CITY OF PACIFICA
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA
Council Chambers
2212 Beach Blvd
Pacifica, CA 94044
Mayor Sue Beckmeyer
Vice Mayor Christine Boles
Councilmember Mary Bier
Councilmember Mayra Espinosa
Councilmember Greg Wright
City Council Regular Meeting 1 October 27, 2025
SPECIAL and REGULAR MEETING
October 27, 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 October 27, 2025
5:00 PM - CLOSED SESSION
00a. PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54956.8: CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS. Agency negotiator: Kevin Woodhouse, City Manager.
Property: A portion of 540 Crespi Drive, Pacifica, CA (APN 022-162-420). Property: A portion of 540 Crespi Drive, Pacifica, CA (APN 022-162-420). Negotiating parties: City of Pacifica and Breakwater Crespi, LLC. Under negotiation: Price and terms of payment. 6:00 PM OPEN SESSION
Call to Order
Roll Call
Reading of Land Acknowledgment
The City of Pacifica acknowledges that we occupy the unceded ancestral homeland of the Ramaytush Ohlone peoples, who are the original inhabitants of the San Francisco Peninsula. We honor the Ramaytush Ohlone peoples for their enduring commitment to Mother Earth. As the Indigenous protectors of this land and in accordance with their traditions, the Ramaytush Ohlone have never ceded, lost, nor forgotten their responsibilities as the caretakers of this place, as well as for all peoples who reside in their traditional territory. We affirm their sovereign rights as First Peoples and wish to pay our respects to the ancestors, elders, and relatives of the Ramaytush Ohlone peoples.
Salute to the Flag led by Councilmember Wright
Closed Session Report
SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS
A. Proclamation: Arbor Day 2025
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.
City Council Regular Meeting 3 October 27, 2025
1. Approval of Minutes
PROPOSED ACTION: Move to approve the minutes for the October 6, 2025 Joint Study Session of the City Council and Planning Commission.
2. Continuation of Proclamation of a Local Emergency at the Sewer Mains Crossing Calera Creek in the Vallemar Neighborhood
PROPOSED ACTION: Accept report and make a determination that conditions of local emergency continue to exist at the Sewer Mains Crossing Calera Creek in the Vallemar Neighborhood.
3. Amendments to Administrative Policy No. 84 relating to Guidelines for Issuing Proclamations, Commendations and Ceremonial Documents to reflect the nomenclature change for the title of “Mayor pro Tem” to “Vice Mayor” PROPOSED ACTION: Adopt the Resolution titled, “A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Pacifica Amending Administrative Policy No. 84, ‘Guidelines for Issuing Proclamations, Commendations and Ceremonial Documents’” to reflect the nomenclature change for the title of “Mayor pro Tem” to “Vice Mayor”.
4. Notice of Completion for the Esplanade & Palmetto Bicycle and Pedestrian Improvements Project
PROPOSED ACTION: Adopt the Resolution of the City Council of the City of Pacifica accepting completion and directing the City Manager to file Notice of completion for the Esplanade & Palmetto Bicycle and Pedestrian Improvements Project; and Authorize the City Manager to release the retention funds to the contractor.
5. Notice of Completion for the Sharp Park PDA Pedestrian Improvements Project PROPOSED ACTION: Adopt the Resolution of the City Council of the City of Pacifica accepting completion and directing the City Manager to file Notice of Completion for the Sharp Park PDA Pedestrian Improvements Project; and Authorize the City Manager to release the retention funds to the contractor.
6. Contracts with the California Department of Education, California Department of Social Services and the San Mateo County Superintendent of Schools for the purpose of providing Child Care and development services for fiscal year 2025-26, Continued Funding Applications and all related contract documents.
PROPOSED ACTION: Adopt the Resolution Approving Agreements with the California Department of Education, the California Department of Social Services and the San Mateo County Superintendent of Schools for the Purpose of Providing Child Care and Development Services and to Authorize the Designated Personnel to Sign Contract Documents for Fiscal Year 2025/26.
7. 2024 Annual Military Equipment Use Report and renewal of Military Equipment Use Policy
PROPOSED ACTION: Adopt a resolution of the City Council of the City of Pacifica approving the Pacifica Police Department 2024 Annual Military Equipment Use Report and renewing Ordinance No. 896 and the adoption of the Military Equipment Use Policy (Policy 705).
City Council Regular Meeting 4 October 27, 2025
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.
PUBLIC HEARINGS - NONE.
CONSIDERATION
8. Appointments to the Climate Action and Resilience Committee and Beautification Advisory Committee
PROPOSED ACTION: Move to appoint:
A) nine (9) applicants to the Climate Action and Resilience Committee: four (4) individuals to 4-year full terms to expire October 2029, plus three (3) individuals to 2- year terms to expire October 2027, plus two (2) youth to 1-year terms to expire October 2026; and
B) two (2) applicants to the Beautification Advisory Committee for partial terms to expire March 2026.
9. Discussion of local amendments to the 2025 Edition of the California Building Standards Code including options for Electric Vehicle readiness, load storage, water efficient landscaping, and bicycle parking requirements.
PROPOSED ACTION: Receive a presentation and provide final direction regarding preparation of the ordinance.
10. Amendments to Mayor and Vice Mayor Selection Process PROPOSED ACTION: Adopt the Resolution titled, “A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Pacifica Rescinding Administrative Policy No. 17 ‘Selection of Mayor and Mayor Pro Tem’ and Amending the City Council Rules and Code of Ethics to Add Guidelines for Selection of Mayor and Vice Mayor”.
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 October 27, 2025
ADJOURN
NOTICE: If you challenge a city's zoning, planning or other decision in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the City Council at, or prior to, the public hearing. Judicial review of any city administrative decision may be had only if a petition is filed with the court not later than the 90th day following the date upon which the decision becomes final. Judicial review of environmental determinations may be subject to a shorter time period for litigation, in certain cases 30 days following the date of the final decision The City of Pacifica will provide assistance for disabled citizens upon at least 24 hours advance notice to the City Manager’s Office (650) 738-7301, or send request via email to:
[email protected] if you need sign language assistance or written material printed in a larger font or taped, advance notice is necessary. All meeting rooms are accessible to the disabled.
The Pacifica Municipal Code is available 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
• San Mateo County Supervisor Ray Mueller, District 3, 500 County Center, Redwood City CA 94063 (650) 363-4569
• 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]
• Vice Mayor Christine Boles, [email protected]
• Councilmember Mary Bier, [email protected]
• Councilmember Mayra Espinosa, [email protected]
• Councilmember Greg Wright, [email protected]
CITY OF PACIFICA
COUNCIL AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT
10/27/2025
1 SUBJECT:
Approval of Minutes
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Move to approve the minutes for the October 6, 2025 Joint Study Session of the City Council and Planning Commission.
STAFF CONTACT:
Sarah Coffey, City Clerk
650-738-7307
[email protected]
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION:
Move to approve the minutes for the October 6, 2025 Joint Study Session of the City Council and Planning Commission (Attachment A).
FISCAL IMPACT:
Within budgeted operational expenses.
ORIGINATED BY:
City Clerk
ATTACHMENT LIST:
Attachment A: Minutes of 10-6-2025 Joint Study Session City Council and Planning Commission (PDF)
1 Packet Pg. 6
CITY OF PACIFICA
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
Council Chambers
2212 Beach Blvd
Pacifica, CA 94044
Mayor Sue Beckmeyer
Vice Mayor Christine Boles
Councilmember Mary Bier
Councilmember Mayra Espinosa
Councilmember Greg Wright
City Council Joint Study Session 1 October 06, 2025
JOINT STUDY SESSION
CITY COUNCIL & PLANNING COMMISSION
October 06, 2025 (MONDAY)
www.cityofpacifica.org
Mayor Sue Beckmeyer called the meeting to order on October 6, 2025 at 6:04 PM 6:00 PM - JOINT STUDY SESSION OF CITY COUNCIL AND PLANNING COMMISSION Call to Order
Mayor Beckmeyer called the Joint Study Session to order at 6:04 p.m.
City Clerk Coffey took a verbal roll call for both City Council and Planning Commission.
Attendee Name Title Status Arrived
Sue Beckmeyer Mayor Present
Christine Boles Vice Mayor Present
Mary Bier Councilmember Present
Mayra Espinosa Councilmember Present
Greg Wright Councilmember Present
Planning Commissioners Present: Samantha Hauser, Chair; Lauren Berman, Vice Chair; Marj Davis; Daniella Devine; Alex Ferguson; James Godwin; Chris Redfield.
Staff Present: Kevin Woodhouse, City Manager; Karen Murphy, Asst. City Attorney; Samantha Updegrave, Community Development Director; Katelyn Snodgrass, Assoc. Planner; Gabrielle DeLavallade, Asst. Planner; Sarah Coffey, City Clerk.
CONSIDERATION
1. Joint presentation by the HEART of San Mateo and Community Development staff to provide an overview of current State and Federal laws that apply to housing development projects, basics of affordable housing and financing, and discussion of Pacifica’s Inclusionary Housing Ordinance and Density Bonus Ordinance.
PROPOSED ACTION: Receive presentation and, in consideration of 2023-2031 Housing Element, provide direction on updates to the Inclusionary Housing Ordinance and Density Bonus Program Ordinance, as well as feedback for further research and analysis. (CEQA Status: Exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
1.a
Packet Pg. 7
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of 10-6-2025 Joint Study Session City Council and Planning Commission (6062 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Joint Study Session 2 October 06, 2025
pursuant to § 15378 of the CEQA Guidelines because the discussion is not a “project,” as defined, because it has no potential for resulting in either a direct physical change in the environment, or a reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment.)
Mayor Beckmeyer stated that the Planning Commission meeting scheduled to start at 7:00 p.m. has been cancelled. She then led pledge of allegiance.
Community Development Director Updegrave and HEART representatives Tim Davis and Alex Waggoner presented the staff report.
Chair Hauser referred to the rental proposal of removing the moderate and lowering the AMIs (Area Median Income) and stated she was under the impression that there is new money for 100% AMIs. She asked if that was something that was factored in.
HEART Representative Davis thought having 100% was a great thing but was not familiar with new money for them. We are proposing units of 50, 80 and 110, which comes out to an average 80% of AMIs, which is what the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) Transit-Oriented Communities (TOC) Policy is proposing for cities. He stated, if maneuvering around that 80%, we could be doing 60, 80 or 100 and he thinks HEART would be supportive of that solution.
Chair Hauser thought she saw two different things on in perpetuity: in perpetuity for rentals and 45 years for sale and the other seemed to say that the recommendation was also in perpetuity.
HEART Representative Davis responded affirmatively.
Chair Hauser asked, on the in-lieu fee, if they had calculated what was proposed from the upgrade as to how a developer would look at it. She asked if the idea is that we want the in-lieu fee or we want the units or some combination.
Community Development Director Updegrave thought it was not necessarily about which is preferred but about providing clear direction in terms of whichever path the developer is proposing. If a project utilizes the density bonus, they are required to construct those units on the site through the density bonus law. You might see a development that provides 10% affordable units but then wants to fee out for the remainder and it allows more flexibility and more clarity in terms of the fee.
Chair Hauser thought the median price for Pacifica homes is $1.25 million and selling it at an affordable sales price of $500,000 means that is a $750,000 fee to the developer; only charging them the $500,000 per unit means we will not get on-site affordable but everyone will fee out.
She thinks the question is what do we want or to make the math equal.
Councilmember Wright stated his preference was to consider property tax in that equation as the in-lieu fee does not help us in that regard and building on-site is more beneficial to the municipality.
Mayor Beckmeyer stated that we will discuss that when we are through with all questions.
HEART Representative Davis responded that we are in an interesting situation where the grand nexus study would give more information about what the fee should be and give the opportunity to say whether we want it more or less depending on what we want to incentivize. Also, we are
1.a
Packet Pg. 8
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of 10-6-2025 Joint Study Session City Council and Planning Commission (6062 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Joint Study Session 3 October 06, 2025
updating it now based on inflation factors and our ordinance would still give the power to say whether we would allow it to be an in-lieu fee. Thus, it is not an automatic right.
Chair Hauser assumed it would have to go to City Council.
HEART Representative Davis responded affirmatively.
Chair Hauser received clarification on a quote he said about requiring an affordable housing partner and she thinks that was associated with the commercial density bonus. She also saw in our code that we have very low required but our current ordinance has a redevelopment area and a non-redevelopment area, and she asked what is the redevelopment area.
Asst. City Attorney Murphy stated that was back from the days of redevelopment and she was hearing it is the Rockaway area and we would remove the redevelopment area.
HEART Representative Davis stated the Community Planning Collaborative (CPC), an organization which created the 21 Elements program, which is for San Mateo County’s 20 jurisdictions plus the County, is a coordination effort between all the jurisdictions. Not all jurisdictions participate in every effort they are having. The last time there was an update for many of the cities in the County was also organized by CPC under the 21 Elements banner. It is a way to spread the cost as it can be very expensive to get these studies done. Under the banner of this one, there are about 15 communities that are all in it together and they are looking at different parts of it, some looking for just the inclusionary housing feasibility study which is what Pacifica is doing and some are also looking for commercial linkage study and nexus study, which is why it is called grand nexus. The inclusionary housing feasibility study is being front loaded into the process and the commercial linkage will come second. They are signing the contract now with Strategic Economics to do the study.
Community Development Director Updegrave stated, because that study is happening, it is going to take some time. With certification of our Housing Element and adoption of our Rezoning Program, we anticipate getting more applications in, hopefully before the end of 2026. The changes we are looking at now, particularly with the in-lieu fees, are more minor adjustments accounting for inflation that should have occurred annually from 2027. She thinks, if we were to bring it before Council today, these are the numbers we would be proposing. With that deeper dive and study, what are the substantive changes and are there changes we want to make and move to a different kind of fee, to a different baseline, how do we want to adjust this annually, etc.
She thinks we need that data from the residential feasibility study we are a part of to make those big changes.
Vice Chair Berman asked what cities were involved in that collaborative study.
HEART Representative Davis stated he would need to check.
Vice Chair Berman stated she thinks it is relevant.
Vice Mayor Boles stated, on the inclusionary ordinance, we mentioned ownership with a half at 80% and half at 120%, and the recommendation was to keep that. She asked why not lower, as our nation’s history of redlining has put disadvantaged communities even further behind. She asked if there were any exceptions to that which we could make to help those catch up, even if below those numbers.
1.a
Packet Pg. 9
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of 10-6-2025 Joint Study Session City Council and Planning Commission (6062 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Joint Study Session 4 October 06, 2025
HEART Representative Davis thought we were trying to make as few changes as necessary.
What we have currently is in align with the Metropolitan Transit Commission TOC policy and we are aligning it with that which a lot of other cities are doing. He would be happy to have a conversation more about whether we want to make those units at a lower income. He stated that he traditionally worked in a city where they did 80% and 100% of AMI units and found that to be very effective in meeting the needs.
Community Development Director Updegrave understands that for ownership units, when you start dropping below 80%, it gets more difficult to find income-qualified.
HEART Representative Davis agreed, adding that once we get down to 50% of AMI, they are spending all their money just on the maintenance of the unit or the HOA fees and they do not have much money for the mortgage. He stated that California law does not have a provision where the HOA fees are based on the income of the owner. Thus, we are looking at a place that has HOA fees for $1.3 million townhouses and the 50% owner is going to pay the same HOA fee, as California does not permit you to reset the HOA fees by income. He stated some other states allow that and the BMR units have lower fees than the other units.
Vice Mayor Boles stated we mentioned in-lieu fees and all the affordability aspects of a project need to be presented and approved early in a project/application review with a total amount approval. She asked what happens if the developer changes their mind. She wanted to make sure what is allowed and we have controls for that if the developer wants to change after they went through the public process and gotten approvals.
HEART Representative Davis stated, returning to a previous question, he shared a list of cities participating in the grand nexus study: Belmont, Brisbane, Daly City, East Palo Alto, Half Moon Bay, Menlo Park, Pacifica, Redwood City, San Bruno, City of San Mateo, and County of San Mateo (12 jurisdictions).
Community Development Director Updegrave returned to Vice Mayor Boles’ question, i.e., if a developer changes their mind, they go through their entitlement as if they are doing on-site and then they want to switch at some point to the in-lieu fee. She stated that we had that come up recently and staff and HEART, on behalf of staff, worked with the developer to come up with a fee that would have then been brought to Council. In the current iteration and future ordinance, in-lieu fees would come before Council. She stated that, along with that, Vice Mayor Boles was asking about the requirements of the map.
Vice Mayor Boles thought all of these agreements would come fairly early in the planning process.
She stated that the developer knows what they are buying into so they have several meetings and that would be one of the early things discussed and agreed upon.
HEART Representative Waggoner responded affirmatively.
Vice Mayor Boles assumed there is no path for in-lieu fees to be taken in an underhanded way.
HEART Representative Davis stated it would be a completely transparent process with the inclusion of the Council.
Community Development Director Updegrave stated, if they were to go through all their entitlements and then change their mind, they have to come back through Planning Commission
1.a
Packet Pg. 10
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of 10-6-2025 Joint Study Session City Council and Planning Commission (6062 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Joint Study Session 5 October 06, 2025
and also through Council. There is not an incentive to change their mind at the last minute, as it would add time and process.
Vice Mayor Boles asked, broadly for projects that involved residential, when are density bonus laws applicable and when can a developer invoke a certain amount of affordable units.
HEART Representative Waggoner stated that the developer would have to opt in to using density bonus by providing those units at affordability as outlined on a state density bonus chart; if you provide 10% of your units as affordable at 80% of area medium income, that qualifies you for a 15% density bonus or for a number of waivers, which all depends on the percentage of units provided as affordability and the level of affordability provided.
Vice Mayor Boles stated even a small project that has one affordable unit could potentially use the density bonus if they meet the AMI requirements.
Community Development Director Updegrave stated, in order to qualify, it has to be a housing development project and needs to be two or more units. They would have to look at the table to see what kind of bonus, but a smaller project could use a density bonus. She has not seen that, but it does not mean it is not coming or that it will not happen. She thinks the requirements to build on site units can be cost-prohibitive and you tend to see it in mid-to-large projects but it does not mean it cannot happen.
Chair Hauser stated, to add to what Vice Mayor Boles was asking, what triggers the density bonus law is five units very low, 10% low for rental, 10% moderate for sale. She stated that there is also different housing that trigger different things and they trigger the amount of density bonus but unlimited waivers and incentives are triggered by any one of those percentages.
Asst. City Attorney Murphy added in general it is a low percentage that triggers the density bonus.
Vice Mayor Boles stated that, for projects in the queue now or someone who might submit one tomorrow, since we cannot enforce our density bonus law, we are following State standards in what we are allowing in review.
Asst. City Attorney Murphy responded affirmatively.
Vice Chair Berman asked, regarding the density bonus minimum requirement and understanding the State requirement, if it is in the City’s purview to have a new minimum number of units for that requirement such as, instead of five very low income, could we make that eight very low as our minimum, going above and beyond the State requirement.
Asst. City Attorney Murphy stated that the City can add an additional local density bonus. If you go above and beyond the State density bonus, there are certain incentives or increased density bonuses that the City can grant. That is something the City can consider, but we cannot have a lower requirement than state law.
Vice Chair Berman asked, for our City’s in-lieu fee payment, what is the smallest level of development where that applies.
Community Development Director Updegrave stated it is eight units.
Vice Chair Berman assumed it does not apply to a single-family home building two new ADUs.
1.a
Packet Pg. 11
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of 10-6-2025 Joint Study Session City Council and Planning Commission (6062 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Joint Study Session 6 October 06, 2025
Community Development Director Updegrave responded affirmatively.
Vice Chair Berman referred to the tentative map requirement being recommended and asked about the word “optional” being there.
HEART Representative Waggoner stated the ones labeled optional go above and beyond what is in the State density bonus law so we would not have to include those but they are best practices.
Community Development Director Updegrave added clarification that they are options presented to Council for consideration but those would be things that would be incorporated into the ordinance and would be required. She stated here are some options of things we can do, changes we can make, things we can include, but it does not mean it is a “choose your own adventure” for a developer reading our Code.
Vice Chair Berman stated everything here is an option for us to look into so that word “optional” is above and beyond.
HEART Representative Waggoner responded affirmatively, adding that they are based on what are considered best practices that some jurisdictions have put into place because of issues they have encountered or things they found are helpful but not required under State law.
Vice Chair Berman stated that we already have a tentative map process that is required, and she asked what is the aspect that is going above and beyond again.
HEART Representative Waggoner stated that this is for the density bonus ordinance specifically and for density bonus projects that would be required to submit a tentative map at the time of their density bonus application.
Vice Chair Berman thought any housing development goes through our typical tentative map process.
Community Development Director Updegrave stated it is typical for developments to come in with all of their required entitlements and we process those as a consolidated application. She thinks one of the things we do not do well in our Code generally is outline application requirements; part of looking at the inclusionary and density bonus is to outline some of those parameters that staff and applicants can use. She does not know if this will make any change to our current process.
Vice Chair Berman asked this is more wanting to make this requirement explicit.
HEART Representative Waggoner agreed and added so they designate which units are going to be the density bonus affordable units. We have a map of what the building is going to look like and which of those units are going to be deed-restricted as affordable.
Vice Chair Berman stated that is not currently explicitly required in our Code.
HEART Representative Waggoner agreed, adding that is to look at comparability requirements such as a developer is doing three affordable units and they cannot put them all on the first floor.
Vice Chair Berman added that they cannot have a note on the tentative map saying that eight of these units will be affordable.
1.a
Packet Pg. 12
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of 10-6-2025 Joint Study Session City Council and Planning Commission (6062 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Joint Study Session 7 October 06, 2025
HEART Representative Waggoner agreed, adding that we can look at the square footage and say that all of the affordable units they are giving are the smallest ones.
Councilmember Wright referred to timelines for permits, and he asked for rough expectations of what a developer might expect for a length of time since a lot of the expense in doing a development is tied up in carrying costs.
Community Development Director Updegrave stated that it was a challenging question to answer as we have no control over how long an application spends in an applicant’s court. We have some projects that have been inactive for years.
Councilmember Wright asked her to limit her response to staff time.
Community Development Director Updegrave stated that the Permit Streamlining Act requires them to review and provide written comments within 30 days of the submittal. When they submit their initial application and when we are processing it for review, there are various timelines, especially with new State laws that have passed which require action within a certain number of days based on CEQA. She stated that, depending on the size and complexity of the project, it is one to three years. She stated that, the more we can clarify and simplify, the hope is some of that time also comes down and is one of the overall goals in modernizing.
Councilmember Wright asked, if our goal is to build more affordable units, what of these different menu options that were being presented in the past has yielded more affordable units, going by the theory of past performances indicative of future results.
Vice Mayor Boles stated that they probably need to look at other cities and not Pacifica.
HEART Representative Davis stated it is very much about the feasibility numbers and you can ask for more units and 120% of AMI, than you can at 80% of AMI because the cost subsidy for years is smaller but then you are getting units that are not as useful for your community. It is a policy question. He thinks the important thing, in terms of are you getting the value for the community, is whether or not you are setting your policy so that developers are still building and still giving you units. That is what the feasibility study is going to do, i.e., tell us where are we today in terms of construction costs and CAP rates and interest rates and other things that developers are looking at and what can you provide so that projects are both feasible and still provide affordability. His experience is that cities around 15% are usually in a pretty safe area in terms of being able to get units produced. Cities doing 20% or 25% are the ones reexamining policies and saying maybe they should pull them back.
Councilmember Wright asks what gets more affordable housing built if we let people pay into a fund or if we make them build it on-site.
HEART Representative Davis stated he has looked at this question a lot over the years. He used to work in a large city where they had an active pipeline of 100% affordable housing projects and their housing director would just as soon take the money as they felt they could get these projects moving but they also had a political situation where community groups, fair housing groups, wanted to see the units in the buildings to make sure they were spread across the city, being built in the same neighborhoods that were growing. That is a situation where you have a strong network of organizations that are building these properties. In smaller cities, if you get $1 million into your affordable housing fund, it may be a very long time before you are able to turn around and give
1.a
Packet Pg. 13
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of 10-6-2025 Joint Study Session City Council and Planning Commission (6062 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Joint Study Session 8 October 06, 2025
that to 100% affordable housing project. There may not be many sites for it, organizations on the ground able to spend it. Thus, in smaller communities, he advocates for doing the mostly on-site as they are getting built at the same time that the projects are being built.
HEART Representative Waggoner added often developers are not a monolith and what they want is going to depend on their financial circumstances and what we want to amend with these policies to allow for some of those alternatives. For one developer, it might work best for them to do land dedication because they have a site they acquired previously that they cannot develop or for a different developer it might make more sense to build those units on-site or pay out an in-lieu fee.
What they are going to care the most about is having those clearly outlined policies and procedures that are in line with some State laws because that gives them certainty.
Councilmember Wright asked which way do cities benefit from the repeated property tax revenue more, with people paying into the in-lieu fee and then having non-profit developers come in and build or having them build on-site.
HEART Representative Davis stated, if he interprets his question correctly, he is asking about the impact on property taxes.
Councilmember Wright responded affirmatively.
HEART Representative Davis stated units on-site are still paying property taxes and 100% affordable buildings built by non-profits can get the welfare exemption and not be paying property taxes. In that respect, the City is getting more benefit by the on-site units.
Mayor Beckmeyer wanted to go back to his recommendation that we align with the MTC TOC guidelines. She wants to go through it so she has a better understanding of what that is.
HEART Representative Davis stated that the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) has a Transit-Oriented Communities (TOC) Policy that they are implementing in cities around the bay that have immediate access to high impact transit sources. He stated that Pacifica does not as it is not on BART, Caltrain, or ferry services. The TOC policy anticipates that cities have to get certain amount of points to get preference for certain transit funds. The point system is based on a number of policy areas, i.e., parking requirements near the transit, density around the transit location, and meeting housing policy goals. They are based on production, preservation and protection, as well as commercial. For each of those areas, there is a menu of options where you get points based on meeting at least two of those options. The inclusion housing ordinance is one of the options for production and they have given guidelines if you meet or exceed these requirements in your inclusion housing ordinance, you get the points. San Bruno’s rental affordability is a little bit higher, meaning not as deep affordability as required, and they are working with them to make a minor adjustment to bring them to that deeper affordability required by the policy. In preservation, it could be funding towards preserving existing housing and making income restrictive. Protection policies are very much about tenant rights policies, such as antitenant harassment ordinance, no net loss when there is development of a building, etc. Because they work with other cities that are transit-oriented communities, they are also very familiar with what those policies are. As they are working with the Planning Commission and Council on what we may want to do to strengthen our protection, preservation, and production policies regardless of being a TOC community or not, they can help advise on that.
1.a
Packet Pg. 14
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of 10-6-2025 Joint Study Session City Council and Planning Commission (6062 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Joint Study Session 9 October 06, 2025
Mayor Beckmeyer stated that looking at those options would be something they would be bringing forward to Planning Commission and Council after the grand nexus study is completed or during the interim phase between now and when it is completed.
HEART Representative Davis stated, because we are not a TOC policy community, we are not on a timeline and they are at the City’s direction. If we are interested in looking at those policies, they can tell us what are the best practices that other communities are doing and, if we want to align with them, there are model ordinances being produced by the Association of Bay Area Governments so multiple cities are adopting basically similar ordinances.
Mayor Beckmeyer referred to the lack of transit-oriented communities in the City and she starts to worry that there are expectations that will impact parking, etc.
HEART Representative Davis stated that they are not looking to Pacifica to get the points and not requiring us to meet this policy in any way.
HEART Representative Waggoner added that part of the reason they look at MTC as the baseline of what they are looking at is their expectations are not entirely based on fulfilling that, as they are also looking at regionally what our best practice is, especially for some of the items less related to that transit item, such as what has worked well for jurisdictions across the Bay Area, hence why they included some of the recommendations from the 21 Elements BMR working group as well as that is less of a transit-oriented group; that was looking at jurisdictions across San Mateo County and what are some of the standards and what are we hearing from developers across the county that works.
Mayor Beckmeyer referred to the grand nexus study cost and the amount paid per city.
Community Development Director Updegrave stated that it is based on what we are participating in and some jurisdictions pursuing additional studies would have a higher fee. She stated that there is some proportionality within that.
Mayor Beckmeyer stated that one thing that can be true is that we are not pursuing as many things but it is possible that we are further behind, as some of our things were updated in 1997; it may be a city that has more recently updated their ordinances does not need quite as much tinkering and Pacifica may need to reach further. She wanted to make sure the fee structure is in keeping with what we need to do in Pacifica.
Commissioner Ferguson asked in 2025 below market rate housing what the 80% and 20% AMI levels are, both in income level and what the subsidy is for that income level.
HEART Representative Waggoner stated that it is based on household size and it is not necessarily a subsidy but more like restriction on the amount of rent allowed to be charged.
Commissioner Ferguson asked, for 80%, what would be the ceiling. He assumed the answer is per the number of bedrooms.
HEART Representative Davis stated, when looking at eligibility for a household, they are looking at the household size and what the maximum income can be and, for a family of three, the maximum income for an 80% unit would be $139,250. The maximum sale price for maximum rent would be based on the unit’s number of bedrooms and they use a formula to set the rent or sales price based on what would be affordable to them.
1.a
Packet Pg. 15
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of 10-6-2025 Joint Study Session City Council and Planning Commission (6062 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Joint Study Session 10 October 06, 2025
Commissioner Ferguson asked who sets those.
HEART Representative Davis stated the County has guidance in terms of setting the rents but it would also be part of your inclusionary housing ordinance to clarify what that process would be and that is one of the things that was also challenged with the current ordinance.
Commissioner Ferguson stated about a start level for all of these number of bedrooms for sale or rent in 2025 and they would be attached to the current price index and just scale naturally or do they get reviewed by a committee at some point.
HEART Representative Davis stated what works best is it is clearly defined in how you determine it in the ordinance and set for each property at the time that they are going to market and approved by the Community Development Director. The sales price is the most complicated because it uses a lot of different inputs, including what the current interest rate is, what the actual HOA dues is, etc. Thus, it is not going to be the same price for a year for all units created.
Commissioner Ferguson understood and, given a three-year window for development, he can see a real advantage to understanding what those numbers are upfront to the developer.
HEART Representative Davis understood. He states, for rents, the formula is fairly simple and the County publishes numbers. If you come in 2025 to get your entitlements for a project and do not actually open the doors until 2027, your risk is what is the change in the area’s median income, as that income is how they set the rents, not based on a number of other features such as interest rates, etc. For homeownership projects, they can run the numbers for today to say, if you were selling it today, this is what you would get, but you are still at risk for some changes, just as if you are selling other units because of interest rate environment.
Commissioner Ferguson asked, if you have a teacher tenant who qualifies for 80% or median income and then the area’s median income jumps way up but does not track with public service hours which happens all the time, would those people have their rent readjusted to the new area median income level or is it locked in for a period of time.
HEART Representative Davis stated this is where they have a provision in the legal agreements that there is not an increase over a certain percent, given the AMI increase. He has seen this where the AMI increased 16% in one year and they are not going to pass that along to the tenant.
You then have a cap on what they can do within the rental restriction agreement, usually 5%.
Commissioner Ferguson assumed the goal is to include all of that language at some point. He stated that we talked about HOAs not being subsidized and understands why, but if you have a purchased below market rate unit, is the State property tax subsidized for those parcels.
HEART Representative Davis stated their property tax is set based on what they paid, just as it is for market rate units.
Commissioner Ferguson stated same percentage but at a lower purchase price.
HEART Representative Davis agreed. He stated that they do pay a lower property tax than the next door unit that sold for $1.3 million.
Commissioner Ferguson assumed depending on when they bought it.
1.a
Packet Pg. 16
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of 10-6-2025 Joint Study Session City Council and Planning Commission (6062 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Joint Study Session 11 October 06, 2025
HEART Representative Davis agreed, and stated that they do benefit from a lower property tax but they do not benefit from any kind of lower HOA.
Commissioner Ferguson stated a market rate unit property tax is approximately $15,000 a year in Pacifica and it is an enormous hurdle.
HEART Representative Waggoner stated that is typically factored in when they do those calculations as you are not placing someone into excess burden based on their housing cost, which is typically about 30% of their income and that factors in to how you do the calculations.
Commissioner Ferguson concluded total housing cost.
HEART Representative Waggoner responded affirmatively.
Chair Hauser stated, for clarification, on rental you would not have HOA dues.
HEART Representative Waggoner agreed that is just ownership.
