica (“City”), San Francisco Foundation, a California nonprofit public benefit corporation (“SAN FRANCISCO FOUNDATION” or “SFF”), and Coro NORTHERN CALIFORNIA, a California nonprofit public benefit corporation (“Coro”). Collectively, City, SFF and Coro are referred to as the “Parties” and individually, as a “Party”.

RECITALS
A. The SAN FRANCISCO FOUNDATION together with a number of other nonprofit and/or public organizations and businesses, have launched the Partnership for the Bay’s Future (the “Partnership”) as a collaborative effort focused on advancing a more inclusive and equitable future for the region comprising of Alameda, Contra Costa, Marin, San Francisco, San Mateo, and Santa Clara Counties (the “Region”) by solving its interconnected challenges: housing, transportation, and economic opportunity.

B. To facilitate the Partnership’s housing goals, SAN FRANCISCO FOUNDATION has established a fund (the “Policy Fund”) to support policy initiatives to produce and preserve affordable housing and protect vulnerable tenants (collectively, “Production, Preservation and Protection Policies”) at the local level in the Region. The Policy Fund is guided by an advisory board, which includes investors from the philanthropic and corporate sectors, public sector and policy experts, and community leaders (the “Advisory Board”).

C. The goals of the Policy Fund are to: (1) increase racial and economic equity across the Region by stemming displacement of people of color from communities across the Region, (2) deepen the practice of partnership between towns, cities and counties in the Region and community groups, (3) support the rise of new government and community leaders that can support the Region’s housing and tenant protection efforts long-term, and (4) provide models for change that inspire other jurisdictions to follow suit.

D. The current funding opportunity offered by the Policy Fund is manifested in the form of a two-year program named the PBF Policy Funds for Housing Production, Preservation and Protection (respectively, the “Program” and the “PBF Policy Fund”). The Program, managed by SAN FRANCISCO FOUNDATION, is a competitive process that incentivizes towns, cities and counties in the Region (each a “Jurisdiction”) to pursue policy change to protect vulnerable tenants and produce and preserve existing affordable housing.

E. City submitted an application and proposal (collectively, the “Proposal”) to SAN FRANCISCO FOUNDATION for a PBF Policy Fund, based upon which, City has been awarded a PBF Policy Fund.

F. The PBF Policy Fund consists of four key components: (1) the placement of a Fellow with City during the two-year period commencing on January 22, 2025 (the “Commitment Period”), (2) a monetary grant from the Policy Fund to Coro to finance the salary of the Fellow, (3) a monetary grant from the Policy Fund to one community organization proposed by City and approved by SAN FRANCISCO FOUNDATION (the “Community Lead”), said grant is intended to be not less than one hundred ten thousand dollars ($110,000) per year for each of the two years in the Commitment Period, and (4) access to the Technical Assistance Pool. The term “Fellow” means an employee of Coro who will assist City develop and adopt meaningful Production, Preservation and Protection Policies as well as begin implementation of said policies. At all times during the Program, the Fellow will be an employee of Coro, and not an employee of either City or SAN FRANCISCO FOUNDATION. The term “Technical Assistance Pool” means a pool of [ADD NUMBER] of expert consultants to provide assistance in the following areas: (1) messaging and communications support, (2) data analysis, (3) polling support, and (4) policy strategy, as necessary to implement the goals of the Partnership

6.b
Packet Pg. 101 Attachment: Attachment B: PBF Policy Fund Memorandum of Understanding (placeholder only-pending 4931-6932-0457 v1
(“Technical Assistance”).

G. The Parties wish to set forth the terms and understanding among them with respect to the PBF Policy Fund.

NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants contained herein, and for good and valuable consideration, the sufficiency and receipt of which are hereby acknowledged, the Parties hereby agree as follows:

AGREEMENT
I. PURPOSE OF THE MOU
This MOU sets forth the terms and understanding among the Parties and is intended to reflect the Parties’ commitment to cooperate and work together to support the Fellow, and to advance the design, adoption and implementation of progressive Production, Preservation and Protection Policies with City staff, community partners and elected officials. This MOU spells out areas of collaboration and expands on ownership and accountability.

A. Principles: Notwithstanding Section V of this MOU, the Parties each commit to the principles that form the foundation of the Partnership, which are listed here and operationalized in Section II of this MOU.
a. Racial justice: The Parties will work toward the shared vision of a thriving Bay Area where race is never a barrier to opportunity. b. Community engagement: The Parties will prioritize actively engaging local community members and leaders in the execution of their shared goals, with special emphasis on engaging people of color and other underserved community members. c. Results orientation: The Parties are committed to their collective impact by realizing concrete gains toward shared goals.

II. AGREEMENT
A. Primary Areas of Collaboration, Roles and Operational Responsibilities: The Parties hereby agree to undertake good-faith efforts to create the enabling conditions necessary to realize the PBF Policy Fund award vision by engaging in specific areas of collaboration and performing the respective activities set forth in the following five category chart:
a. PBF Policy Fund Vision;
b. PBF Policy Fund Award: Fellows and Community Partnerships; c. PBF Policy Fund Award: Technical Assistance + Cohort Convenings; d. Communication (Internal + External); and
e. Evaluation.

6.b
Packet Pg. 102 Attachment: Attachment B: PBF Policy Fund Memorandum of Understanding (placeholder only-pending 4931-6932-0457 v1
Area of Collaboration City Coro SAN FRANCISCO FOUNDATION Structures for Accountability

1. PBF Policy Fund VISION
The Parties will honor
the Partnership’s
housing goals as set
forth in this MOU.

Use good faith efforts to activate and
engage in the implementation of
progressive Production, Preservation and
Protection Policies, in collaboration with
community partners, with the support
and facilitation of the Fellow.

Will use best efforts to actively advance
equitable systems change with an
emphasis on expanded community
engagement and progressive policy.

Ensure a competent, racially diverse Fellows
pool that is supported with strong
onboarding, Technical Assistance, and
relationship building to successfully assist
Jurisdictions in advancing Production,
Preservation, and Protection Policies.

Ensure Jurisdictions and their respective
Fellows land on a strong results framework to
guide their work.

Actively build a strong bench of diverse
regional leaders, wraparound support
structure and national/regional best
practices to ensure the Fellow’s success.

Ensure that the Policy Fund PBF Policy
Fund vision and long-term expectations
for the Fellows program and jurisdictional
cohorts are infused with SFF’s
commitment to racial and economic
inclusion.

Utilize grant making, convening,
organizational capacity building and the
lever of the Partnership at large to support
and advance the Fellows’ work.

Galvanize civic engagement related to the
Policy Fund broadly and PBF Policy Fund
specifically. Build momentum for the Policy
Fund through influence, expertise and
flexible dollars. Engage civic leaders from
advocacy organizations, academia,
foundations, etc. through the Partnership.

PBF Policy Fund MOU

6.b
Packet Pg. 103 Attachment: Attachment B: PBF Policy Fund Memorandum of Understanding (placeholder only-pending 4931
-6932-0457 v1
Operational
Responsibility:

Provide engaged staff to supervise and
support the Fellow’s assistance with
developing policy recommendations and
increased community engagement.

Provide Technical Assistance and employer
oversight for the Fellows and their
matched Jurisdictions.

Elevate best practices in systems change
from a regional and national perspective
with Fellows and Jurisdictions.

Regularly engage, convene, update and
recruit influential civic leaders and anchor
institutions to support fundraising, strategy,
advocacy and reflection, in partnership with
SFF.

Serve as the direct manager for the Fellow,
including but not limited to, overseeing
their work performance, setting clear
expectations of job duties, providing
necessary training and coaching, and
ensuring compliance with company policies
and standards. Feedback will be shared in
regular 1:1 sessions between the manager
and Fellow and performance evaluations
will be provided at a regular cadence
throughout the duration of the Fellowship.

Provide regular opportunities for City to
share relevant feedback about the Fellow’s
performance to be reviewed during Fellow’s
1:1s and performance evaluation.

Generate engagement and momentum for
PBF Policy Funds among jurisdictional
leaders through regular updates and by
celebrating what works.

Regularly engage, convene, update and
recruit influential civic leaders and anchor
institutions to support fundraising,
strategy, advocacy and reflection.

Promote the role of civic leaders as long-
term promoters of equitable and
progressive housing policy.

6.b
Packet Pg. 104 Attachment: Attachment B: PBF Policy Fund Memorandum of Understanding (placeholder only-pending 4931-6932-0457 v1
Area of Collaboration CITY Coro SAN FRANCISCO FOUNDATION Structures for Accountability

1. PBF Policy Fund VISION
Leverage the impact of Fellows and
Jurisdictions by supporting activities such as
Jurisdiction-to-Jurisdiction learning,
dissemination of best practices, and
potential state policy change efforts.

Area of Collaboration CITY Coro SAN FRANCISCO FOUNDATION Structures for Accountability

2. PBF Policy Fund AWARD: FELLOWS AND COMMUNITY PARTNERSHIPS City is
awarded the
following for 2 years.

A PBF Policy Fund
Fellow who will
facilitate the
development and
implementation of
innovative and highimpact Production,
Preservation and
Protection Policies in
collaborative
partnership with
community and staff
from departments
across City .

Community
Partnerships:

City will
engage with the
community to develop
solutions that meet local
needs. City will work
with the Community
PBF Policy Fund Fellow:

The Fellow will be placed at the City via
a collaborative matching process. Coro
has final determination over
Jurisdiction/Fellow matches.

City is expected to provide logistical
support to facilitate collaboration
between City and Fellow, regardless of
where Fellow is located. For purposes of
this MOU logistical support shall mean a
location and computer and phone which
may be accessed at a City facility.

City commits lead staff and executive
team staff to support Fellow.

The Fellow will be required to attend
monthly meetings with Fellows from
other Jurisdictions, quarterly cohort
meetings, (see schedule) and other
professional development and
relationship building opportunities, as
PBF Policy Fund Fellow: Hire, match and pay
the Fellow all wages and compensation, and
health and welfare benefits due, including
social security (if applicable), with Coro as
the program manager of the Program and
sole employer of the Fellow.

In case any issues arise between the Fellow
and City , Coro will be the point of contact to
resolve.

Assist the Fellow with leadership, research
and policy development Technical Assistance
that helps them tailor and adapt strategies to
address unique community conditions; and
will identify and bolster any gaps in the
Fellow’s development around working with
data, utilizing research, etc.

Assist the Fellow in assessing, in real time,
the Technical Assistance needs that exist
within City’s teams. Using the funding pool
provided by SFF, as well as
PBF Policy Fund Fellow: SFF will
(1) make a monetary grant to Coro to
fund the Fellow’s salary package, and (2)
provide access to the Technical Assistance
Pool.

Community Lead: SFF will grant directly to
the Community Lead in an amount not
less than $110,000 per year for each of
the two years during the Commitment
Period.

PBF Policy Fund MOU

6.b
Packet Pg. 105 Attachment: Attachment B: PBF Policy Fund Memorandum of Understanding (placeholder only-pending 4931-6932-0457 v1
Area of Collaboration [JURISDICTION NAME] Coro SAN FRANCISCO FOUNDATION Structures for Accountability

2. PBF Policy Fund AWARD: FELLOWS AND COMMUNITY PARTNERSHIPS Lead to serve as a lead
partner in community
engagement and share a
strong community
partnership plan.
identified. The Fellow will provide
advance notice of such meetings and
events to City. City and the Fellow will
coordinate scheduling so the Fellow can
attend.

Community Partners: City commits its
proposed community partnership model
for the duration of the Commitment
Period.

City will take the lead on the PBF Policy
Fund Community Partnership plans as
described in the City’s Proposal. The
Fellow will help facilitate relationships
and work.
through peer learning within the cohort, help
the Fellow secure resources to meet the
Technical Assistance needs.

Operational
Responsibility
Provide engaged staff to assist and
support the Fellow’s work in developing
and achieving policy objectives, in
addition to increasing community
engagement.

The designated staff person will serve as
an onsite “Supervisor” to the Fellow for
the duration of the Fellowship. They will
be responsible for holding the Fellow
accountable for work hours, attendance
and deliverables.

Assistance and support also includes
providing direct, timely feedback to the
Fellow and the Coro Program Director;
ensuring a safe, comfortable onsite
Provide tailored Technical Assistance to the
Fellow and City, and host monthly meetings
for Fellows from participating jurisdictions,
throughout the duration of the Commitment
Period.

Employ the Fellow as a full-time employee
of Coro and be the managing partner
responsible if any issues arise with the
Fellow and/or City as it relates to the
Fellows and the Program. Quickly resolve
any issues that may arise between the
Fellow and City.

6.b
Packet Pg. 106 Attachment: Attachment B: PBF Policy Fund Memorandum of Understanding (placeholder only-pending 4931
-6932-0457 v1
workspace for the Fellow; securing site
access and equipment needs prior to
the Fellow’s start date; and creating a
work plan for the Fellow to begin on
their first day. If access to the worksite
or network is delayed, the site
supervisor should provide meaningful
preparatory work or research for the
Fellow to do in the meantime.

Be a good steward of the Fellow during
the Commitment Period by facilitating
the Fellow’s relationships with key
partners who are necessary in achieving
the policy objectives. These partners
can be stakeholders both within and
outside of government.

In partnership with the Fellow, actively
lead in engagement with community
partners.

6.b
Packet Pg. 107 Attachment: Attachment B: PBF Policy Fund Memorandum of Understanding (placeholder only-pending 4931-6932-0457 v1
Area of Collaboration CITY Coro SAN FRANCISCO FOUNDATION Structures for Accountability

3. PBF Policy Fund AWARD: TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE AND COHORT CONVENINGS In addition to the Fellow,
City is
awarded the
following for 2 years:

Technical Assistance:

The City and Fellow will
have access to the
Technical Assistance
Pool to complete work
for City.

Regional Cohort:

Quarterly Network
Convenings
Quarterly Leadership
Training Sessions
Technical Assistance Pool: The Technical
Assistance Pool is available to assist the City and
Fellow in filling in gaps of knowledge or tools to
complete the work for City .

Process: The Fellow highlights City’s
Technical Assistance needs through Coro.

The City and/or Fellow submits a short
proposal to Enterprise Community Partners
to access assistance from the Technical
Assistance Pool. The City and/or Fellow may
access the Technical Assistance Pool may
submit an unlimited amount of proposals.

SFF retains the right to fund at any amount
or not at all.

PBF Policy Fund Cohorts:

Attend and actively participate in quarterly
Network Convenings and Coro Leadership
Training sessions, to strengthen regional
connectivity and to share learnings across all
PBF Policy Fund Cohort participants, whether
remote or in-person. Attendees include City
staff, the Fellow and the Community Lead.

Technical Assistance Fund:

Assist the Fellow to assess the Technical
Assistance needs within City’s teams and use
the TA Fund and peer learning to address
these.

PBF Policy Fund Cohorts: Coordinate,
structure and host quarterly convenings
of the PBF Policy Grant jurisdictions
from across the Region to share critical
analysis and strategy recommendations,
best practices, access to relevant
education and advance regional
strategy. Agenda setting will be done in
consultation with SFF.

Coordinate, structure, and host quarterly
Leadership Training Sessions with City and
their Community Partner to build leadership
and technical capacity of local leaders to for
greater impact.

Technical Assistance Pool: Maintain
the Technical Assistance Pool for
requests from jurisdictions that are not
covered by the Coro contract.

Determine Technical Assistance
Pool requests in partnership with
Coro.

PBF Policy Fund Cohorts:

Actively participate in agenda setting for
cohort meetings.

PBF Policy Fund MOU
Meeting and Convening
Calendar
Operational
Responsibility
Actively engage in convenings and training
sessions, connect with other members of the
PBF Policy Fund cohort, and commit to hosting
at least one convening, which includes
providing a meeting space, for the cohort.

Convene Fellowship program stakeholders
for quarterly leadership training, updates,
knowledge sharing and learning, lifting up
best practices and areas of course
correction.

Co-create convening agendas in
partnership with Coro.

6.b
Packet Pg. 108 Attachment: Attachment B: PBF Policy Fund Memorandum of Understanding (placeholder only-pending 4931-6932-0457 v1
Area of Collaboration CITY Coro SAN FRANCISCO FOUNDATION Structures for Accountability

4. COMMUNICATIONS
Contribute to a strong
regional communication
strategy that advances
and amplifies local work
and leverages valuesaligned opportunities.

Make good-faith efforts to actively
participate in regional communication
strategy by sharing relevant and timely
learnings and case studies from the
policy and community engagement
processes. This information is to be
shared with the regional cohorts and
other Jurisdictions within the region.

Coro will share learnings from Technical
Assistance providers, subject matter experts,
Fellows and jurisdictions with SFF Policy
Fund staff.

For information that requires permission
to distribute, Coro will acquire so that SFF
can share within newsletters, etc.

The Partnership will develop and manage
a foundational strategic communications
and branding plan that raises visibility,
promotes fundraising, and civic and
political support through knowledge
sharing and storytelling.

Knowledge and material
sharing will occur on a
rolling basis with Coro
submitting quarterly
summary updates.

Operational
Responsibility:

Commit to actively creating and sharing
communications content (such as
updates, briefings, and reports) for the
Partnership’s Advisory Board members,
funders and broad Partnership
networks.

Frequent and productive
communication across the network is
expected, whether it’s collaboration
between City and Community Partner,
regular 1:1s with the PBF Fellow, or
updates to the San Francisco
Foundation.

Accountable for creating/sharing
communications content for Advisory Board
members, funders and broad Partnership
networks.

Support the Partnership in strategic
communications, particularly around
promoting civic and political support through
knowledge sharing and storytelling.

Aligning capacity of Fellows, Jurisdictions,
and partners around strategic
communications goals.

Support the Fellow in advancing
communications strategies, and convening
City staff and resources focused on
communications.

The Partnership will centrally manage
initiative-wide strategic communications
and process for supporting
communications across partners.

The Partnership will manage external
requests for communications. Coro will
forward media and communications
requests to the Partnership via the Policy
Fund Initiative Officer for review and
approval to proceed.

6.b
Packet Pg. 109 Attachment: Attachment B: PBF Policy Fund Memorandum of Understanding (placeholder only-pending 4931-6932-0457 v1
Area of Collaboration CITY Coro SAN FRANCISCO FOUNDATION Structures for Accountability

5. EVALUATION
Actively participate in
evaluative learning,
course correction
and evidencebuilding.

Participate fully in the evaluation
process by sharing relevant learnings
and case studies from the policy and
community engagement processes, in
order to facilitate collective learning
with the regional cohorts and other
jurisdictions within the Region. This
entails collaborating with an evaluation
partner and proactively sharing relevant
information with PBF Policy Fund staff.

Share learnings from Technical Assistance
providers, subject matter experts, Fellows and
jurisdictions with SFF Policy Fund staff.

For information that requires permission
to distribute, Coro will acquire so that SFF
can share within newsletters, etc.

Thought partner in structuring the system for
evaluation, with a particular focus on
progress on results, leadership development
(across stakeholder groups), policy traction,
and communications impact.

Contract and direct the work of the
evaluation partner. Manage the
interaction of the evaluating partner with
MOU partners.

Operational
Responsibility:

Actively participate in evaluation
learning efforts and provide timely
information and candid insights of the
Fellowship and the work being
performed by the jurisdiction.

Actively participate in evaluation efforts and
utilize evaluative learnings to impact
program success.

Manage evaluation efforts.

B. Coro as Fellow's Employer: Coro shall be the sole employer of the Fellow placed by Coro with City. Coro shall be responsible for payment of wages and benefits, withholding of payroll and other applicable taxes, and worker's compensation coverage for the Fellow. City shall not control the manner or means of Fellow’s employment and shall not be a joint employer of the Fellow and the Fellow shall not have any rights to compensation, retirement benefits, medical benefits or any other benefits accruing to City employees. It is Coro's responsibility to provide written notice to the Fellow of the provisions of this Section. The provisions of this Section shall survive the termination or expiration of this MOU.

While Coro will make the final Fellow placement decision, City will be given an opportunity to review and concur with the placement.

Coro will provide ample opportunities for City to provide feedback and raise any issues or concerns regarding a Fellow’s conduct or performance and if necessary, will take performance management and corrective action steps in accordance with Coro’s employee handbook. Such issues include not performing the Partnership activities in an acceptable manner, demonstrating uncooperative behavior, or presenting a threat to the adequate or timely completion of the project or a threat to the safety of persons or property. If this behavior persists after corrective actions have been implemented, City may make a written request to Coro to remove the Fellow. Once the Fellow is removed from a jurisdiction, it is at Coro’s discretion as to whether to terminate the Fellow’s employment. City may request a replacement Fellow, a request which may be granted at Coro’s discretion. In the event that the Fellow is replaced, Coro will ensure proper training of the replacement Fellow and work with City to transition work to the replacement Fellow as efficiently and quickly as possible. If hiring a new Fellow is not feasible, alternative options or resources can be explored in support of continuing and completing City policy proposal

6.b
Packet Pg. 110 Attachment: Attachment B: PBF Policy Fund Memorandum of Understanding (placeholder only-pending 4931-6932-0457 v1
In the event that a Fellow engages in egregious or dangerous conduct, City may request immediate removal of the Fellow and/or Coro may decide at its discretion to terminate the Fellow’s employment based on the severity of their action. If City requests the immediate removal of a Fellow and has not engaged in the performance management process or demonstrated that the action of the Fellow is egregious, the Fellow will be removed, but a replacement Fellow is not guaranteed. The San Francisco Foundation and Coro will determine if a replacement Fellow is appropriate given the circumstances.