Chair Hauser stated, when you are calculating a sales price, you are taking the percentage of income that qualifies like 30 or 35 depending on income level. You are then netting out your monthly costs and you would include your HOA dues in it. Even though she would agree it is not subsidized, it is being considered if you are living in a $500 a month HOA or $200 a month HOA, she assumed your affordable sales price is adjusting based on that input.
HEART Representative Davis responded affirmatively. He added it does affect that, but when someone is paying everything towards HOA fees, there is not much money left for the mortgage.
HEART Representative Waggoner agreed, adding it factors in on the really low end such as looking at 30% or 50% AMI restriction, and maybe you are only paying $1100 or less for it but still $400 of that is your HOA fee and that is still $400 out of your pocket at the end of the day.
Chair Hauser asked, if you are in a very low category and being qualified at 50% AMI but your affordable sales price is based on 40% AMI, and you are netting out your HOA dues, your sales price is going to be lower and your payment should adjust down.
HEART Representative Davis responded affirmatively.
Councilmember Wright asked what they do in the case of a cash call on HOA fees, supposing you need to replace all the roofs, etc.
HEART Representative Davis stated that they pay the share that they would have paid if they were a full market buyer in the building. He stated that this is a cause of concern as you have a very big risk for a very low-income household not having the cash on hand that an upper middle class household might have.
Councilmember Wright asked if there was funding available from the County to help people like that from the State.
HEART Representative Davis stated no, adding that his recommendation is that there should be such a fund available. He has seen cities that have had longer histories with BMR units and had
1.a
Packet Pg. 17
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of 10-6-2025 Joint Study Session City Council and Planning Commission (6062 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Joint Study Session 12 October 06, 2025
to occasionally step in and help out with the condo association or a specific condo owner to keep them afloat, maybe using some of their home repair funds and letting it apply to their part of the common area costs.
Councilmember Espinosa referred to community benefits, and asked, if we are doing a high density project, can we request having open space, childcare or a park, depending on the density.
HEART Representative Waggoner stated part of density bonus does include having a childcare facility as part of it. While you cannot force a developer to do anything, you can definitely request it in negotiations and there is an incentive in density bonus to have a childcare facility. There is not anything for open space. Part of the strength of inclusionary and below market rate units in those developments is that they are market rate developments that will have those market rate amenities such as open space, a gym, etc., and that is why they have the requirements that they have access to all those same things.
Councilmember Wright asked, in terms of the rentals, what are some of the potential unintended consequences, such as garbage rates or sewer rates getting higher than CPI.
HEART Representative Davis asked if he means in terms of the cost to the landlord of the project.
Councilmember Wright asked if there is any kind of adjustment built along the way or just set.
HEART Representative Davis stated that AMI has tended to increase in this region faster than some of those other costs and that usually does it. If they have a vacancy, they can rent it at their maximum AMI rent. He added that, if someone is out, they can move it back out to that format.
Councilmember Wright assumed that, in a hyper-inflation area environment, it is potential with a 5% cap that it could outpace over time.
HEART Representative Davis responded affirmatively.
HEART Representative Waggoner added there is potential to renegotiate with those legal agreements.
HEART Representative Davis agreed, stating that they can look at doing legal agreements that have some kind of provision if they are coming back to the City and say it is not working and they need to increase the rents. He stated that it is not the same as regular rent control but covered in the legal agreements.
Councilmember Wright understood, especially in a high tariff environment, such as roofs could be more expensive. He asked when we are passing things like parcel taxes or sewer rate increases, if we should consider affordable units and a different rate for them.
HEART Representative Waggoner stated as part of the calculation for that the utility allowance is factored in and the way it works is that any utilities that the tenant or owner would pay for are factored into that to allow for them to pay their utilities without going into housing cost burden.
Community Development Director Updegrave stated that those are regulations that are outside of what we would have in the ordinance.
Councilmember Wright stated that the parcel tax is not.
1.a
Packet Pg. 18
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of 10-6-2025 Joint Study Session City Council and Planning Commission (6062 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Joint Study Session 13 October 06, 2025
Community Development Director Updegrave stated, in terms of things like sewer rates, etc., it is an issue that is adjacent but outside what the City is able to regulate in their Code.
Councilmember Wright stated he is looking at trying to keep an affordable unit affordable.
HEART Representative Davis stated, if he is talking about rental units, he wanted to restate what Representative Waggoner said, i.e., if sewer cost goes up on the tenant, they pay less rent.
Councilmember Wright asked what if they are an owner.
HEART Representative Davis said, for an owner, there is a risk.
Councilmember Wright stated that there was a chart about all the different rates that all the surrounding cities do, and he asked what the advantages or disadvantages are with some of those different strategies and what seems to get more housing built compared to what does not.
HEART Representative Davis asked if he wanted rental or home ownership.
Councilmember Wright stated both.
HEART Representative Davis stated they do not have a good census on what has been created in each city. He did not think that would be part of the grand nexus study but it is something that would be worthwhile looking at.
Commissioner Ferguson stated he was thinking about 120% area median income below market rate housing and he imagined most of the residents of Pacifica would qualify for that.
HEART Representative Waggoner stated 100% of AMI for a one-person household in San Mateo County is $130,600.
Commissioner Ferguson asked if City advertises that these programs exist. He stated it will be half of our BMR program and he guesses that two-thirds of Pacificans qualify for this. He asked if there is anything we do for outreach.
Mayor Beckmeyer rephrased his question, i.e., for cities that have built recently with these kind of features, what are the practices around informing the community and public of these options.
HEART Representative Davis stated cities will put information on their website, regular newsletters and other outlets. A traditional form is using newspapers. He stated that one thing available to them that was not until recently is called Doorway, which is a new project under Bay Area Affordable Homeownership Alliance (BAAHA) which is part of Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) that provides a one-stop place for people looking for affordable housing anywhere in the region except San Francisco. He stated it is a one-stop online shop and is in multiple languages for individuals looking for housing anywhere in the Bay Area. All the counties except for San Francisco (which is using its own housing portal called Dahlia) provide a place where you can look, push a button, and say you are interested and think you qualify for this particular project and that lottery. It is also incumbent on both the developer and the City to say that they need to reach out to the community specifically.
1.a
Packet Pg. 19
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of 10-6-2025 Joint Study Session City Council and Planning Commission (6062 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Joint Study Session 14 October 06, 2025
Commissioner Ferguson stated that his concern is that it would make sense to give some early notice or advantage to people who live here and should qualify for these versus someone who has been shopping affordable housing.
Community Development Director Updegrave stated that will be part of the BMR manual to help outline what the preference points are with for sale units.
HEART Representative Davis stated that we already have a local preference within the ordinance.
It is useful and is standard practice that a local preference is backed up by what they call a disparate impact analysis that makes it clear that, although doing local preference, you are not hurting the ability of people of certain races or backgrounds from being able to access those units.
In a disparate impact analysis, you are looking at the local demographic compared to the County demographics and saying that they are fairly similar so it is okay to do a local preference or you can do a local preference but only to a certain percent of the units. He is leading getting a multijurisdictional district impact analysis done that would include Pacifica so you have this kind of legal grounding from a fair housing perspective to go ahead and continue to implement the policy.
Commissioner Ferguson was not suggesting giving an advantage for applicants, just give them an equal footing for applying in the first place.
HEART Representative Waggoner stated one thing they have required for some developments that they would want here is having an affordable housing marketing plan. That basically requires the developer to take a look at the local community, disadvantaged groups or folks who would not normally hear about something like this and then go out to community organizations that work with those folks or publications that are seen by people.
Commissioner Ferguson thinks, if they are talking about 20% above median income, not to have them think of themselves or want to be thought of as disadvantaged people. He stated that Pacifica is historically a blue collar town and our area of median income is skewed in a different direction and these people will not think about qualifying for affordable housing. He also does not know where the direction came from for 7.5% for 80% and 7.5% for 120% and asked why skip over the 100% AMI level.
HEART Representative Davis stated that they had units at 80% and 100% of AMI but only after moving to the Bay Area he sees that standard here is to do 80% and 120%. He thinks that is historic happenstance here and would love seeing 100% units.
Community Development Director Updegrave stated it may be something that will come out of the residential feasibility study we are currently part of as 100% has not been in our framework.
HEART Representative Waggoner thinks another part of it factoring in is on the developers’ side and even some non-profit developers will be thinking about how much money they can make and is part of why 120% is popular.
Commissioner Ferguson stated it is attractive to the developer.
HEART Representative Waggoner agreed, adding that it helps them pencil the deal the better.
Commissioner Ferguson stated in theory market rate housing is better in general.
1.a
Packet Pg. 20
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of 10-6-2025 Joint Study Session City Council and Planning Commission (6062 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Joint Study Session 15 October 06, 2025
HEART Representative Waggoner stated that they have seen circumstances where 120% of AMI units are more expensive than market rate units on rentals.
Commissioner Davis stated that they talked about some requirements for the developer and one of them did say a marketing plan and she was curious how they are going to market the BMR.
She asked if they can have some specific requirements, such as six months before it is completed you have to put out some kind of announcement to the community, Bay Area at large, or whatever is decided, and she asked if we could add specificity and a timeline to that.
HEART Representative Davis agreed.
HEART Representative Waggoner stated that is part of why they are recommending many of these updates, i.e., both from a developer’s side of things it is better to have more certainty and things clearly outlined and there are a lot of benefits to the community and residents.
Commissioner Davis stated that, at 801 Fassler, there were two low and three moderate and she knows people who went to look at those units when they first opened up, not specifically low income, and the person showing the property did not even know they existed. She thought there may be an advantage to the developers selling the market rate ones first with a return on their investment. She thinks that should be considered as the marketing plan talks about having to build them all at the same time and know where they are going to be in the building, and she thinks we should make sure they are all marketed and listed at the same time as well.
Mayor Beckmeyer opened public comment.
Suzanne Moore, Pacifica, stated we should prioritize transitional housing until permanent housing is built, that public land should be earmarked for low-income housing, and our housing fund should have a continuous source of income.
Michael Wahlmann, Pacifica, referred to the scenario of a larger family with one income qualifying but not being able to get a mortgage or a dual income family not being able to hit 120%.
He also shared concerns that building affordable housing would lower existing home values.
Michael Fernaza, Pacifica, asked what is the total height of the building able to be built in Pacifica and asked if it is true parking is not a requirement to satisfy people who would live in the new units that would be built.
Mayor Beckmeyer closed public comment.
Chair Hauser asked if the state density bonus law has a maximum height and if there are ways to waive out of all parking.
Community Development Director Updegrave stated that the density bonus allows waivers for height to construct a project at the permitted density. There is not necessarily a maximum limit as there are a lot of controlling factors and the base density is the primary factor in terms of how much bonus they can build within the overall size of the building. In Pacifica, our heights range from 35 feet to 55 feet with rezoning and it would be possible to go above that with a density bonus. Another limiting factor is the type of development, i.e. staying under high rise construction.
She thought it was 75 feet or 85 feet that kicks you into a different construction type.
1.a
Packet Pg. 21
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of 10-6-2025 Joint Study Session City Council and Planning Commission (6062 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Joint Study Session 16 October 06, 2025
Chair Hauser stated it is typically five stories. She thought, at a certain amount of building height, you are able to use frame construction and do not need smoke barriers and there are not a million means of egress that you need to meet and it is more economical to build at those lower heights; but, if you go to a tower, that is a much more difficult building topology to finance and build before you get your money back out of it. She thinks Director Updegrave is trying to say that people are disincentivized from building infinity high because it is infinity expensive.
Community Development Director Updegrave added that our current density and the amount of bonus that you can get would not necessarily support a tower type construction. In terms of parking and the ability to use incentives and waivers to reduce or eliminate parking, there are also different State laws that apply to parking depending on the target population. There may be different standards for supportive housing, transitional housing, homeless shelters, etc.
Mayor Beckmeyer presumes there are no standards for lack of public transit.
Community Development Director Updegrave responded affirmatively.
Chair Hauser thought you cannot totally waive out of requiring parking. The State density bonus law has parking standards that, in some instances, are higher; as you get to three and four bedrooms they are more onerous than what we provide in our Municipal Code but we are smaller bedrooms that count for less. She thought we tried to be consistent with the Housing Element and the Rezoning.
Community Development Director Updegrave stated, with any development project, we have to look at the specifics of the cases in front of them and what laws apply.
Commissioner Redfield stated, with that parking issue that came up, given the transit corridor items, he asked if there were any State laws that allow for more parking in Pacifica specifically because we are a commuter city as we do not have access to public transportation. He asked if there are any differences in that in State law, i.e. are we allowed more parking.
Community Development Director Updegrave stated she cannot speak to every State law but there are State laws passed in recent years that basically eliminated all parking requirements within a certain proximity to high quality, high frequency transit. Those exceptions do not apply within Pacifica because we do not have those facilities such as BART and buses, but in terms of State law that says we can require more, she does not believe that exists. She stated that there are a number of different rules impacting parking and we have parking requirements that are coastal zone in order to preserve coastal access and it is a complex question.
Chair Hauser felt that we want units and not fees and what a lot of cities do is say you cannot fee out of affordable housing unless it is a creative solution posed to Council. If that was the case and we adopted this similar ideology that a lot of other cities have done, would we need the nexus study to set the fee or could the City do non-nexus study based fees that were more responsive to whatever the current environment was for construction costs and housing prices.
Asst. City Attorney Murphy asked if her question is whether someone wants to fee out rather than adopting a standard in-lieu fee and they would come with a proposal.
Chair Hauser thought fractional fees for units, which we do not currently have, are great. If someone owns 12.3 units, they pay the fee for the 0.3 but they cannot pay 12.3 units worth of fees, which is what a nexus study would back up. Instead, if Council wanted to see inclusionary
1.a
Packet Pg. 22
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of 10-6-2025 Joint Study Session City Council and Planning Commission (6062 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Joint Study Session 17 October 06, 2025
housing from in-lieu housing money, could they entertain an application where the value of that fee was not contingent on the nexus study.
Asst. City Attorney Murphy stated, with in-lieu fees, you technically do not need the type of nexus study you need for other fees. She thinks you do want some sort of standard so you are treating developers the same across the board. She was not sure if there is a way we could have one without an exact number but some sort of standard, as that could be more difficult to do but the City could say that an in-lieu fee is not allowed after certain circumstances.
Chair Hauser added unless Council approves that.
Asst. City Attorney Murphy agreed, except for fractional in-lieu fees.
Vice Chair Berman asked what the City’s current bucket of affordable money that was contributed by in-lieu fees pay for, as she thought it was not just the City building affordable housing units but other factors that fee contributes to.
Community Development Director Updegrave agreed, adding that there are limits on what an inlieu fee can be used for.
Asst. City Attorney Murphy stated the current inclusionary ordinance says, “It shall be used for the purpose of providing funding assistance for the provision of affordable housing and reasonable administrative costs, including but not limited to a buyer’s assistance program for eligible households.” It can be used for providing housing and administrative costs, and administrative costs would have to be a reasonable fee and some ordinances have a cap on that.
Community Development Director Updegrave stated for administrative costs for administering BMR below market rate.
Vice Chair Berman asked if for City-managed BMR.
HEART Representative Davis stated the cost of running the program. It could be the grand nexus study is a fee that you have to pay to keep the program running every few years. It could be from monitoring the units you do have. You would not have direct management, but you need staff people that are making sure that the developer is doing the income certifications correctly and documentations are being turned in annually. He has also seen where there is a cost of the city to work to spend the money with an affordable housing developer. The cost of creating legal agreements are all fees that are part of the administration.
Vice Chair Berman assumes all that centers around City-led affordable housing development. In the scenario a development cannot pay an in-lieu fee and had to build a unit unless you have a unique case, she wants to make sure, if we are depleting the bucket of money the City currently has for affordable housing, what that bucket of money serves. If there are other services that are not directly related to the City developing affordable housing, we want to be cognizant of what funding might get impacted.
Community Development Director Updegrave stated that it would potentially be things like the hard cost of the mortgage and construction, as well as the soft cost where a local agency might provide some additional funding toward the construction, acquisition of land, etc., but not necessarily that the City has $22 million and is going out and building an affordable housing project. It would just be part of financing for an affordable housing developer.
1.a
Packet Pg. 23
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of 10-6-2025 Joint Study Session City Council and Planning Commission (6062 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Joint Study Session 18 October 06, 2025
Mayor Beckmeyer thought one of the figures in the chart showed the $22 million project and $1 million would be the City’s part.
HEART Representative Davis agreed, stating that the primary use of in-lieu fees is to help fund 100% of affordable housing projects. Cities are helping to leverage the tax credit funds and other funds to make it work. He stated it is very common to have the federal tax credits, State tax credits, and County soft debt and local soft debt all in the same project.
Community Development Director Updegrave stated there are a lot of funding streams.
Mayor Beckmeyer stated that the subtext of what she is hearing is to make sure we do not spend it all on legal fees, studies, etc., and when the opportunity comes along to give our $1 million to the project, we don’t have $1 million anymore. She asked if there would be a way, in terms of annual reporting, policy manuals, etc. to put a check on that.
Community Development Director Updegrave stated that money would have to be earmarked or in a subaccount to be used for those specific purposes and it would not be used for Housing Element implementation. The in-lieu fee needs to be very directly tied to the creation, preservation, and rehabilitation of affordable housing.
Vice Chair Berman added not necessarily City-led.
Community Development Director Updegrave agreed, stating that we are not a big enough city to develop our own affordable project.
HEART Representative Davis thought it would be helpful to provide an example from East Palo Alto which is supporting a number of housing initiatives. They are using in-lieu fees to support 100% affordable projects, but they also have program to assist with legal assistance, foreclosure prevention, rental assistance, etc. and they are using a fee on rental receipts from private landlords and a portion of their transient occupancy taxes to pay for those programs. They are not using any of their operating money but some cities may dedicate a bit of their operating funds to that as it is an important program for them to make those commitments.
Vice Chair Berman stated that example is helpful. From her standpoint, she agrees with Chair Hauser said that we want to see more units built here but, as the same time, we also need to be considerate of needing that bucket of money to also support units being built here.
HEART Representative Waggoner added that one thing they have seen is that folks need 15% if you are building the units but a higher requirement for an alternate compliance option such as 25% if you’re doing in-lieu payout. If you are going to do the in-lieu payout, you have to pay more, and that allows for the opportunity for there to be an alternative compliance hearing where, to some degree, you can negotiate with a developer, such as you build 10% on-site and then you do a 10% in-lieu fee so you are kind of getting both.
Vice Mayor Boles thanked Vice Chair Berman for bringing that up which she thinks is a critical piece of defining our in-lieu fees but also our Housing Action Funds. She dug into the in-lieu fees that were collected for the Harmony One project and originally there were two units and one vacant piece of land to build affordable housing and, somehow, all that went away for an in-lieu fee of less than $400,000 and all this time that money has been sitting and the cost of units have gone up and it is nothing anymore. The City ended up sending some of it for updating our previous
1.a
Packet Pg. 24
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of 10-6-2025 Joint Study Session City Council and Planning Commission (6062 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Joint Study Session 19 October 06, 2025
Housing Element for administration costs. The money is so precious to try to build these units and we need to have good control over how those funds can be used if we are setting them up. She agreed with Chair Hauser that she does not want to see in-lieu fees but see things built as it is so hard to get any units built. She does not know if there is certain criteria by which they can come to us and she is sure there needs to be an exception if there is something unique or a particular hardship. If we can go to a place where we are mostly building those units, that would be her preference. She heard of going through and prioritizing other things. She had not heard that when going quickly through the Housing Element, but on funding our Housing Action Fund, we had put some money into it but now those sources of money are gone so how are we going to start putting that money back in so we can put in that money and get affordable housing.
Community Development Director Updegrave stated that we are hoping to come back in January or February with the Housing Element implementation plan, providing Council the opportunity to provide direction on what programs and actions we ought to be prioritizing. She stated that working on funding sources for the Housing Action Fund is something we have been in conversation with HEART about as part of our work with them in trying to find funding sources, and not just in-lieu fee but to have a more robust fund. Now, a lot of pir work has been trying to lay a framework, establish the policies, get the work done, get things on the book like get our manual, etc. That is something we will be coming back to Council in January or February looking for some direction on prioritization.
Councilmember Bier thought a city like ours, using some of the in-lieu money for that purpose, which was the Housing Element, was an appropriate use of funds as we do not have a lot of money anywhere else. We are extremely lucky to have HEART working with us. She thanked them as the experts we rely on them, adding that it is an honor to work with them as a board member. She appreciated all their suggestions and is very interested in looking toward the protection, production, and preservation policies moving forward.
Mayor Beckmeyer wanted to understand from staff what they need at this session, if anything specifically, and could we go one more time over rough timeline.
Community Development Director Updegrave stated she will start with the timeline. HEART as our staff experts are able to start drafting ordinances for updating and modernizing our inclusionary and density bonus. The approach we are hoping to take is to do this initial modernizing clean up so we have clear resolution in terms of what the fee may be in place as we are getting applications coming in and we are able to implement. That is something we hope to do within the next six months, first quarter of the year. In terms of the more substantive changes, that would be the grand nexus and feasibility studies will probably completed at the end of 2026.
There will probably be another update with some of the results and recommendations coming out of that. She imagined that would be work that happens in 2027 or 2028. In terms of direction, we heard different things and it is very helpful to understand what it is Council and Planning Commission are looking for, such as fractional fees and no other in-lieu fees.
Asst. City Attorney Murphy added the split for rentals and ownership and affordability levels.
Chair Hauser stated she has built market rate and deed restricted projects, as well as with HEART. She referred to Councilmember Wright’s question about what incentivizes developers to build housing. On rental housing, she thinks that should be deed-restricted in perpetuity. On for sale housing, she want the units to stay and want people in lower income situations to be able to participate in the housing market and build equity. She thinks building generational wealth is important and having the opportunity to do so is important. If you buy a deed-restricted home and
1.a
Packet Pg. 25
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of 10-6-2025 Joint Study Session City Council and Planning Commission (6062 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Joint Study Session 20 October 06, 2025
you hold it in our current ordinance 45 years, Santa Rosa 30 years, and other cities 55 years, and you go through the hard part of holding that home for your family, you may not be seeing that participation but you are building generational wall for your family. She is torn as she loves the idea of having deed-restricted units in Pacifica but deed restricting for sale homes for people leads to why put down a down payment if you are not going to get the benefit of what everybody who buys a market rate home gets. She referred to Councilmember Wright speaking on incentives.
They talked about the 120% moderate and she thinks the developers have a hard time building very low- and lower-income homes as it is hard to build a home from $600,000 to $800,000 more depending on what the fees are and only get $200,000 back for it, as that is the tax on development and that is part of development. She thinks some cities do a good job defining what they can define, such as what downpayment is part of our inclusionary ordinance, such as 3%, 5%, 7%, or 10% (maxed the State allows) She thinks it is important to define what percent income is qualifying, and she thinks it should be 30% for lower income households and 35% for moderate, consistent with the State. She wants to say that, while she thinks 120% does attract a lot of for sale development that Pacifica is not currently getting, if we choose to go to a lower AMI, we can do what Cotati just did and think about waiving impact fees on just deed-restricted affordable units as there may be some assistance there. She thinks, for the split on rental, lower incomes are better. For for-sale housing, she thinks the proposal HEART has put together is the right proposal and she would love to see an ordinance that clearly delineates the things we can define. If we are going to take out HOA fees, private mortgage insurance, property tax, and all the things that go into the calculation, it may not be perfect but at least the developer can predict out close.
HEART Representative Davis agreed, and in response to the question about the 45 years in perpetuity, he has looked at this question in terms of how you build intergenerational wealth, particularly in a city that was much more demographically diverse than here and had a tradition of black families being locked out of ownership. They had enough history on BMR units to say what did the resale price get them compared to what they would have gotten in the market. They had a resale restriction that was 3% per year plus a capital gain. They found that was not quite sufficient but they had an earlier policy where it was 5% and the concern was, when they pulled it from 5% to 3%, about continuing affordability to the next family. They found, at the 5%, people were making the same percent increase that people in the regular market were making over the long term. If you are an income-restricted unit, you are more protected from those downs in the market than in the regular market rate units. In the long term, they were about the same increase.
Councilmember Wright asked on a national level, State level, or Bay Area level.
HEART Representative Davis stated he moved from Boston, Massachusetts, and this was research they did in Boston where they had a 20-year-old BMR program with thousands of units created. They had the track record there. It was also a high cost area with high increases like here so there was some comparability. The lesson learned from that is that you can adjust some of how you set your resale mechanism within your agreements to make sure people can still get something. One thing they were proposing was having the fund where you are guaranteed of getting that resale price and, if they may have to give a bigger down payment to the next buyer to get them into that unit.
Chair Hauser thought that was helpful for her to understand.
HEART Representative Davis stated that the balance you are looking at is between the long-term affordability as affordable to the next homeowner and you want to give them some equity. If they are there for the 45 years, they are hitting a jackpot at that point if you just lifted the restriction.
1.a
Packet Pg. 26
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of 10-6-2025 Joint Study Session City Council and Planning Commission (6062 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Joint Study Session 21 October 06, 2025
Councilmember Espinosa asked if you can pass the property to the next generation.
HEART Representative Davis stated that, within the legal agreements, there are ways you can pass it along to the next generation. Generally speaking, you want that next generation to also be income eligible, so they are benefitting. If they are not income-eligible, they say they should sell it to someone who is.
Councilmember Espinosa assumed they have to qualify as well.
HEART Representative Davis responded affirmatively.
Vice Mayor Boles stated when someone qualifies initially, and then they are moving up and making more money, are they still forever granted that unit because they qualified at that point or is there any review, especially for rentals.
HEART Representative Davis stated, for rental units, there is a review every year. For homeownership units, once you are in the unit, it is yours. If your income goes up, the question of some of the costs you might incur as a homeowner, you are still seeing that lower mortgage rate and, over time, you could get some equity.
Vice Mayor Boles stated, regarding the question of the term lengths, she has not heard of too many in perpetuity and obviously that is something they would love but do they see that as a disincentive for developers.
Chair Hauser stated that in ten years the developer is gone.
HEART Representative Davis agreed to that, as the timeline for the developer is not that far out.
He clarified that the State density bonus law requires a minimum of 45 years on homeownership and 55 on rentals which is your baseline.
Councilmember Wright asked, if they contemplated that, if you owned that unit for less than five years, you get a lower rate versus getting 5% bonus over the whole time if you own it for longer.
HEART Representative Davis stated that they did not contemplate it in that case.
Councilmember Wright thought that would be a good incentive to help build generational wealth.
HEART Representative Davis stated that they have seen, if you resold within a very short period of time, you did get a lower rate.
Councilmember Wright asked Director Updegrave how many units we build this year.
Community Development Director Updegrave stated, in 2024, we constructed a total of 20 units, 16 of which were accessory dwelling units. We do not have the numbers for 2025 yet.
Councilmember Wright asked if she has any idea how many we approved.
Community Development Director Updegrave stated, if in title, in 2024, we entitled two units.
Chair Hauser asked two of two applications.
1.a
Packet Pg. 27
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of 10-6-2025 Joint Study Session City Council and Planning Commission (6062 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Joint Study Session 22 October 06, 2025
Community Development Director Updegrave responded affirmatively, adding that, with the rezoning, we are anticipating additional applications coming in.
Councilmember Wright referred to the low income and asked what counts as income.
HEART Representative Davis stated they are looking at your employment income, public assistance income, income from assets such as interest, etc. They are looking at the adjusted gross income on your income taxes. That is looking at your past income and they are trying to see what your current income is and looking for the same documents you submitted for your income taxes.
Councilmember Wright asked if there was a net worth piece there.
HEART Representative Davis stated that is a policy decision and something they can discuss as part of this process. There are two different philosophies on this. In San Francisco, they have imputative income where 10% of your assets contributes to your annual income. They do not have an asset cap on the program. If you have a lot of assets, you end up having an imputed income that makes you go over income. There are other places that say they are only going to take the interest they are getting on the assets and they may have an asset cap either for a rental program or homeownership program. It may be different if you are a senior and they may not count pension and 401Ks towards that number.
Councilmember Wright stated, along those lines, if we did not have one, we might attract more seniors to purchase it which would cause more turnover in the units. He asked if that would be a beneficial or negative thing.
Vice Mayor Boles stated that is the fastest growing homeless population so she thinks it is a beneficial thing by helping more people over time.
Councilmember Wright thought the question we would need to think about and get direction on is how we handle net worth.
HEART Representative Davis stated there is more than one way to do it.
Mayor Beckmeyer asked, for our purposes in discussing and thinking about those policy decisions, if it would be in relationship to our demographic in Pacifica. It seems it is not changing dramatically and we are steadily growing our aging population and it seems like we want it to be pertinent to what Pacifica’s demographics look like.
HEART Representative Davis stated that, generally, those guidelines are within our guidelines, not in the housing ordinance; we have the flexibility to change them and we certainly could be part of the discussion.
Community Development Director Updegrave thought it would be helpful if there was consensus on how to handle the in-lieu fees, such as coming back with a fractional fee only.
HEART Representative Davis stated that they are recommending strongly that we update the fees by the changes in home values and CPI.
Mayor Beckmeyer asked if he means from 2007 to 2025.
1.a
Packet Pg. 28
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of 10-6-2025 Joint Study Session City Council and Planning Commission (6062 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Joint Study Session 23 October 06, 2025
HEART Representative Davis agreed, adding that we want clear guidance on that.
There was Council consensus to update the fees by the changes in home values and CPI as well as on the fractional unit in-lieu fee.
HEART Representative Davis thought a question that might get some different responses is, in terms of changing the affordability levels, they proposed a 60-80-100 in terms of the rental units, which is the same outcome for the developer as a 50-80-110.
Councilmember Bier does not want to bring up the bottom any more than we already have and she thinks it should stay at 50.
Chair Hauser thinks we have to hit certain percentages like different bedroom counts to try to get the family tax credits and there may be different AMIs part rate. She stated, as you are trying to get Low-Income Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC) financing from the State for affordable housing, there are different requirements. She does not want to do something in Pacifica that disallows an affordable developer from getting credit. She almost wants to say the blended average should be determined and the developer can determine how they want to hit it. Maybe part of the study is what does an affordable developer need to hit to get tax credit.
HEART Representative Davis thinks it will be helpful to clarify the difference. He is speaking only about the on-site inclusionary units. When they are spending money from a fund, they want to make it available to what will work for a project that can get California Tax Credit Allocation Committee (CTCAC) funds. They have a lot more flexibility there.
Chair Hauser clarified just inclusionary rentals.
HEART Representative Davis stated they were talking about inclusionary. He was basically giving them what the blended average which was 80% AMI for 60-80-100 and 50-80-110. He stated that they can discuss this later. He stated, on the homeownership, they were considering leaving ours unchanged but he asked if there was an interest in going to 80-100-120 or 80 and just 120. That is another whether you are opening the option for 100% units.
Councilmember Wright stated he would be in favor of 80-100-120.
Chair Hauser thinks we are going to have a hard time getting people to build here. She thinks we do what HEART recommended, as what they recommended is consistent with South San Francisco and Daly City. The low moderate blend is what almost every San Mateo County city has in their ordinance.
Councilmember Wright agreed.
Vice Mayor Boles stated low is 80.
Chair Hauser stated, to be clear, the 120 and 80 is whatever the administrator is using to qualify buyers but the affordable sales price is being set at a lower percent of that.
HEART Representative Davis agreed, stating 10% points lower to create a marketing window.
Chair Hauser stated that allows more families to qualify.
1.a
Packet Pg. 29
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of 10-6-2025 Joint Study Session City Council and Planning Commission (6062 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Joint Study Session 24 October 06, 2025
HEART Representative Davis responded affirmatively.
Vice Chair Berman stated, to round out the in-lieu fee from her perspective, we will have a better idea after the grand nexus study, but she will be interested in seeing what an in-lieu fee cost would be to a developer for the developer to say it does not make sense for them to pay this in-lieu fee versus building the units instead. She still likes the ability for the City to gain that in-lieu fee if there happens to be a developer willing to pay that very high cost.
Community Development Director Updegrave heard that changing the structure to possibly not allow in-lieu fees at all or only in special circumstances or part of the fraction, whatever it may be, may be part of what we bring back once we have the data from the study. More immediately, it would be updating the price and adding provisions to allow for fractional fee payments. She stated this more restrictive use is something we would something we would explore at a future date.
Vice Chair Berman stated she may be seeing them as mutually exclusive to where there was a recommendation if there is a fractional unit, they update the fee per HEART’s recommendation.