To the maximum extent permitted by law, Coro shall indemnify, keep and hold harmless City and those entities (if any) identified as additional insureds in Attachment A, Insurance Provisions, and their commissioners, directors, officers, agents, and employees (“City Indemnified Parties”) against any and all demands, claims, suits or actions (collectively referred to as “Employment Related Claims”) arising out of any of the following: any injury or death to persons or property or pecuniary, financial or economic losses that may occur or that may be alleged to have occurred, arising from any allegation or finding that the City Indemnified Parties is an employer, either by common law, statute, or otherwise, of Fellow. Such Employment Related Claims include without limitation injury or death to Fellow, as well as any claim by Fellow or by a third-party that Fellow is entitled to any benefit provided to employees of City, including coverage under the California Public Employee Retirement System. Coro further agrees to defend any and all such Employment Related Claims or other legal proceedings, including but not limited to any penalties that may be imposed, and pay all charges of attorneys and all other costs and expenses of defenses as they are incurred. If any judgment is rendered against any of the City Indemnified Parties, Coro shall, at its expense, satisfy and discharge the same. The provisions set forth in this Section are intended to be applied to the fullest extent allowed under the law and, if any portion of it is found to be void or unenforceable, the remainder is to be severable and enforceable. This section shall survive termination or expiration of this is separate and distinct from the indemnification set forth in Section XIV and not subject to any limitations set forth in Sections IX or XIV.

C. Cooperation: In addition to performing the activities and obligations set forth above, the Parties agree to take such other actions and negotiate in good faith and enter such further agreements as will be necessary to consummate the transactions contemplated by this MOU.

D. Staffing: Each Party shall provide adequate dedicated staff time to support the activities to be conducted by it under in this MOU, and each Party shall be responsible for ensuring that staffing positions are replaced in the event of any changes in staffing or employment in order to fulfill each Party’s obligations as set forth in this MOU. The current staffing list includes:
a. Staff person to be responsible for the day-to-day work of the Program i. Coro: Kaitlyn Quakenbush
ii. SAN FRANCISCO FOUNDATION: Aysha Pamukcu
iii. City: Samantha Updegrave, Community Development Department Director b. High-level leader who has the authority to make decisions on behalf of the Party i. Coro: Laney Whitcanack
ii. SAN FRANCISCO FOUNDATION: Khanh Russo
iii. City: Kevin Woodhouse, City Manager
c. Additional staff with specific expertise to participate as needed in an advisory capacity to support the ongoing initiative activities listed above. i. Coro: Clifford Yee, Lauren Haworth (Finance and HR)
ii. SAN FRANCISCO FOUNDATION: Ella Zimbalist, Elisa Orona, Jordan Shapiro (Communications) iii. City : Brianne Harkousha, Senior Planner

6.b
Packet Pg. 111 Attachment: Attachment B: PBF Policy Fund Memorandum of Understanding (placeholder only-pending 4931-6932-0457 v1
III. Notices. Any notices required or permitted to be given under or in this MOU shall be in writing, and shall be deemed to be effective upon delivery when hand delivered, delivered by overnight courier, delivered by certified mail, postage prepaid, return receipt requested, by facsimile, or by email (provided no return to sender or similar error message is delivered to the sender) unless such address is changed by written notice hereunder:

If to Coro:

Coro
230 California Street
STE 600
San Francisco, CA 94111
Attn: Laney Whitcanack
Email: [email protected]
If to City:

City of Pacifica
170 Santa Maria Ave
Pacifica, CA 94044
Attn: Samantha Updegrave
Email: [email protected]

If to SAN FRANCISCO FOUNDATION:

THE SAN FRANCISCO FOUNDATION
One Embarcadero Center, Suite 1400
San Francisco, CA 94111
Attn: Fred Blackwell
Email: [email protected]
IV. Funding. Except as expressly set forth herein, nothing in this MOU shall obligate City, SAN FRANCISCO FOUNDATION or Coro to expend funds or other resources, nor shall anything in this MOU be construed as a limitation on any Party’s authority to contribute staff, funds or other resources to further the purposes of this MOU or in the implementation of this MOU. Any costs that exceed the amount of the PBF Policy Fund as awarded under this MOU will be reassessed by SAN FRANCISCO FOUNDATION and Coro utilizing good faith efforts to resolve any such overages in a manner that furthers the purposes of this MOU while minimizing additional out-of-pocket expenditures by Coro.

V. Discretion. Each Party, including their respective employees, officials and boards, shall exercise its sole discretion over all matters relating to the MOU and over each project or decision over which it has jurisdiction consistent with its customary practices and procedures and consistent with all legal requirements. In addition, each City agency having jurisdiction over the subject matter of this MOU shall exercise its sole discretion under this MOU in a manner that is consistent with the public health and safety and shall at all times retain its respective authority to take any action that is necessary to protect the physical health and safety of the public or to comply with changes in Federal or California law, including applicable federal and California regulations.

6.b
Packet Pg. 112 Attachment: Attachment B: PBF Policy Fund Memorandum of Understanding (placeholder only-pending 4931-6932-0457 v1
VI. No Joint Venture or Liability. Nothing in this MOU shall be construed as creating the right or ability of any Party to bind the other Parties except as provided in this MOU, and nothing in this MOU shall be construed to create any joint liability with regard to, or as a result of, the activities undertaken by any Party, its employees, officers and/or agents, to implement this MOU. All employees, officers and/or agents of each Party shall remain employees, officers and/or agents of that Party and shall be subject to the laws, procedures, rules and policies governing that Party's employees, officers and/or agents. Nothing in this MOU shall be construed as creating a partnership, joint venture, employment or agency relationship between City, SAN FRANCISCO FOUNDATION and Coro. Each Party shall conduct all of its activities under this MOU in accordance with all applicable laws and regulations. Each Party shall remain an independent contractor and does not intend to create any employer-employee or agency-operative relationship of any kind.

VII. Public Records. SAN FRANCISCO FOUNDATION and Coro acknowledge and agree that this MOU and communications and documents exchanged between City, SAN FRANCISCO FOUNDATION and Coro are subject to the California Public Records Act and any locally applicable laws, and/or regulations.

VIII. Publications. No publication by Coro or SAN FRANCISCO FOUNDATION shall include use of City’s official seal without the prior written approval of City. No publication by City shall include the use of the names or logos of either Coro or SAN FRANCISCO FOUNDATION without the prior written approval of Coro or SAN FRANCISCO FOUNDATION, as applicable.

IX. No Damages. The Parties have determined that damages are inappropriate and that it would be extremely difficult and impractical to fix or determine the damages to a Party as a result of a breach of this MOU. The Parties would not have entered into this MOU if any of them were liable to the other Parties for damages under or with respect to this MOU. Consequently, the Parties have agreed that no Party will be liable in damages to the other Parties, and each Party covenants not to sue the other Parties for or claim any damages and expressly waives its right to do so, for any matter arising from or connected with any dispute, controversy, or issue regarding the application, interpretation, or effect of this MOU. This section shall not apply to any claims for indemnification as set forth in Sections II.B or XIV, or failure to maintain insurance as required by Section XV.

X. Proprietary or Confidential Information. Each Party understands and acknowledges that in performing activities under this MOU it may obtain access to proprietary or confidential information owned or controlled by the other Parties, the disclosure of which to third parties may be damaging to the other Parties. Accordingly, the Parties each agree that any and all such proprietary or confidential information disclosed by the other Parties shall be returned to the applicable other Party (if in writing) and held in confidence, except as a Party, on the advice of counsel, may be compelled by judicial or administrative process or by other requirements of applicable law to disclose any such information, such Party may disclose such information or documents, only to the extent necessary to comply with applicable law, and, to the extent reasonably practicable under applicable law, shall notify any affected Party at least fourteen days in advance of disclosing such information. Each Party shall exercise the same standard of care to protect the other Parties’ proprietary or confidential information as a reasonably prudent entity would use to protect its own proprietary or confidential data. All confidentiality obligations hereunder shall be subject to applicable law, Including, without limitation, the California Public Records Act and any local public records laws and regulations. Coro shall require each Fellow to sign an agreement declaring they will comply with this Proprietary or Confidential Information provision.

XI. No Lobbying or Election Activities. No part of any funds provided under this MOU (including the monetary grants from SAN FRANCISCO FOUNDATION to Coro or to the Community Lead) may be used: (1) to attempt to influence legislation, carry on propaganda or otherwise carry out lobbying activities within the meaning of Section 4945(e) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, or (2) to influence the outcome of any election for public office, or to carry on, directly or indirectly, any voter registration drive. Fellows shall not be permitted while acting in their capacity of Fellow to participate in lobbying activities or attempting to influence the outcome of any election for public office, or to carry on, directly or indirectly, any voter registration drive, but may participate in such activities on their own personal time and in their own personal capacity, which shall not be connected in any way to their position as a Fellow.

6.b
Packet Pg. 113 Attachment: Attachment B: PBF Policy Fund Memorandum of Understanding (placeholder only-pending 4931-6932-0457 v1
XII. Conflict of Interest. Each Party acknowledges that it is familiar with Section 1090 et seq. of the Government Code of the State of California and any locally applicable laws, regulations, or policies, and certifies that it does not know of any facts which constitutes a violation of said provisions and agrees that it will immediately notify the other if it becomes aware of any such fact during the term of this MOU.

XIII. Nondiscrimination. In the performance of its obligations and activities under this MOU, the Parties each agree not to discriminate against any of its employees or applicants for employment, or against any person seeking accommodations, advantages, facilities, privileges, services, or membership in all business, social, or other establishments or organizations, on the basis of the fact or perception of a person’s race, color, creed, religion, national origin, ancestry, age, height, weight, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, domestic partner status, marital status, disability or Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome or HIV status, or association with members of such protected classes, or in retaliation for opposition to discrimination against such classes.