She is on board with that, but she is not convinced that she would want to update an ordinance that says there is no in-lieu fee for full units, only in-lieu fee for fractional units.
HEART Representative Davis stated that is not what they are recommending. He stated there was discussion about cities that are too restrictive in the options and are in danger of being sued because they did not provide options. It is important we have some options that are reasonable and we can still set something that sets a preference, a steering but not an absolute prohibition.
Vice Chair Berman stated whoever is reviewing the options for consideration next, she thought it would be helpful to see the updated in-lieu fee numbers, assuming that we do not have a prohibition on paying an in-lieu fee. We could allow developers to pay an in-lieu fee and what is that fee and how much does it cost to build a unit, how do we make that fee so high that it really incentivizes developers to build the unit.
Councilmember Wright stated that there are social benefits to having the units built as part of the whole housing project.
Vice Chair Berman stated that is what she is most interested in, but she thinks having the opportunity for a developer to pay a high in-lieu fee is potentially beneficial that developer but also beneficial to the city.
Chair Hauser stated, instead of having an in-lieu fee, can we add a different fee that is more of a one-time tax that every project has as it would be dependent on size. There would be an affordable fee that was not in lieu.
Vice Chair Berman stated that we are then still funding that program.
Chair Hauser agreed. She asked if a park fee was still an in-lieu fee.
Vice Chair Berman stated that we do not get a lot of developments.
Chair Hauser stated that we can think about how many second loans, home buyer assistance, etc. She stated that there are other things you can do with the money to get deeper affordability.
1.a
Packet Pg. 30
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of 10-6-2025 Joint Study Session City Council and Planning Commission (6062 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Joint Study Session 25 October 06, 2025
Vice Chair Berman stated she was asking how do we make sure we get the money. She was concerned if it is just a tax per development and we only have one development every year.
Vice Mayor Boles would love to see the numbers too. If you are given that money today, and you have to save up to have enough for ten of those, by then the money is worth less. She stated that it is a losing game to be taking in-lieu fees. She assumes there are some limits to how much we can charge.
Asst. City Attorney Murphy agreed, and she thought it could be problematic to have a fee in addition to a requirement to build unless it is somehow proportionate. She thinks there was a discussion about in-lieu fees in coordination with building units to meet the obligation that there is some kind of mix that could be looked at. In terms of just having a separate fee, such as an impact fee that would have to go through a nexus study, and then have the on-site building obligation as well, that is going to be difficult.
Chair Hauser asked about a fair share fee for administering the BMR program.
Asst. City Attorney Murphy stated that, in agreements, you can have a monitoring fee and can make the developer pay the cost of implementing the program. It can be upfront fee to run the BMR sales and a yearly monitoring program for rental units, which is fairly common. She does not know if we would want a monitoring fee for the ownership units.
HEART Representative Davis stated you want them to keep their money.
Asst. City Attorney Murphy agreed, adding that there will be costs at resale and refinance and maybe there is some way to capture some of those fees at that point but certainly in the initial phase requiring a fee of the developer to pay for the cost of implementing everything is fine.
HEART Representative Davis stated too many cities have not put monitoring fees into the legal agreements and it could be a larger fee for initial rent up of a unit, for turnover of a unit, and then a smaller annual fee for the rental monitoring to charge the landlord. They were going more into BMR monitoring space as an agency and looking to see what they think those numbers will be reasonable.
Councilmember Espinosa asked if we can see other cities’ ordinances as they are getting builders to build and they are very close to us. She asked what we can do to get them to be incentivized to come to Pacifica to build.
Community Development Director Updegrave thinks that our Housing Element and Rezoning Program has laid the foundation and we have the regulatory framework that provides more certainty, more clarity in the rules. She stated that we have no control over market conditions, and cost of construction, cost of land, and interest rates are all very high right now and that is impacting construction. However, she thinks we are in a good place in terms of our regulatory framework. As we work to modernize our ordinance and make our regulations clearer and more predictable, streamline our processes, etc. all things that will be very helpful. Having updated inclusionary and updated density bonus all contribute to that.
Commissioner Davis saw a density bonus ordinance that was unenforceable because of the State and she thought that should be updated. The in-lieu fee resolution are from 2007, but there is some interest in their group of eliminating an in-lieu fee as a possibility and going to fractional one. In the meantime, while we wait for grand nexus study, what if we update the in-lieu fees so
1.a
Packet Pg. 31
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of 10-6-2025 Joint Study Session City Council and Planning Commission (6062 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Joint Study Session 26 October 06, 2025
at least they are current until we decide to change them but not giving them away. She asked if those would be logical steps forward.
HEART Representative Davis stated some of the changes they were thinking about for the inclusionary ordinance are technical changes to bring them in line with best practices. He thinks this conversation is the most salient about any changes in the conversation about changing the affordability levels. He thanked them tonight as this has been a great discussion and this was a good example of people asking thoughtful questions.
Mayor Beckmeyer appreciated him very much and his support in partnership.
ADJOURN
Mayor Beckmeyer adjourned the meeting at 9:10 p.m.
Transcribed by Barbara Medina, Public Meeting Stenographer.
Respectfully Submitted,
Sarah Coffey, City Clerk
__________________________
Sue Beckmeyer, Mayor
1.a
Packet Pg. 32
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of 10-6-2025 Joint Study Session City Council and Planning Commission (6062 : Approval of Minutes)
CITY OF PACIFICA
COUNCIL AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT
10/27/2025
1 SUBJECT:
Continuation of Proclamation of a Local Emergency at the Sewer Mains Crossing Calera Creek in the Vallemar Neighborhood
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Accept report and make a determination that conditions of local emergency continue to exist at the Sewer Mains Crossing Calera Creek in the Vallemar Neighborhood.
STAFF CONTACT:
Melissa Tigbao, P.E., Director of Public Works
(650) 501-6016
[email protected]
Louis Sun, P.E., Deputy Director of Public Works – Wastewater (650) 738-4660
[email protected]
Sarah Coffey, City Clerk
650-738-7307
[email protected]
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION:
On August 6, 2025, Public Works Wastewater Division staff received a call from a resident observing a crack on the 6-inch sewer main crossing Calera Creek near the intersection of Oneonta Avenue and Minerva Avenue. Public Works Wastewater Division staff responded to the notification and inspected the sewer main and discovered evidence of corrosion on the sewer main. Staff also conducted a temporary repair. The temporary repair is inadequate for the long term, and the cracked sewer main requires immediate repair to prevent potential sanitary Sewer Spills and threaten the safety of persons and property, including polluting the Calera Creek watershed.
On August 20, 2025, the Director of Emergency Services proclaimed the existence of a local emergency at the sewer mains crossing Calera Creek in the Vallemar Neighborhood near the intersection of Oneonta Avenue and Minerva Avenue due to corroded conditions and potential collapse of the 6-inch sewer main crossing Calera Creek (Attachment 1). Since this date, the Director of Emergency Services has proclaimed the existence of these emergencies as described below:
• There is a potential for leakage during wet weather flows. The potential for sewer main failures and resulting sanitary sewer spills threatens the creek. • Sewer mains cross Calera Creek in three locations in the Vallemar neighborhood. These sewer mains have been identified as health and safety of persons and property, including critical 2 Packet Pg. 33
Pacifica City Council 2
October 27, 2025
public infrastructure for replacement as part of the Vallemar and Rockaway Beach Boulevard Areas Sewer and Rehabilitation and Repair Project. The design of this project (approved by Council August 26, 2024) is in progress. The City is fast-tracking the creek crossings portion of the project, and construction documents are underway.
• The creek crossing near Oneonta Avenue and Minerva Avenues has deteriorated further since inspection earlier this year, and there is a risk that the other creek crossings in the neighborhood are deteriorating further and may result in sanitary sewer spills.
The City Council first ratified this proclamation (Attachment 2) at its regular meeting of August 25, 2025. Since that date, staff is expeditiously working towards a permanent repair solution. • Design documents for the creek crossing reached 100% on the week of September 15, 2025, and it is currently under final review.
• Once the design documents have been reviewed for completion, the staff will issue the document to a contractor for construction.
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 at the sewer mains crossing Calera Creek in the Vallemar Neighborhood near the intersection of Oneonta Avenue and Minerva Avenue still exist since the City Council first acted to declare a local emergency on August 25, 2025. Staff will bring up the continuance of Proclamation every 30 days, with October 27, 2025, 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 the conditions of local emergency continue to exist at the sewer mains crossing Calera Creek in the Vallemar Neighborhood near the intersection of Oneonta Avenue and Minerva Avenue.
ALTERNATIVE ACTION:
Council may choose to not to adopt the Proclamation Confirming Existence of Local Emergency at the sewer mains crossing Calera Creek in the Vallemar neighborhood, however this is not recommended. Delaying the work increases the risk of Sanitary Sewer Spills into Calera Creek and may cause health and safety issues to persons and property, including critical public infrastructure.
FISCAL IMPACT:
There are no fiscal impacts associated with the emergency declared.
ORIGINATED BY:
Public Works - Wastewater Division
2 Packet Pg. 34
Pacifica City Council 3
October 27, 2025
ATTACHMENT LIST:
Attachment 1 - PROCLAMATION OF LOCAL EMERGENCY at Calera Creek Oneonta - Minerva (PDF)
Attachment 2 - ResolutionNo74-2025_RatifyingProclamationLocalEmergency_SewerMainVallemar_EXECUTED (PDF) 2 Packet Pg. 35
CITY OF PACIFICA
170 Santa Maria Avenue • Pacifica, California 94044-2506 www.cityofpacifica.org
MAYOR
Sue Beckmeyer
MAYOR PRO
TEM
Christine Boles
COUNCIL
Mary Bier
Mayra Espinosa
Greg Wright
Scenic Pacifica
Incorporated Nov. 22, 1957
PROCLAMATION OF LOCAL EMERGENCY
WHEREAS, Section 4-2.01 et seq. of the Pacifica Municipal Code empowers the Director of Emergency Services to proclaim the existence or threatened existence of a local emergency when the City Council is not in session, subject to confirmation by the City Council at the earliest possible time; and WHEREAS, the City Manager is the Director of Emergency Services of the City of Pacifica; and WHEREAS, on Wednesday, August 6, 2025, Public Works Wastewater Division received a notification from the public regarding observation of a crack on the 6-inch sewer main crossing the Calera Creek near the intersection of Oneonta Avenue and Minerva Avenue in Vallemar neighborhood; and WHEREAS, Public Works Wastewater Division staff responded to the notification and inspected the sewer main and discovered evidence of corrosion, which caused a crack that was dripping; and WHEREAS, Staff made a temporary repair that would help to prevent complete failure of the sewer main by wrapping pipe repair tape; and
WHEREAS, the temporary repair is inadequate for the long term, and the cracked sewer main requires a more extensive immediate repair to prevent potential sanitary Sewer Spills and threatens the safety of persons and property, including polluting the Calera Creek watershed; and WHEREAS, such conditions are or are likely to be beyond the handling capability of the City’s services, personnel, equipment, and facilities, requiring the use of outside contractors to conduct emergency repair; and
WHEREAS, the City provides this written notification to the San Mateo County and State CalEMA’s Regional and Headquarter offices of a proclamation of local emergency; and WHEREAS, such proclamation shall be subject to confirmation by the Pacifica City Council at the earliest possible time.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT PROCLAIMED that, in accordance with State Law and the City of Pacifica Municipal Code, the Director of Emergency Services proclaims the existence of a local emergency at the sewer main crossing the Calera Creek near the intersection of Oneonta Avenue and Minerva Avenue in the Vallemar neighborhood.
DATED: August 20, 2025
By:
_____________________________
Kevin Woodhouse
Director of Emergency Services
2.a
Packet Pg. 36
Attachment: Attachment 1 - PROCLAMATION OF LOCAL EMERGENCY at Calera Creek Oneonta - Minerva (6040 : Continuation of Proclamation RESOLUTION NO. 74-2025
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PACIFICA
RATIFYING THE PROCLAMATION CONFIRMING EXISTENCE OF LOCAL EMERGENCY AT
THE SEWER MAINS CROSSING CALERA CREEK IN THE VALLEMAR NEIGHBORHOOD WHEREAS, Section 4-2.05 of the City of Pacifica Municipal Code (“PMC”) designates the City Manager as the Director of Emergency Services; and WHEREAS, Government Code section 8630 and PMC section 4-2.05(a) empower the Director of Emergency Services to proclaim the existence or threatened existence of a local emergency when said city is affected or likely to be affected by an emergency, subject to ratification by the City Council; and
WHEREAS, Section 4-2.02 of the PMC defines “emergency” as the “actual or threatened existence of conditions of disaster or of extreme peril to the safety of persons and property within this City caused by such conditions as earthquake, hazardous materials, plane crash, landslide, tsunami, epidemic, flood, riot, fire, or other conditions, including conditions resulting from a labor controversy, which conditions are or are likely to be beyond the capability of control of the services, personnel, equipment, and facilities of this City, requiring the combined forces of other political subdivisions to combat”; and
WHEREAS, Section 4-2.01 et seq. of the Pacifica Municipal Code empowers the Director of Emergency Services to proclaim the existence or threatened existence of a local emergency when the City Council is not in session, subject to confirmation by the City Council; and WHEREAS, the City Manager is the Director of Emergency Services of the City of Pacifica; and
WHEREAS, on August 5, 2025, the Department of Public Works Wastewater Division staff, observed a crack in the six-inch sewer main crossing Calera Creek between Oneonta Avenue and Reina del Mar Avenue; and
WHEREAS, failures of corroded sewer mains would create a hazardous condition including potential Sanitary Sewer Spills and threaten the safety of persons and property, including critical public infrastructure; and
WHEREAS, the City Manager has determined that the damaged sewer main threatens the health and safety of persons and properties, including critical public infrastructure, and requires immediate attention and repair and as such constitutes an emergency pursuant to Pacifica Municipal Code section 4-2.02 and Public Contract Code section 1102; and WHEREAS, such conditions are or are likely to be beyond the handling capability of the City’s services, personnel, equipment, and facilities, requiring the use of outside contractors to conduct emergency repair pursuant to Pacifica Municipal Code section 3-15.09 without giving notice for bids to let contract, pursuant to Public Contract Code 22050; and WHEREAS, on August 20, 2025, the City Manager, in his capacity as Director of Emergency Services, proclaimed the existence of local emergency in the City of Pacifica, after determining that the 6-inch sewer main crossing Calera Creek near the intersection of Oneonta Avenue and Minerva
2.b
Packet Pg. 37
Attachment: Attachment 2 - ResolutionNo74-2025_RatifyingProclamationLocalEmergency_SewerMain-Vallemar_EXECUTED (6040 :
2.b
Packet Pg. 38
Attachment: Attachment 2 - ResolutionNo74-2025_RatifyingProclamationLocalEmergency_SewerMain-Vallemar_EXECUTED (6040 :
RESOLUTION NO. 74-2025
ATTACHMENT A
2.b
Packet Pg. 39
Attachment: Attachment 2 - ResolutionNo74-2025_RatifyingProclamationLocalEmergency_SewerMain-Vallemar_EXECUTED (6040 :
CITY OF PACIFICA
170 Santa Maria Avenue • Pacifica, California 94044-2506 www.cityofpacifica.org
MAYOR
Sue Beckmeyer
MAYOR PRO
TEM
Christine Boles
COUNCIL
Mary Bier
Mayra Espinosa
Greg Wright
Scenic Pacifica
Incorporated Nov. 22, 1957
PROCLAMATION OF LOCAL EMERGENCY
WHEREAS, Section 4-2.01 et seq. of the Pacifica Municipal Code empowers the Director of Emergency Services to proclaim the existence or threatened existence of a local emergency when the City Council is not in session, subject to confirmation by the City Council at the earliest possible time; and WHEREAS, the City Manager is the Director of Emergency Services of the City of Pacifica; and WHEREAS, on Wednesday, August 6, 2025, Public Works Wastewater Division received a notification from the public regarding observation of a crack on the 6-inch sewer main crossing the Calera Creek near the intersection of Oneonta Avenue and Minerva Avenue in Vallemar neighborhood; and WHEREAS, Public Works Wastewater Division staff responded to the notification and inspected the sewer main and discovered evidence of corrosion, which caused a crack that was dripping; and WHEREAS, Staff made a temporary repair that would help to prevent complete failure of the sewer main by wrapping pipe repair tape; and
WHEREAS, the temporary repair is inadequate for the long term, and the cracked sewer main requires a more extensive immediate repair to prevent potential sanitary Sewer Spills and threatens the safety of persons and property, including polluting the Calera Creek watershed; and WHEREAS, such conditions are or are likely to be beyond the handling capability of the City’s services, personnel, equipment, and facilities, requiring the use of outside contractors to conduct emergency repair; and
WHEREAS, the City provides this written notification to the San Mateo County and State CalEMA’s Regional and Headquarter offices of a proclamation of local emergency; and WHEREAS, such proclamation shall be subject to confirmation by the Pacifica City Council at the earliest possible time.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT PROCLAIMED that, in accordance with State Law and the City of Pacifica Municipal Code, the Director of Emergency Services proclaims the existence of a local emergency at the sewer main crossing the Calera Creek near the intersection of Oneonta Avenue and Minerva Avenue in the Vallemar neighborhood.
DATED: August 20, 2025
By:
_____________________________
Kevin Woodhouse
Director of Emergency Services
2.b
Packet Pg. 40
Attachment: Attachment 2 - ResolutionNo74-2025_RatifyingProclamationLocalEmergency_SewerMain-Vallemar_EXECUTED (6040 :
CITY OF PACIFICA
COUNCIL AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT
10/27/2025
1 SUBJECT:
Amendments to Administrative Policy No. 84 relating to Guidelines for Issuing Proclamations, Commendations and Ceremonial Documents to reflect the nomenclature change for the title of “Mayor pro Tem” to “Vice Mayor”
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Adopt the Resolution titled, “A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Pacifica Amending Administrative Policy No. 84, ‘Guidelines for Issuing Proclamations, Commendations and Ceremonial Documents’” to reflect the nomenclature change for the title of “Mayor pro Tem” to “Vice Mayor”.
STAFF CONTACT:
Sarah Coffey, City Clerk
(650) 738-7307
[email protected]
Kevin Woodhouse, City Manager
(650) 738-7409
[email protected]
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION:
On August 25, 2025 by Resolution No. 81-2025 the City Council adopted amendments to the City Council Rules and Code of Ethics, including but not limited to revising the nomenclature of the title “Mayor pro Tem” to “Vice Mayor”. City Administrative Policies were reviewed for consistency with the nomenclature update for Vice Mayor and it was found that Administrative Policy No. 84 referenced “Mayor pro Tem”.
The proposed Resolution amends Administrative Policy No. 84 “Guidelines for Issuing Proclamations, Commendations and Ceremonial Documents” to make the administrative edit to be consistent with current terminology to edit the nomenclature used in the Policy from “Mayor pro Tem” to “Vice Mayor”. The proposed edits to Administrative Policy No. 84 are shown in Attachment A.
RELATION TO CITY COUNCIL GOALS AND WORK PLAN:
Review of this issue is not part of the FY 2024-25 workplan and does not directly relate to the City Council 2023-2030 Strategic Plan.
FISCAL IMPACT:
There is no fiscal impact related to amending Administrative Policy No. 84.
ORIGINATED BY:
3 Packet Pg. 41
Pacifica City Council 2
October 27, 2025
City Clerk
ATTACHMENT LIST:
Exhibit A: Redline Version of Proposed Amendment to Administrative Policy No. 84 (PDF) 3 Packet Pg. 42
Pacifica City Council 3
October 27, 2025
RESOLUTION NO. ___________
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PACIFICA AMENDING ADMINISTRATIVE POLICY NO. 84 “GUIDELINES FOR ISSUING PROCLAMATIONS, COMMENDATIONS AND CEREMONIAL DOCUMENTS”
WHEREAS, the City of Pacifica has certain Administrative Policies to set forth specific policy, regulations, and to establish procedural guidelines on various subject matters; and
WHEREAS, the City of Pacifica’s Administrative Policy No. 84 “Guidelines for Issuing Proclamations, Commendations and Ceremonial Documents” was previously adopted on January 27, 2025 by Resolution No.06-2025 to establish clear and consistent criteria and guidelines for official City Council recognition in the form of ceremonial acknowledgment such as Proclamations, Certificates or Letters of Recognition, Commendation or Congratulations; and
WHEREAS, on August 25, 2025 by Resolution No. 81-2025 the City Council adopted amendments to the City Council Rules and Code of Ethics, including but not limited to revising the nomenclature of the title “Mayor pro Tem” to “Vice Mayor”; and WHEREAS, City Administrative Policies were reviewed for consistency with the nomenclature update for Vice Mayor and it was found that Administrative Policy No. 84 referenced “Mayor pro Tem”; and
WHEREAS, it is the intent to amend Administrative Policy No. 84 to reference “Vice Mayor” in lieu of “Mayor pro Tem” to be consistent with current terminology; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Pacifica hereby approves the amendment to Administrative Policy No. 84 as set forth in the revised Administrative Policy No. 84, which is attached hereto and incorporated in Exhibit A. • • • • •
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Pacifica, California, held on the 27th day of October, 2025, by the following vote:
AYES, Councilmembers:
NOES, Councilmembers:
ABSENT, Councilmembers:
ABSTAIN, Councilmembers:
_________________________________
Sue Beckmeyer, Mayor
ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
3 Packet Pg. 43
Pacifica City Council 4
October 27, 2025
______________________________ _________________________________ Sarah Coffey, City Clerk Michelle Kenyon, City Attorney 3 Packet Pg. 44
Pacifica City Council 5
October 27, 2025
EXHIBIT A
3 Packet Pg. 45
Administrative Policy No. 84 p. 1
CITY OF PACIFICA
ADMINISTRATIVE POLICY
No.
84 GUIDELINES FOR ISSUING PROCLAMATIONS,
COMMENDATIONS AND CEREMONIAL
DOCUMENTS
DATE REVISED:
10/27/2025
DATE ISSUED:
01/27/2025
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.
Proclamations
Proclamations may be requested for the following:
A. Recognition of outgoing Mayor or Councilmember;
3.a
Packet Pg. 46
Attachment: Exhibit A: Redline Version of Proposed Amendment to Administrative Policy No. 84 (6059 : Amend Admin Policy 84 Guidelines for Administrative Policy No. 84 p. 2
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 promoting or taking a position relating to candidates or potential candidates for elected office, etc.
3.a
Packet Pg. 47
Attachment: Exhibit A: Redline Version of Proposed Amendment to Administrative Policy No. 84 (6059 : Amend Admin Policy 84 Guidelines for Administrative Policy No. 84 p. 3
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.
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
3.a
Packet Pg. 48
Attachment: Exhibit A: Redline Version of Proposed Amendment to Administrative Policy No. 84 (6059 : Amend Admin Policy 84 Guidelines for Administrative Policy No. 84 p. 4
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 Vice 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.
Nothing in this Policy shall prohibit Councilmembers from requesting through the City Manager to agendize a Proclamation for consideration by Council pursuant to the City Council Rules and Code of Ethics.
3.a
Packet Pg. 49
Attachment: Exhibit A: Redline Version of Proposed Amendment to Administrative Policy No. 84 (6059 : Amend Admin Policy 84 Guidelines for
CITY OF PACIFICA
COUNCIL AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT
10/27/2025
1 SUBJECT:
Notice of Completion for the Esplanade & Palmetto Bicycle and Pedestrian Improvements Project
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Adopt the Resolution of the City Council of the City of Pacifica accepting completion and directing the City Manager to file Notice of completion for the Esplanade & Palmetto Bicycle and Pedestrian Improvements Project; and Authorize the City Manager to release the retention funds to the contractor.
STAFF CONTACT:
Rey Soriano, Assistant Civil Engineer
(650) 676-5608
[email protected]
Roland Yip, P.E., DPW Deputy Director/City Engineer
(650) 738-3771
[email protected]
Melissa Tigbao P.E., DPW Director
(650) 501-6016
[email protected]
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION:
On January 13, 2025, the City Council authorized the City Manager to execute a construction agreement with Dryco Construction, Inc. (Dryco) for the Esplanade & Palmetto Bicycle and Pedestrian Improvement Project. The project implemented improvements identified in the City’s 2020 Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan, including installation of Class 2, 2B, and 3 bike lanes, new Class 3B bicycle boulevards, painted bulbouts, upgraded curb ramps, high-visibility crosswalks, and roadway resurfacing to provide a safer, smoother surface.
There were six change orders issued to Dryco over the course of construction totaling $104,527. These included a drainage inlet tie-in, push button extensions for ADA compliance, asphalt conform corrections at curb ramps, red curb painting, a concrete median, and a quantity adjustments. The final construction cost for the project was $1,276,277.60.
As the project is now complete and staff is satisfied with the contractor’s work on the project, it is appropriate to record the formal Notice of Completion with the San Mateo County Recorder’s Office. This document is the legal notice that the City considers the project complete and that we intend to pay the contractor for the full and complete contract price of the work actually completed. This also puts all subcontractors and suppliers on notice that if they have any claims for payment from the contractor, they have 30 days to file claims for payment against the City.
This provision of contract law protects subcontractors from contractors who may not pay them 4 Packet Pg. 50
Pacifica City Council 2
October 27, 2025
properly. It also protects the City from claims against us for any nonpayment on the part of the contractor. The City withheld 5% of the final contract amount, $63,813.88, as retention to make sure that all subcontractors and suppliers have been paid. The City will release the retention if no claims are received. The project plans are also available to view on the City's website at:
<https://www.cityofpacifica.org/departments/public-works/engineering/esplanade-palmettobicyle-pedestrian-improvement-project> The City Manager is recommending the adoption of the attached resolution accepting completion of the project and authorizing the filing of the Notice of Completion (Attachment 1) with the San Mateo County Recorder’s Office.
FISCAL IMPACT:
There is no fiscal impact associated with the filing of the Notice of Completion. The total project Source and Use of Funds table is shown below. The project balance will remain in Fund 13 - Street Improvement Fund.
Total Project Source and Use of Funds
TDA Article 3 $335,160
SMCTA Cycle 6 $568,504
General Fund (FY 22-23 CIP Budget) $37,240
Fund 13 - Street Improvement Fund $465,354.50
SRTS Small Infrastructure Capital Grant $10,000
Total Source of Funds $1,416,258.50
Construction Cost $1,276,277.60
Design Cost $115,423.29
Total Use of Funds $1,391,700.89
Project Ending Balance $24,557.61
ALTERNATIVE ACTION:
Council may choose not to adopt the resolution accepting completion of the project, but as the work has been satisfactorily completed, the contractor may file a claim against the City for nonpayment of retention, if there are no claims.
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.
ORIGINATED BY:
Public Works
4 Packet Pg. 51
Pacifica City Council 3
October 27, 2025
ATTACHMENT LIST:
Esplanade Palmetto NOTICE OF COMPLETION attachment (DOCX) 4 Packet Pg. 52
Pacifica City Council 4
October 27, 2025
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PACIFICA
ACCEPTING COMPLETION AND DIRECTING THE CITY MANAGER TO FILE
NOTICE OF COMPLETION FOR THE
ESPLANADE & PALMETTO BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN IMPROVEMENT PROJECT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Pacifica, California, that WHEREAS, the City Engineer of the said City has filed with the City Clerk of said City, his Certificate as to the completion of all the work provided to be done under and pursuant to the contract between said City and DRYCO Construction, Inc, on January 13, 2025, and WHEREAS, it appears to the satisfaction of this Council that said work under the contract has been fully completed as provided in the contract and the plans and specifications therein referred to,
NOW, THEREFORE, it is ordered as follows:
1. That acceptance of completion of the work be, and it is hereby, made and ordered.
2. That the City Manager is directed to file for record with the County Recorder of the County of San Mateo, Notice of Completion thereof, pursuant to Section 3093 of the Civil Code of the State of California.
• • • • •
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Pacifica, California, held on the 27h day of October 2025, by the following vote:
AYES, Councilmembers:
NOES, Councilmembers:
ABSENT, Councilmembers:
ABSTAIN, Councilmembers:
CITY OF PACIFICA
By: _______________________________
Sue Beckmeyer, Mayor
ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
______________________________ _________________________________ Sarah Coffey, City Clerk Michelle Kenyon, City Attorney 4 Packet Pg. 53
NOTICE OF COMPLETION
CITY OF PACIFICA
FOR THE ESPLANADE & PALMETTO BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN
IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN, pursuant to Section 3093 of the Civil Code of the State of California, by Roland Yip, City Engineer of the City of Pacifica, California, that the contract awarded to DRYCO Construction, Inc. on January 13, 2025, has been completed in accordance with the plans and specifications for said work filed with the City Clerk, and approved by the City Council of said City.
That said work and improvements were actually completed on the 22nd day of September 2025 and that acceptance of completion of said work was ordered by the City Council of said City, adopted on the 27th day of October 2025, and that the name of the surety on the contractor's bond for labor and materials on said project is Travelers Casualty and Surety Company of America.
That said work consists generally of the installation of curb ramps, RRFBs, pavement resurfacing, roadway & bike lane striping, and other associated bicycle and pedestrian improvements.
Name and address of Owner: City of Pacifica
170 Santa Maria Ave
Pacifica, California 94044
Roland Yip, P.E.
City Engineer
VERIFICATION
The undersigned states that he is the City Engineer of the City of Pacifica and that he makes this verification on behalf of said entity; that he has read the foregoing, and knows the contents thereof, and that the facts stated therein are true.
Roland Yip, P.E.
City Engineer
Executed at Pacifica, California, October 27, 2025.
4.a
Packet Pg. 54
Attachment: Esplanade Palmetto NOTICE OF COMPLETION attachment (6058 : Notice of Completion for the Esplanade & Palmetto Bicycle and
CITY OF PACIFICA
COUNCIL AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT
10/27/2025
1 SUBJECT:
Notice of Completion for the Sharp Park PDA Pedestrian Improvements Project RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Move to Adopt the Resolution of the City Council of the City of Pacifica accepting completion and directing the City Manager to file Notice of Completion for the Sharp Park PDA Pedestrian Improvements Project; and Authorize the City Manager to release the retention funds to the contractor.
STAFF CONTACT:
Bryan Bautista, Assistant Civil Engineer
(650) 898-2233
[email protected]
Roland Yip, P.E., DPW Deputy Director
(650) 738-3771
[email protected]
Melissa Tigbao, Director of Public Works
(650) 501-6016
[email protected]
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION:
On January 13, 2025, City Council authorized the City Manager to Award and Execute a Construction Agreement for the Sharp Park PDA Pedestrian Improvements Project. The Sharp Park Priority Development Area (PDA) Pedestrian Improvement Project closed sidewalk gaps, improved sidewalks to current ADA standards, installed new ADA compliant driveways and corner curb ramps, installed curb and gutter to improve storm water management, removed and replaced failed pavement, installed Bicycle Boulevard (Paloma) and pedestrian crossing striping, and resurfaced roads with slurry seal along Paloma Avenue, Carmel Avenue and Santa Maria Avenue from Francisco Boulevard to Beach Boulevard. The new driveways and sidewalks provided an ADA compliant path of travel in the project area and provided a vital link for pedestrians and bicyclists from the eastern residential neighborhood of Pacifica to the Sharp Park district, Palmetto business area, Pacifica Civic Center, two schools, the Sharp Park Library, and the popular Sharp Park Beach, and Pacifica Pier. The project was funded by the One Bay Area Grant 2, Measure M Grant, and Measure W (Fund 11).
There were 25 change orders issued to the contractor, JJR Construction, Inc., over the course of construction. The total change order amount was $390,360.13 and included additional sidewalk, driveways, curb & gutter, and curb ramps, additional work for removal and planting of 3 additional trees, relocation of water meters, and additional resurfacing and striping 5 Packet Pg. 55
Pacifica City Council 2
October 27, 2025
improvements. The final contractor construction cost for the project was $2,029,838.34.
As the project is now complete and staff is satisfied with the contractor’s work on the project, it is appropriate to record the formal Notice of Completion with the San Mateo County Recorder's Office. This recorded document is the legal notice that the City considers the project complete and that we intend to pay the contractor for the full and complete contract price. This also puts all subcontractors and suppliers on notice that if they have any claims for payment from the contractor, they have 30 days to file claims for payment against the City. This provision of contract law protects subcontractors from contractors who may not pay them properly. It also protects the City from claims against us for any nonpayment on the part of the contractor. The City withheld 5% of the contract amount, $101,491.92, as retention to make sure that all subcontractors and suppliers have been paid. The City will release the retention if no claims are received. The project plans are also available to view on the City's website at:
https://www.cityofpacifica.org/departments/public-works/engineering/capital-improvementprojects/sharp-park-pda-pedestrian-improvement-project.
The City Manager is recommending the adoption of the attached resolution accepting completion of the project and the filing of the Notice of Completion (Attachment 1) with the San Mateo County Recorder's Office.
FISCAL IMPACT:
There is no fiscal impact associated with the filing of the Notice of Completion. The total project Source and Use of Funds table is shown below. The project balance will remain in the Fund 11 - Measure W.
Total Project Source and Use of Funds
One Bay Area Grant 2 $1,000,000.00
Measure M $1,258,247.00
Fund 11 - Measure W $188,737.05
Total Source of Funds $2,446,984.05
Construction $2,029,838.34
Design Consultant $213,517.93
Arborist $12,088.89
Total Use of Funds $2,255,445.16
Project End Balance $191,538.89
ALTERNATIVE ACTION:
Council may choose not to adopt the resolution accepting completion of the project, but as the work has been satisfactorily completed, the contractor may file a claim against the City for nonpayment of retention, if there are no claims.
RELATION TO CITY COUNCIL GOALS AND WORK PLAN:
Approval of the Notice of Completion for the Sharp Park PDA Pedestrian Improvements Project is consistent with the following Council adopted Goals:
5 Packet Pg. 56
Pacifica City Council 3
October 27, 2025
- 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.
ORIGINATED BY:
Engineering
ATTACHMENT LIST:
NOTICE OF COMPLETION (DOCX)
5 Packet Pg. 57
Pacifica City Council 4
October 27, 2025
RESOLUTION NO. _______
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PACIFICA
ACCEPTING COMPLETION AND DIRECTING THE CITY MANAGER TO FILE
NOTICE OF COMPLETION FOR THE
SHARP PARK PDA PEDESTRIAN IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT
RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Pacifica, California, that WHEREAS, the City Engineer of the said City has filed with the City Clerk of said City, his Certificate as to the completion of all the work provided to be done under and pursuant to the contract between said City and JJR Construction, Inc., on January 13, 2025, and WHEREAS, it appears to the satisfaction of this Council that said work under said contract has been fully completed as provided in said contract and the plans and specifications therein referred to,
NOW, THEREFORE, it is ordered as follows:
1. That acceptance of completion of said work be, and it is hereby, made and ordered.
2. That the City Manager is directed to file for record with the County Recorder of the County of San Mateo, Notice of Completion thereof, pursuant to Section 3093 of the Civil Code of the State of California.
• • • • •
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Pacifica, California, held on the 27h day of October 2025, by the following vote:
AYES, Councilmembers:
NOES, Councilmembers:
ABSENT, Councilmembers:
ABSTAIN, Councilmembers:
CITY OF PACIFICA
By: _______________________________
Sue Beckmeyer, Mayor
ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
______________________________ _________________________________ Sarah Coffey, City Clerk Michelle Kenyon, City Attorney 5 Packet Pg. 58
NOTICE OF COMPLETION
CITY OF PACIFICA
FOR THE SHARP PARK PDA PEDESTRIAN IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN, pursuant to Section 3093 of the Civil Code of the State of California, by Roland Yip, City Engineer of the City of Pacifica, California, that the contract awarded to JJR Construction Inc. on January 13, 2025, has been completed in accordance with the plans and specifications for said work filed with the City Clerk, and approved by the City Council of said City.
That said work and improvements were actually completed on the 18th day of September 2025 and that acceptance of completion of said work was ordered by the City Council of said City, adopted on the 27
th day of October 2025, and that the name of the surety on the contractor's bond for labor and materials on said project is Great American Insurance Company.
That said work consists, generally of concrete curb ramps, driveways, sidewalk, curb and gutter and other miscellaneous work.
Name and address of Owner: City of Pacifica
170 Santa Maria Ave
Pacifica, California 94044
Roland Yip, P.E.
City Engineer
VERIFICATION
The undersigned states that he is the City Engineer of the City of Pacifica and that he makes this verification on behalf of said entity; that he has read the foregoing, and knows the contents thereof, and that the facts stated therein are true.
Roland Yip, P.E.
City Engineer
Executed at Pacifica, California, on October 27, 2025.
5.a
Packet Pg. 59
Attachment: NOTICE OF COMPLETION (6055 : Sharp Park PDA Ped Notice of Completion)
CITY OF PACIFICA
COUNCIL AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT
10/27/2025
1 SUBJECT:
Contracts with the California Department of Education, California Department of Social Services and the San Mateo County Superintendent of Schools for the purpose of providing Child Care and development services for fiscal year 2025-26, Continued Funding Applications and all related contract documents.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Adopt the Resolution Approving Agreements with the California Department of Education, the California Department of Social Services and the San Mateo County Superintendent of Schools for the Purpose of Providing Child Care and Development Services and to Authorize the Designated Personnel to Sign Contract Documents for Fiscal Year 2025/26.
STAFF CONTACT:
Scott Leslie, Director, Parks, Beaches and Recreation
(650) 738-7387
[email protected]
Tracy Gilbert, Recreation Supervisor, Child Care
(650) 738-7388
[email protected]
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION:
The City regularly enters into agreements with the California Department of Education, the California Department of Social Services and the San Mateo County Office of Education for the purpose of receiving certain funding for providing Child Care and development services.
The City must enter into written agreements with the California Department of Education, the California Department of Social Services and the San Mateo County Office of Education and consent to the general terms and conditions, the general child care and development program requirements in order to receive state funding for the program. Through these agreements, the City is obligated to provide certain child care and development services including, but not limited to, the following:
• The City will be required to indemnify the State and County in accordance with the applicable indemnification obligations;
• Conduct a Preschool part-day and/or full-day program for children ages three to fiveyears-old prior to Kindergarten entry which conforms to the California State Preschool Program Funding Terms and Conditions (FT&C) and philosophies and complies with various enrollment criteria;
• Participate in providing family literacy activities to Title V families based on the annual Program Self-Evaluation plan approved by the California Department of Education, Early Learning and Care Division;
• Maintain records for program review, evaluation, audit and/or other purposes and make 6 Packet Pg. 60
Pacifica City Council 2
October 27, 2025
them available to persons authorized by the State, including the County; • Send Department of Social Services, Child Care licensing annual reports and any violations issued during a CCLD visit within three days of receiving the report to the SMCOE for reporting to California Department of Education; • Determine the eligibility of families for child development services and keep eligibility documentation based on California State Preschool Program FT&C; and • Inform parents of the right to appeal adverse eligibility determinations to the Delegate Agency’s Board.
The term of the Agreements is from July 1, 2025 through June 30, 2026.
The California Department of Education, the California Department of Social Services, and the San Mateo County Office of Education request a Council resolution approving the 2025- 26 contract documents, continued funding applications and all related contract documents and naming an authorized representative. The proposed resolution identifies City Manager Kevin Woodhouse, Parks and Recreation Director Scott Leslie and current Recreation Services Supervisor Tracy Gilbert. Once authorized, these representatives may process the annual reapplication, submission of monthly/quarterly requests for reimbursement, attending semi-annual and annual training sessions, authorizing families to receive subsidized care and ongoing communications with the state representative of the Early Education and Support Division and the San Mateo County Superintendent of Schools.
ALTERNATIVE ACTION:
Do not approve the agreement and provide staff with alternative direction.
RELATION TO CITY COUNCIL GOALS AND WORK PLAN:
This action helps to support youth services, which is a component of A Healthy and Compassionate Community.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The annual contract with the California Department of Social Services for providing subsidized Child Care at Sunset Ridge, Vallemar, and Cabrillo, are the General Child Care contract in the amount of $1,204,006. The contract with the California Department of Education for early education services providing subsidized child care at Fairmont West in the amount of $341,014, and the contract with the San Mateo County Superintendent of School sunder a California State Preschool Program Grant in the amount of $443,134. The expenditures and revenues related to these contracts were included in the Fiscal Year 2025-2026 budget. No additional budget authority is needed.
ORIGINATED BY:
Parks, Beaches & Recreation Department
ATTACHMENT LIST:
2025-26 CSPP DIRECT CONTRACT (PDF)
2025-26 SMCOE CSPP CONTRACT (PDF)
2025-26_CCTR CONTRACT (PDF)
6 Packet Pg. 61
Pacifica City Council 3
October 27, 2025
RESOLUTION NO. _______
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PACIFICA APPROVING
AGREEMENTS WITH THE CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION, THE
CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF SCOIAL SERVICES AND THE SAN MATEO COUNTY
SUPERINTENDENT OF SCHOOLS FOR THE PURPOSE OF PROVIDING CHILD CARE AND
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES AND TO AUTHORIZE THE DESIGNATED PERSONNEL TO SIGN CONTRACT DOCUMENTS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2025-26.
WHEREAS, the City regularly enters into agreements with the California Department of Education, the California Department of Social Services and the San Mateo County Office of Education for the purpose of receiving certain funding for providing Child Care and development services; and
WHEREAS, The City must enter into written agreements with the California Department of Education, the California Department of Social Services and the San Mateo County Office of Education and consent to the general terms and conditions, the general child care and development program requirements in order to receive state funding for the program; and WHEREAS, the California Department of Education, the California Department of Social Services, and the San Mateo County Office of Education request a Council resolution approving the 2025-26 contract documents, continued funding applications and all related contract documents and naming an authorized representative.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Pacifica hereby approves the agreements with the California Department of Education, the California Department of Social Services and the San Mateo County Superintendent of Schools for the purpose of providing Child Care and development services.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Manager is authorized to execute the agreements, attached hereto, in a form approved by the City Attorney, with minor amendments that may be approved by the City Manager and City Attorney.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, person/s who are listed below, are authorized to sign the contract for the Governing Board.
NAME TITLE SIGNATURE
Kevin Woodhouse City Manager __________________________ Scott Leslie Parks, Beaches and __________________________ 6 Packet Pg. 62
Pacifica City Council 4
October 27, 2025
Recreation Director
Mindy Tiet Recreation Supervisor __________________________ • • • • •
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Pacifica, California, held on the 27th day of October, 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 6 Packet Pg. 63
LOCAL AGREEMENT FOR EARLY EDUCATION SERVICES
CONTRACTOR'S NAME:
DATE:
CONTRACT NUMBER:
PROGRAM TYPE:
PROJECT NUMBER:
CITY OF PACIFICA
CSPP-5500
41-2189-00-5
CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
F.Y.
July 01, 2025
CALIFORNIA STATE
PRESCHOOL PROGRAM
25 - 26
This Agreement is entered into between the State Agency and the Contractor named above. The Contractor agrees to comply with the terms and conditions of the CURRENT APPLICATION*; the SAN MATEO COUNTY Local Individualized Subsidized Child Care Plan (hereafter the "SAN MATEO COUNTY PILOT PLAN") as most recently approved by the California Department of Education; the GENERAL TERMS AND CONDITIONS (GTC 02/2025)*; the CALIFORNIA STATE PRESCHOOL PROGRAM CONTRACT TERMS AND CONDITIONS (CT&C)* and any subsequent changes to the CT&C*, which are by this reference made a part of this Agreement. Where the GTC 02/2025 conflicts with the CT&C, the CT&C will prevail. The Contract must meet the specifications of the CT&C except where the SAN MATEO COUNTY PILOT PLAN allows for exceptions.
Funding of this contract is contingent upon appropriation and availability of sufficient funds. This contract may be terminated immediately by the State if funds are not appropriated or available in amounts sufficient to fund the State's obligations under this contract.
The period of performance for this contract is July 01, 2025 through June 30, 2026 . For satisfactory performance of the required services, the contractor shall be reimbursed in accordance with the Determination of Reimbursable Amount Section of the CT&C, based on the contract rate (which is the service county reimbursement rate as provided in https://www.cde.ca.gov/fg/aa/cd/documents/csppcontractrates.xlsx, applicable to the sites, as located in the service counties, approved by the Early Education Division and indicated in the Child Development Management Information System), the Minimum Days of Operation (MDO), which is based on the approved program calendar, and the Maximum Reimbursable Amount (MRA) of $341,014.00.
During the term of this contract, the contract rate, the MDO and the MRA may be adjusted through an Allocation Letter issued to the Contractor by State Agency.
SERVICE REQUIREMENTS
MDO: 249
Any provision of this contract found to be in violation of Federal or State statute or regulation shall be invalid but such a finding shall not affect the remaining provisions of this contract.
Items shown with an asterisk (*), are hereby incorporated by this reference and made part of this Agreement as if attached hereto. Amendments to any of these asterisked documents during the term of this contract shall be incorporated by reference as of the date issued by State Agency without need for formal amendment. These documents can be viewed at http://www.cde.ca.gov/fg/aa/cd/ctc2025.asp.
STATE AGENCY: CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
$
$
AMOUNT ENCUMBERED BY THIS
DOCUMENT
PRIOR AMOUNT ENCUMBERED FOR
THIS CONTRACT
TOTAL AMOUNT ENCUMBERED TO
DATE
CHAPTER STATUTE FISCAL YEAR
OBJECT OF EXPENDITURE (CODE AND TITLE)
ITEM
(OPTIONAL USE)
PROGRAM/CATEGORY (CODE AND TITLE) FUND TITLE
706
25451-2189
341,014
2025 2025-2026
Early Education Programs General
341,014
6100-194-0001 B/A
30.10.020.001
SACS: Res-0000 Rev-0000
0656 $
0 take effect July 01, 2025 unless rejected in writing by June 30, 2025.
IMPORTANT: Signature is not required. Pursuant to the submission of the Continued Funding Application, this agreement will automatically
6.a
Packet Pg. 64
Attachment: 2025-26 CSPP DIRECT CONTRACT (6052 : 2025/26 Child Care Agreements and Continuing Funding Application) Agreement Between
SAN MATEO COUNTY SUPERINTENDENT OF SCHOOLS
and
City of Pacifica
Pursuant to a
California State Preschool Program (CSPP) Grant
1. PARTIES
This contract is made and entered into, in the State of California, by and between the San Mateo County Superintendent of Schools (“County Superintendent”) as LEA under a California State Preschool Program grant (CSPP) and City of Pacifica (“Delegate Agency”).
2. TERM
This Agreement will be effective July 1, 2025 through June 30, 2026.
3. FUNDING CONTINGENCY
Funding for this Agreement is contingent upon the appropriation and availability of funds from the State. Consequently, this Agreement is not effective until the current application that approves the spending of the funds is signed by the State.
4. FUNDING TERMS AND CONDITIONS
If funded, the Delegate Agency agrees to provide services in accordance with the budget, approved calendar, and the Funding Terms and Conditions (FT&C) attached and incorporated by this reference into this Agreement. The FT&C specify the contractual responsibilities of the Delegate Agency relating to the provision of preschool services, personnel and expenditures. The Delegate Agency is subject to all applicable laws and regulations including the same audit and/or audit review requirements as the County Superintendent based on California Department of Education Audit Guidelines. Costs of the audit shall be borne by the Delegate Agency and are reimbursable under this Agreement.
5. COUNTY SUPERINTENDENT’S RESPONSIBILITIES
A. The County Superintendent shall:
1. Act as an intermediate agent between the California Department of Education and the Delegate Agency.
2. Monitor contract operations and reports relating to ensure compliance with FT&C and the standards contained in the Program Self-Evaluation (PSE) and Federal Program Monitoring processes (FPM) incorporated by this reference into this Agreement.
3. Provide technical assistance and require the Delegate Agency participation to meet SMCOE's Annual Agency goals and SMCOE's FPM review.
4. Provide program assistance to the State Preschool Directors of the Delegate Agency.
5. Provide technical budget assistance on behalf of the Delegate Agency.
Excellence and Equity in Education
Nancy Magee • County Superintendent of Schools
Document Ref: PUOHE-KS7OO-E3B5L-N2HYS Page 1 of 6
6.b
Packet Pg. 65
Attachment: 2025-26 SMCOE CSPP CONTRACT (6052 : 2025/26 Child Care Agreements and Continuing Funding Application) 2025-2026 CSPP Subcontract
6. Provide NoHo Care and DRDP Online™ Databases for Delegate Agency use to electronic transmission of program documentation of eligibility, attendance, and back-up documentation.
7. Send all required subcontractor information to California Department of Education regarding program compliance and other requested information.
8. Reimburse the Delegate Agency in accordance with the FT&C from allocations provided by the California Department of Education minus ten percent (10%) for the administrative cost of the program to the County Superintendent.
9. Ensure that a Release and Exchange of Information between Delegate Agency and SMCOE is signed allowing exchange and sharing of information relating to any services performed.
B. The County Superintendent reserves the right to reduce the Delegate Agency’s allocation, when in her opinion, the agency fails to submit required reports including the audit report or the agency fails to conduct its operations in accordance with Title 22 California Code of Regulations, the FT&C, Title 5, California Department of Education regulations and the standards contained in the PSE and FPM processes.
C. The County Superintendent reserves the right to reduce the performance requirements of the Agreement when it is evident that the Delegate Agency will not earn the amount of the Agreement.
D. The County Superintendent shall notify the Delegate Agency in writing of changes in laws or regulations affecting this contract prior to their effective date or as soon as possible after enactment.
E. The County Superintendent shall limit reimbursement to the least of the following or otherwise directed by CDE in its Management Bulletin in the current year:
1. The Maximum Reimbursable Amount (MRA) or contract amount
2. The Net Reimbursable Cost for subsidized children
3. The Service Earnings (Daily Rate x Total Attendance)
6. DELEGATE AGENCY RESPONSIBILITIES
A. The Delegate Agency shall:
1. Conduct a Preschool part-day and/or full-day program for children ages three to fiveyears-old prior to Kindergarten entry which conforms to the California State Preschool Program FT&C and philosophies.
Comply with the enrollment criteria:
a. Enroll three and four-year-old children who will have their 3rd or 4th birthday, respectively, on or before December 1st of the fiscal year in a state preschool program at the beginning of the fiscal year
b. Enroll children who have their 3rd birthday on or after December 1st of the fiscal year, in a state preschool program on or after their 3rd birthday. c. Delegate Agency has the option to serve two-year-olds from July 2, 2024 – June 30,2027 though it is not required. Delegate Agency elect to serve two-year-olds must follow all applicable requirements. Any changes to these agreement amounts are requested in advance of services being approved and implemented.
Document Ref: PUOHE-KS7OO-E3B5L-N2HYS Page 2 of 6
6.b
Packet Pg. 66
Attachment: 2025-26 SMCOE CSPP CONTRACT (6052 : 2025/26 Child Care Agreements and Continuing Funding Application) 2025-2026 CSPP Subcontract
2. The Delegate agency will participate in providing family literacy activities to Title V families based on the annual Program Self-Evaluation plan approved by the California Department of Education, Early Learning and Care Division.
3. Maintain records for program review, evaluation, audit and/or other purposes and make them available to persons authorized by the State, including the County Superintendent. Such records will be maintained for a minimum of five (5) years or as otherwise required by law and be available for review and/or copying to County Superintendent within 24-hour notice should they be requested. Should the contractual relationship terminate, all records shall be provided immediately to the County Superintendent for copying and all original records for the previous five (5) years shall be delivered to the County Superintendent within thirty (30) days of the termination.
4. Send Department of Social Services, Child Care licensing annual reports and any violations issued during a CCLD visit within three days of receiving the report to the SMCOE for reporting to California Department of Education.
5. Determine the eligibility of families for child development services and keep eligibility documentation based on California State Preschool Program FT&C.
6. Inform parents of the right to appeal adverse eligibility determinations to the Delegate Agency’s Board.
7. Delegate Agency will offer agreed upon services (number of days and hours) based on the approved calendar submitted at the beginning of the fiscal year. No changes should be made to the service level unless it is approved by the County Superintendent.
8. Submit CDNFS 8501 or 8501MCHS report on a quarterly basis to SMCOE’S State Preschool Manager and Fiscal Analyst, consistent with the following schedule:
Quarterly Reporting Period Submission Due Date
July 1-September 30, 2025 October 10, 2025
October 1-December 31, 2025 January 10, 2026
January 1-March 31, 2026 April 10, 2026
April 1-June 30, 2026 July 10, 2026
9. Be liable for any audit exceptions or overpayments made in this or prior years. In addition to any other remedy or source of funds, the County Superintendent may recover any audit exceptions or overpayments from claims for reimbursement under this Agreement or any subsequent agreement to the extent of claimed reimbursements.
10. Adhere to the Fair Employment Practices and Nondiscrimination Clause outlined by the FT&C.
11. Adhere to the Federal Certifications regarding Lobbying; Debarment, Suspension and other Responsibility Matters; and Drug-Free Workplace Requirements, as set forth in the "Federal Certifications" attached hereto and incorporated by this reference into this Agreement.
12. Include County Superintendent Uniform Complaint Procedure (UCP) in Delegate Agency’s parent handbook.
13. Include in your agency's parent handbook the County Superintendent’s boiler template language regarding religious worship and/or instruction is strictly prohibited, unlawful harassment and non-discrimination with the necessary elements and protected classes are identified and notification of these disclosures and rights occur.
14. Participate in activities of the California Department of Education Federal Program Monitoring and Annual Agency goals.
15. Submit an annual budget, calendar and program assurances with your signed Agreement.
16. Implement program assurances as outlined in the addendum of this Agreement.
Document Ref: PUOHE-KS7OO-E3B5L-N2HYS Page 3 of 6
6.b
Packet Pg. 67
Attachment: 2025-26 SMCOE CSPP CONTRACT (6052 : 2025/26 Child Care Agreements and Continuing Funding Application) 2025-2026 CSPP Subcontract
B. San Mateo County Office of Education participates in the San Mateo County Child Care Subsidy Plan. The Subsidy Plan allows for the development of local policies related to family eligibility, family fees, and reimbursement rates. Through this agreement, the Subcontractor will also participate in the Subsidy Plan.
C. Title to any equipment or supplies purchased with State funds rests with the Delegate Agency only as long as the Agreement is in effect. Upon termination of this Agreement, title and possession of all equipment and remaining supplies shall revert to the County Superintendent.
D. Any unit of equipment costing over five thousand dollars ($5,000) and/or having a useful life expectancy of two (2) years or more and purchased with California State Preschool Program funds must have prior written authorization both from the County Superintendent and the State. A written inventory record for all items of $500 or over in value must be kept by the Delegate Agency.
E. Any alterations or amendments to this Agreement are subject to review by the California Department of Education.
F. Travel and per diem are reimbursable at rates not exceeding those established by the California Department of Education.
G. Administrative and indirect charges shall not exceed five percent (5%) of the total funds.
7. INDEMNIFICATION
The Delegate Agency agrees to indemnify, defend, save and hold harmless the County Superintendent, her officers, agents and employees, as well as the State of California, Department of Education, from any and all claims and losses accruing or resulting to any and all of the Delegate Agency’s contractors, subcontractors, laborers and any person, firm or corporation furnishing or supplying work, services, materials or supplies in connection with the performance of this Agreement, and from any and all claims and losses accruing or resulting to any person, firm or corporation who may be injured or damaged by the Subcontractor in the performance of this contract.
The duty of the Delegate Agency to indemnify and hold harmless as set forth herein shall include the duty to defend as set forth in Section 2778 of the California Civil Code.
8. INSURANCE
The Delegate Agency shall furnish to the County Superintendent evidence of sufficient insurance coverage as will protect it while performing the services required by this contract. Delegate Agency shall maintain a Certificate of Insurance to be made available upon request.
9. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR
The Delegate Agency and its agents and employees, in the performance of this contract, are acting in an independent capacity and not as officers, employees or agents of the State of California or the County Superintendent or the County Board of Education.
10. ASSIGNABILITY
Without the prior written consent of the County Superintendent, this Agreement is not assignable by the Delegate Agency either in whole or in part.
11. FINAL AGREEMENT
No modification of the terms of this Agreement shall be valid unless made in writing and signed by the parties hereto, and no oral understanding or agreement not incorporated herein, shall be binding on any of the parties hereto.
Document Ref: PUOHE-KS7OO-E3B5L-N2HYS Page 4 of 6
6.b
Packet Pg. 68
Attachment: 2025-26 SMCOE CSPP CONTRACT (6052 : 2025/26 Child Care Agreements and Continuing Funding Application) 2025-2026 CSPP Subcontract
12. TERMINATION
A. The County Superintendent may terminate this Agreement and be relieved of the payment of any consideration to the Delegate Agency when, in her opinion, the agency fails to perform the covenants herein contained in the time and in the manner herein provided. In the event of such termination, the County Superintendent may proceed with the work in any manner deemed proper by the County Superintendent. The cost to the County Superintendent shall be deducted from any sum due the Delegate Agency. County Superintendent shall provide thirty (30) days written notice to Delegate Agency of termination.
B. If any of the conditions contained in the FT&C arise which warrant termination of funding by either the County Superintendent or the Delegate Agency, then this Agreement shall automatically be canceled as of the date funding is terminated.
C. If the Agreement is canceled, the Delegate Agency shall cooperate with the County Superintendent to effectuate the termination, including copying any records and moving any and all furniture deemed necessary by the County Superintendent. The Delegate Agency shall be paid according to the FT&C for actual services rendered through the date of cancellation.
D. The County Superintendent or the Delegate Agency shall notify the other by certified mail of the termination, with the reason for the action specified.
13. NONDISCRIMINATION CLAUSE
A. During the performance of this contract, the Delegate Agency and its subcontractors shall not deny the contract’s benefits to any person on the basis of religion, race, color, ethnic group identification, national origin, ancestry, sex, sexual orientation, physical or mental disability, medical condition, marital status, or age (over 40), nor shall they discriminate unlawfully against any employee or applicant for employment because of religion, race, color, ethnic group identification, national origin, ancestry, sex, sexual orientation, physical, or mental disability, medical condition, marital status, or age (over 40). Delegate Agency shall insure that the evaluation and treatment of employees and applicants for employment are free of such discrimination.
B. Delegate Agency shall comply with the provisions of the Fair Employment and Housing Act (Government Code, Section 12900 et seq.), the regulations promulgated thereunder (California Administrative Code, Title 2, Section 7285.0 et seq.), the provisions of Article 9.5, Chapter 1, Part 1, Division 3, Title 2 of the Government Code (Government Code, Sections 11135-11139.5) and the regulations or standards adopted by the awarding State agency to implement such article.
C. Delegate Agency shall permit access by representatives of the Department of Fair Employment and Housing and the awarding state agency upon reasonable notice at any time during the normal business hours, but in no case less than twenty-four (24) hour notice, to such of its books, records, accounts, other sources of information and its facilities as said Department or Agency shall require to ascertain compliance with this clause.
D. Delegate Agency and its subcontractors shall give written notice of their obligations under this clause to labor organizations with which they have a collective bargaining or other agreement.
E. Delegate Agency shall include the nondiscrimination and compliance provisions of this clause in all subcontracts to perform work under the contract.
14. COMMUNICATIONS
A. This Agreement is of no force or effect unless or until authorized signatures from the County Superintendent and the Delegate Agency appear on this document.
Document Ref: PUOHE-KS7OO-E3B5L-N2HYS Page 5 of 6
6.b
Packet Pg. 69
Attachment: 2025-26 SMCOE CSPP CONTRACT (6052 : 2025/26 Child Care Agreements and Continuing Funding Application) 2025-2026 CSPP Subcontract
B. For any communication regarding this Agreement contact the San Mateo County Office of Education, 101 Twin Dolphin Drive, Redwood City, CA 94065-1064.
Telephone: (650) 802-5616.
15. SERVICE REQUIREMENTS AND REIMBURSEMENT
Delegate Agency by signing this Agreement, agrees to the following service requirements and levels of reimbursement based on the Standard Reimbursement Rate (SRR) with Adjustment Factors:
A. Minimum days of operation shall be: Full-day 246
B. Daily rate for attendance shall be: Full-day $ 73.87 C. Children with Exceptional Needs Set Aside: $110,270.66 D. Maximum reimbursable amount shall be: $ 443,133.85
City of Pacifica
Signature
Title
Date
Print Name
San Mateo County Superintendent of Schools
Signature
Title
Date
Print Name
2025-08-15 2025-08-26
Kevin J. Bultema
Deputy Supt. Business
2025-08-28
Tracy Gilbert
Recreation Supervisor
2025-08-18
Document Ref: PUOHE-KS7OO-E3B5L-N2HYS Page 6 of 6
6.b
Packet Pg. 70
Attachment: 2025-26 SMCOE CSPP CONTRACT (6052 : 2025/26 Child Care Agreements and Continuing Funding Application) R
EF. NUMBER
PUOHE-KS7OO-E3B5L-N2HYS
DOCUMENTCOMPLETEDBYALLPARTIESON
28AUG202517:36:54UTC
SIGNERTIMESTAMPSIGNATURE
SHERYLCHAN
EMAIL
[email protected]
SENT
15AUG202523:23:24UTC
VIEWED
15AUG202523:24:35UTC
SIGNED
15AUG202523:25:21UTC IP
ADDRESS
209.188.128.207
LOCATION
SANMATEO,UNITEDSTATES
RECIPIENTVERIFICATION
EMAILVERIFIED
15AUG202523:24:35UTC
TRACYGILBERT
EMAIL
[email protected]
SENT
15AUG202523:23:24UTC
VIEWED
15AUG202523:46:06UTC
SIGNED
19AUG202501:14:23UTC IP
ADDRESS
96.82.82.158
LOCATION
HAYWARD,UNITEDSTATES
RECIPIENTVERIFICATION
EMAILVERIFIED
15AUG202523:46:06UTC
SignedwithPandaDoc
PAGE1OF2
6.b
Packet Pg. 71
Attachment: 2025-26 SMCOE CSPP CONTRACT (6052 : 2025/26 Child Care Agreements and Continuing Funding Application) R
EF. NUMBER
PUOHE-KS7OO-E3B5L-N2HYS
DOCUMENTCOMPLETEDBYALLPARTIESON
28AUG202517:36:54UTC
SIGNERTIMESTAMPSIGNATURE
MONCERRATBARRIGA
EMAIL
[email protected]
SENT
15AUG202523:23:24UTC
VIEWED
21AUG202516:28:54UTC
SIGNED
26AUG202515:57:36UTC IP
ADDRESS
209.188.128.208
LOCATION
SANMATEO,UNITEDSTATES
RECIPIENTVERIFICATION
EMAILVERIFIED
21AUG202516:28:54UTC
KEVINBULTEMA
EMAIL
[email protected]
SENT
15AUG202523:23:24UTC
VIEWED
28AUG202517:36:23UTC
SIGNED
28AUG202517:36:54UTC IP
ADDRESS
209.188.128.207
LOCATION
SANMATEO,UNITEDSTATES
RECIPIENTVERIFICATION
EMAILVERIFIED
28AUG202517:36:23UTC
SignedwithPandaDoc
PAGE2OF2
6.b
Packet Pg. 72
Attachment: 2025-26 SMCOE CSPP CONTRACT (6052 : 2025/26 Child Care Agreements and Continuing Funding Application)
LOCAL AGREEMENT FOR CHILD DEVELOPMENT SERVICES
CONTRACTOR'S NAME:
DATE:
CONTRACT NUMBER:
PROGRAM TYPE:
PROJECT NUMBER:
CITY OF PACIFICA
CCTR-5326
41-2189-00-5
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
F.Y.
July 01, 2025
GENERAL CHILD CARE &
DEV PROGRAMS
25 - 26
This Agreement is entered into between the State Agency and the Contractor named above. The Contractor agrees to comply with the terms and conditions of the CURRENT APPLICATION; GENERAL TERMS AND CONDITIONS (GTC 04/2017)*; the GENERAL CHILD CARE AND DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM REQUIREMENTS (Program Requirements)*; the FUNDING TERMS AND CONDITIONS (FT&C)*, as approved by the State Agency referenced at:
https://www.cdss.ca.gov/inforesources/child-care-and-development/contractor-resources. Where the GTC 04/2017 conflicts with either the Program Requirements or the FT&C, the Program Requirements or the FT&C will prevail.
Funding of this Agreement is contingent upon appropriation and availability of sufficient funds. This Agreement may be terminated immediately by the State if funds are not appropriated or available in amounts sufficient to fund the State's obligations under this Agreement.