XIV. Indemnification.

A. Each Party will indemnify, defend and hold harmless the other Party or Parties, and their respective officers, employees and agents from and against any and all loss, liability, expense (including reasonable attorneys’ fees) or claims for injury or other damages (collectively “Indemnification Claims”) arising out of the indemnifying party’s performance of this MOU, but only in proportion to and to the extent such Indemnification Claims are caused by or result from the negligent or intentional acts or omissions of the indemnifying party.

B. In the event of concurrent negligence of two or more of the Parties, or the Parties’ respective officers, employees or agents, the liability for any and all Indemnification Claims shall be apportioned under the California theory of comparative negligence as presently established or as may hereafter be modified. Nothing in this MOU shall constitute a waiver or limitation of any rights that the indemnifying party may have under applicable law in the event of concurrent negligence of persons or entities other than the parties to this MOU.

C. The Parties intend and agree to cooperate with each other in the investigation and disposition of third-party liability claims arising out of the performance of this MOU. Such cooperation may include joint investigation, defense and disposition of claims. The Parties agree to promptly inform one another whenever an incident report, claim or complaint is filed or when an investigation is initiated concerning any service performed under this MOU. In the event of a conflict in interest, each Party may conduct its own investigation and engage its own counsel.

D. The provisions of this Section XIV shall survive the termination or expiration of this MOU.

XV. Insurance. Coro shall procure and maintain during the full term of the MOU the insurance coverage described in Exhibit A hereto. Coro shall obtain a policy endorsement naming City as an additional insured under any general liability or automobile policy or policies.

XVI. Amendment; Entire Agreement. This MOU may be amended only by a writing signed by all three Parties. No waiver by any Party of any of the provisions of this MOU shall be effective unless in writing and signed by an authorized representative of the affected Party, and only to the extent expressly provided in such written waiver. This MOU, including any attachments, contains the entire understanding between the Parties with respect to the subject matter of this MOU as of the date hereof, and all prior and contemporaneous written or oral negotiations, discussions, understandings and agreements are merged herein. In the event that any provision or part of this MOU is found to be invalid or unenforceable, only that particular provision or part so found, and not the entire Agreement, will be inoperative.

XVII. Assignment. This MOU may not be assigned, subcontracted or delegated by any Party without the prior written approval of the other Parties.

6.b
Packet Pg. 114 Attachment: Attachment B: PBF Policy Fund Memorandum of Understanding (placeholder only-pending 4931-6932-0457 v1
XVIII. Effective Date and Termination. This MOU will be effective from January 22, 2025 - December 31, 2026, but may be terminated by any of the Parties for any or no reason, with or without cause, with thirty (30) days advance written notice. Upon the termination of this MOU, all obligations and rights of the Parties shall cease and be of no further force or effect, provided, however, those rights and obligations that by their nature are intended to survive the termination of this MOU shall so survive. In the event of termination, the parties will utilize good faith efforts to effectuate an orderly wind-down of the Program. Coro will return any funds not expended or committed for the purposes of the PBF Policy Funds, or within the Commitment Period, to SAN FRANCISCO FOUNDATION. SAN FRANCISCO FOUNDATION will notify Coro if it determines, after careful consideration of the information available to it, that the PBF Policy Fund is not being used for the purposes specified or is not reasonably in the interest of the general public. In addition, Coro will return any unexpended funds if Coro loses its exemption under Code Section 501(c)(3). Notwithstanding the foregoing: (1) Coro shall have the right to remove the Fellow from placement with City as soon as practicable after the termination date, (2) SAN FRANCISCO FOUNDATION shall have the right to cease any outstanding grants to the Community Lead and any outstanding financial support for access to the Technical Assistance Pool, and (3) subject to Sections VIII and X hereof, the Parties will have the right to use any and all information and data developed or obtained as a result of this MOU in furtherance of the goals of the Partnership, except where such information or data constitute the proprietary or confidential information of either of the other Parties.

XIX. Counterparts. This MOU may be executed in any number of counterparts, each of which when so executed and delivered shall be deemed to be an original of this MOU, and all of which taken together shall constitute one and the same agreement. Delivery of an executed counterpart of a signature page to this MOU by telecopier, facsimile machine, portable document format (“PDF”), or other electronic means shall be as effective as delivery of a manually executed counterpart of this MOU. The effectiveness of any such documents and signatures shall, subject to applicable laws, have the same force and effect as manually signed originals and shall be binding on the parties. No party may raise the use of a telecopier, facsimile machine, PDF or other electronic means, or the fact that any signature was transmitted through the use of a telecopier, facsimile machine, PDF or other electronic means, as a defense to the enforcement of this MOU.

XX. Governing Law; Venue. This MOU and all disputes arising here from, whether in contract or in tort, shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of California. The parties agree that the exclusive venue for the resolution of any dispute relating to the subject matter of this MOU shall be in the State and Federal Courts of California. [Signatures on next page.]

6.b
Packet Pg. 115 Attachment: Attachment B: PBF Policy Fund Memorandum of Understanding (placeholder only-pending 4931
-6932-0457 v1
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties have executed this Agreement through their duly authorized representatives effective as of January 14, 2025.

City of Pacifica
By:

Name: Kevin Woodhouse
Title: City Manager
Coro
By:

Name: Laney Whitcanack
Title: CEO

THE SAN FRANCISCO FOUNDATION
By:

Name:

Title

6.b
Packet Pg. 116 Attachment: Attachment B: PBF Policy Fund Memorandum of Understanding (placeholder only-pending

PARTNERSHIP FOR
THE BAY’S FUTURE

POLICY FUND
City of Pacifica
Written By (650) 738-7341
[email protected]
https://www.cityofpacifica.org/
Community Development Department
City of Pacifica
HEART
2024 Grant Application

6.c
Packet Pg. 117 Attachment: Attachment C: Pacifica’s PBF Policy Fund 2024 Grant Application (5825 : Reso Accepting Grant Award from PBF Policy Fund) Pacifica is located just 12 miles south
of San Francisco along the scenic
coast of the Pacific Ocean. Known for
its natural beauty, Pacifica is filled
with numerous hiking trails through
rolling hills that overlook the ocean
surf and forested canyons. Our City is
rich in history, beauty, nature,
resources and community spirit.

Whether you’re a nature-lover,
athlete, or traveler, there’s something
for everyone!
The mission of Pacifica’s Community
Development Department is to
foster a vibrant, inclusive, and
sustainable community through
thoughtful planning, innovative
development, and responsive public
service. We strive to enhance the
quality of life for all residents by
promoting balanced growth,
preserving our natural and cultural
resources, and ensuring equitable
access to housing, transportation,
and economic opportunities. The
department is made up of three
divisions:

Building Division
Code Enforcement Division
Planning Division
We are a collaborative department,
and would greatly benefit from the
assistance of the Partnership for
the Bay’s Future Policy Fund and
Fellows. We appreciate your
consideration of our application,
and hope this is the beginning of a
promising partnership.

ABOUT US
Building a
Better
Tomorrow
City of Pacifica
Community Development Department

6.c
Packet Pg. 118 Attachment: Attachment C: Pacifica’s PBF Policy Fund 2024 Grant Application (5825 : Reso Accepting Grant Award from PBF Policy Fund) Name of Local Government:

City of Pacifica
Community Development Department
170 Santa Maria Avenue
Pacifica, CA 94044
I. BASIC INFORMATION
Name of staff contact person for application:

Brianne Harkousha
Senior Planner
Community Development Department
[email protected]
650-738-7341
Name of person providing direct supervision to fellow:

Brianne Harkousha
Senior Planner
Community Development Department
[email protected] | 650-738-7341
Secondary person providing direct supervision to fellow (in the event the primary person is unavailable), if applicable:

Stefanie Cervantes
Interim Deputy Director
Community Development Department
[email protected] | 650-738-7341
City of Pacifica
Community Development Department

6.c
Packet Pg. 119 Attachment: Attachment C: Pacifica’s PBF Policy Fund 2024 Grant Application (5825 : Reso Accepting Grant Award from PBF Policy Fund) II. VISION, POLICY

PRIORITIES AND IMPACT
Reference
Numbers
Policy Policy Description
Community
Involvement
Barriers to
Implementation
Measure of Success
HE-I-1 (1)
Comprehensive
Zoning
Regulation
Modernization
Streamline
application submittal
and review processes;
Amend zoning codes
and incentivize
development in areas
less susceptible to
sea level rise
High
Regulatory
compliance,
community
resistance
Adoption of
comprehensive update to
the City’s Zoning
Regulations, 30-day
response to all application
submittals, monitoring,
and reducing the
development review
process timeline for
housing projects
Since its early beginnings as an Ohlone settlement, Pacifica has remained a refuge for the Bay’s most industrious and resilient households. The neighborhoods that make up our municipality are deeply committed to one another, and our residents are known for cultivating a sense of home beyond their own front door. Here in Pacifica, we believe that housing should be within reach for all of our residents and are a community where opportunity knocks – loudly.

Founded by our pillars of economic equality, environmental justice, and racial equity, we hope to increase housing production while addressing climate change and other economic factors.

These zoning reforms will provide much-needed affordable housing to low- and middle-income residents, easing rent burdens and offering secure, sustainable homes for families who currently struggle to afford living in Pacifica. By ensuring that residents can stay in the community, particularly low-income and vulnerable households, we strengthen social bonds, enhance equity, and provide long-term economic stability for our neighbors.

In partnership with the Housing Endowment and Regional Trust (HEART) of San Mateo County and the Pacifica Resource Center (PRC), the City of Pacifica would like to work with a fellow from the Partnership for the Bay’s Future (PBF) program. The PBF fellow would be responsible for identifying and implementing best practices for updating zoning that incorporates high levels of community engagement, highlights the voices of Pacifica’s most vulnerable residents, and creates the path for furthering the following suite of policies outlined in the adopted 2023- 2031 Housing Element. A fellow brings unique, focused expertise that City staff cannot easily replicate while juggling other responsibilities. With dedicated time and attention, the fellow can ensure that strategies are equitable and far-reaching, effectively mobilizing and empowering the voices of Pacifica's most vulnerable residents.

City of Pacifica
Community Development Department

6.c
Packet Pg. 120 Attachment: Attachment C: Pacifica’s PBF Policy Fund 2024 Grant Application (5825 : Reso Accepting Grant Award from PBF Policy Fund) II. VISION, POLICY

PRIORITIES AND IMPACT
Reference
Numbers
Policy Policy Description
Community
Involvement
Barriers to
Implementation
Measure of Success
HE-I-1 (3)
Adopt
Objective
Design
Standards
Establish objective
design standards
for multi-family
residential projects
and mixed-use
projects with a
residential
component.