The period of performance for this Agreement is July 01, 2025 through June 30, 2026. For satisfactory performance of the required services, Effective November 9, 2022, the service county reimbursement rate as provided in CCB NO. 22-32:
https://cdss.ca.gov/Portals/9/Additional-Resources/Letters-and-Notices/CCBs/2022/CCB_22-32.pdf?ver=2022-11-10-135821-41 0 is applicable to the sites, as located in the service counties, approved by the Child Care Development Division and indicated in the Child Development Management Information System (CDMIS), the Minimum Days of Operations (MDO), which is based on the approved program calendar, and the Maximum Reimbursable Amount (MRA) of $1,204,006.00 During the term of this Agreement, the Agreement Rate, the MDO and the MRA may be adjusted through an Allocation Letter issued to the Contractor by State Agency.
SERVICE REQUIREMENTS
Minimum Days of Operation (MDO): 249
Any provision of this Agreement found to be in violation of Federal or State statute or regulation shall be invalid but such a finding shall not affect the remaining provisions of this Agreement.
Items shown with an asterisk (*), are hereby incorporated by this reference and made part of this Agreement as if attached hereto. Amendments to any of these asterisked documents during the term of this Agreement shall be incorporated by reference as of the date issued by State Agency without need for formal amendment. https://www.cdss.ca.gov/inforesources/child-care-and-development/contractor-resources .
STATE AGENCY: CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES
$
$
AMOUNT ENCUMBERED BY THIS
DOCUMENT
PRIOR AMOUNT ENCUMBERED FOR
THIS CONTRACT
TOTAL AMOUNT ENCUMBERED TO
DATE
CHAPTER STATUTE FISCAL YEAR
OBJECT OF EXPENDITURE (CODE AND TITLE)
ITEM
(OPTIONAL USE)
PROGRAM/CATEGORY (CODE AND TITLE) FUND TITLE
706
See Attached
1,204,006 Child Development Programs
1,204,006
See Attached
$
0 IMPORTANT: Signature is not required.
6.c
Packet Pg. 73
Attachment: 2025-26_CCTR CONTRACT (6052 : 2025/26 Child Care Agreements and Continuing Funding Application) CONTRACTOR'S NAME:
CONTRACT NUMBER:
CITY OF PACIFICA
CCTR-5326
AMOUNT ENCUMBERED BY THIS DOCUMENT
$
PRIOR AMOUNT ENCUMBERED
$
TOTAL AMOUNT ENCUMBERED TO DATE
$
PROGRAM/CATEGORY (CODE AND TITLE)
(OPTIONAL USE)
ITEM
OBJECT OF EXPENDITURE (CODE AND TITLE)
FUND TITLE
CHAPTER STATUTE FISCAL YEAR
356,886 Child Development Programs
356,886
Federal
9990 FC# 93.575 PC# 000324
25136-2189
30.10.020.001
5180-101-0890 B/A 2025 2025-2026
706 SACS: Res-5025 Rev-8290
0 AMOUNT ENCUMBERED BY THIS DOCUMENT
$
PRIOR AMOUNT ENCUMBERED
$
TOTAL AMOUNT ENCUMBERED TO DATE
$
PROGRAM/CATEGORY (CODE AND TITLE)
(OPTIONAL USE)
ITEM
OBJECT OF EXPENDITURE (CODE AND TITLE)
FUND TITLE
CHAPTER STATUTE FISCAL YEAR
790,137 Child Development Programs
790,137
General
9990
13254-2189
30.10.020.001
5180-101-0001 B/A 2025 2025-2026
706 SACS: Res-6105 Rev-8590
0 AMOUNT ENCUMBERED BY THIS DOCUMENT
$
PRIOR AMOUNT ENCUMBERED
$
TOTAL AMOUNT ENCUMBERED TO DATE
$
PROGRAM/CATEGORY (CODE AND TITLE)
(OPTIONAL USE)
ITEM
OBJECT OF EXPENDITURE (CODE AND TITLE)
FUND TITLE
CHAPTER STATUTE FISCAL YEAR
31,754 Child Development Programs
31,754
Federal
9990 FC# 93.596 PC# 000000
24568-2189
30.10.020
5180-101-0890 B/A 2025 2025-2026
706 SACS: Res-5160 Rev-8290
0 AMOUNT ENCUMBERED BY THIS DOCUMENT
$
PRIOR AMOUNT ENCUMBERED
$
TOTAL AMOUNT ENCUMBERED TO DATE
$
PROGRAM/CATEGORY (CODE AND TITLE)
(OPTIONAL USE)
ITEM
OBJECT OF EXPENDITURE (CODE AND TITLE)
FUND TITLE
CHAPTER STATUTE FISCAL YEAR
25,229 Child Development Programs
25,229
General
9990
15540-2189
30.10.020.001
5180-101-3350 B/A 2025 2025-2026
706 SACS: Res-6040 Rev-8590
0 SIGNATURE OF ACCOUNTING OFFICER
I hereby certify upon my own personal knowledge that budgeted funds are available for the period and purpose of the expenditure stated above.
B.R. NO.
DATE
T.B.A. NO.
6.c
Packet Pg. 74
Attachment: 2025-26_CCTR CONTRACT (6052 : 2025/26 Child Care Agreements and Continuing Funding Application)
CITY OF PACIFICA
COUNCIL AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT
10/27/2025
1 SUBJECT:
2024 Annual Military Equipment Use Report and renewal of Military Equipment Use Policy RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Adopt a resolution of the City Council of the City of Pacifica approving the Pacifica Police Department 2024 Annual Military Equipment Use Report and renewing Ordinance No. 896 and the adoption of the Military Equipment Use Policy (Policy 705).
STAFF CONTACT:
Ryan Bianculli, Police Sergeant
(650) 738-7314
[email protected]
Vicente Romero, Police Captain
(650) 738-7314
[email protected]
BACKGROUND:
On April 11, 2022, the Pacifica City Council approved the Police Department’s Military Equipment Use Policy (Policy 705) and introduced an ordinance governing the acquisition and use of military equipment by the Pacifica Police Department.
On April 25, 2022, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 877-C.S., formally approving the Acquisition and Use of Military Equipment Ordinance, which was superseded by Ordinance No. 896-C.S., adopted on October 28, 2024. Ordinance No. 896 revised Chapter 19 of Title 4 to provide that the Pacifica Police Department's Policy 705 "Military Equipment" will be maintained on the Pacifica Police Department's website. This ordinance requires annual renewal, and the Police Department must provide an annual Military Equipment Report to both the City Council and the public.
Pursuant to California Government Code §7072, the annual report must include information regarding the purpose, authorized uses, acquisition or disposal, associated costs, and any complaints related to the listed equipment. The attached report outlines all equipment approved for departmental use. This equipment is standard in modern law enforcement and serves to enhance officer and community safety, support de-escalation efforts, and effectively manage critical incidents.
The Pacifica Police Department does not possess equipment supplied by the military or 7 Packet Pg. 75
Pacifica City Council 2
October 27, 2025
obtained through military surplus programs, and none of the equipment is specifically designed for military purposes.
DISCUSSION:
The 2024 Annual Military Equipment Use Report is attached to this council report. Pursuant to Assembly Bill 481, the report includes the following information:
Summary of Use:
All uses of military equipment complied with the Military Equipment Use Policy.
Complaints or Concerns:
No complaints or concerns were received regarding the department’s use of authorized equipment.
Internal Audits and Violations:
No internal audit findings, policy violations, or corrective actions were reported.
Annual Costs:
The total annual costs for each category of military equipment, including acquisition, personnel, training, transportation, maintenance, storage, and upgrades, are detailed in the attached 2024 Annual Military Equipment Use Report.
Quantity of Equipment:
The quantities of each type of approved equipment are outlined in the attached report.
Intended Acquisitions:
In October 2024, the Pacifica Police Department received approval to purchase and deploy Unmanned Aerial Systems (UAS/drones). Delivery of the initially purchased DJI drones was delayed when the United States Customs and Border Protection Agency prohibited their import due to concerns about labor practices. The department subsequently partnered with its vendor, Axon, to acquire replacement drones from Skydio, an American manufacturer based in San Mateo. Delivery of the Skydio drones is anticipated in Fall 2025.
The Pacifica Police Department will also purchase twenty (20) additional Smith & Wesson rifles in 2025 to enhance operational readiness and officer safety.
During 2024, the Mobile Command Trailer was deployed at community and special events including Fog Fest, Fourth of July celebrations, and DUI checkpoints. No complaints were received regarding its use. The Police Department did not acquire any new military equipment during the reporting period.
The department requested mutual aid support from the San Bruno Police Department’s Drone Team on four (4) occasions in 2024. The drone assets provided real-time, high-resolution situational awareness during critical incidents while enhancing officer and community safety. 7 Packet Pg. 76
Pacifica City Council 3
October 27, 2025
February 1, 2024: Officers responded to a report of a double homicide. UAS deployment assisted in determining the report was false.
February 25, 2024: UAS was used during the search for a suspect following a residential burglary in progress.
July 8, 2024: UAS supported the search for a violent and combative subject who fled into a densely vegetated area after attempting to break into a residence.
November 22, 2024: UAS assisted in locating a suspect following a commercial burglary in progress.
In 2024, there were two (2) incidents where the FTC Launchers were utilized.
June 2, 2024: Officers provided mutual aid to San Bruno PD during the apprehension of a wanted felon who barricaded himself inside a vehicle. The FTC launcher was used to break the vehicle’s window and allow officers to safely take the suspect into custody without injury.
July 8, 2024: During the same incident described above, the FTC Launcher deployed a pepper irritant into the area where the suspect fled, prompting compliance without the need for higher levels of force.
Government Code Section 7072 requires law enforcement agencies to submit an annual Military Equipment Report to their governing body and to hold at least one well-publicized and conveniently located community engagement meeting. This meeting must provide the public an opportunity to discuss and ask questions regarding the annual report and the department’s funding, acquisition, or use of military equipment.
To renew Ordinance No. 896, Government Code Section 7071 further requires the City Council to review the Police Department’s annual Military Equipment Report and determine whether each type of military equipment identified in the report complies with the standards for approval.
The Pacifica Police Department held a well-publicized and conveniently located community engagement meeting at a local Starbucks on September 10, 2025. The Department submitted the 2024 Annual Military Equipment Use Report to the Pacifica City Council on September 15, 2025, and made the report publicly available on the Police Department’s website on September 8, 2025.
The City Council meeting on October 27, 2025, fulfills the requirements of AB 481 and provides the Council the opportunity to consider the 2024 Annual Military Equipment Use Report and determine whether the use of military equipment remains consistent with the standards outlined in the Military Equipment Use Policy.
Intention to Acquire New Militarized Equipment:
The Pacifica Police Department will purchase twenty (20) additional Smith & Wesson rifles in 7 Packet Pg. 77
Pacifica City Council 4
October 27, 2025
2025 to enhance operational readiness and officer safety. The additional rifles will ensure that officers have immediate access to a rifle during high-risk incidents, eliminating delays associated with locating or transferring shared weapons. Individual rifle assignments will also allow officers to become more familiar with the function and handling of their specific weapon, reducing the potential for error when responding under stressful conditions.
Individual rifle assignments will further strengthen accountability and maintenance practices. A defined chain of custody will facilitate the tracking of use, inspections, and maintenance schedules, thereby reducing liability for the department. Officers are generally more diligent in the care and upkeep of equipment assigned to them personally, resulting in improved reliability and extended service life.
Training and overall proficiency will also improve through consistent use of the same weapon system. Optics and sights can be calibrated to each officer’s preference, increasing accuracy and confidence. Regular use of an assigned rifle supports skill development and readiness that cannot be achieved when equipment is shared among multiple users.
As previously discussed, in October 2024 the Police Department received approval to acquire two (2) Unmanned Aerial Systems (UAS/drones) manufactured by DJI. Delivery of those units was delayed when the United States Customs and Border Protection Agency restricted their import from China due to labor practice concerns. The Department subsequently purchased two (2) replacement drones from Skydio, an American manufacturer based in San Mateo. Delivery of the Skydio drones is expected in December 2025, and the prior order for the DJI drones was canceled.
ALTERNATIVE ACTION:
Decline to approve the Pacifica Police Department 2024 Annual Military Equipment Use Report and provide further direction to staff.
RELATION TO CITY COUNCIL STRATEGIC PLAN:
Strategic Goal 2: Improve and steward City infrastructure, streets, and facilities.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The total cost of a five-year contract with Axon for two (2) Skydio UAS drones, accessories, training, and required licenses is approximately $71,000. This acquisition is funded through the Department of Justice COPS Technology and Equipment Grant.
The total budgeted cost for twenty (20) Smith & Wesson rifles and accessories is $25,000, as approved in the Police Department’s FY 2024–25 budget.
CEQA:
7 Packet Pg. 78
Pacifica City Council 5
October 27, 2025
The Ordinance and Policy are exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) because they will not result in a direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment and is not a “project,” as defined in Section 15378 of the CEQA Guidelines.
ORIGINATED BY:
Police
ATTACHMENT LIST:
Attachment A - 2024 Annual Military Equipment Use Report (PDF) Attachment B - Military Equipment Policy #705 (PDF)
7 Packet Pg. 79
Pacifica City Council 6
October 27, 2025
RESOLUTION NO. _______
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PACIFICA APPROVING THE PACIFICA POLICE DEPARTMENT 2024 ANNUAL MILITARY EQUIPMENT USE REPORT AND RENEWING ORDINANCE NO. 896 AND THE ADOPTION OF THE MILITARY EQUIPMENT USE POLICY (POLICY 705)
WHEREAS, on September 30, 2021, Governor Gavin Newsom signed into law Assembly Bill 481, relating to the use of military equipment by law enforcement agencies; and
WHEREAS, Assembly Bill 481, codified at California Government Code sections 7070 through 7075, requires law enforcement agencies to obtain approval of the applicable governing body prior to taking certain actions relating to the funding, acquisition, solicitation, or use of military equipment; and
WHEREAS, Assembly Bill 481, requires that the approval by the governing body by an ordinance adopting a military equipment use policy, at a regular meeting held pursuant to open meeting laws; and
WHEREAS, Assembly Bill 481 allows the governing body of a city to approve the funding, acquisition, or use of military equipment within its jurisdiction only if it makes specified determinations with respect to a military equipment use policy; and WHEREAS, a draft of the Pacifica Police Department 2024 Annual Militarized Equipment Use Report was published on the Department’s internet website, and provided to the City Council at least 30 days prior to public hearing in accordance with requirements of Government Code section 7071; and
WHEREAS, the Pacifica Police Department’s Policy 705 “Military Equipment” meets the requirements of California Government Code section 7070, subdivision (d); and WHEREAS, the military equipment identified in Policy 705 “Military Equipment” is necessary, because there are no reasonable alternatives that can achieve the same objectives of officer and civilian safety; and
WHEREAS, Policy 705 “Military Equipment” will safeguard the public’s welfare, safety, civil rights, and civil liberties; and
WHEREAS, the military equipment identified in Policy 705 “Military Equipment” is reasonably cost effective compared to available alternatives that can achieve the same objective of officer and civilian safety; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Pacifica originally adopted Ordinance No. 877-C.S. which became effective on May 25, 2022, adopting the City of Pacifica’s Military Equipment Policy, Policy 705 “Military Equipment”; and
7 Packet Pg. 80
Pacifica City Council 7
October 27, 2025
WHEREAS, Ordinance No. 877-C.S. was superseded by Ordinance No. 896-C.S, which was adopted on October 28, 2024; and
WHEREAS, in accordance with Government Code section 7071(e), the Police Department has prepared the 2024 Annual Military Equipment Use Report, which was made available to Council on September 15, 2025, and made available to the public on the Pacifica Police Department’s website on September 8, 2025; and WHEREAS, the Police Department held a well-publicized and conveniently located community engagement meeting at Starbucks (Fairmont Shopping Center) on September 10, 2025, where the public discussed and asked questions regarding the annual military equipment report and the Pacifica Police Department’s funding, acquisition, or use of military equipment; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Pacifica has been presented with the 2024 Annual Military Equipment Use Report by the City of Pacifica Police Department and has determined that use of each type of military equipment identified in that report has complied with the military equipment use policy that was in effect at the time and satisfies all the requirements specified in Government Code section 7072.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Pacifica does hereby find that the 2024 Annual Military Equipment Use Report by the City of Pacifica Police Department meets the requirements of Government Code section 7072 and the use of military equipment complied with the standards of use authorized. The City Council hereby renews Ordinance No. 896-C.S. and the Pacifica Police Department’s Policy 705 “Military Equipment”, found here:
https://www.cityofpacifica.org/departments/police/transparency and approves the 2024 Annual Military Equipment Use Report.
• • • • •
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Pacifica, California, held on the 27th day of October 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. 81
ASSEMBLY BILL 481 MILITARY QUIPMENT ANNUAL REPORT 1
Military Equipment Use
Annual Report 2024
7.a
Packet Pg. 82
Attachment: Attachment A - 2024 Annual Military Equipment Use Report (6045 : AB481 Ordinance, Policy, and Annual Report) ASSEMBLY BILL 481 MILITARY QUIPMENT ANNUAL REPORT 2
Executive Summary
On September 30, 2021, California Governor Gavin Newsom approved Assembly Bill 481, requiring law enforcement agencies to obtain approval from the applicable governing body (City Council), by adoption of a military equipment use policy. The Pacifica Police Department is required to seek City Council approval of their Military Equipment Use Policy at a regular open meeting prior to taking certain actions relating to the funding, acquisition, and use of military equipment. The term “military equipment,” as used in AB 481, does not necessarily indicate equipment used by the military. Items deemed by the bill to be “military equipment” include commonly used law enforcement tools such as unmanned aircraft systems, armored rescue vehicle, less-than-lethal weapons, certain types of semi-automatic rifles, and etc.
Assembly Bill 481 allows the governing body to approve the funding, acquisition, and use of this equipment within its jurisdiction, only if it determines that the equipment meets specified standards. The Military Equipment Use Policy is subject to City Council review to determine whether the standards set forth in Assembly Bill 481 have been met, based upon an Annual Military Equipment Use Report. AB 2546 was signed into law in 2024 and made minor amendments to certain devices referred to in the definition of “military equipment.” Finally, Assembly Bill 481 requires publication of the Military Equipment Use Policy and the Annual Military Equipment Use Report on the police department’s website.
Assembly Bill 481 California Government Code section 7072 states the following:
A. A law enforcement agency that receives approval for a military equipment use policy pursuant to Section 7071 shall submit to the governing body an annual military equipment report for each type of military equipment approved by the governing body within one year of approval, and annually thereafter for as long as the military equipment is available for use. The law enforcement agency shall also make each annual military equipment report required by this section publicly available on its internet website for as long as the military equipment is available for use. The annual military equipment report shall, at a minimum, include the following information for the immediately preceding calendar year for each type of military equipment:
a. A summary of how the military equipment was used and the purpose of its use. b. A summary of any complaints or concerns received concerning the military equipment.
c. The results of any internal audits, any information about violations of the military equipment use policy, and any actions taken in response.
7.a
Packet Pg. 83
Attachment: Attachment A - 2024 Annual Military Equipment Use Report (6045 : AB481 Ordinance, Policy, and Annual Report) ASSEMBLY BILL 481 MILITARY QUIPMENT ANNUAL REPORT 3
d. The total annual cost for each type of military equipment, including acquisition, personnel, training, transportation, maintenance, storage, upgrade, and other ongoing costs, and from what source funds will be provided for the military equipment in the calendar year following submission of the annual military equipment report.
e. The quantity possessed for each type of military equipment. f. If the law enforcement agency intends to acquire additional military equipment in the next year, the quantity sought for each type of military equipment.
B. Law enforcement agency shall hold at least one well- publicized and conveniently located community engagement meeting, at which the public may discuss and ask questions regarding the annual military equipment report and the law enforcement agency’s funding, acquisition, or use of military equipment.
The Pacifica Police Department is committed to transparency, public trust, community partnerships, and compliance with the law. As such, the department has authored the following 2024 Military Equipment Use Report per annual reporting requirements outlined in California Government Code section 7072.
_______________________________________
Introduction
The Pacifica Police Department possesses and employs a variety of equipment to serve and protect the community. The term “military equipment,” as used in AB 481, does not necessarily indicate equipment used by the military. Items deemed by the bill to be “military equipment” include commonly used law enforcement tools such as unmanned aircraft systems, armored rescue vehicle, less-than-lethal weapons, and certain types of semi-automatic rifles. Each tool has proven effective in mitigating risk to both the public and police officers. The equipment discussed in this annual report will include “military equipment” maintained and utilized by the Pacifica Police Department.
The Pacifica Police Department recognizes that critical incidents are unpredictable and dynamic. Various equipment options can greatly assist incident commanders, officers, and specific units in bringing those incidents to a swift resolution in a safe manner. The use of military equipment is restricted to certain instances and, in some cases, by specifically trained officers. The use of the department’s military equipment is continuously evaluated based on the totality of the circumstances, public safety, officer safety, civil rights, state law, and
7.a
Packet Pg. 84
Attachment: Attachment A - 2024 Annual Military Equipment Use Report (6045 : AB481 Ordinance, Policy, and Annual Report) ASSEMBLY BILL 481 MILITARY QUIPMENT ANNUAL REPORT 4
information available at the time of deployment
It is incumbent upon our police department’s personnel to recognize the circumstances wherein specialized equipment should be employed to enhance the safety of the public and officers and to bring a critical incident to a safe outcome. This Military Equipment Use Report outlines a summary of equipment usage guidelines, inventory, fiscal impact, complaints, and reported concerns from January 1st, 2024, thru December 31st, 2024.
The Pacifica Police Department does not possess any tactical equipment obtained from the military, nor does it possess any equipment designed for military use. The Pacifica Police Department has not acquired any equipment through military surplus programs such as the 1033 Program.
_______________________________________
California Government Code §7070(d) describes a Military Equipment Use Policy as a publicly released, written document that includes, at a minimum, all of the following:
1. A description of each type of Military Equipment, the quantity sought, its capabilities, expected lifespan, and product descriptions from the manufacturer of the Military Equipment.
2. The purposes and authorized uses for which the law enforcement agency or the state agency proposes to use each type of Military Equipment.
3. The fiscal impact of each type of Military Equipment, including the initial costs of obtaining the equipment and estimated annual costs of maintaining the equipment.
4. The legal and procedural rules that govern each authorized use.
5. The training, including any course required by the Commission on Peace Officer Standards and Training, that must be completed before any officer, agent, or employee of the law enforcement agency or the state agency is allowed to use each specific type of Military Equipment to ensure the full protection of the public's welfare, safety, civil rights, and civil liberties and full adherence to the Military Equipment use policy.
6. The mechanisms to ensure compliance with the Military Equipment use policy, including which independent persons or entities have oversight authority, and, if applicable, what legally enforceable sanctions are put in place for violations of the policy.
7. For a law enforcement agency, the procedures by which members of the public may register complaints or concerns or submit questions about the use of each specific type of Military Equipment, and how the law enforcement agency will ensure that each complaint, concern, or question receives a response in a timely manner.
7.a
Packet Pg. 85
Attachment: Attachment A - 2024 Annual Military Equipment Use Report (6045 : AB481 Ordinance, Policy, and Annual Report) ASSEMBLY BILL 481 MILITARY QUIPMENT ANNUAL REPORT 5
California Government Code § 7070(c) defines Military Equipment as any of the following:
1. Unmanned, remotely piloted, powered aerial systems or ground vehicles.
2. Mine-resistant ambush-protected (MRAP) vehicles or armored personnel carriers.
However, police versions of standard consumer vehicles are specifically excluded from this subdivision.
3. High mobility multipurpose wheeled vehicles (HMMWV), commonly referred to as Humvees, two and one-half-ton trucks, five-ton trucks, or wheeled vehicles that have a breaching or entry apparatus attached. However, unarmored all-terrain vehicles (ATVs) and motorized dirt bikes are specifically excluded from this subdivision.
4. Tracked armored vehicles that provide ballistic protection to their occupants and utilize a tracked system instead of wheels for forward motion.
5. Command and control vehicles that are either built or modified to facilitate the operational control and direction of public safety units.
6. Weaponized aircraft, vessels, or vehicles of any kind.
7. Battering rams, slugs, and breaching apparatuses that are explosive in nature. However, items designed to remove a lock, such as bolt cutters, or a handheld ram designed to be operated by one person, are specifically excluded from this subdivision.
8. Firearms of .50 caliber or greater. However, standard issue shotguns are specifically excluded from this subdivision.
9. Ammunition of .50 caliber or greater. However, standard issue shotgun ammunition is specifically excluded from this subdivision.
10. Specialized firearms and ammunition of less than .50 caliber, including assault weapons as defined in Sections 30510 and 30515 of the Penal Code, with the exception of standard issue service weapons and ammunition of less than .50 caliber that are issued to officers, agents, or employees of a law enforcement agency or a state agency.
11. Any firearm or firearm accessory that is designed to launch explosive projectiles.
12. "Flashbang" grenades and explosive breaching tools, "tear gas," and "pepper balls," excluding standard, service-issued handheld pepper spray.
13. Area denial electroshock devices, microwave weapons, water cannons, and the LongRange Acoustic Device (LRAD) hailing devices and sound cannons.
14. The following projectile launch platforms and their associated munitions: 40mm projectile launchers, "bean bag," rubber bullet, and specialty impact munition (SIM) weapons.
15. Any other equipment as determined by a governing body or a state agency to require additional oversight.
16. Notwithstanding paragraphs (1) through (15), "Military Equipment" does not include general equipment not designated as prohibited or controlled by the federal Defense Logistics Agency.
7.a
Packet Pg. 86
Attachment: Attachment A - 2024 Annual Military Equipment Use Report (6045 : AB481 Ordinance, Policy, and Annual Report) ASSEMBLY BILL 481 MILITARY QUIPMENT ANNUAL REPORT 6
Summary
The Pacifica Police Department (PPD) has equipment meeting 4 of the 16 categories requiring reporting by AB 481 and Department Policy 705 in 2024. The equipment has been used minimally, largely related to training and certification. The City did not receive any complaints, audits, or policy violations regarding the use or acquisition of the equipment. The Pacifica Police Department has diligently followed the established Department Policy 705, ensuring transparency and accountability in its operations. Plans for future equipment purchases meeting the reporting requirements of AB 481 are minimal and mostly focused on replacing or replenishing equipment used throughout the year.
Military Equipment Definitions & Status in Pacifica:
The following is a list of the Military Equipment, as defined in Department Policy 705, and an overview of how it is used by the Pacifica Police Department in 2024:
“Unmanned, remotely piloted, powered aerial system or ground vehicles” In October of 2024, the police department was approved to purchase and deploy two (2) Unmanned Aerial Systems (UAS/drones). Delivery of the initially purchased DJI drones were delayed because the United States Customs and Border Protection Agency did not allow them to be imported from China, citing concerns related to labor practices. After several months of delay, our vendor, Axon, facilitated the purchase of two (2) new drones from Skydio, an American manufacturer based in San Mateo. Delivery of the Skydio drones is expected in Fall of 2025. The City terminated its order for the two (2) DJI drones.
During 2024, UAS/drone technology was utilized in specific incidents where it served a public safety need. Requests for these assets were made through the San Bruno and Daly City Police Department.
With the acquisition of two Skydio X10 drones, the police department intends to utilize these assets during search and rescue operations, pre-planned tactical operations, high-risk and critical incident overwatch, suspect apprehension, and community caretaking situations involving missing persons. The unmanned aerial systems will not be weaponized.
The police department identified the Skydio X10 as the UAS technology that best meets the community’s public safety needs. The Skydio X10 is a medium-sized UAS with a battery system for extended flight operations and weather-resistant image sensors. It is also the first drone to integrate a Teledyne FLIR Boson+ sensor, delivering the highest-quality thermal imaging.
Onboard image optimization algorithms enhance detail in distant objects and improve overall clarity for easier interpretation.
7.a
Packet Pg. 87
Attachment: Attachment A - 2024 Annual Military Equipment Use Report (6045 : AB481 Ordinance, Policy, and Annual Report) ASSEMBLY BILL 481 MILITARY QUIPMENT ANNUAL REPORT 7
The Skydio X10 is designed for rapid deployment, equipped with both color and thermal imaging sensors, and the capability to communicate through an attached speaker. The system is easily accessible from a patrol car and supports quick field deployment.
The Skydio X10 will provide high-quality imaging systems to support operations and deliver critical safety technology to ensure safe flights and contingency responses. This advanced technology includes obstacle-avoidance capabilities and an automatic return-to-home function in the event of lost connectivity or low power.
Utilizing this Axon Air technology will also allow for seamless integration with the department’s Axon digital evidence management system, ensuring secure video storage and compliance with established record retention policies.
“Mine-resistant ambush-protected (MRAP) vehicles or armored personnel carriers. However, police versions of standard consumer vehicles are specifically excluded.” The police department does not utilize or operate any tracked vehicles of any kind. Armored Rescue Vehicle (ARV) are specifically used by first responders. They offer ballistic protection in emergencies where an armed encounter is likely. The ARV is also used to evacuate citizens from an area where a threat from an armed suspect exists.
“High mobility multipurpose wheeled vehicles (HMMWV), commonly referred to as Humvees, two and one-half-ton trucks, five-ton trucks, or wheeled vehicles that have a breaching or entry apparatus attached. However, unarmored all-terrain vehicles (ATVs) and motorized dirt bikes are specifically excluded.”
The police department does not use high mobility multipurpose wheeled vehicles (HMMWV), Humvees, or similar vehicles, nor does it use large trucks, as described in this section. Some armored rescue vehicle (ARV) can have a breaching ram mounted to its front. This tool has proven helpful for safely opening front doors without exposing officers to danger by having them approach the door on foot. Breaching an entry point is often the most dangerous part of a high-risk entry to a structure. This breaching option results in a reduced likelihood of a potentially lethal encounter during entry.
“Tracked armored vehicles that provide ballistic protection to their occupants and utilize a tracked system instead of wheels for forward motion.”
The police department does not utilize tracked vehicles of any kind. “Command and control vehicles that are either built or modified to facilitate the operational control and direction of public safety units.”
The police department currently has one marked police command trailer used to sustain law enforcement incidents. It is used as a command post for law enforcement incidents, including, but not limited to DUI checkpoints, major collision scenes, major crime scenes, or other
7.a
Packet Pg. 88
Attachment: Attachment A - 2024 Annual Military Equipment Use Report (6045 : AB481 Ordinance, Policy, and Annual Report) ASSEMBLY BILL 481 MILITARY QUIPMENT ANNUAL REPORT 8
sustained incident where access to law enforcement computers, communication equipment and shelter is required. Grant funds (OTS) were the primary source of funding for this piece of equipment.
“Weaponized aircraft, vessels or vehicles of any kind.” The police department does not utilize weaponized aircraft, vessels or vehicles of any kind. “Battering rams, slugs, and breaching apparatuses that are explosive in nature. However, items designed to remove a lock, such as bolt cutters, or a handheld ram designed to be operated by one person, are specifically excluded from this subdivision.” The police department does not use explosive breaching devices. Due to the construction of doors in commercial, government, and school buildings, more than manual breaching equipment such as single-person rams and pry bars are required to gain entry to many structures rapidly.
“Firearms of .50 caliber or greater. However, standard issue shotguns are specifically excluded from this subdivision.”
The police department does not utilize any firearms of .50 caliber or greater. “Ammunition of .50 caliber or greater. However, standard issue shotgun ammunition is specifically excluded from this subdivision.”
The police department does not utilize any ammunition of .50 caliber or greater. “Specialized firearms and ammunition of less than .50 caliber, including assault weapons as defined in Sections 30510 and 30515 of the Penal Code, with the exception of standard issue service weapons and ammunition of less than .50 caliber that are issued to officers, agents, or employees of a law enforcement agency or a state agency.” The police department possess 16 semi-automatic, 16” barrel, Smith & Wesson M&P patrol rifles, defined as assault weapons, under the California Penal Code. Police officers are required to complete a 4-hour in-house training course with a certified range instructor prior to deploying the weapon out in the field. Officers will also attend a certified California Commission on Peace Officer Standards and Training (P.O.S.T.) rifle training course. Patrol rifles allow officers to address lethal threats with precision from a distance. Compared to handguns, they are more accurate at greater distances. The rifles use standard law enforcement ammunition, and their use and deployment are outlined in PPD Policy 306.
The department possess 3 semi-automatic, 11.5” barrel, Colt M4 Commando rifles, defined as assault rifles. The rifles are short-barreled rifles which allow a trained officer better control inside of structures with greater accuracy, rapid response, maneuverability and enhanced firepower in critical situations. The Colt rifles are typically used by trained SWAT officers.
7.a
Packet Pg. 89
Attachment: Attachment A - 2024 Annual Military Equipment Use Report (6045 : AB481 Ordinance, Policy, and Annual Report) ASSEMBLY BILL 481 MILITARY QUIPMENT ANNUAL REPORT 9
The department maintains a supply of .223 Winchester duty and training ammunition. These are maintained by the range staff and secured in the department armory. “Any firearm or firearm accessory that is designed to launch explosive projectiles.” The police department does not use any firearm designed to launch explosive projectiles. “’Flashbang” grenades and explosive breaching tools, “tear gas,” and “pepper balls,” excluding standard, service-issued handheld pepper spray.” The police department does not utilize noise-flash diversionary devices known as “flashbangs” or “tear gas”. Noise-flash diversionary devices are used to cause a distraction during highly dangerous activities, such as entering a structure during warrant service. The use of this equipment is intended to minimize injury to officers and suspects. “Taser Shockwave, microwave weapons, water cannons, and the Long-Range Acoustic Device (LRAD).”
The police department does not utilize any of the described devices. Taser Shockwave is a device built by Axon Technologies to deny entry to certain areas. Long-Range Acoustic Devices have applications to deliver highly audible public addresses. “The following projectile launch platforms and their associated munitions: 40mm projectile launchers, “bean bag,” rubber bullet, and specialty impact munition (SIM) weapons.” The Pacifica Police Department possesses 11 clearly marked Mossberg 590 Tactical, 12-guage, less-than-lethal shotguns. The less-than-lethal shotguns are a de-escalation tool where lethal force is not appropriate or undesirable. The shotguns fire a ballistic fiber bag, “Super-Sock”, filled with approximately 40 grams of shot at a velocity of approximately 270 feet per second.
Officers are required to complete a 4-hour in-house training course with a certified range instructor prior to deploying the less-than-lethal shotguns out in the field.
The Pacifica Police Department possesses 2 Pepperball FTC launchers. The FTC Launchers function similarly to a paintball gun which deploys PAVA powder projectiles. FTC Launchers are intended to be used as less-than-lethal impact devices, an alternate to a higher level of force.
Officers are required to complete a 2-hour in-house training course with a certified Pepperball instructor prior to deploying the launchers out in the field.
Summary of Military Equipment Usages
The Pacifica Police Department's military equipment inventory is wide-ranging, and the equipment is not utilized on all calls for service. This section outlines the military equipment usage from January 1st, 2024, thru December 31st, 2024. Certain items of military equipment, particularly consumables (ammunition, less-than-lethal rounds, PAVA projectiles, etc.), are used
7.a
Packet Pg. 90
Attachment: Attachment A - 2024 Annual Military Equipment Use Report (6045 : AB481 Ordinance, Policy, and Annual Report) ASSEMBLY BILL 481 MILITARY QUIPMENT ANNUAL REPORT 10
throughout the year regularly for training to maintain proficiency. Usage in training environments is not captured in this annual report. The usage section of this report provides data for the operational use of military equipment listed within this Annual Military Equipment Use Report.
Military Equipment Item Authorized
Usage
Citizen
Complaints
Internal
Audits
Policy
Violations
UAS/Drone (Outside Agencies) 4 0 0 0
UGV/Avatar Robot N/A N/A N/A N/A
Mine-resistant ambush-protected
(MRAP) vehicle/Armored Personnel
carrier
N/A N/A N/A N/A
High mobility multipurpose wheeled
vehicles (HMMWV)
N/A N/A N/A N/A
Tracked armored vehicles that provide
ballistic protection
N/A N/A N/A N/A
Mobile Command Vehicle (Trailer) 5 0 0 0
Weaponized aircraft, vessels or
vehicles
N/A N/A N/A N/A
Battering rams, slugs, and breaching
apparatuses that are explosive in
nature
N/A N/A N/A N/A
Firearms of .50 caliber or greater N/A N/A N/A N/A
Ammunition of .50 caliber or greater N/A N/A N/A N/A
Smith &Wesson Patrol Rifles 0 0 0 0
Any firearm or firearm accessory that
is designed to launch explosive
projectiles
N/A N/A N/A N/A
Noise-Flash Diversionary device /
“Tear Gas”
N/A N/A N/A N/A
Area denial electroshock devices,
microwave weapons, water cannons,
long-range acoustic devices, acoustic
hailing devices, and sound cannons.
N/A N/A N/A N/A
Mossberg 590 tactical “Less-thanlethal” Shotguns0 0 0 0 FTC Launchers (Pepperball) 2 0 0 0
7.a
Packet Pg. 91
Attachment: Attachment A - 2024 Annual Military Equipment Use Report (6045 : AB481 Ordinance, Policy, and Annual Report) ASSEMBLY BILL 481 MILITARY QUIPMENT ANNUAL REPORT 11
Category 1: Unmanned, Remotely Piloted, Powered Aerial or Ground Vehicles • Equipment Name: The DJI Matrice 210 and Mavic II Enterprise: Unmanned Aerial Systems (UAS/Drones)
• Summary of Use and Purpose: The Pacifica PD utilized San Bruno PD’s (SBPD) UAS/Drones on four separate occasions, and did not utilize the Daly City PD’s (DCPD) UAS/Drone in 2024. These incidents consisted of search and rescue efforts, suspect apprehension, crime documentation and tactical operations. The UAS/Drones are remotely piloted aerial vehicle capable of providing live and recorded video images captured from aerial positions. Personnel are authorized to request a UAV when the lawful use may increase safety to officers or would be a more efficient way of searching an area for a missing person or for the documentation of a crime scene. • Quantity Owned: N/A-Owned and operated by SBPD or DCPD. • Costs: N/A-Owned and operated by SBPD or DCPD.
• Summary of Complaints: N/A-Owned and operated by SBPD or DCPD. • Audits, Policy Violations, Actions in Response: N/A-Owned and operated by SBPD or DCPD.
• Future Purchases: N/A Owned and operated by SBPD or DCPD.
Category 5: Command and Control Vehicles that are either built or modified to facilitate the operational control and direction of public safety units • Equipment Name: Mobile Command Trailer (MCT)
• Summary of Use and Purpose: The MCT was deployed to support the management of incidents and planned events by providing interior and/or exterior workspaces, and command and control capabilities to the Incident Commander on-scene or at remote locations.
1. (2 Days) DUI Checkpoints
2. (2 Days) Pacifica Fog-Fest
3. (1 Day) Fourth of July Detail
• Quantity Owned: (1) Mobile Command Trailer (TPD 24’X8.5’ tandem special Ops trailer) • Cost: Approximately $50,000.
• Summary of Complaints: There were no reported complaints regarding this equipment. • Audits, Policy Violations, Actions in Response: There were no violations of policy, no actions taken in response, and no internal audits.
• Future Purchases: There are no plans to acquire additional vehicles in the upcoming year.
7.a
Packet Pg. 92
Attachment: Attachment A - 2024 Annual Military Equipment Use Report (6045 : AB481 Ordinance, Policy, and Annual Report) ASSEMBLY BILL 481 MILITARY QUIPMENT ANNUAL REPORT 12
Category 10: Specialized Firearms and Ammunition of less than .50 caliber • Equipment Name: Smith & Wesson M&P patrol rifles and Colt M4 Commando rifles. • Summary of Use and Purpose: The patrol rifles were not utilized out in the field in 2024.
The rifles were mainly used during training and range purposes. Patrol officers may deploy the rifle in any circumstance where the officer can articulate a reasonable expectation that the rifle may be needed. The rifles allow officers to address lethal threats with precision from a distance. Compared to handguns, they are more accurate at greater distances
• Quantity Owned: (16) Smith & Wesson M&P patrols rifles. (3) Colt M4 Commando rifles. • Ammunition: Approximately 4,400 rounds (.223 Winchester Remington) • Cost: Approximately $2,500 in 2024.
• Summary of Complaints: There were no reported complaints regarding this equipment. • Audits, Policy Violations, Actions in Response: There were no violations of PPD Policy 306 or 705, no actions taken in response, and all weapons were accounted for during the inventory.
• Future Purchases: The police department anticipates purchasing approximately $1000- $3000 worth of ammunition (approximately 2000-3000 rounds) from the general fund in the fiscal Year 2025-26 for training purposes.
Category 14: Kinetic Energy Weapons and Specialty Munitions (Less-than-lethal Shotguns)
• Equipment Name: Mossberg 590 Tactical 12-gauge shotguns (Less-than-lethal) • Summary of Use and Purpose: The Mossberg less-than-lethal shotguns were not utilized in 2024. The less-than-lethal shotguns were only deployed in training to maintain certification and/or proficiency. The less-than-lethal shotguns can help de-escalate and limit the escalation of conflict where effective without the need for lethal force in situations such as, but not limited to, self-destructive subjects, dangerous, and/or combative individuals, riot control and civil unrest incidents, circumstances where a tactical advantage can be obtained, potentially vicious animals, training exercises, or approved demonstrations.
• Quantity Owned: (11) Mossberg 590 Tactical 12-gauge shotguns (Less-than-lethal) • Cost: Approximately $560 for each shotgun in 2022.
• Ammunition: Approximately 90 rounds of CTS Super Socks. No additional CTS Super Socks rounds were purchased in 2024.
• Summary of Complaints: There were no reported complaints regarding this equipment. • Audits, Policy Violations, Actions in Response: There were no violations of PPD Policy 303 or 705, no actions taken in response, and all weapons were accounted for during the inventory.
7.a
Packet Pg. 93
Attachment: Attachment A - 2024 Annual Military Equipment Use Report (6045 : AB481 Ordinance, Policy, and Annual Report) ASSEMBLY BILL 481 MILITARY QUIPMENT ANNUAL REPORT 13
• Future Purchases: There are no plans to acquire additional Less-than-lethal shotguns in 2025, but additional munition purchases are anticipated to replace depleted supply due to operational use out in the field, or for training purposes. The police department anticipates purchasing approximately $809.10 worth of munitions (approximately 90 rounds at $8.99 per round) from the general fund in the fiscal Year 2025-26 for training purposes.
Category 14: Kinetic Energy Weapons and Specialty Munitions (Pepperball FTC Launcher)
• Equipment Name: FTC Launcher (Less-than-lethal)
• Summary of Use and Purpose: The FTC Launchers were utilized on two occasions in 2024. The first incident occurred when officers assisted an allied agency in the apprehension of a subject. The subject was taken into custody without serious injury.
The second incident occurred when officers attempted to de-escalate, and apprehend a violent and combative subject. The subject was taken into custody without serious injury. For each of these incidents, the FTC Launchers were used within policy and procedures. Also, the FTC Launchers were deployed in training to maintain certification and/or proficiency.
The FTC Launchers can help de-escalate and limit the escalation of conflict where effective without the need for lethal force in situations such as, but not limited to, selfdestructive subjects, dangerous, and/or combative individuals, riot control and civil unrest incidents, circumstances where a tactical advantage can be obtained, potentially vicious animals, training exercises, or approved demonstrations.
The FTC launchers are air powered and use compressed air to launch LIVE-X projectiles.
The Live-X projectiles contain a concentrated amount (5%) of PAVA pepper powder. The projectiles have a direct impact of approximate 60ft and an area saturation of 150ft. • Quantity Owned: (2) Pepperball FTC Launchers (Less-than-lethal) • Cost: Approximately $591.00 each.
• Ammunition: Pepperball Live-X projectile Rounds: There are approximately 90 rounds in our current inventory, which were purchased in 2023 at approximately $322.00. No additional rounds/munitions were purchased in 2024.
• Summary of Complaints: There were no reported complaints regarding this equipment. • Audits, Policy Violations, Actions in Response: There were no violations of PPD Policy 303 or 705, no actions taken in response, and all weapons were accounted for in the internal audit.
7.a
Packet Pg. 94
Attachment: Attachment A - 2024 Annual Military Equipment Use Report (6045 : AB481 Ordinance, Policy, and Annual Report) ASSEMBLY BILL 481 MILITARY QUIPMENT ANNUAL REPORT 14
• Future Purchases: There are no plans to acquire additional FTC Launchers in 2025, but more Live-X projectile purchases may be made as needed to replace depleted supply due to operational use out in the field, or for training purposes. The Police Department anticipates purchasing approximately $318.00 worth of inert powder projectiles (approximately 375 rounds), as well as approximately $331 worth of Live-X powder projectiles (approximately 90 rounds) from the general fund in the fiscal Year 2025-26.
Pacifica Police Department Inventory by Equipment:
The inventory of certain items of consumable military equipment (i.e., ammunition, parts, etc.) frequently fluctuates throughout the year due to operational usage, training usage, operational wear, and/or manufacturer recommended replacement guidelines. While the Pacifica Police Department strives to provide accuracy in its inventory reporting, this report reflects approximations of certain consumable items of military equipment during January 1st, 2024, thru December 31st, 2024.
Mobile Command Trailer
Equipment Name: Mobile Command Trailer
Quantity: 1 Lifespan: 20-25 years
Capabilities: Provide a mobile command platform for special events, critical incidents, natural disasters, major crime scenes, major collision scene, DUI checkpoints, or other sustained law enforcement incidents. The vehicle will be equipped with computer and radio communications equipment, phone and internet access
Manufacturer’s Description: TPD 24’ x 8.5’ tandem, 5k Axle Special Ops trailer.
Purpose/Authorized Uses: To be used as a Command Post for sustained law enforcement incidents, including, but not limited to DUI checkpoints, major collision scenes, major crime scenes, or other sustained incidents where access to law enforcement computers, communication equipment and shelter is required.
Fiscal Impacts: The cost of a mobile command trailer was approximately $50,000, with ongoing vehicle and equipment maintenance costs. Grant funds were the primary source of funding for this piece of equipment.
Annual Maintenance: Cost is estimated to be $1500, service or parts.
Personnel Cost: TBD
Legal/Procedural Rules Governing Use: Deployment of trailer is only allowed upon authorization of the Watch Commander or Division Commander.
Required Training: 1-hour of in-house training regarding safe deployment, operational use and stationing of the trailer.
Other Notes: None
7.a
Packet Pg. 95
Attachment: Attachment A - 2024 Annual Military Equipment Use Report (6045 : AB481 Ordinance, Policy, and Annual Report) ASSEMBLY BILL 481 MILITARY QUIPMENT ANNUAL REPORT 15
Smith & Wesson M&P Patrol Rifles
Equipment Name: Smith & Wesson M&P AR-15 Patrol Rifles
Quantity Owned/Sought: 16 owned Lifespan: Approximately 15-20 years Equipment Capabilities: Capable of firing .223 and .556 ammunition Manufacturer’s Description: The AR-15 semi-automatic rifle is a lightweight, 16’’ barrel, magazine-fed, gas-operated semi-automatic rifle modeled after the military classic M4 Rifle.
Purpose/Authorized Uses: Patrol officers may deploy the rifle in any circumstance where the officer can articulate a reasonable expectation that the rifle may be needed. The rifles allow officers to address lethal threats with precision from a distance. Compared to handguns, they are more accurate at greater distances and can penetrate most body armor.
Fiscal Impacts: The rifles were purchased in 2019. The initial cost of each rifle was estimated to be $552.56. After trade-in rebates and accessories, the total cost of the 16 rifles was approximately $3,924.92.
Although the Police Department had anticipated purchasing an additional twenty (20) rifles in 2024, that purchase did not occur in 2024. The Police Department now plans to purchase (20) additional Smith & Wesson M&P patrol rifles during the 2025/2026fiscal year. The total cost for the additional patrol rifles will be approximately $13,759.37.
Annual Maintenance: Approximately $500, depending on type of maintenance needed.
Personnel Cost: Approximately $500-$1000, depending on training costs.
Legal/Procedural Rules Governing Use: PPD Policy 306 covers deployment, use, care, and maintenance of rifles. All applicable Local, State, and Federal laws governing police use of force. All applicable PPD policies on Use of Force and Firearms.
Training Required: Prior to deploying the rifle, officers will complete a 4-hour in-house course presented by a POST certified approved instructor, followed by proficiency qualification. Officers will also complete a P.O.S.T. certified 16-hour patrol rifle course of instruction on use, deployment, and maintenance of the rifles. P.O.S.T. also requires four hours of tactical firearm instruction every two years for officers and this training is facilitated by P.O.S.T. certified rifle instructors.
Other Notes: These rifles are standard issue service weapons for our officers and therefore exempt from this Military Equipment Use Policy per CA Gov’t Code §7070 (c)(10). They have been included in this document in the interest of transparency.
Colt M4 Commando Rifles
Equipment Name: Colt M4 Commando AR-15 Rifle
Quantity Owned/Sought: 3 owned Lifespan: 15-20 years
Equipment Capabilities: Capable of firing .223 and .556 ammunition Manufacturer’s Description: The Colt M4 Commando semi-automatic AR-15 rifle is a lightweight, 11.5’’ barrel, magazine-fed, gas-operated semi-automatic rifle.
Purpose/Authorized Uses: The Colt M4 rifles serve the same function as patrol rifles. It is a short-barreled rifle which allows a trained officer better control inside the structures with greater accuracy, rapid response, maneuverability in critical situations. The Colt rifles are
7.a
Packet Pg. 96
Attachment: Attachment A - 2024 Annual Military Equipment Use Report (6045 : AB481 Ordinance, Policy, and Annual Report) ASSEMBLY BILL 481 MILITARY QUIPMENT ANNUAL REPORT 16
intended to be used by members of the SWAT team. However, officers that have completed a certified POST rifle course are authorized to use it out in the field.
Fiscal Impacts: The rifles were initially purchased in 2005. There is no record of purchase available because records are only maintained since 2016. The cost for one rifle in 2023 was approximately $1,085.57 each.
Personnel Cost: Approximately $500, depending on training needs and costs.
Legal/Procedural Rules Governing Use: PPD Policy 306 covers deployment, use, care, and maintenance of rifles. All applicable Local, State, and Federal laws governing police use of force. All applicable PPD policies on Use of Force and Firearms.
Training Required: Prior to deploying the rifle, officers will complete a 4-hour in-house course presented by a POST certified approved instructor, followed by proficiency qualification. Officers will also complete a P.O.S.T. certified 16-hour patrol rifle course of instruction on use, deployment, and maintenance of the rifles. P.O.S.T. also requires four hours of tactical firearm instruction every two years for officers and this training is facilitated by P.O.S.T. certified rifle instructors.
Other Notes: These rifles are standard issue service weapons for our officers and therefore exempt from this Military Equipment Use Policy per CA Gov’t Code §7070 (c)(10). They have been included in this document in the interest of transparency.
Less-than-lethal Shotguns
Equipment Name: Mossberg 590 Tactical (less-than-lethal) Shotguns Quantity Owned/Sought: 11 owned Lifespan: 15 years
Equipment Capabilities: Capable of firing “less-than-lethal” 12-gauge CTS Super Sock rounds Manufacturer Product Description: The Mossberg 590 Tactical shotgun is one of the most durable pump action shotguns, meeting MIL-SPEC 3443G, with its heavy-walled barrel, metal trigger guard and safety, clean out mag tube, and parkerized finish. The dedicated less-thanlethal shotguns are distinguishable by an orange butt-stock and fore-grip. The range of the weapon system helps to maintain space between officers and a threat reducing the immediacy of the threat which is a principle of de-escalation.
Purpose/Authorized Uses: The less-than-lethal shotguns provide alternative levels of force to overcome resistance when reasonably necessary in accordance with policy and law.
Fiscal Impacts: The less-than-lethal shotguns were purchased in 2022. The initial cost for the 11 shotguns, orange fore-grips with lighting system, and orange butt-stocks was approximately $5,849.58.
Annual Maintenance: Approximately $100-$500, depending service and parts needed.
Personnel Cost: Approximately $100-$300, depending on training needs and cost.
Legal/Procedural Rules Governing Use: All use of force applications is governed by state law (including Penal Code section 13652) and PPD Policy Sections 303.
Training Required: Officers who have been trained and completed a training course with a certified instructor on the shotguns may deploy them. Officers receive initial training upon hire and annual training thereafter.
Other Notes: None
7.a
Packet Pg. 97
Attachment: Attachment A - 2024 Annual Military Equipment Use Report (6045 : AB481 Ordinance, Policy, and Annual Report) ASSEMBLY BILL 481 MILITARY QUIPMENT ANNUAL REPORT 17
CTS Super Sock Impact Munitions
Equipment Name: CTS Super-Sock Impact Munitions
Quantity Owned/Sought: Approximately 90-150 owned Lifespan: Depends on storage Equipment Capabilities: Ammunition capable of being fired from a 12-gauge shotgun Manufacturer Product Description: The Model 2581 Super-Sock delivers unprecedented accuracy and consistent terminal impact characteristics at close-in and extended ranges, thanks to the flexible tubular material bag specially developed for this unique less than lethal round. Super-Sock is a safer and more effective round due to its accuracy and consistent transfer of kinetic energy to the target. Unlike traditional flat bags, no "unfolding" is necessary. Super-Sock is correctly deployed as soon as it exits the muzzle. No frisbee or wind surfing effects. No hitting the target folded or sideways. When deployed, super-sock presents a consistent aerodynamic shape every time, delivering consistent and predictable terminal performance. Fits cylinder and improved cylinder 12ga shotguns chambered for 2.75" & 3" cartridges.
Purpose/Authorized Uses: The CTS Super-Sock rounds provide alternative levels of force to overcome resistance when reasonably necessary in accordance with policy and law.
Fiscal Impacts: No ammunitions were purchased in 2024. The CTS Super Sock ammunition cost is now approximately $8.99 each round.
Annual Maintenance: N/A
Personnel Cost: Approximately $300-500, depending on training needs and cost.
Legal/Procedural Rules Governing Use: All use of force applications are governed by state law (including Penal Code section 13652) and applicable PPD policies on Use of Force.
Training Required: Officers who have been trained and have passed a qualification course with the munitions may deploy them. Officers receive initial training upon hire and annually thereafter.
Other Notes: None
Pepperball FTC Launcher
Equipment Name: Pepperball FTC Launcher
Quantity Owned/Sought: 2 owned Lifespan: 10 years
Equipment Capabilities: Capable of firing PAVA pepper powder projectile rounds Manufacturer Product Description: The FTC Launcher is a semi-automatic compressed airpowered launcher designed to fire non-lethal Pepperball projectiles. Reliable and accurate, it features a hopper that can hold up to 180 rounds, a flexible air source configuration and a compact modular design. The FTC Launcher can help de-escalate and limit the escalation of conflict where effective without the need for lethal force in situations such as, but not limited to, self-destructive subjects, dangerous, and/or combative individuals, riot control and civil unrest incidents, circumstances where a tactical advantage can be obtained, potentially vicious animals, training exercises, or approved demonstrations.
Purpose/Authorized Uses: The less-than-lethal launchers provide alternative levels of force to overcome resistance when reasonably necessary in accordance with policy and law.
7.a
Packet Pg. 98
Attachment: Attachment A - 2024 Annual Military Equipment Use Report (6045 : AB481 Ordinance, Policy, and Annual Report) ASSEMBLY BILL 481 MILITARY QUIPMENT ANNUAL REPORT 18
Fiscal Impacts: The less-than-lethal FTC Launchers were purchased in 2021. The cost for an FTC Launcher was approximately $591. The Police Department anticipates purchasing approximately $318.00 worth of inert powder projectiles (approximately 375 rounds), as well as approximately $331 worth of Live-X powder projectiles (approximately 90 rounds) from the general fund in the fiscal Year 2025-26 for training purposes.
Annual Maintenance: $100-$200, depending on service needed.
Personnel Cost: Approximately $300, depending on training needs and cost.
Legal/Procedural Rules Governing Use: All applicable Local, State, and Federal laws governing police use of force. All applicable PPD policies on Use of Force.
Training Required: Officers are required to complete a 2-hour in-house training course with a certified Pepperball instructor prior to deploying the launcher out in the field.
Other Notes: None
Unmanned Aerial System
Equipment Name: Unmanned Aerial Systems (UAS)
Quantity Owned: 2 purchased in 2024 Lifespan: Approximately 5 years Equipment Capabilities: Remotely piloted aerial system capable of providing live and recorded video images captured from aerial positions, including images enhanced by Teledyne FLIR Boson+ thermal camera and optical zoom lenses.
Manufacturer Product Description: (2) The Skydio X10 is a medium size, highly autonomous quadcopter introduced in September 2023 by U.S.-based drone manufacturer Skydio.
Designed for a range of applications in public safety, inspection, and industrial use, it builds on Skydio's legacy of deploying autonomous drones with best-in-class sensor technology.
The Skydio X10 offers the following capabilities:
1. Flight time: Up to 40-minute for long missions
2. Speed: Up to 45 mph, with advanced Obstacle avoidance for safer flights.
3. Extended drone range with cellular 5G connectivity
4. Precise GPS navigation ensures accurate control
5. Speaker and additional attachment capabilities
The Skydio X10 are equipped with a VT300-Z camera and FLIR system. The Teledyne FLIR Boson+ sensor, delivers the highest quality thermal imaging. Capable of resolutions of 640x512 and offering increased sensitivity, delivering more accurate radiometric readings, anywhere, anytime.
The Police Department obtained approval for two (2) Unmanned Aerial Systems (UAS/drones) in October, 2024 and had purchased DJI drones. However, those drones were delayed because the United States Customs and Border Protection Agency did not allow them to be imported from China, citing concerns related to labor practices. After several months of delay, our vendor, Axon, facilitated the purchase of two (2) new drones from
7.a
Packet Pg. 99
Attachment: Attachment A - 2024 Annual Military Equipment Use Report (6045 : AB481 Ordinance, Policy, and Annual Report) ASSEMBLY BILL 481 MILITARY QUIPMENT ANNUAL REPORT 19
Skydio, an American manufacturer based in San Mateo. Delivery of the Skydio drones is expected in Fall of 2025. The City terminated its order for the two (2) DJI drones Purpose/Authorized Uses: UAS may be utilized to enhance the department’s mission of protecting lives and property when other means and resources are not available or are less effective. Uses may include but are not limited to: search and rescue, suspect apprehension, crime scene documentation, tactical operations, scene security, hazard monitoring, identification and mitigation, response to emergency calls, crisis communications, legally authorized surveillance.
Fiscal Impacts: The total costs for entering a 5- year contract with Axon for the two (2) Skydio X10 UAS/Drones, accessories, training, Axon-Air software and associated required licenses will cost approximately $74,934.72, and will come from the Police Departments S.L.E.S (fund 7) account.
Annual Maintenance: TBD
Personnel Cost: $100-200 for FAA licensing fees.
Legal/Procedural Rules Governing Use: Any use of a UAS will be in strict accordance with constitutional and privacy rights and Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) regulations. The use of the UAS potentially involves privacy considerations. Absent a warrant or exigent circumstances, operators and observers shall adhere to FAA altitude regulations and shall not intentionally record or transmit images of any location where a person would have a reasonable expectation of privacy (e.g., residence, yard, enclosure). Operators and observers shall take reasonable precautions to avoid inadvertently recording or transmitting images of areas where there is a reasonable expectation of privacy. Reasonable precautions can include, for example, deactivating or turning imaging devices away from such areas or persons during UAS operations.
Training Required: All department UAS drone operators will be licensed by FAA. In addition, each operator should attend monthly ongoing training hosted by the police department or approved outside training sources.
Other Notes: None
Military Equipment Owned and Operated by Outside Agencies:
The Pacifica Police Department may utilize qualifying military equipment owned and/or maintained by outside neighboring agencies (San Bruno PD and Daly City PD SWAT) for law enforcement purposes. While the equipment in this section is not purchased, owned, or maintained by the Pacifica Police Department, it could be used in the City of Pacifica when we request mutual aid assistance from San Bruno PD’s UAS Team or the Daly City PD SWAT Team.
It is important to note that Daly City SWAT is generally only deployed in extreme circumstances such as active shooter incidents, hostage situations, and the execution of high-risk search and arrest warrants. The equipment Daly City PD SWAT possesses is rarely deployed but could prove essential to emergency operations when needed. Please refer to Daly PD and San Bruno PD’s military equipment report for further information.
7.a
Packet Pg. 100 Attachment: Attachment A - 2024 Annual Military Equipment Use Report (6045 : AB481 Ordinance, Policy, and Annual Report) ASSEMBLY BILL 481 MILITARY QUIPMENT ANNUAL REPORT 20
Unmanned Aerial System
Equipment Name: Unmanned Aerial Systems (UAS)
Quantity Owned: 3 owned by San Bruno PD Lifespan: Approximately 5 years Equipment Capabilities: Remotely piloted aerial system capable of providing live and recorded video images captured from aerial positions, including images enhanced by Forward Looking Infrared (FLIR) and optical zoom lenses.
Manufacturer Product Description: (1) Matrice 210: The DJI Matrice 210 is a powerful, industrial-grade fight platform with world-class agility and speed, two barometers, and redundant IMUs for maximum reliability, and new smart flight features that make capturing complex shots easy. The aircraft’s visual sensors enable enhanced hovering precision even when flying indoors or in environments where GNSS is unavailable. The drone’s new airframe design gives it an IP43 Ingress Protection Rating, in accordance with the global IEC 60529 standard. The M210/M210 RTK’s mechanical design, along with quick release landing gears and mounted folding arms, makes it easy to transport, store, and prepare for flight. (2) Mavic II Enterprise: The DJI Mavic II Enterprise features omnidirectional Vision Systems and Infrared Sensing Systems and comes with a fully stabilized 3-axis gimbal camera with an equivalent 24-48 mm 2x optical enterprise lens capable of shooting 4k videos and 12 megapixel photos that support up to 6x FHD zoom. DJI signature tecuologies such as Obstacle Sensing and the Advanced Pilot Assistance System, help you capture complex shots effortlessly. Additional features like the built in Airsense make you aware of your surrounding airspace, and password protection helps you maintain secure access to your aircraft and protect your data. The Mavic II Enterprise also has attachable modular accessories like the M2E spotlight, M2E Beacon, and M2E Speaker that are purpose built for various applications.
The Mavic II Enterprise boasts a maximum flight speed of 44.7 mph and a maximum flight time of 31 minutes.
Purpose/Authorized Uses: UAS may be utilized to enhance the department’s mission of protecting lives and property when other means and resources are not available or are less effective. Uses may include but are not limited to: search and rescue, suspect apprehension, crime scene documentation, tactical operations, scene security, hazard monitoring, identification and mitigation, response to emergency calls, crisis communications, legally authorized surveillance.
Fiscal Impacts: None. Equipment owned, maintained, and operated by another agency Legal/Procedural Rules Governing Use: Any use of a UAS will be in strict accordance with constitutional and privacy rights and Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) regulations. The use of the UAS potentially involves privacy considerations. Absent a warrant or exigent circumstances, operators and observers shall adhere to FAA altitude regulations and shall not intentionally record or transmit images of any location where a person would have a reasonable expectation of privacy (e.g., residence, yard, enclosure). Operators and observers shall take reasonable precautions to avoid inadvertently recording or transmitting images of areas where there is a reasonable expectation of privacy. Reasonable precautions can
7.a
Packet Pg. 101 Attachment: Attachment A - 2024 Annual Military Equipment Use Report (6045 : AB481 Ordinance, Policy, and Annual Report) ASSEMBLY BILL 481 MILITARY QUIPMENT ANNUAL REPORT 21
include, for example, deactivating or turning imaging devices away from such areas or persons during UAS operations.
Training Required: None. Equipment owned, maintained, and operated by San Bruno PD.
Other Notes: None
Unmanned Aerial System
Equipment Name: Unmanned Aerial Systems (UAS)
Quantity Owned: 7 owned by Daly City PD Lifespan: Approximately 5 years Equipment Capabilities: Remotely piloted aerial systems capable of providing live and recorded video images captured from aerial positions, including images enhanced by optical zoom lenses.
DJI Phantom 4 Pro V2: Featuring a 1-inch CMOS sensor that can shoot 4K/60fps videos and 20MP photos.
The Ocusync 2.0 HD transmission system ensures stable connectivity and reliability, five directions of obstacle sensing ensure additional safety, and a dedicated remote controller with a built-in screen grants even greater precision and control. [1] A wide array of intelligent features makes flying that much easier. The Phantom 4 Pro V2.0 is a complete aerial imaging solution, designed for the professional creator.
The onboard camera features a 1-inch 20MP CMOS sensor and a mechanical shutter, eliminating rolling shutter distortion. An advanced sensor and impressive processing capture every detail and provide the image data needed for advanced post-production.
The Phantom 4 Pro V2.0 camera has an optimized f/2.8 wide-angle lens, ensuring consistently detailed photos and videos that remain vivid and sharp while maintaining color accuracy.