Medium
Design
flexibility
concerns
Adoption and
implementation of
Objective Design
Standards
HE-I-1 (4)
Amend
PlannedDevelopment
Zoning
District
Eliminate potential
barriers to multifamily and
affordable housing
development.

Low
Existing zoning
conflicts
Amendments to the
Planned-Development
Zoning District
HE-I-1 (5)
Develop Zoning
Code
Amendments
for SB 330
Align Zoning Code
with SB 330 objective
standard
requirements.

Low
Legislative
changes
Successful adoption of
amendments aligning
with SB 330
HE-I-1 (6)
Establish
Priority
Building
Permit
Processing
Implement priority
building permit
processing and
reduced plan check
times for multifamily projects and
affordable units.

Medium Staff capacity
Reduction in plan check
times and prioritized
processing for specified
housing projects
It is our hope that, with the assistance of technical experts, community-led organizations, and the funding from the PBF Policy Fund, the listed set of policies will accelerate housing development that will increase affordability for Pacifica’s low-income and most vulnerable residents while also addressing long standing regional patterns of racial and income segregation. These efforts will directly benefit families facing displacement due to skyrocketing housing costs by creating new affordable housing options, reducing rent burdens, and ensuring that all residents can continue to call Pacifica home.

Because Pacifica possesses 6 miles of California’s coastline, this process must also integrate climate concerns related to flooding, erosion, and sea level rise. Developments that incorporate stringent environmental standards aligned with California Coastal Commission regulations can mitigate climate risks with flood-resistant design and erosion control measures. Cities can also promote density bonuses further inland from Pacifica’s coastline to encourage high-density housing in safer areas while restricting development in environmentally vulnerable zones.

City of Pacifica
Community Development Department

6.c
Packet Pg. 121 Attachment: Attachment C: Pacifica’s PBF Policy Fund 2024 Grant Application (5825 : Reso Accepting Grant Award from PBF Policy Fund) Pacifica has long had a reputation as a laid back, family friendly, coastal surfer town (it hosts the World Dog Surfing Championships[1]). A City of almost 38,000 people, Pacifica includes significant Asian (22%) and Hispanic (18%) communities, but has a majority White, Non-Hispanic population (58%), and most of the City is classified by HCD as a racially concentrated area of affluence. Even so, there are thousands of Pacifica residents that are vulnerable to displacement. Over 2,000 people live in poverty in the community, with Hispanics experiencing a poverty rate 61% higher than White, non-Hispanic individuals[2].

Unlike most of the communities in San Mateo County, its largest employers are not tech companies, but local schools, the City of Pacifica, and Safeway[3]. In this respect, Pacifica is a bedroom community for the larger region, and as the Bay Area has become more expensive, Pacifica’s demographics are changing, making it more difficult for lower- and middle-income families to call this surfside town “home.” According to the American Community Survey, from 2010 to 2022, the median household income increased from $90,742 to $151,849, and the percent of adults 25 and over with at least a Bachelor's degree increased from 37.9% to 47.9% over the same period. This demographic change is reflected in the change in the market.

According to 2018-2022 American Community Survey estimates, home values are approaching $1.2million. As such, small houses (ADUs) and multi-family development are essential to providing housing affordable to low- and moderate-income households, to maintain the economic and racial diversity the community has, and to ensure that families of all races, ethnicities, and incomes from across the Bay Area can enjoy the natural, cultural, and educational amenities Pacifica has to offer, the City needs to add housing, especially incomerestricted housing.

As part of the City’s work to complete its Assessment of Fair Housing, the City identified the lack of multi-family housing, low housing production overall, and the low production of affordable housing, in particular, as major factors that needed to be addressed to become a more equitable City. Addressing these gaps will provide immediate relief to vulnerable populations, such as low-income households and communities of color, who are disproportionately affected by housing insecurity. These efforts will ensure affordable housing options are accessible, allowing these residents to remain in their community without sacrificing basic living standards. The lack of housing has led to skyrocketing housing costs, causing many households to spend over 50% of their income on rent. The rent burdenship in Pacifica leaves many of our neighbors walking a tightrope between financial stability or housing security. Pacifica Resource Center’s Executive Director, Anita M. Rees, has acknowledged that many of the seniors and families they work with often sacrifice basic fundamentals like habitability , room size or bedroom count to make their living situations work: “Many people are just trying to get by or make the most with what they have,” she states.
[1] "CBS San Francisco." Thousands Crowd Beach in Pacifica for World Dog Surfing Championships. CBS News, 13 Aug. 2024, https://www.cbsnews.com/sanfrancisco/news/thousands-crowd-beach-pacifica-world-dog-surfing-championships/. [1] Source: American Community Survey, 2018-2022 Five-Year Averages, Table B17001. [1]"City of Pacifica, California : Comprehensive Annual Financial Report For the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2023". City of Pacifica. 2023. https://www.cityofpacifica.org/home/showpublisheddocument/17224/638417824961230000

FOCUS ON SOCIAL EQUITY

6.c
Packet Pg. 122 Attachment: Attachment C: Pacifica’s PBF Policy Fund 2024 Grant Application (5825 : Reso Accepting Grant Award from PBF Policy Fund)

FOCUS ON SOCIAL EQUITY
“Low-income residents coming to us won’t complain or seek legal aid out of fear of eviction or landlord retaliation.” With limited variety and supply, many of Pacifica’s most vulnerable are left with choices they have to take, rather than ones they would want to make. By introducing community engagement efforts that prioritize these residents, we will ensure that their voices shape the future of housing policy in Pacifica, creating developments that meet their needs for affordability, accessibility, and security.

Climate Disasters Raise Further Concerns of Displacement In addition to zoning reform that will increase the production of housing, it is imperative that policy measures address the risk of climate change on Pacifica’s housing market. According to researchers from UCLA Anderson School of Management, residents in flood zones, especially those from low socio-economic communities, are exposed to risks associated with sea level rise.

Coastal flooding and erosion also threaten transportation infrastructure, especially Highway 1, as well as local streets and pipelines in areas like West Linda Mar and Northwest Sharp Park.[4] The Coastal Commission (also referred to as the “CCC”) is the regulatory body that protects and enhances California’s coast through the regulation of shoreline access, visitor accommodations, habitat protection, commercial fishing, water quality, transportation and real estate development.[5] The Commission was predicated on a shared desire for eco-justice; however, the independent, quasi-judicial state agency has been criticized by housing advocates in recent years for inconsistent enforcement of environmental principles. In efforts to increase Bay Area housing production, Democratic legislators proposed a string of bills in 2023 that reduced the Coastal Commission's control over land use zoning and entitlements[6].

According to experts, San Mateo and Alameda counties are projected to host the most at-risk hazardous sites by 2050. Rising flood heights and tidal surges are more likely to increase flood risks in coastal zones, which could set off a lasting domino effect of environmental devastation on the City and Pacifica residents if not addressed. Floods can trigger “nantech” disasters, which can include fires, explosions, damage to safety systems and the disruption of phone lines. Past flood and storm surge events can also release toxic substances into the environment from industrial, hazardous waste, and legacy contamination sites. Flood contamination is most likely to impact low-income households and people of color, who are generally more likely to live near industrial and hazardous waste facilities. With fewer resources to prepare for natural disasters, low-income families, seniors, or people of color have less control or capital for mitigation efforts like floodproofing or adapting homes to climate challenges. [5] Yu, Haotian. The Risk of Sea-Level Rise on California's Housing Market: An Economic Impact Analysis. UCLA Anderson School of Management, Dec. 2020, https://anderson-review.ucla.edu/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/uclaforecast_Dec2020_Yu.pdf. [6] California Coastal Commission. "Who We Are." California Coastal Commission, n.d., https://www.coastal.ca.gov/whoweare.html.

Accessed 15 Aug. 2024.
6] Botts, Jackie. California Lawmakers Challenge Coastal Commission Protections Amid Housing Crisis. CalMatters, 14 Mar. 2024, https://calmatters.org/housing/2024/03/california-coastal-commission-protections/.

6.c
Packet Pg. 123 Attachment: Attachment C: Pacifica’s PBF Policy Fund 2024 Grant Application (5825 : Reso Accepting Grant Award from PBF Policy Fund)

FOCUS ON SOCIAL EQUITY
Without proper planning, many of our most vulnerable are often left wading in treacherous waters. Prior research demonstrates that low-income households and people of color are less likely to own a car in the event of an evacuation; they are also the most likely to experience injury or death from flooding. Households displaced from natural disasters without proper resources are also less likely to return home or rebuild, according to academic experts. To prevent displacement in the long-term, the City must incorporate environmental and social equity frameworks into their crisis planning as soon as possible.

The fellow’s role will be crucial in ensuring that zoning policies account for these climate risks.

By aligning zoning policies with both environmental justice and climate resilience, we will protect Pacifica’s most at-risk residents from displacement while promoting housing growth in safer areas. These zoning reforms will create climate-resilient, flood-safe homes and ensure that our low-income and vulnerable residents are not disproportionately affected by these environmental challenges.

PAST EFFORTS
Pacifica has a history of enforcing fair housing policies. The City has worked on aligning its local legislation with state housing mandates, including the adoption of past resolutions like 894-C.S., 890-C.S. and 889-C.S., which are ordinances related to emergency shelter, approved workforce housing, and rezoning for increased workforce housing production.[7] In addition to housing production measures, the City is leveraging its unique coastal setting and community assets to support its housing goals. To meet their RHNA requirements, Pacifica has designated Priority Development Areas (PDAs) to promote high-density, mixed-use development in transitaccessible regions. While Pacifica has limited funding avenues for affordable multi-family development, the City is exploring various state and federal grants to support their housing initiatives.

In recent years, the lack of affordable housing has become a prominent concern for Pacifica residents. Pacifica’s City Council considered but did not pass a rent stabilization and just cause ordinance. It did implement other measures, such as forming a Rent Advisory Task Force and creating a safe parking program, to mitigate displacement risk. However, housing advocates fear these measures may not be enough. The population of Pacifica has grown at a slower rate compared to the rest of the Bay Area, seeing only a 7% increase in population size over the last 50 years. Pacifica’s stunted growth has resulted in fewer housing units, further exacerbating the rate of gentrification and displacement for low-income residents. [7] City Council Ordinances, https://www.cityofpacifica.org/government/city-council/city-council-ordinances .