DJI Mavic 3T: The Mavic 3 Thermal is a multi-purpose and compact drone built for public safety, inspection, search and rescue operations and more applications. Featuring up to 45 minutes of flight-time with an integrated camera, the Mavic 3 is portable yet powerful, exceeding data quality requirements for enterprise tasks.
DJI Matrice 30 Series: The Matrice 30 is a powerful yet portable drone made for public safety, inspection, and more. Featuring over 41 minutes of flight-time with an integrated camera, the M30 is small and mobile while still providing the image resolution needed for enterprise tasks. The Matrice 30 features a multi-sensor camera with high-resolution wide angle and zoom cameras, laser rangefinder, and advanced thermal camera (Matrice 30T only).
Purpose/Authorized Uses: UAS may be utilized to enhance the Department’s mission of protecting lives and property when other means and resources are not available or are less effective. Current uses for the UAS include traffic collision investigations and/or urgent community safety needs. These devices are not used for general tracking or surveillance purposes.
7.a
Packet Pg. 102 Attachment: Attachment A - 2024 Annual Military Equipment Use Report (6045 : AB481 Ordinance, Policy, and Annual Report) ASSEMBLY BILL 481 MILITARY QUIPMENT ANNUAL REPORT 22
Fiscal Impacts: None. Equipment owned, maintained, and operated by another agency Legal/Procedural Rules Governing Use: The use of unmanned, remotely piloted, powered ground vehicles potentially involves privacy considerations. Absent a warrant or exigent circumstances, operators and observers shall adhere to all applicable privacy laws and shall not intentionally record or transmit images of any location where a person would have a reasonable expectation of privacy (e.g., residence, yard, enclosure).
Training Required: None. Equipment owned, maintained, and operated by DCPD SWAT.
Other Notes: None
Armored Personnel Carrier (Lenco Bearcat)
Equipment Name: Armored Personnel Carrier (Lenco Bearcat) Quantity Owned/Sought: None (1 Owned by DCPD SWAT) Lifespan: Varies on Usage Equipment Capabilities: The Lenco Bearcat G1 is a tactical armored vehicle capable of transporting 8- 10 officers and equipment during tactical and recovery operations, offering ballistic protection and other features to enhance the safety of involved personnel during potential high-risk tactical and recovery operations.
Manufacturer Product Description: The Lenco Bearcat G1 is the standard tactical armored vehicle for special operations units within the US Law Enforcement community. Since the early 2000s, agencies such as LAPD, LASD SEB, NYPD ESU, Boston PD and hundreds of Federal, State and Local Law Enforcement agencies have made the Bearcat G1 part of their standard operating procedure. The G1 has excellent on-road driving characteristics and maneuverability in tight urban settings. The large floorplan seats 8 – 10 fully equipped officers with a long list of tactical features only found on the Lenco Bearcat line of armored SWAT vehicles.
Purpose/Authorized Uses: To enhance the safety and tactical advantage of officers and support personnel during potentially dangerous situations or high-risk tactical operations, and rescue missions.
Fiscal Impacts: None. Equipment owned, maintained, and operated by DCPD SWAT.
Legal/Procedural Rules Governing Use: The Daly City Police Department recognizes the use of armored vehicles during law enforcement operations can potentially startle members of the general public or create a sense of fear amongst the community. As such, the use of the armored vehicle is limited to SWAT Team operations or other law-enforcement responses or events that are considered high-risk. Special consideration is given in analyzing the risk factors associated with the intended operation or event with the need for the added protection offered by the armored vehicle. During specific community events, the armored vehicle can be used as a static display when appropriate and when authorized by the SWAT Commander. Drivers shall adhere to all applicable State and Local laws governing emergency vehicle use.
Training Required: None. Equipment owned, maintained, and operated by DCPD SWAT Other Notes: None
7.a
Packet Pg. 103 Attachment: Attachment A - 2024 Annual Military Equipment Use Report (6045 : AB481 Ordinance, Policy, and Annual Report) ASSEMBLY BILL 481 MILITARY QUIPMENT ANNUAL REPORT 23
Unmanned Ground Vehicles (Mini Vantage Robot)
Equipment Name: Unmanned Ground Vehicles (Avatar Robot) Quantity Owned/Sought: None (1 Owned by DCPD SWAT) Lifespan: Approximately 7-10 years
Equipment Capabilities: The Vantage Robot is a small robotic vehicle capable of being remotely navigated through a variety of environments to provide scene information and intelligence in the form of video and still images transmitted to the user.
Manufacturer Product Description: The 4.5-pound Mini Vantage is a throwable remotecontrolled vehicle that can be quickly deployed by hand. It can maneuver over small objects, climb up to 8”, and it has a 2-hour runtime. It is only outfitted with a 120-degree color camera, allowing officers the ability to clear an interior space prior to entry. It has a 3-pound payload capacity, which would allow for the ability to deliver a cell phone to a subject for negotiation or communication purposes. The Mini Vantage is not, nor is it designed to be, equipped with any lethal or non-lethal force devices. This UGV would be accessible to patrol and tactical teams to reduce confrontations while responding to critical incidents.
Purpose/Authorized Uses: To enhance the safety of potentially dangerous situations by providing first responders with the ability to capture video and still images of hazardous areas prior to, or in lieu of, sending in personnel.
Fiscal Impacts: None. Equipment owned, maintained, and operated by DCPD SWAT Legal/Procedural Rules Governing Use: The use of unmanned, remotely piloted, powered ground vehicles potentially involves privacy considerations. Absent a warrant or exigent circumstances, operators and observers shall adhere to all applicable privacy laws and shall not intentionally record or transmit images of any location where a person would have a reasonable expectation of privacy (e.g., residence, yard, enclosure).
Training Required: None. Equipment owned, maintained, and operated by DCPD SWAT Other Notes: None
Colt M4 Patrol Rifles
Equipment Name: Semiautomatic Patrol Rifles
Quantity Owned/Sought: None (60 Owned by DCPD SWAT) Lifespan: Approximately 10 years Equipment Capabilities: The Colt M4 Carbine (AR-15) semi-automatic rifle fires 5.56 x 45mm (.223 caliber) ammunition and is capable of firing at greater distances and with greater accuracy than Department issued pistols.
Manufacturer Product Description: Colt M4 Carbine (AR-15): Built for the demanding use of those who protect our communities every day, the Colt M4 Carbine Patrol Rifle is the next evolution in the world's most dependable, thoroughly field-tested patrol rifle. It is a lightweight, magazine-fed, gas-operated semi-automatic rifle. It is the semi-automatic version of the M16 rifle sold for the civilian and law enforcement markets in the United States. The Colt M4 Carbine Patrol Rifle reestablishes theColt AR-15® as the finest tool for local, regional, and national law enforcement agencies.
Purpose/Authorized Uses: Officers may deploy the patrol rifle in any circumstance where the officer can articulate a reasonable expectation that the rifle may be needed. Examples of some general guidelines for deploying the patrol rifle may include but are not limited to:
7.a
Packet Pg. 104 Attachment: Attachment A - 2024 Annual Military Equipment Use Report (6045 : AB481 Ordinance, Policy, and Annual Report) ASSEMBLY BILL 481 MILITARY QUIPMENT ANNUAL REPORT 24
1) Situations where the officer reasonably anticipates an armed encounter. 2) When an officer is faced with a situation that may require accurate and effective fire at distances beyond the effective range of a duty pistol. 3) Situations where an officer reasonably expects the need to meet or exceed a suspect's firepower.
4) When an officer reasonably believes that there may be a need to fire on a barricaded person or a person with a hostage.
5) When an officer reasonably believes that a suspect may be wearing body armor. 6) When authorized or requested by a supervisor.
Fiscal Impacts: None. Equipment owned, maintained, and operated by DCPD SWAT Legal/Procedural Rules Governing Use: All applicable Local, State, and Federal laws governing police use of force. All applicable Daly City Police Department Policies on Use of Force and Firearms
Training Required: None. Equipment owned, maintained, and operated by DCPD SWAT Other Notes: These rifles are standard issue service weapons for our officers and therefore exempt from this Military Equipment Use Policy per CA Gov’t Code §7070 (c)(10). They have been included in this document in an abundance of caution and in the interest of transparency.
Remington 700 Sniper Rifle
Equipment Name: Bolt-Action Sniper Rifles
Quantity Owned/Sought: None (5 Owned by DCPD SWAT) Lifespan: Approximately 15 years Equipment Capabilities: The Remington 700 Sniper Rifle is a bolt-action, precision-fire weapon system that fires 7.62 x 51mm (.308 caliber) ammunition. It is capable of firing at greater distances and with great accuracy than Department issued patrol rifles. The five rifles owned by theDepartment are outfitted with high-powered adjustable magnification optics for observation and targeting.
Manufacturer Product Description: Remington Model 700: The Remington® Model 700® Bolt- Action Rifle is enhanced to hit targets at long ranges. At the heart of this specialized long-range rifle is the famous Model 700 action that has been proven for reliability and precision accuracy in combat with the U.S. Army's M24 sniper rifle. The Model 700 Long Range rifle comes with a tactical stock made of solid urethane combined with aramid, graphite, and fiberglass. The barreled receiver is bedded with an aluminum block, and the heavy-contoured barrel is free-floated, providing excellent accuracy and minimal shift in zero caused by changes in the environment. The non-reflective stock and exterior metal blend in with a wide range of environments. The 2-position safety at the rear of the action is quick to operate with the thumb and can also be gripped with the forefinger and thumb and moved extra quietly to the fire position. The Remington Model 700 Long Range Bolt-Action Rifle comes drilled and tapped for scope mounts. An extra sling swivel stud on the fore-end provides an attachment point for a bipod.
Purpose/Authorized Uses: This rifle is authorized for use by trained SWAT Sniper Team Operators. SWAT Sniper Team Operators may deploy this rifle in any circumstance where
7.a
Packet Pg. 105 Attachment: Attachment A - 2024 Annual Military Equipment Use Report (6045 : AB481 Ordinance, Policy, and Annual Report) ASSEMBLY BILL 481 MILITARY QUIPMENT ANNUAL REPORT 25
the officer can articulate a reasonable expectation that the rifle may be needed. Examples of some general guidelines for deploying the rifle may include, but are not limited to:
(1) Situations where the officer reasonably anticipates an armed encounter. (2) When the officer is faced with a situation that may require accurate and effective fire at long range.
(3) Situations where an officer reasonably expects the need to meet or exceed a suspect's firepower.
(4) When an officer reasonably believes that there may be a need to fire on a barricaded person or a person with a hostage.
(5) When an officer reasonably believes that a suspect may be wearing body armor. (6) When authorized or requested by a supervisor.
Fiscal Impacts: None. Equipment owned, maintained, and operated by DCPD SWAT Legal/Procedural Rules Governing Use: All applicable Local, State, and Federal laws governing police use of force. All applicable Daly City Police Department Policies on Use of Force and Firearms
Training Required: None. Equipment owned, maintained, and operated by DCPD SWAT Other Notes: None
Breaching Apparatuses (Breaching Shotgun)
Equipment Name: Breaching Apparatuses (Breaching Shotgun) Quantity Owned/Sought: None (2 Owned by DCPD SWAT) Lifespan: Approximately 15 years Equipment Capabilities: The Royal Arms Breaching Shotgun is capable of firing 12-gauge shotgun ammunition. It is a compact and modified version of the Remington 870 platform designed for breaching purposes. It is specifically intended to fire frangible compressed copper slugs to breach doorway locking mechanisms while minimizing overpenetration or risk of injury to persons in close proximity to the doorway or lock.
Manufacturer Product Description: Royal Arms Breaching Shotgun starts out with the triedand-true Remington 870 Police Model 12 Ga Shotgun as its base. We then completely modify it with our custom CNC machined parts to be the ultimate Breaching Shotgun. Royal Arms invented the Breachers and Breaching shotguns, why settle for an imitation or knock off when you can buy the best American Made Breaching Shotgun for all Tactical Operators and discerning individuals. Royal Arms Tesar-2 Black Cap Slugs: 425 grain compressed copper slug, frangible. Slug Material: Copper powder. Velocity: 1,525 feet per second. Use:
For metal doors, locks, and hinges. Defeats: Heavy locks, dead-bolts and hinges (solid oak – steel doors).
Purpose/Authorized Uses: The breaching shotguns are intended for use as a breaching option during tactical entry into a dwelling or other enclosed space when other breaching options have failed, or when authorized by a supervisor.
Fiscal Impacts: None. Equipment owned, maintained, and operated by DCPD SWAT
7.a
Packet Pg. 106 Attachment: Attachment A - 2024 Annual Military Equipment Use Report (6045 : AB481 Ordinance, Policy, and Annual Report) ASSEMBLY BILL 481 MILITARY QUIPMENT ANNUAL REPORT 26
Legal/Procedural Rules Governing Use: All applicable Local, State, and Federal laws governing police use of force. All applicable Daly City Police Department Policies on Use of Force and Firearms.
Training Required: None. Equipment owned, maintained, and operated by DCPD SWAT Other Notes: None
Chemical Agents (Tear-Gas)
Equipment Name: Chemical Agents (Tear Gas)
Quantity Owned/Sought: None (130 Owned by DCPD SWAT) Lifespan: Varies on storage conditions
Equipment Capabilities: Chemical agents, sometimes referred to as “tear gas” or riot control agents, are less-lethal chemical compounds that temporarily induce discomfort to an individual in the form of one or more of the following: Irritation to the skin, eyes, mouth, throat, and lungs. The goal of which is to gain compliance, dispersal, or direct the movement of one or more individuals.
The Daly City Police Department owns multiple types of chemical agents in various forms, totaling 154 individual units at present. The units are expendable items; therefore, the quantities will vary. Each chemical agent type has different capabilities. The types and manufacturers are as follows:
1. Defense Technologies Speed-Heat CS gas grenade, 81.2g, 20-40 second burn time
2. Defense Technologies Flameless Tri-Chamber CS gas grenade, 20.0g, 20-30 second burn time
3. Combined Tactical Systems Indoor Baffled CS gas grenade, 25.0g, 20-40 second burn time, launchable through outfitted less-lethal shotgun apparatus, requires specific blank 12 gauge launching cartridge manufactured by Combined Tactical Systems
4. Defense Technologies 40mm Liquid Ferret Round, liquid CS projectile dispersed upon impact, 8.0g, launchable though 40mm launcher
5. Defense Technologies Pocket Tactical CS gas grenade, 20.0g, 20-40 second burn time
6. Defense Technologies Maximum Smoke HC (Hexachloroethane) grenade, smoke screen, 1 ½ - 2 minute burn time
Defense Technologies Triple-Chaser, CS gas canister, 90.7g, 20-30 second burn time Manufacturer Product Description: Defense Tech Spede-Heat CS Grenade: The SpedeHeat™ CS Grenade is a high volume, continuous burn it expels its payload in approximately 20-40 seconds. The payload is discharged through four gas ports on top of the canister, three on the side and one on the bottom. This launchable grenade is 6.12 in. by 2.62 in. and holds approximately 2.9 oz. of active agent.
Defense Tech Flameless Tri-Chamber CS Grenade: The design of the Tri-Chamber Flameless CS Grenade allows the contents to burn within an internal can and disperse the agent safely with reduced risk of fire. The grenade is designed primarily for indoor tactical situations to detect and/or dislodge a barricaded subject. This grenade will deliver
7.a
Packet Pg. 107 Attachment: Attachment A - 2024 Annual Military Equipment Use Report (6045 : AB481 Ordinance, Policy, and Annual Report) ASSEMBLY BILL 481 MILITARY QUIPMENT ANNUAL REPORT 27
approximately .70 oz. of agent during its 20-25 seconds burn time. The Tri-Chamber Flameless Grenade can be used in crowd control as well as tactical deployment situations by Law Enforcement and Corrections but was designed with the barricade situation in mind. Its applications in tactical situations are primarily to detect and/or dislodge barricaded subjects. The purpose of the Tri-Chamber Flameless Grenade is to minimize the risks to all parties through pain compliance, temporary discomfort, and/or incapacitation of potentially violent or dangerous subjects. The Tri-Chamber Flameless Grenade provides the option of delivering a pyrotechnic chemical device indoors, maximizing the chemicals’ effectiveness via heat and vaporization, while minimizing or negating the chance of fire to the structure. The Tri-Chamber Flameless Grenade is NOT to be launched utilizing a launching cup.
Combined Tactical Systems Indoor Baffled CS Grenade: Pyrotechnic grenade designed for indoor use delivering a maximum amount of irritant smoke throughout multiple rooms with minimal risk of fire.
Combined Tactical Systems 12 gauge Launching Cartridge: The Model 2600 Launching Cartridge is a 12-gauge cartridge much shorter than standard full-sized 12-gauge cartridges.
Therefore, to prevent weapon malfunctions, each cartridge must be manually loaded into the chamber for each shot.
Effective range is dependent on the launching cup, launcher, and weight of munitions being launched. The baseline for performance of a Model 2600 Launching Cartridge is that it will launch a Model 9230 CS Grenade a minimum of 100 yards (91M), with cylinder bore and 18" bbl.
Defense Technologies 40mm Liquid Ferret Round: The Ferret® 40mm Round is non-burning and suitable for indoor use. Used primarily by tactical teams, it is designed to penetrate barriers, such as windows, hollow core doors, wallboard and thin plywood. Upon impacting the barrier, the nose cone ruptures and instantaneously delivers a small chemical payload inside of a structure or vehicle. In a tactical deployment situation, the 40mm Ferret is primarily used to dislodge barricaded subjects from confined areas. Its purpose is to minimize the risks to all parties through pain compliance, temporary discomfort and/or incapacitation of potentially violent or dangerous subjects.
Defense Technologies Pocket Tactical CS Gas Grenade: The Pocket Tactical CS Grenade is small, and lightweight. The 0.9 oz. of active agent will burn approximately 20-40 seconds.
At 4.75 in. by 1.4 inches in size, it easily fits in most tactical pouches. This is a launchable grenade; however, it is normally used as a signaling or covering device. Though this device is slightly over four inches in length, it produces a smoke cloud so fast it appears to be an enveloping screen produced by a full-size tactical grenade.
Defense Technologies Maximum Smoke HC Grenade: The Maximum Smoke Grenade is designed specifically for outdoor use in crowd control situations with a high-volume continuous burn that expels its payload in approximately 30-40 seconds through four gas
7.a
Packet Pg. 108 Attachment: Attachment A - 2024 Annual Military Equipment Use Report (6045 : AB481 Ordinance, Policy, and Annual Report) ASSEMBLY BILL 481 MILITARY QUIPMENT ANNUAL REPORT 28
ports located on the top of the canister. This grenade can be used to conceal tactical movement or to route a crowd. The volume of smoke and agent is vast and obtrusive. This launchable colored smoke grenade is 6.0 in. by 2.35 in. and holds approximately 2.9 oz. of active agent.
Defense Technologies Triple-Chaser CS Gas Canister: The Triple-Chaser® CS consists of three separate canisters pressed together with separating charges between each. When deployed, the canisters separate and land approximately 20 feet apart allowing increased area coverage in a short period of time. This grenade can be hand thrown or launched from a fired delivery system. The grenade is 6.5 in. by 2.7 in. and holds an approximately 3.2 oz. of active agent payload. It has an approximate burn time of 20-30 seconds.
Purpose/Authorized Uses: Chemical agents are intended for use as a less-lethal force response option. They can be deployed by trained Department personnel for riot control purposes, during tactical operations involving barricaded suspects, or in other situations where lesser means are reasonably believed to be ineffective or involve substantially more risk to Department personnel.
Fiscal Impacts: None. Equipment owned, maintained, and operated by DCPD SWAT Legal/Procedural Rules Governing Use: All applicable Local, State, and Federal laws governing police use of force. All applicable Daly City Police Department Policies on Use of Force.
Training Required: None. Equipment owned, maintained, and operated by DCPD SWAT Other Notes: The Daly City Police Department presently employs four trained and qualified Chemical Agent Instructors who are authorized to train SWAT Team members and Crowd Control Unit personnel on the use of chemical agents.
Flashbang (Diversionary) Devices
Equipment Name: Flashbang Grenades
Quantity Owned/Sought: None (51 Owned by DCPD SWAT) Lifespan: Varies on storage conditions
Equipment Capabilities: The flashbang, sometimes referred to as “stun grenade,” is a diversionary device that delivers a bright flash and loud explosive-type noise when deployed.
This is a non-lethal handheld grenade that does not fragment or produce any shrapnel.
Manufacturer Product Description: Defense Technologies Low Roll 4-gram Distraction Device: The reloadable distraction device unit incorporates a model 7007 type fuse with hex design gun steel body. This is a compact version of the 8933 Low Roll® body Distraction Device and is the newest version of the first reusable non-bursting canister that limits movement and rolling once deployed. The compact Distraction Device fits safely in your hand and packs all the power of the full-size Distraction Device. The 4-Gram Distraction Device® Reload produces a reduced light, and sound output ideal for when the full effects of the 12-gram charge are not desirable.
Purpose/Authorized Uses: Diversionary devices are intended for use as a distraction option used during high-risk entries into a dwelling or similar structure by SWAT
7.a
Packet Pg. 109 Attachment: Attachment A - 2024 Annual Military Equipment Use Report (6045 : AB481 Ordinance, Policy, and Annual Report) ASSEMBLY BILL 481 MILITARY QUIPMENT ANNUAL REPORT 29
operators. They can be deployed by trained Department SWAT operators when authorized by the SWAT Commander or in the event of
exigent circumstances.
Fiscal Impacts: None. Equipment owned, maintained, and operated by DCPD SWAT.
Legal/Procedural Rules Governing Use: All applicable Local, State, and Federal laws governing police use of force. All applicable Daly City Police Department Policies on Use of Force.
Training Required: None. Equipment owned, maintained, and operated by DCPD SWAT Other Notes: None
40mm Launchers and Kinetic Energy Munitions
Equipment Name: 40mm Launchers and Kinetic Energy Munitions Quantity Owned/Sought: None (15 Owned by DCPD SWAT) Lifespan: Approximately 15 years
Equipment Capabilities: The Defense Technology 40mm LMT is a single-shot launcher capable of firing 40mm kinetic energy munitions, also commonly referred to as specialty impact munitions (SIM), which are less-lethal projectiles. The 40mm launcher is also capable of firing 40mm chemical agent munitions, commonly referred to as “tear gas” or CS gas.
Refer to “Tear Gas and Chemical Agents” page for further details on these munitions. The Daly City Department has outfitted the launchers with Trijicon optics for aiming and targeting purposes.
Manufacturer Product Description: The Penn Arms CTS multi-shot 40mm launchers is a pump action advance magazine drum launcher, with a six-shot capacity and rifled barrel.
The approved 40mm impact munition for patrol use is the CTS Tactical 4557 40mm Point Control Impact Munitions. This lightweight, high-speed projectile incorporates a plastic body and closed cell neoprene material which is spin stabilized via the incorporated rifling collar and the 40mm launcher's rifle barrel. The round uses smokeless powder as the propellant and has velocities that are extremely consistent. The CTS Tactical 4556 40mm Frangible Impact OC powder are designed to disperse marking powder on and around the target following deployment. The frangible Impact+ munitions are spin-stabilized projectile and deliver multi-effects of blunt trauma and dispersal of irritant powder on and around target. Although it is extremely accurate and consistent, accuracy is dependent on the launcher, using open sights vs. an improved sight, environmental conditions, and the operator. Effectiveness depends on many variables, such as distance, clothing, stature, and the point where the projectile impacts.
Purpose/Authorized Uses: The 40mm Launchers, kinetic energy munitions, and chemical agent munitions are intended for use as a less-lethal force response option.
Fiscal Impacts: None. Equipment owned, maintained, and operated by DCPD SWAT Legal/Procedural Rules Governing Use: All applicable Local, State, and Federal laws governing police use of force. All applicable Daly City Police Department Policies on Use of Force and Firearms.
Training Required: None. Equipment owned, maintained, and operated by DCPD SWAT
7.a
Packet Pg. 110 Attachment: Attachment A - 2024 Annual Military Equipment Use Report (6045 : AB481 Ordinance, Policy, and Annual Report) ASSEMBLY BILL 481 MILITARY QUIPMENT ANNUAL REPORT 30
Other Notes: The Daly City Police Department presently employs four trained and qualified Chemical Agent Instructors who are authorized to train SWAT Team members and Crowd Control Unit personnel on the use of chemical agent munitions with the 40mm launcher.
Less Lethal Shotguns
Equipment Name: Kinetic Energy Munitions (Less Lethal Shotguns) Quantity Owned/Sought: 39 owned by DCPD SWAT Lifespan: 15 years Equipment Capabilities: Capable of firing “less-than-lethal” 12-gauge CTS Super Sock rounds Manufacturer Product Description: The Remington Model 870 Police Magnum is a pumpaction 12- gauge shotgun. Featuring an ultra-durable parkerized matte finish, synthetic stocks, 18-inch barrel with front sight and a 4-round magazine.
Hogue 870 Conversion Kit: Hogue rubber grips are molded from durable synthetic rubber that is neither spongy nor tacky yet provides a soft recoil absorbing feel without affecting accuracy. This modern rubber requires a completely different molding process than ordinary neoprene, resulting in a superior grip. The flexibility of our materials and molding process has allowed us to produce rubber grips with features that outperform all other makes.
The approved 12-gauge munitions for patrol use is the The CTS Tactical 12-Guage Bean Bag “Super-sock”,. Round is comprised of a translucent 12-Gauge shell loaded with a 40 gram, tear-shaped bag made of shot filled ballistic fiber. The 12-Gauge Bean Bag Round utilizes smokeless powder as a propellant.
Purpose/Authorized Uses: The Less Lethal shotguns and kinetic energy munitions are intended for use as a less-lethal force response option.
Fiscal Impacts: None. Equipment owned, maintained, and operated by DCPD SWAT Legal/Procedural Rules Governing Use: All applicable Local, State, Federal laws governing police use of force. All applicable DCPD Policies on Use of Force and Firearms.
Training Required: None. Equipment owned, maintained, and operated by DCPD SWAT.
Other Notes: The department currently has four trained and qualified Chemical Agent Instructors who are authorized to train SWAT Team members and Crowd Control Unit personnel on the use of chemical agent munitions with the less lethal shotgun.
Internal Audit
The Pacifica Police Department is committed to providing information to our community in compliance with Assembly Bill 481. The Police Department personnel conduct various military equipment audits to determine functionality, inventory, and verify proper personnel has assigned equipment. All military equipment operated and maintained in this report were accounted for during this period.
7.a
Packet Pg. 111 Attachment: Attachment A - 2024 Annual Military Equipment Use Report (6045 : AB481 Ordinance, Policy, and Annual Report) ASSEMBLY BILL 481 MILITARY QUIPMENT ANNUAL REPORT 31
Training Costs
The use of certain items of military equipment and related special tactics are perishable skills that require ongoing training to maintain proficiency. While the Department conducts constant training within its personnel and training unit and specific specialized units, there is significant tactical insight and an enhanced skillset to be gained by participating in external training courses. These courses provide officers with a curriculum and exercises designed to impart knowledge, skills, and enhanced capability. The courses attended by officers can vary from year to year, depending on operational needs. Funding sources for training are funded from the existing police training budget.
Storage Costs
Our current military equipment listed in this report is stored at the police department in the armory. There are no third-party storage costs.
Conclusion
As outlined in this report, the Pacifica Police Department utilizes various but minimal types of military equipment to protect life, prevent crime, and enhance the quality of life for all our community members. In accordance with Assembly Bill 481 and Department Policy 705, the Police Department will be transparent regarding funding, acquisition, or use of military equipment by the Police Department. When making decisions regarding how military equipment is funded, acquired, or used, the Pacifica Police Department considers the public’s welfare, safety, civil rights, and civil liberties.
Any member of the public can submit a complaint to the Pacifica Police Department in person, telephone, email, etc.). All complaints will be routed to the Professional Standards Unit in accordance with the Pacifica Police Department’s policy and procedures.
Pursuant to California Government Code §7070(d)(7), members of the public may register complaints or concerns or submit questions about the use of each specific type of Military Equipment in this policy by any of the following means:
1. Via email to: [email protected]
2. Via phone call to: (650) 738-7314
3. Via mail sent to: Pacifica Police Department
Attn: Military Equipment Use Coordinator
2075 Coast Highway
Pacifica, CA 94044
7.a
Packet Pg. 112 Attachment: Attachment A - 2024 Annual Military Equipment Use Report (6045 : AB481 Ordinance, Policy, and Annual Report) Policy
705
Pacifica Police Department
Pacifica PD Policy Manual
Copyright Lexipol, LLC 2025/09/08, All Rights Reserved.
Published with permission by Pacifica Police Department ***DRAFT*** Military Equipment - 1 Military Equipment
705.1 PURPOSE AND SCOPE
The purpose of this policy is to provide guidelines for the approval, acquisition, and reporting requirements of military equipment (Government Code § 7070; Government Code § 7071; Government Code § 7072).
705.1.1 DEFINITIONS
Definitions related to this policy include (Government Code § 7070):
Governing body – The elected or appointed body that oversees the Department.
Military equipment – Includes but is not limited to the following:
• Unmanned, remotely piloted, powered aerial or ground vehicles. • Mine-resistant ambush-protected (MRAP) vehicles or armored personnel carriers. • High mobility multipurpose wheeled vehicles (HMMWV), two-and-one-half-ton trucks, five-ton trucks, or wheeled vehicles that have a breaching or entry apparatus attached. • Tracked armored vehicles that provide ballistic protection to their occupants. • Command and control vehicles that are either built or modified to facilitate the operational control and direction of public safety units. • Weaponized aircraft, vessels, or vehicles of any kind. • Battering rams, slugs, and breaching apparatuses that are explosive in nature. This does not include a handheld, one-person ram.
• Firearms and ammunition of_.50 caliber or greater, excluding standard-issue shotguns and standard-issue shotgun ammunition.
• Specialized firearms and ammunition of less than_.50 caliber, including firearms and accessories identified as assault weapons in Penal Code § 30510 and Penal Code § 30515, with the exception of standard-issue firearms.
• Any firearm or firearm accessory that is designed to launch explosive projectiles. • Noise-flash diversionary devices and explosive breaching tools. • Munitions containing tear gas or OC, excluding standard, service-issued handheld pepper spray.
• Area denial electroshock devices, microwave weapons, water cannons, long-range acoustic devices (LRADs), acoustic hailing devices, and sound cannons. • Kinetic energy weapons and munitions.
• Any other equipment as determined by a governing body or a state agency to require additional oversight.
7.b
Packet Pg. 113 Attachment: Attachment B - Military Equipment Policy #705 (6045 : AB481 Ordinance, Policy, and Annual Report) Pacifica Police Department
Pacifica PD Policy Manual
Military Equipment
Copyright Lexipol, LLC 2025/09/08, All Rights Reserved.
Published with permission by Pacifica Police Department ***DRAFT*** Military Equipment - 2 705.2 POLICY
It is the policy of the Pacifica Police Department that members of this department comply with the provisions of Government Code § 7071 with respect to military equipment. 705.3 MILITARY EQUIPMENT COORDINATOR
The Chief of Police should designate a member of this department to act as the military equipment coordinator. The responsibilities of the military equipment coordinator include but are not limited to:
(a) Acting as liaison to the governing body for matters related to the requirements of this policy.
(b) Identifying department equipment that qualifies as military equipment in the current possession of the Department, or the equipment the Department intends to acquire that requires approval by the governing body.
(c) Conducting an inventory of all military equipment at least annually. (d) Collaborating with any allied agency that may use military equipment within the jurisdiction of Pacifica Police Department (Government Code § 7071). (e) Preparing for, scheduling, and coordinating the annual community engagement meeting to include:
1. Publicizing the details of the meeting.
2. Preparing for public questions regarding the department’s funding, acquisition, and use of equipment.
(f) Preparing the annual military equipment report for submission to the Chief of Police and ensuring that the report is made available on the department website (Government Code § 7072).
(g) Establishing the procedure for a person to register a complaint or concern, or how that person may submit a question about the use of a type of military equipment, and how the Department will respond in a timely manner.
705.4 MILITARY EQUIPMENT INVENTORY
Pursuant to Government Code section 7070(d), the below provides a description of each type of military equipment, the quantity sought, it's capabilities, expected lifespan, and descriptions from the manufacturer of the military equipment. This section will include the purposes and authorized uses, the fiscal impact, the legal and procedural rules that govern the use, and the training required, for each type of military equipment. This section of the Military Equipment Use Policy is divided into two sections.