6.c
Packet Pg. 124 Attachment: Attachment C: Pacifica’s PBF Policy Fund 2024 Grant Application (5825 : Reso Accepting Grant Award from PBF Policy Fund) City of Pacifica
Community Development Department

PAST EFFORTS
In addition to strides in housing, the City of Pacifica has made prior efforts toward disaster planning and relief. The City has assembled an Emergency Preparedness & Safety Commission that provides training and materials on how to best prepare for a coastal disaster. Pacifica also contributed to the County of San Mateo Local Hazard Mitigation Plan in 2021, and participates in the SMC alert network. Despite this action, it is unclear how Pacifica’s Hazard Mitigation Plan incorporates social or climate justice into its framework. The City would like to partner with our community organizations, Pacifica's Emergency Preparedness & Safety Commission, and the PBF fellow to incorporate community-centered frameworks into our disaster management and housing development.

STAKEHOLDERS AND

COMMUNITY PARTNERSHIPS
The City of Pacifica has chosen to work closely with the Pacifica Resource Center (PRC) and the Housing Endowment and Regional Trust of San Mateo County (also referred to as “HEART”).

Both organizations are reputable and have a strong working relationship with both the City and Pacifica residents, which will be vital for the success of the City’s policy implementation.

Radicalizing Resources to Create Change
PRC was established in 2004 and provides a range of services, including providing groceries onsite or by delivery to help our community feed families; emergency financial assistance for past due rent, mortgages, deposits, and utilities to prevent homelessness; financial education and coaching, tax preparation, and matched savings programs to help increase families’ economic security; and problem solving with families and individuals to find solutions and opportunities that work for them, including information and referrals.

PRC’s work is radical social work. As defined by the Social Welfare Action Alliance, “radical social work practice includes: forming democratic and egalitarian relationships with service users and coworkers; addressing people’s problems from their own perspective; participating with service users and coworkers in collective action; and understanding that “the personal is political” – individual concerns can often be traced to larger power systems.” PRC provides support to anyone who needs it, in particular vulnerable families who are often marginalized and underrepresented. By encouraging self-advocacy, PRC empowers individuals to participate in creating social change. This manifests mainly by addressing immediate needs and providing a safe, nonjudgmental space to explore how to create a more socially just community together. PRC lives its moto, “neighbors helping neighbors,” and empowers its community to be the change that is needed.

6.c
Packet Pg. 125 Attachment: Attachment C: Pacifica’s PBF Policy Fund 2024 Grant Application (5825 : Reso Accepting Grant Award from PBF Policy Fund) City of Pacifica
Community Development Department

STAKEHOLDERS AND

COMMUNITY PARTNERSHIPS
Bridging the Technical Gap
HEART is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit and a Joint Powers Authority established in 2003 that creates and preserves affordable housing opportunities for low- and middle-income households in San Mateo County. HEART improves capacity through a variety of programming, particularly through its housing consulting services division. Our team, composed of technical experts with lived experience, provides policy analysis, program design and stakeholder engagement to smaller San Mateo County jurisdictions, who often struggle with intense workloads and lean housing staff. Since launching the program in January of 2023, our division has successfully provided intermediary support to over eight municipalities within the region. HEART has recognized the importance of cultivating the next generation of leaders in housing with the Don Horsely fellowship. This opportunity, named in memory of one of HEART’s long-time board members, offers full-time, salaried positions in either real estate development or housing consulting services for entry-level Black, Indigenous, other People of Color (BIPOC), Femaleidentifying, and LGBTQAI+ professionals.

Engagement Strategies
Pacifica is determined to create the best outcomes for its residents, the environment and infrastructure, both now and in the future. The City’s most vulnerable residents, our low-income families and seniors, exist at the intersection of social vulnerability and housing insecurity, and are often disproportionately impacted by housing emergencies and natural disasters. To ensure that no neighbor is left behind, climate and social equity targets must be advanced in parallel to one another, and envision equity as both a structural outcome and intentional process.

Stakeholders must come together to overcome housing disparities caused by ineffective housing processes, so that every resident, regardless of their socioeconomic status, can thrive.

Under the guidance of the City, HEART, and PRC, the PBF fellow will undertake a community engagement strategy focused on increasing the understanding of the importance of zoning reform for housing production and affordability, while increasing the breadth of who is engaged in discussions about zoning, with a particular emphasis on low-income households, and individuals experiencing housing insecurity. Operationally, equity in our zoning and objective standards policies will include:

Gathering public perspectives: The City aims to achieve equity by centering the most impacted at the core of our solutions. The City would like to have advisory boards with diverse representatives who can offer input on housing policies and initiatives.

6.c
Packet Pg. 126 Attachment: Attachment C: Pacifica’s PBF Policy Fund 2024 Grant Application (5825 : Reso Accepting Grant Award from PBF Policy Fund) City of Pacifica
Community Development Department

STAKEHOLDERS AND

COMMUNITY PARTNERSHIPS
Engagement Strategies
Public forums will be hosted to allow residents to share their experiences, challenges, and ideas related to housing, with their feedback informing and refining policy proposals.

Engagement activities will be assessed through surveys and participant feedback, allowing for continuous improvement in outreach efforts. This feedback will be incorporated into an environmental and social equity framework, which will be distributed to the Community Development Department, as well as Pacifica's Emergency Preparedness & Safety Commission, to incorporate into any further zoning or emergency preparedness planning.

Workshops and Training Programs: To garner awareness and support for equitable zoning policies, efforts will include the organization of workshops and information sessions to educate the community about housing policies, rights, and resources, as well as encourage participation in the processes related to zoning reform and setting objective design standards. To keep community meetings accessible and inclusive, presentations and materials will be provided in languages commonly spoken in the community, such as Spanish, Tagalog, and Chinese.

Focus on Equitable Data: To understand communities in Pacifica with elevated risk, the fellow will leverage tools that will help their constituents understand how climate change will impact them. Tools include the Neighborhoods at Risk Tool, the Social Vulnerability Index, the National Index, and the Climate and Economic Justice Screening Tool.

Intentional Partnerships: The PBF will have the opportunity to collaborate with partners before, during and after the implementation of our policy initiatives. Stakeholder groups and the fellow will be responsible for formal and informal guidance on equitable decision practices, and will prioritize partnerships with those who typically aren’t traditionally offered a voice in the planning process or disaster management. Intentional partnership also means facilitating crosssector accountability, and calling attention to zoning policies and practices that harm vulnerable residents.

LOCAL GOVERNMENT LEADERSHIP

AND CONTRIBUTIONS
The City will work in conjunction with Coro to hold regular training sessions and workshops to enhance the fellow’s skills in policy analysis, community engagement, and project management.

6.c
Packet Pg. 127 Attachment: Attachment C: Pacifica’s PBF Policy Fund 2024 Grant Application (5825 : Reso Accepting Grant Award from PBF Policy Fund) City of Pacifica
Community Development Department

LOCAL GOVERNMENT LEADERSHIP

AND CONTRIBUTIONS
This investment in a dedicated fellow allows for innovation and focused progress that hiring an additional City staff member may not achieve, given the competing priorities typical City staff face. Pacifica can also provide office space, as well as access to technical resources, including data, research materials, and GIS tools, to support their professional responsibilities.

Brianne Harkousha, AICP, Senior Planner at the City of Pacifica, will oversee the policy fellow.

Brianne brings a wealth of experience in policy analysis, public engagement, and technical programs. Her background in environmental and long-range planning, combined with her expertise in consulting and the public sector, make her an ideal candidate to lead this initiative.

In the event Brianne is unable to fulfill her oversight responsibilities, HEART (Housing Endowment and Regional Trust of San Mateo County) will step in. HEART's team for this project are Tim Davis and Chasidy Miles, who bring a deep understanding of housing policies and community development. Tim Davis, formerly of the City of Boston Mayor’s Office of Housing, and Chasidy Miles, previously associated with JPMorgan Chase’s Community Development division, will also offer technical assistance and professional development throughout the process.

6.c
Packet Pg. 128 Attachment: Attachment C: Pacifica’s PBF Policy Fund 2024 Grant Application (5825 : Reso Accepting Grant Award from PBF Policy Fund) City of Pacifica
Community Development Department
III. APPROACH AND

KEY MILESTONES
The City has established the following timeline for its housing goals and established a set of expectations and responsibilities for the PBF fellow. The fellow will work under the guidance and support from the City of Pacifica, HEART, and PRC. While the PBF fellow will be assisting City staff on researching best practices for both zoning reform and objective design standards, their work will focus on both researching and implementing community engagement best practices in conjunction with our non-profit partners.

Months 1-2: Assessment of
Current Zoning Regulations
Months 3-6: Stakeholder
Engagement
Months 5-6: Drafting
Zoning Revisions
Months 7-11: Public Review,
Feedback and Approvals
Months 14-18: Monitoring
and Adjustments
Months 12-13:

Implementation
Comprehensive Zoning Regulation Timeline
The first two months of our zoning objectives will include a comprehensive and thorough review of Pacifica’s existing zoning codes. The fellow will be responsible for identifying current zoning regulations that are inconsistent with Pacifica’s General Plan and SB330 and will be laying the groundwork with PRC and HEART to begin stakeholder engagement, in month three.

The fellow, with the support of PRC and HEART, will hold workshops, focus groups, and public meetings to gather input from residents, developers, and other stakeholders. During the stakeholder engagement process, the fellow will determine key concerns and priorities for zoning reform and develop a clear set of guidelines for increased density and housing production.

The drafting of zoning code revisions will begin while engagement is ongoing; the fellow will submit revisions to relevant City departments for review and feedback.

6.c
Packet Pg. 129 Attachment: Attachment C: Pacifica’s PBF Policy Fund 2024 Grant Application (5825 : Reso Accepting Grant Award from PBF Policy Fund) City of Pacifica
Community Development Department
III. APPROACH AND

KEY MILESTONES
Once zoning revisions have been held for public review, finalized and approved, the fellow will move on to implementing our new zoning regulations. The fellow will launch a public education campaign to inform residents of the changes, and will assist the City in updating zoning maps, ordinances, and administrative procedures to reflect the new regulations. The fellow, with oversight from HEART, will track the impact of the new regulations and schedule annual reviews for consistent monitoring and oversight.

Addressing Objective Design Standards
The City has established the following timeline for its objective design standards process, which will be held in tandem with the rezoning process. The fellow will work under the guidance and support from the City of Pacifica, HEART, and PRC.

Months 1-2: Project Initiation
and Research
Months 3-6: Stakeholder
Engagement
Months 7-10: Drafting
Initial Standards
Months 11-13: Public Review,
Feedback
Months 17-18:

Implementation
Months 12-13: Approval
and Adoption
Objective Design Standards and Permit Processing Timeline The first two months of our objective standards timeline will consist of a comprehensive review of existing objective design standards from other jurisdictions, with a focus on how other cities have incorporated community engagement into the process. With the assistance of HEART, the fellow will determine relevant guidelines for multi-family and mixed-use projects on building form, architectural style, materials, site layout, and sustainability.

6.c
Packet Pg. 130 Attachment: Attachment C: Pacifica’s PBF Policy Fund 2024 Grant Application (5825 : Reso Accepting Grant Award from PBF Policy Fund) City of Pacifica
Community Development Department
III. APPROACH AND

KEY MILESTONES
Months 1-2: Project Initiation
and Research
Months 4-6: Stakeholder
Engagement
Months 7-10: Drafting
Initial Standards
Months 11-13: Public Review,
Feedback
Months 17-18:

Implementation
Months 12-13: Approval
and Adoption
Objective Design Standards and Permit Processing Timeline This will be followed by our stakeholder engagement process, where the fellow will conduct workshops, focus groups, and surveys to gather input from housing advocates, developers and residents. Once the fellow has collected feedback, they will work with City staff to begin drafting our objective design standards, focusing on clear, measurable criteria for building massing, height, setbacks, architectural consistency, open space, landscaping, and parking.

Once the first set of guidelines are completed and reviewed, the fellow will release the draft standards for public review and host public meetings with PRC to gather feedback. Then, a final version of the draft will be written and submitted to Pacifica and our City Council. If the standards secure formal approval, the fellow will be responsible for updating planning and zoning documents to reflect the new standards. The City will begin applying new objective design standards to all new multi-family and mixed-use projects. The fellow, with the help of PRC and HEART, will conduct training sessions or City staff, developers, and architects to ensure smooth implementation.

6.c
Packet Pg. 131 Attachment: Attachment C: Pacifica’s PBF Policy Fund 2024 Grant Application (5825 : Reso Accepting Grant Award from PBF Policy Fund)

PARTNERSHIP FOR
THE BAY’S FUTURE

POLICY FUND
City of Pacifica
Letters From:
(650) 738-7341
[email protected]
https://www.cityofpacifica.org/
Community Development Department
City of Pacifica
San Mateo County
HEART and PRC
Letters of Support

6.c
Packet Pg. 132 Attachment: Attachment C: Pacifica’s PBF Policy Fund 2024 Grant Application (5825 : Reso Accepting Grant Award from PBF Policy Fund)

6.c
Packet Pg. 133 Attachment: Attachment C: Pacifica’s PBF Policy Fund 2024 Grant Application (5825 : Reso Accepting Grant Award from PBF Policy Fund)

6.c
Packet Pg. 134 Attachment: Attachment C: Pacifica’s PBF Policy Fund 2024 Grant Application (5825 : Reso Accepting Grant Award from PBF Policy Fund)

6.c
Packet Pg. 135 Attachment: Attachment C: Pacifica’s PBF Policy Fund 2024 Grant Application (5825 : Reso Accepting Grant Award from PBF Policy Fund)

6.c
Packet Pg. 136 Attachment: Attachment C: Pacifica’s PBF Policy Fund 2024 Grant Application (5825 : Reso Accepting Grant Award from PBF Policy Fund)

6.c
Packet Pg. 137 Attachment: Attachment C: Pacifica’s PBF Policy Fund 2024 Grant Application (5825 : Reso Accepting Grant Award from PBF Policy Fund)

CITY OF PACIFICA

COUNCIL AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT
1/13/2025
1 SUBJECT:

Esplanade & Palmetto Bicycle and Pedestrian Improvements Project RECOMMENDED ACTION:

Approve the following actions for the Esplanade & Palmetto Bicycle and Pedestrian Improvements Project

1. Adopt a Resolution entitled "A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Pacifica Approving the Construction Contract between the City of Pacifica and Dryco Construction Inc. for the Esplanade and Palmetto Pedestrian and Bicycle Improvements Project in an amount of $1,171,750.60; Authorize a budget authority in the amount of $1,288,758.00 which includes contingencies in an amount of approximately ten percent (10%) of the Construction Contract amounts; Authorize staff to Execute Future Change Orders and Task Orders within the contingency amount;

2. Authorize City Manager to Execute an amendment to the City’s existing project design contract with Fehr and Peers (F&P), on a time and materials basis in an amount not to exceed $15,000 for construction engineering support, bringing the total contract cost ceiling to $117,500; and

3. Authorize the City Manager to Sign Contract Documents for the Project; and

4. Execute Budget Amendment Appropriating $465,354.50 from Available Fund Balance In Fund 13 - Street Improvement Fund.”
STAFF CONTACT:

Roland Yip, P.E., DPW Deputy Director/City Engineer
(650) 738-3771
[email protected]
Rey Soriano, Assistant Civil Engineer
(650) 676-5608
[email protected]
John Mullins, Interim Director of Public Works
(650) 738-3767
[email protected]
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION:

The Esplanade & Palmetto Bicycle and Pedestrian Improvement Project will provide a variety of bicycle and pedestrian improvements along approximately 2 miles of portions of Palmetto Avenue, West Avalon Drive, and Esplanade Avenue in the City of Pacifica. The improvements are part of the City’s 2020 Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan. 7 Packet Pg. 138
Pacifica City Council 2
January 13, 2025
The project will install new, and improve existing, Class 2 (dedicated), Class 2B (buffered and dedicated), and Class 3 (shared) bike lanes along Palmetto Avenue and a portion of Esplanade Avenue and install new Class 3B bicycle boulevards (shared with traffic calming elements) along West Avalon Drive and portions of Esplanade Avenue. The Project will also resurface the above roads which will encourage more bicycling and ensure a smoother surface for use by all users.

The project will enhance pedestrian safety by installing quick-build painted bulbout safety zones at pedestrian crossings, curb ramps, high visibility crosswalks, and rectangular rapid flashing beacons at several intersections that connect high use centers with beaches, including the intersections of Palmetto/Westline, Palmetto/Esplanade, Esplanade/Bill Drake, Esplanade/West Manor, Esplanade/West Avalon, Palmetto/West Avalon, Palmetto/SB Hwy 1 On-Ramp, Palmetto/Surf, and Palmetto/Shoreview. The project plans are available to view on the City's website at: <https://www.cityofpacifica.org/departments/public-works/engineering/esplanadepalmetto-bicyle-pedestrian-improvement-project> The project was submitted and selected for Transportation Development Act (TDA) Article 3 grant funding in July 2022 and was programmed in the 2022-27 Capital Improvement Program.

Staff further applied and was successful in additional funding to perform pavement resurfacing (slurry/cape seal with asphalt repairs) along the route through San Mateo County Transportation Authority (SMCTA) Cycle 6 Bike-Ped Grant.

On June 3rd, 2024, the Planning Commission found the project is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and approved Coastal Development Permit CDP-455-23 and Tree Permit TP-8-24 for the Project.

On August 26, 2024 Council rejected all bids for the project. The City received three bids ranging from $1,192,554.60 to $1,523,325.00. The low bid amount exceeded the engineer’s estimate by approximately $142,554.60, or 14%. Staff proposed to re-advertise the project later this year to attract a wider pool of available contractors, and a more favorable bid. Staff also reevaluated the current scope of work to amend the bid documents, however the scope of work could not be reduced due to the grant requirements.

Staff rebid the project on November 8, 2024 and opened bids on December 12, 2024. The City received the following three bids:

Company Total Bid
Dryco Construction Inc. $1,171,750.60
Golden Bay Construction $1,272,252.40
VSS International $1,372,325.00
The revised engineer’s estimate at the time of the second bid was $1,084,000. The low bid from Dryco Construction Inc. (Dryco) is 8% above that estimate. However, given that the City has bid the project twice and that the bid amounts are close together, staff is recommending that the Council award the construction contract to Dryco. Staff has examined the low bid from Dryco and found it to be responsive as defined in the Public Contracts Code.

If approved, Staff anticipates to commence project construction in approximately February 2025 and construction completed by July 2025.

Staff is further recommending awarding an amendment to the City’s existing project design contract with Fehr and Peers (F&P), on a time and materials basis in an amount not to exceed 7 Packet Pg. 139
Pacifica City Council 3
January 13, 2025
$15,000, for F&P to provide engineering support during construction. F&P is the primary design engineering consultant for the project, and their existing contract does not include construction engineering support. The scope of work for construction engineering support would include submittal review, assistance with Requests for Information (RFIs) and contract change orders, site visits including delineator and striping layout, and preparation of as-built plans. The amendment would bring their total contract amount to $117,500. F&P’s proposal for these services is provided in Attachment 2.

ALTERNATIVE ACTION:

Council may direct staff to reject all bids again in the hope that bids would come in lower in the future, or to provide additional time to seek additional grant funding in lieu of the necessary City Funds. However, doing so would risk losing the existing TDA Article 3 funding which expires on August 31, 2025, and would incur additional project management costs.

Staff does not recommend this alternative because construction costs could increase, and the TDA Article 3 grant funds could be put at risk.

RELATION TO CITY COUNCIL GOALS AND WORK PLAN:

Approval of the recommended actions is consistent with the following Council adopted Goals:
• Stewardship of City Infrastructure: Includes repairing/replacing outdated city facilities such as city hall, the libraries, fire stations, etc., improving streets, and responding to impacts of sea level rise. This construction project will improve the existing bicycle and pedestrian network by improving the safety and usability of existing bike lanes and pedestrian facilities.

FISCAL IMPACT:

The following is the source and use of funds:

Total Project Source and Use of Funds
TDA Article 3 $335,160.00
SMCTA Cycle 6 $568,504.00
General Fund (FY 22-23 CIP Budget) $37,240.00
Fund 13 - Street Improvement Fund $465,354.50
Total Source of Funds $1,406,258.50
Construction $1,171,750.60
Construction Contingency (10%) $117,007.40
Fehr & Peers Design $102,500.00
Fehr & Peers Task Order 2 Amendment 2 $15,000.00
Total Use of Funds $1,406,258.50
In order to complete the project, an additional $465,354.50 is needed from Fund 13 - Street Improvement Fund.
7 Packet Pg. 140
Pacifica City Council 4
January 13, 2025
ORIGINATED BY:

Public Works
ATTACHMENT LIST:

Attachment 1: City of Pacifica - Esplanade & Palmetto Construction Services Agreement - Signed (PDF)
Attachment 2: FP-Proposal_Esplanade-Palmetto-DSDC (PDF) 7 Packet Pg. 141
Pacifica City Council 5
January 13, 2025
RESOLUTION NO. _______

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PACIFICA

APPROVING THE CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT BETWEEN THE CITY OF PACFICA AND DRYCO CONSTRUCTION INC. IN AN AMOUNT OF $1,171,750.60; AUTHORIZING A BUDGET AUTHORITY IN THE AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $1,288,758.00, WHICH INCLUDES CONTINGENCIES IN AN AMOUNT APPROXIMATELY TEN PERCENT (10%) OF THE CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT AMOUNT; AUTHORIZE STAFF TO EXECUTE FUTURE CHANGE ORDERS AND TASK ORDERS WITHIN THE CONTINGENCY AMOUNT; AUTHORIZE STAFF TO EXECUTE AN AMENDMENT TO THE CITY’S EXISTING PROJECT

DESIGN CONTRACT WITH FEHR & PEERS ON A TIME AND MATERIALS BASIS IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $15,000 FOR CONSTRUCTION ENGINEERING SUPPORT BRINGING THE TOTAL CONTRACT COST CEILING TO $117,500; AUTHORIZE THE CITY MANAGER TO SIGN CONTRACT DOCUMENTS FOR THE PROJECT; AND EXECUTE BUDGET AMENDMENT APPROPRIATING $465,354.50 FROM AVAILABLE FUND BALANCE IN FUND 13 - STREET IMPROVEMENT FUND
WHEREAS, consistent with the City of Pacifica’s Bidding Procedures for Public Projects (Municipal Code Title 3 Chapter 15) the City of Pacifica advertised the Request for Bids for Esplanade & Palmetto Bicycle and Pedestrian Improvements Project on July 10, 2024; and WHEREAS, the lowest responsive and responsible bid was from Dryco Construction Inc. in the amount of $1,171,750.60; and
WHEREAS, consistent with the City of Pacifica’s Purchasing Policy (Administrative Policy No. 76), the City of Pacifica entered into an agreement with Fehr & Peers for consulting services under the City Council’s purchasing authority in October 2022; and WHEREAS, the City Council previously authorized Task Order No. 1 and Task Order No. 2 to F&P’s contract for project design, bringing the total not to exceed amount to $103,000; and
WHEREAS, additional services are needed from F&P to provide construction engineering support services in the amount of $15,000 during the construction phase of the project, bringing the total contract cost ceiling to $117,500.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Pacifica approves the Construction Contract between the City of Pacifica and Dryco Construction Inc. for the Esplanade and Palmetto Pedestrian and Bicycle Improvements Project in an amount of $1,171,750.60; Authorizes a budget authority in the amount of $1,288,758.00 which includes contingencies in an amount of approximately ten percent (10%) of the Construction Contract amounts; Authorizes staff to Execute Future Change Orders and Task Orders within the contingency amount; Authorizes staff to Execute an amendment to the City’s existing project design contract with Fehr and Peers (F&P), on a time and materials basis in an amount not to exceed $15,000 for construction engineering support, bringing the total contract cost ceiling to $117,500; Authorizes the City Manager to Sign Contract Documents for the Project; and execute budget amendment appropriating $465,354.50 from available fund balance in Fund 13 - Street Improvement Fund.
7 Packet Pg. 142
Pacifica City Council 6
January 13, 2025
• • • • •
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Pacifica, California, held on the 13th day of January, 2025, by the following vote:

AYES, Councilmembers:

NOES, Councilmembers:

ABSENT, Councilmembers:

ABSTAIN, Councilmembers:
_________________________________
Sue Beckmeyer, Mayor
ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
______________________________ _________________________________ Sarah Coffey, City Clerk Michelle Kenyon, City Attorney 7 Packet Pg. 143
ATTACHMENT 1

7.a
Packet Pg. 144 Attachment: Attachment 1: City of Pacifica - Esplanade & Palmetto Construction Services Agreement - Signed [Revision 1] (5823 : Esplanade &

7.a
Packet Pg. 145 Attachment: Attachment 1: City of Pacifica - Esplanade & Palmetto Construction Services Agreement - Signed [Revision 1] (5823 : Esplanade &

7.a
Packet Pg. 146 Attachment: Attachment 1: City of Pacifica - Esplanade & Palmetto Construction Services Agreement - Signed [Revision 1] (5823 : Esplanade &

7.a
Packet Pg. 147 Attachment: Attachment 1: City of Pacifica - Esplanade & Palmetto Construction Services Agreement - Signed [Revision 1] (5823 : Esplanade &

7.a
Packet Pg. 148 Attachment: Attachment 1: City of Pacifica - Esplanade & Palmetto Construction Services Agreement - Signed [Revision 1] (5823 : Esplanade &

7.a
Packet Pg. 149 Attachment: Attachment 1: City of Pacifica - Esplanade & Palmetto Construction Services Agreement - Signed [Revision 1] (5823 : Esplanade &

7.a
Packet Pg. 150 Attachment: Attachment 1: City of Pacifica - Esplanade & Palmetto Construction Services Agreement - Signed [Revision 1] (5823 : Esplanade &

7.a
Packet Pg. 151 Attachment: Attachment 1: City of Pacifica - Esplanade & Palmetto Construction Services Agreement - Signed [Revision 1] (5823 : Esplanade &

7.a
Packet Pg. 152 Attachment: Attachment 1: City of Pacifica - Esplanade & Palmetto Construction Services Agreement - Signed [Revision 1] (5823 : Esplanade &

7.a
Packet Pg. 153 Attachment: Attachment 1: City of Pacifica - Esplanade & Palmetto Construction Services Agreement - Signed [Revision 1] (5823 : Esplanade &

7.a
Packet Pg. 154 Attachment: Attachment 1: City of Pacifica - Esplanade & Palmetto Construction Services Agreement - Signed [Revision 1] (5823 : Esplanade &

7.a
Packet Pg. 155 Attachment: Attachment 1: City of Pacifica - Esplanade & Palmetto Construction Services Agreement - Signed [Revision 1] (5823 : Esplanade &

7.a
Packet Pg. 156 Attachment: Attachment 1: City of Pacifica - Esplanade & Palmetto Construction Services Agreement - Signed [Revision 1] (5823 : Esplanade &

7.a
Packet Pg. 157 Attachment: Attachment 1: City of Pacifica - Esplanade & Palmetto Construction Services Agreement - Signed [Revision 1] (5823 : Esplanade &

7.a
Packet Pg. 158 Attachment: Attachment 1: City of Pacifica - Esplanade & Palmetto Construction Services Agreement - Signed [Revision 1] (5823 : Esplanade &

7.a
Packet Pg. 159 Attachment: Attachment 1: City of Pacifica - Esplanade & Palmetto Construction Services Agreement - Signed [Revision 1] (5823 : Esplanade &

7.a
Packet Pg. 160 Attachment: Attachment 1: City of Pacifica - Esplanade & Palmetto Construction Services Agreement - Signed [Revision 1] (5823 : Esplanade &

7.a
Packet Pg. 161 Attachment: Attachment 1: City of Pacifica - Esplanade & Palmetto Construction Services Agreement - Signed [Revision 1] (5823 : Esplanade &

7.a
Packet Pg. 162 Attachment: Attachment 1: City of Pacifica - Esplanade & Palmetto Construction Services Agreement - Signed [Revision 1] (5823 : Esplanade &

7.a
Packet Pg. 163 Attachment: Attachment 1: City of Pacifica - Esplanade & Palmetto Construction Services Agreement - Signed [Revision 1] (5823 : Esplanade &

7.a
Packet Pg. 164 Attachment: Attachment 1: City of Pacifica - Esplanade & Palmetto Construction Services Agreement - Signed [Revision 1] (5823 : Esplanade &

7.a
Packet Pg. 165 Attachment: Attachment 1: City of Pacifica - Esplanade & Palmetto Construction Services Agreement - Signed [Revision 1] (5823 : Esplanade &

7.a
Packet Pg. 166 Attachment: Attachment 1: City of Pacifica - Esplanade & Palmetto Construction Services Agreement - Signed [Revision 1] (5823 : Esplanade &

7.a
Packet Pg. 167 Attachment: Attachment 1: City of Pacifica - Esplanade & Palmetto Construction Services Agreement - Signed [Revision 1] (5823 : Esplanade &

7.a
Packet Pg. 168 Attachment: Attachment 1: City of Pacifica - Esplanade & Palmetto Construction Services Agreement - Signed [Revision 1] (5823 : Esplanade &

7.a
Packet Pg. 169 Attachment: Attachment 1: City of Pacifica - Esplanade & Palmetto Construction Services Agreement - Signed [Revision 1] (5823 : Esplanade &

7.a
Packet Pg. 170 Attachment: Attachment 1: City of Pacifica - Esplanade & Palmetto Construction Services Agreement - Signed [Revision 1] (5823 : Esplanade &

7.a
Packet Pg. 171 Attachment: Attachment 1: City of Pacifica - Esplanade & Palmetto Construction Services Agreement - Signed [Revision 1] (5823 : Esplanade & 345 California Street | Suite 450 | San Francisco, CA 94104 | (415) 348-0300 | Fax (415) 773-1790 www.fehrandpeers.com
July 24, 2024
Roland Yip, Deputy Director/City Engineer
City of Pacifica Public Works Department, Engineering Division 540 Crespi Drive
Pacifica, CA 94044
Subject: Proposal for Engineering Support During Construction – Esplanade & Palmetto Bicycle and Pedestrian Improvements Project
This proposal has been prepared to support the City of Pacifica and their consultants during the construction phase of the Esplanade & Palmetto Bicycle and Pedestrian Improvements Project. In July 2-24, Fehr & Peers and our subconsultant NCE prepared final construction documents for paving, curb ramp, signing, and striping improvements along segments of Esplanade and Palmetto in Pacifica. To continue supporting the city during the construction phase, we have prepared this proposal for additional support activities. Our detailed scope of work is described below.

Scope of Work
Fehr & Peers will provide engineering support during the construction of the project. Our efforts will cover activities related to supporting the city-administered construction process. While the exact requests from the city will be determined as part of the construction process, the following summarizes the types of work our team is prepared to support as part of this phase of the project If necessary, Fehr & Peers can support the city during the construction phase. The tasks that we would expect to support include
• Material submittal review
• Responding to requests for information (RFI) and other design questions arising during construction
• Site visits to resolve unforeseen issues on site, review cat-tracking, verify limits and locations of pavement rehabilitation, resolve issues in the field, etc. • Meetings and coordination with City staff and contractor • Preparation of as-built plans.

ATTACHMENT 2 7.b
Packet Pg. 172 Attachment: Attachment 2: FP-Proposal_Esplanade-Palmetto-DSDC [Revision 1] (5823 : Esplanade & Palmetto Bicycle and Pedestrian Roland Yip
July 24, 2024