Section One lists qualifying equipment that is owned and/ or utilized by the Pacifica Police Department. See attachment: ATTACHEMENT A_25.pdf
7.b
Packet Pg. 114 Attachment: Attachment B - Military Equipment Policy #705 (6045 : AB481 Ordinance, Policy, and Annual Report) Pacifica Police Department
Pacifica PD Policy Manual
Military Equipment
Copyright Lexipol, LLC 2025/09/08, All Rights Reserved.
Published with permission by Pacifica Police Department ***DRAFT*** Military Equipment - 3 Section Two lists qualifying equipment not previously listed in this policy, that is not owned or regularly utilized by the Pacifica Police Department, but which is known to be owned and or utilized by the Daly City SWAT Team (Daly City Police, Pacifica Police, and Broadmore Police), for which the Pacifica Police Department is a participating agency. While the equipment in Section Two is not purchased, owned, or maintained by the Pacifica Police Department, it could be used in the City of Pacifica if Daly City SWAT is deployed, and is therefore included in the Military Equipment Use Policy. It is important to note that Daly City SWAT is a generally only deployed in extreme circumstances such as active shooter incidents,, hostage situations, and the execution of high risk search and arrest warrants. The equipment Daly City SWAT possesses is rarely deployed but could prove essential to emergency operations when needed.
Pacifica Police collaborates with the San Bruno Police Department in the use of their UAV's (drones) within the City limits for search/rescue, suspect apprehension, crime scene documentation, and hazard monitoring. See attachment: ATTACHMENT B.pdf 705.5 APPROVAL
The Chief of Police or the authorized designee shall obtain approval from the governing body by way of an ordinance adopting the military equipment policy. As part of the approval process, the Chief of Police or the authorized designee shall ensure the proposed military equipment policy is submitted to the governing body and is available on the department website at least 30 days prior to any public hearing concerning the military equipment at issue (Government Code § 7071). The military equipment policy must be approved by the governing body prior to engaging in any of the following (Government Code § 7071):
(a) Requesting military equipment made available pursuant to 10 USC § 2576a. (b) Seeking funds for military equipment, including but not limited to applying for a grant, soliciting or accepting private, local, state, or federal funds, in-kind donations, or other donations or transfers.
(c) Acquiring military equipment either permanently or temporarily, including by borrowing or leasing.
(d) Collaborating with another law enforcement agency in the deployment or other use of military equipment within the jurisdiction of this department. (e) Using any new or existing military equipment for a purpose, in a manner, or by a person not previously approved by the governing body.
(f) Soliciting or responding to a proposal for, or entering into an agreement with, any other person or entity to seek funds for, apply to receive, acquire, use, or collaborate in the use of military equipment.
(g) Acquiring military equipment through any means not provided above. 705.6 COORDINATION WITH OTHER JURISDICTIONS
Military equipment should not be used by any other law enforcement agency or member in this jurisdiction unless the military equipment is approved for use in accordance with this policy.
7.b
Packet Pg. 115 Attachment: Attachment B - Military Equipment Policy #705 (6045 : AB481 Ordinance, Policy, and Annual Report) Pacifica Police Department
Pacifica PD Policy Manual
Military Equipment
Copyright Lexipol, LLC 2025/09/08, All Rights Reserved.
Published with permission by Pacifica Police Department ***DRAFT*** Military Equipment - 4 705.7 ANNUAL REPORT
Upon approval of a military equipment policy, the Chief of Police or the authorized designee should submit a military equipment report to the governing body for each type of military equipment approved within one year of approval, and annually thereafter for as long as the military equipment is available for use (Government Code § 7072).
The Chief of Police or the authorized designee should also make each annual military equipment report publicly available on the department website for as long as the military equipment is available for use. The report shall include all information required by Government Code § 7072 for the preceding calendar year for each type of military equipment in department inventory. 705.8 COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT
Within 30 days of submitting and publicly releasing the annual report, the Department shall hold at least one well-publicized and conveniently located community engagement meeting, at which the Department should discuss the report and respond to public questions regarding the funding, acquisition, or use of military equipment.
7.b
Packet Pg. 116 Attachment: Attachment B - Military Equipment Policy #705 (6045 : AB481 Ordinance, Policy, and Annual Report) Pacifica PD Policy Manual
Copyright Lexipol, LLC 2025/09/08, All Rights Reserved.
Published with permission by Pacifica Police Department ***DRAFT*** Attachments - 5 Attachments
7.b
Packet Pg. 117 Attachment: Attachment B - Military Equipment Policy #705 (6045 : AB481 Ordinance, Policy, and Annual Report) Attachment
Pacifica PD Policy Manual
Copyright Lexipol, LLC 2025/09/08, All Rights Reserved.
Published with permission by Pacifica Police Department ***DRAFT*** ATTACHEMENT A_25.pdf - 6 ATTACHEMENT A_25.pdf
ATTACHEMENT A_25.pdf
7.b
Packet Pg. 118 Attachment: Attachment B - Military Equipment Policy #705 (6045 : AB481 Ordinance, Policy, and Annual Report)
ATTACHEMENT A
MILITARY EQUIPMENT OWNED BY THE PACIFICA POLICE
DEPARTMENT
Mobile Command Trailer
Equipment Name: Mobile Command Trailer
Quantity: 1 Lifespan: 20-25 years
Capabilities: Provide a mobile command platform for special events, critical incidents, natural disasters, major crime scenes, major collision scene, DUI checkpoints, or other sustained law enforcement incidents. The vehicle will be equipped with computer and radio communications equipment, phone and internet access
Manufacturer’s Description: TPD 24’ x 8.5’ tandem, 5k Axle Special Ops trailer.
Purpose/Authorized Uses: To be used as a Command Post for sustained law enforcement incidents, including, but not limited to DUI checkpoints, major collision scenes, major crime scenes, or other sustained incidents where access to law enforcement computers, communication equipment and shelter is required.
Fiscal Impacts: The cost of a mobile command trailer was approximately $50,000, with ongoing vehicle and equipment maintenance costs. Grant funds were the primary source of funding for this piece of equipment.
Annual Maintenance: Cost is estimated to be $1500, service or parts.
Personnel Cost: TBD
Legal/Procedural Rules Governing Use: Deployment of trailer is only allowed upon authorization of the Watch Commander or Division Commander.
Required Training: 1-hour of in-house training regarding safe deployment, operational use and stationing of the trailer.
Other Notes: None
Smith & Wesson M&P Patrol Rifles
Equipment Name: Smith & Wesson M&P AR-15 Patrol Rifles
Quantity Owned/Sought: 16 owned Lifespan: Approximately 15-20 years Equipment Capabilities: Capable of firing .223 and .556 ammunition Manufacturer’s Description: The AR-15 semi-automatic rifle is a lightweight, 16’’ barrel, magazine-fed, gas-operated semi-automatic rifle modeled after the military classic M4 Rifle.
Purpose/Authorized Uses: Patrol officers may deploy the rifle in any circumstance where the officer can articulate a reasonable expectation that the rifle may be needed. The rifles allow officers to address lethal threats with precision from a distance. Compared to handguns, they are more accurate at greater distances and can penetrate most body armor.
7.b
Packet Pg. 119 Attachment: Attachment B - Military Equipment Policy #705 (6045 : AB481 Ordinance, Policy, and Annual Report) Fiscal Impacts: The rifles were purchase in 2019. The initial cost of each rifle was estimated to be $552.56. After trade-in rebates and accessories, the total cost of the 16 rifles was approximately $3,924.92.
Annual Maintenance: Approximately $500, depending on type of maintenance needed.
Personnel Cost: Approximately $500-1000, depending on training costs.
Legal/Procedural Rules Governing Use: PPD Policy 306 covers deployment, use, care, and maintenance of rifles. All applicable Local, State, and Federal laws governing police use of force. All applicable PPD policies on Use of Force and Firearms.
Training Required: Prior to deploying the rifle, officers will complete a 4-hour in-house course presented by a POST certified approved instructor, followed by proficiency qualification. Officers will also complete a P.O.S.T. certified 16-hour patrol rifle course of instruction on use, deployment, and maintenance of the rifles. P.O.S.T. also requires four hours of tactical firearm instruction every two years for officers and this training is facilitated by P.O.S.T. certified rifle instructors.
Other Notes: None
Colt M4 Commando Rifles
Equipment Name: Colt M4 Commando AR-15 Rifle
Quantity Owned/Sought: 3 owned Lifespan: 15-20 years
Equipment Capabilities: Capable of firing .223 and .556 ammunition Manufacturer’s Description: The Colt M4 Commando semi-automatic AR-15 rifle is a lightweight, 11.5’’ barrel, magazine-fed, gas-operated semi-automatic rifle.
Purpose/Authorized Uses: The Colt M4 rifles serve the same function as patrol rifles. It is a short-barreled rifle which allows a trained officer better control inside the structures with greater accuracy, rapid response, maneuverability in critical situations. The Colt rifles are intended to be used by members of the SWAT team. However, officers that have completed a certified POST rifle course are authorized to use it out in the field.
Fiscal Impacts: The rifles were initially purchased in 2005. There is no record of purchase available because records are only maintained since 2016. The current cost for one rifle is approximately $1,085.57 each.
Personnel Cost: Approximately $500, depending on training needs and costs.
Legal/Procedural Rules Governing Use: PPD Policy 306 covers deployment, use, care, and maintenance of rifles. All applicable Local, State, and Federal laws governing police use of force. All applicable PPD policies on Use of Force and Firearms.
Training Required: Prior to deploying the rifle, officers will complete a 4-hour in-house course presented by a POST certified approved instructor, followed by proficiency qualification. Officers will also complete a P.O.S.T. certified 16-hour patrol rifle course of instruction on use, deployment, and maintenance of the rifles. P.O.S.T. also requires four hours of tactical firearm instruction every two years for officers and this training is facilitated by P.O.S.T. certified rifle instructors.
Other Notes: None
7.b
Packet Pg. 120 Attachment: Attachment B - Military Equipment Policy #705 (6045 : AB481 Ordinance, Policy, and Annual Report) Less-than-lethal Shotguns
Equipment Name: Mossberg 590 Tactical (less-than-lethal) Shotguns Quantity Owned/Sought: 11 owned Lifespan: 15 years
Equipment Capabilities: Capable of firing “less-than-lethal” 12-gauge CTS Super Sock rounds Manufacturer Product Description: The Mossberg 590 Tactical shotgun is one of the most durable pump action shotguns, meeting MIL-SPEC 3443G, with its heavy-walled barrel, metal trigger guard and safety, clean out mag tube, and parkerized finish. The dedicated less-thanlethal shotguns are distinguishable by an orange butt-stock and fore-grip. The range of the weapon system helps to maintain space between officers and a threat reducing the immediacy of the threat which is a principle of de-escalation.
Purpose/Authorized Uses: The less-than-lethal shotguns provide alternative levels of force to overcome resistance when reasonably necessary in accordance with policy and law.
Fiscal Impacts: The less-than-lethal shotguns were purchased in 2022. The initial cost for the 11 shotguns, orange fore-grips with lighting system, and orange butt-stocks was approximately $5,849.58.
Annual Maintenance: Approximately $100-$500, depending service and parts needed.
Personnel Cost: Approximately $100-&300, depending on training needs and cost.
Legal/Procedural Rules Governing Use: All use of force applications is governed by state law (including Penal Code section 13652) and PPD Policy Sections 303.
Training Required: Officers who have been trained and completed a training course with a certified instructor on the shotguns may deploy them. Officers receive initial training upon hire and annual training thereafter.
Other Notes: None
CTS Super Sock Impact Munitions
Equipment Name: CTS Super-Sock Impact Munitions
Quantity Owned/Sought: Approximately 90-150 owned Lifespan: Depends on storage Equipment Capabilities: Ammunition capable of being fired from a 12-gauge shotgun Manufacturer Product Description: The Model 2581 Super-Sock delivers unprecedented accuracy and consistent terminal impact characteristics at close-in and extended ranges, thanks to the flexible tubular material bag specially developed for this unique less than lethal round. Super-Sock is a safer and more effective round due to its accuracy and consistent transfer of kinetic energy to the target. Unlike traditional flat bags, no "unfolding" is necessary. Super-Sock is correctly deployed as soon as it exits the muzzle. No frisbee or wind surfing effects. No hitting the target folded or sideways. When deployed, super-sock presents a consistent aerodynamic shape every time, delivering consistent and predictable terminal performance. Fits cylinder and improved cylinder 12ga shotguns chambered for 2.75" & 3" cartridges.
7.b
Packet Pg. 121 Attachment: Attachment B - Military Equipment Policy #705 (6045 : AB481 Ordinance, Policy, and Annual Report) Purpose/Authorized Uses: The CTS Super-Sock rounds provide alternative levels of force to overcome resistance when reasonably necessary in accordance with policy and law.
Fiscal Impacts: Approximately $1,055.74 for 165 rounds in 2022. The CTS Super Sock ammunition cost was approximately $5.85 each round.
Annual Maintenance: N/A
Personnel Cost: Approximately $100-300, depending on training needs and cost.
Legal/Procedural Rules Governing Use: All use of force applications are governed by state law (including Penal Code section 13652) and applicable PPD policies on Use of Force.
Training Required: Officers who have been trained and have passed a qualification course with the munitions may deploy them. Officers receive initial training upon hire and annually thereafter.
Other Notes: None
Pepperball FTC Launcher
Equipment Name: Pepperball FTC Launcher
Quantity Owned/Sought: 2 owned Lifespan: 10 years
Equipment Capabilities: Capable of firing PAVA pepper powder projectile rounds Manufacturer Product Description: The FTC Launcher is a semi-automatic compressed airpowered launcher designed to fire non-lethal pepperball projectiles. Reliable and accurate, it features a hopper that can hold up to 180 rounds, a flexible air source configuration and a compact modular design. The FTC Launcher can help de-escalate and limit the escalation of conflict where effective without the need for lethal force in situations such as, but not limited to, self-destructive subjects, dangerous, and/or combative individuals, riot control and civil unrest incidents, circumstances where a tactical advantage can be obtained, potentially vicious animals, training exercises, or approved demonstrations.
Purpose/Authorized Uses: The less-than-lethal launchers provide alternative levels of force to overcome resistance when reasonably necessary in accordance with policy and law.
Fiscal Impacts: The less-than-lethal FTC Launchers were purchased in 2021. The cost for an FTC Launcher is currently approximately $591. The cost for 90 Live-X projectile rounds was approximately $322 in 2022.
Annual Maintenance: $100-$200, depending on service needed.
Personnel Cost: Approximately $300, depending on training needs and cost.
Legal/Procedural Rules Governing Use: All applicable Local, State, and Federal laws governing police use of force. All applicable PPD policies on Use of Force.
Training Required: Officers are required to complete a 2-hour in-house training course with a certified Pepperball instructor prior to deploying the launcher out in the field.
Other Notes: None
7.b
Packet Pg. 122 Attachment: Attachment B - Military Equipment Policy #705 (6045 : AB481 Ordinance, Policy, and Annual Report) Unmanned Aerial System
Equipment Name: Unmanned Aerial Systems (UAS)
Quantity Owned: 2 purchased in 2024 Lifespan: Approximately 5 years Equipment Capabilities: Remotely piloted aerial system capable of providing live and recorded video images captured from aerial positions, including images enhanced by Teledyne FLIR Boson+ thermal camera and optical zoom lenses.
Manufacturer Product Description: (2) The Skydio X10 is a medium size, highly autonomous quadcopter introduced in September 2023 by U.S.-based drone manufacturer Skydio.
Designed for a range of applications in public safety, inspection, and industrial use, it builds on Skydio's legacy of deploying autonomous drones with best-in-class sensor technology.
The Skydio X10 offers the following capabilities:
1. Flight time: Up to 40-minute for long missions
2. Speed: Up to 45 mph, with advanced Obstacle avoidance for safer flights.
3. Extended drone range with cellular 5G connectivity
4. Precise GPS navigation ensures accurate control
5. Speaker and additional attachment capabilities
The Skydio X10 are equipped with a VT300-Z camera and FLIR system. The Teledyne FLIR Boson+ sensor, delivers the highest quality thermal imaging. Capable of resolutions of 640x512 and offering increased sensitivity, delivering more accurate radiometric readings, anywhere, anytime.
Purpose/Authorized Uses: UAS may be utilized to enhance the department’s mission of protecting lives and property when other means and resources are not available or are less effective. Uses may include but are not limited to: search and rescue, suspect apprehension, crime scene documentation, tactical operations, scene security, hazard monitoring, identification and mitigation, response to emergency calls, crisis communications, legally authorized surveillance.
Fiscal Impacts: The total costs for entering a 5- year contract with Axon for the Skydio X10 UAS/Drones (2), accessories, training, Axon-Air software and associated required licenses will cost approximately $74,934.72, and will come from the Police Departments S.L.E.S (fund 7) account.
Annual Maintenance: TBD
7.b
Packet Pg. 123 Attachment: Attachment B - Military Equipment Policy #705 (6045 : AB481 Ordinance, Policy, and Annual Report) Personnel Cost: $100-200 for FAA licensing fees.
Legal/Procedural Rules Governing Use: Any use of a UAS will be in strict accordance with constitutional and privacy rights and Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) regulations. The use of the UAS potentially involves privacy considerations. Absent a warrant or exigent circumstances, operators and observers shall adhere to FAA altitude regulations and shall not intentionally record or transmit images of any location where a person would have a reasonable expectation of privacy (e.g., residence, yard, enclosure). Operators and observers shall take reasonable precautions to avoid inadvertently recording or transmitting images of areas where there is a reasonable expectation of privacy. Reasonable precautions can include, for example, deactivating or turning imaging devices away from such areas or persons during UAS operations.
Training Required: All department UAS drone operators will be licensed by FAA. In addition, each operator should attend monthly ongoing training hosted by the police department or approved outside training sources.
7.b
Packet Pg. 124 Attachment: Attachment B - Military Equipment Policy #705 (6045 : AB481 Ordinance, Policy, and Annual Report) Attachment
Pacifica PD Policy Manual
Copyright Lexipol, LLC 2025/09/08, All Rights Reserved.
Published with permission by Pacifica Police Department ***DRAFT*** ATTACHMENT B.pdf - 7 ATTACHMENT B.pdf
ATTACHMENT B.pdf
7.b
Packet Pg. 125 Attachment: Attachment B - Military Equipment Policy #705 (6045 : AB481 Ordinance, Policy, and Annual Report)
ATTACHMENT B
Military Equipment Owned and Operated by Outside Agencies:
Unmanned Aerial System
Equipment Name: Unmanned Aerial Systems (UAS)
Quantity Owned: 3 owned by San Bruno PD Lifespan: Approximately 5 years Equipment Capabilities: Remotely piloted aerial system capable of providing live and recorded video images captured from aerial positions, including images enhanced by Forward Looking Infrared (FLIR) and optical zoom lenses.
Manufacturer Product Description: (1) Matrice 210: The DJI Matrice 210 is a powerful, industrial-grade fight platform with world-class agility and speed, two barometers, and redundant IMUs for maximum reliability, and new smart flight features that make capturing complex shots easy. The aircraft’s visual sensors enable enhanced hovering precision even when flying indoors or in environments where GNSS is unavailable. The drone’s new airframe design gives it an IP43 Ingress Protection Rating, in accordance with the global IEC 60529 standard. The M210/M210 RTK’s mechanical design, along with quick release landing gears and mounted folding arms, makes it easy to transport, store, and prepare for flight. (2) Mavic II Enterprise: The DJI Mavic II Enterprise features omnidirectional Vision Systems and Infrared Sensing Systems and comes with a fully stabilized 3-axis gimbal camera with an equivalent 24-48 mm 2x optical enterprise lens capable of shooting 4k videos and 12 megapixel photos that support up to 6x FHD zoom. DJI signature tecuologies such as Obstacle Sensing and the Advanced Pilot Assistance System, help you capture complex shots effortlessly. Additional features like the built in Airsense make you aware of your surrounding airspace, and password protection helps you maintain secure access to your aircraft and protect your data. The Mavic II Enterprise also has attachable modular accessories like the M2E spotlight, M2E Beacon, and M2E Speaker that are purpose built for various applications.
The Mavic II Enterprise boasts a maximum flight speed of 44.7 mph and a maximum flight time of 31 minutes.
Purpose/Authorized Uses: UAS may be utilized to enhance the department’s mission of protecting lives and property when other means and resources are not available or are less effective. Uses may include but are not limited to: search and rescue, suspect apprehension, crime scene documentation, tactical operations, scene security, hazard monitoring, identification and mitigation, response to emergency calls, crisis communications, legally authorized surveillance.
Fiscal Impacts: None. Equipment owned, maintained, and operated by another agency Legal/Procedural Rules Governing Use: Any use of a UAS will be in strict accordance with constitutional and privacy rights and Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) regulations. The use of the UAS potentially involves privacy considerations. Absent a warrant or exigent circumstances, operators and observers shall adhere to FAA altitude regulations and shall not intentionally record or transmit images of any location where a person would have a
7.b
Packet Pg. 126 Attachment: Attachment B - Military Equipment Policy #705 (6045 : AB481 Ordinance, Policy, and Annual Report) reasonable expectation of privacy (e.g., residence, yard, enclosure). Operators and observers shall take reasonable precautions to avoid inadvertently recording or transmitting images of areas where there is a reasonable expectation of privacy. Reasonable precautions can include, for example, deactivating or turning imaging devices away from such areas or persons during UAS operations.
Training Required: None. Equipment owned, maintained, and operated by San Bruno PD.
Other Notes: None
Unmanned Aerial System
Equipment Name: Unmanned Aerial Systems (UAS)
Quantity Owned: 7 owned by Daly City PD Lifespan: Approximately 5 years Equipment Capabilities: Remotely piloted aerial systems capable of providing live and recorded video images captured from aerial positions, including images enhanced by optical zoom lenses.
DJI Phantom 4 Pro V2: Featuring a 1-inch CMOS sensor that can shoot 4K/60fps videos and 20MP photos.
The Ocusync 2.0 HD transmission system ensures stable connectivity and reliability, five directions of obstacle sensing ensure additional safety, and a dedicated remote controller with a built-in screen grants even greater precision and control. [1] A wide array of intelligent features makes flying that much easier. The Phantom 4 Pro V2.0 is a complete aerial imaging solution, designed for the professional creator.
The onboard camera features a 1-inch 20MP CMOS sensor and a mechanical shutter, eliminating rolling shutter distortion. An advanced sensor and impressive processing capture every detail and provide the image data needed for advanced post-production.
The Phantom 4 Pro V2.0 camera has an optimized f/2.8 wide-angle lens, ensuring consistently detailed photos and videos that remain vivid and sharp while maintaining color accuracy.
DJI Mavic 3T: The Mavic 3 Thermal is a multi-purpose and compact drone built for public safety, inspection, search and rescue operations and more applications. Featuring up to 45 minutes of flight-time with an integrated camera, the Mavic 3 is portable yet powerful, exceeding data quality requirements for enterprise tasks.
DJI Matrice 30 Series: The Matrice 30 is a powerful yet portable drone made for public safety, inspection, and more. Featuring over 41 minutes of flight-time with an integrated camera, the M30 is small and mobile while still providing the image resolution needed for enterprise tasks. The Matrice 30 features a multi-sensor camera with high-resolution wide angle and zoom cameras, laser rangefinder, and advanced thermal camera (Matrice 30T only).
Purpose/Authorized Uses: UAS may be utilized to enhance the Department’s mission of protecting lives and property when other means and resources are not available or are less effective. Current uses for the UAS include traffic collision investigations and/or urgent
7.b
Packet Pg. 127 Attachment: Attachment B - Military Equipment Policy #705 (6045 : AB481 Ordinance, Policy, and Annual Report) community safety needs. These devices are not used for general tracking or surveillance purposes.
Fiscal Impacts: None. Equipment owned, maintained, and operated by another agency Legal/Procedural Rules Governing Use: The use of unmanned, remotely piloted, powered ground vehicles potentially involves privacy considerations. Absent a warrant or exigent circumstances, operators and observers shall adhere to all applicable privacy laws and shall not intentionally record or transmit images of any location where a person would have a reasonable expectation of privacy (e.g., residence, yard, enclosure).
Training Required: None. Equipment owned, maintained, and operated by DCPD SWAT.
Other Notes: None
Armored Personnel Carrier (Lenco Bearcat)
Equipment Name: Armored Personnel Carrier (Lenco Bearcat) Quantity Owned/Sought: None (1 Owned by DCPD SWAT) Lifespan: Varies on Usage Equipment Capabilities: The Lenco Bearcat G1 is a tactical armored vehicle capable of transporting 8- 10 officers and equipment during tactical and recovery operations, offering ballistic protection and other features to enhance the safety of involved personnel during potential high-risk tactical and recovery operations.
Manufacturer Product Description: The Lenco Bearcat G1 is the standard tactical armored vehicle for special operations units within the US Law Enforcement community. Since the early 2000s, agencies such as LAPD, LASD SEB, NYPD ESU, Boston PD and hundreds of Federal, State and Local Law Enforcement agencies have made the Bearcat G1 part of their standard operating procedure. The G1 has excellent on-road driving characteristics and maneuverability in tight urban settings. The large floorplan seats 8 – 10 fully equipped officers with a long list of tactical features only found on the Lenco Bearcat line of armored SWAT vehicles.
Purpose/Authorized Uses: To enhance the safety and tactical advantage of officers and support personnel during potentially dangerous situations or high-risk tactical operations, and rescue missions.
Fiscal Impacts: None. Equipment owned, maintained, and operated by DCPD SWAT.
Legal/Procedural Rules Governing Use: The Daly City Police Department recognizes the use of armored vehicles during law enforcement operations can potentially startle members of the general public or create a sense of fear amongst the community. As such, the use of the armored vehicle is limited to SWAT Team operations or other law-enforcement responses or events that are considered high-risk. Special consideration is given in analyzing the risk factors associated with the intended operation or event with the need for the added protection offered by the armored vehicle. During specific community events, the armored vehicle can be used as a static display when appropriate and when authorized by the SWAT Commander. Drivers shall adhere to all applicable State and Local laws governing emergency vehicle use.
Training Required: None. Equipment owned, maintained, and operated by DCPD SWAT Other Notes: None
7.b
Packet Pg. 128 Attachment: Attachment B - Military Equipment Policy #705 (6045 : AB481 Ordinance, Policy, and Annual Report) Unmanned Ground Vehicles (Mini Vantage Robot)
Equipment Name: Unmanned Ground Vehicles (Avatar Robot) Quantity Owned/Sought: None (1 Owned by DCPD SWAT) Lifespan: Approximately 7-10 years
Equipment Capabilities: The Vantage Robot is a small robotic vehicle capable of being remotely navigated through a variety of environments to provide scene information and intelligence in the form of video and still images transmitted to the user.
Manufacturer Product Description: The 4.5-pound Mini Vantage is a throwable remotecontrolled vehicle that can be quickly deployed by hand. It can maneuver over small objects, climb up to 8”, and it has a 2-hour runtime. It is only outfitted with a 120-degree color camera, allowing officers the ability to clear an interior space prior to entry. It has a 3-pound payload capacity, which would allow for the ability to deliver a cell phone to a subject for negotiation or communication purposes. The Mini Vantage is not, nor is it designed to be, equipped with any lethal or non-lethal force devices. This UGV would be accessible to patrol and tactical teams to reduce confrontations while responding to critical incidents.
Purpose/Authorized Uses: To enhance the safety of potentially dangerous situations by providing first responders with the ability to capture video and still images of hazardous areas prior to, or in lieu of, sending in personnel.
Fiscal Impacts: None. Equipment owned, maintained, and operated by DCPD SWAT Legal/Procedural Rules Governing Use: The use of unmanned, remotely piloted, powered ground vehicles potentially involves privacy considerations. Absent a warrant or exigent circumstances, operators and observers shall adhere to all applicable privacy laws and shall not intentionally record or transmit images of any location where a person would have a reasonable expectation of privacy (e.g., residence, yard, enclosure).
Training Required: None. Equipment owned, maintained, and operated by DCPD SWAT Other Notes: None
Colt M4 Patrol Rifles
Equipment Name: Semiautomatic Patrol Rifles
Quantity Owned/Sought: None (60 Owned by DCPD SWAT) Lifespan: Approximately 10 years Equipment Capabilities: The Colt M4 Carbine (AR-15) semi-automatic rifle fires 5.56 x 45mm (.223 caliber) ammunition and is capable of firing at greater distances and with greater accuracy than Department issued pistols.
Manufacturer Product Description: Colt M4 Carbine (AR-15): Built for the demanding use of those who protect our communities every day, the Colt M4 Carbine Patrol Rifle is the next evolution in the world's most dependable, thoroughly field-tested patrol rifle. It is a lightweight, magazine-fed, gas-operated semi-automatic rifle. It is the semi-automatic version of the M16 rifle sold for the civilian and law enforcement markets in the United States. The Colt M4 Carbine Patrol Rifle reestablishes theColt AR-15® as the finest tool for local, regional, and national law enforcement agencies.
7.b
Packet Pg. 129 Attachment: Attachment B - Military Equipment Policy #705 (6045 : AB481 Ordinance, Policy, and Annual Report) Purpose/Authorized Uses: Officers may deploy the patrol rifle in any circumstance where the officer can articulate a reasonable expectation that the rifle may be needed. Examples of some general guidelines for deploying the patrol rifle may include but are not limited to:
1) Situations where the officer reasonably anticipates an armed encounter. 2) When an officer is faced with a situation that may require accurate and effective fire at distances beyond the effective range of a duty pistol. 3) Situations where an officer reasonably expects the need to meet or exceed a suspect's firepower.
4) When an officer reasonably believes that there may be a need to fire on a barricaded person or a person with a hostage.
5) When an officer reasonably believes that a suspect may be wearing body armor. 6) When authorized or requested by a supervisor.
Fiscal Impacts: None. Equipment owned, maintained, and operated by DCPD SWAT Legal/Procedural Rules Governing Use: All applicable Local, State, and Federal laws governing police use of force. All applicable Daly City Police Department Policies on Use of Force and Firearms
Training Required: None. Equipment owned, maintained, and operated by DCPD SWAT Other Notes: These rifles are standard issue service weapons for our officers and therefore exempt from this Military Equipment Use Policy per CA Gov’t Code §7070 (c)(10). They have been included in this document in an abundance of caution and in the interest of transparency.
Remington 700 Sniper Rifle
Equipment Name: Bolt-Action Sniper Rifles
Quantity Owned/Sought: None (5 Owned by DCPD SWAT) Lifespan: Approximately 15 years Equipment Capabilities: The Remington 700 Sniper Rifle is a bolt-action, precision-fire weapon system that fires 7.62 x 51mm (.308 caliber) ammunition. It is capable of firing at greater distances and with great accuracy than Department issued patrol rifles. The five rifles owned by theDepartment are outfitted with high-powered adjustable magnification optics for observation and targeting.
Manufacturer Product Description: Remington Model 700: The Remington® Model 700® Bolt- Action Rifle is enhanced to hit targets at long ranges. At the heart of this specialized long-range rifle is the famous Model 700 action that has been proven for reliability and precision accuracy in combat with the U.S. Army's M24 sniper rifle. The Model 700 Long Range rifle comes with a tactical stock made of solid urethane combined with aramid, graphite, and fiberglass. The barreled receiver is bedded with an aluminum block, and the heavy-contoured barrel is free-floated, providing excellent accuracy and minimal shift in zero caused by changes in the environment. The non-reflective stock and exterior metal blend in with a wide range of environments. The 2-position safety at the rear of the action is quick to operate with the thumb and can also be gripped with the forefinger and thumb and moved extra quietly to the fire position. The Remington Model 700 Long Range Bolt-Action Rifle comes drilled and tapped for scope mounts. An extra sling swivel stud on the fore-end provides an attachment point for a bipod.
7.b
Packet Pg. 130 Attachment: Attachment B - Military Equipment Policy #705 (6045 : AB481 Ordinance, Policy, and Annual Report) Purpose/Authorized Uses: This rifle is authorized for use by trained SWAT Sniper Team Operators. SWAT Sniper Team Operators may deploy this rifle in any circumstance where the officer can articulate a reasonable expectation that the rifle may be needed. Examples of some general guidelines for deploying the rifle may include, but are not limited to:
(1) Situations where the officer reasonably anticipates an armed encounter. (2) When the officer is faced with a situation that may require accurate and effective fire at long range.
(3) Situations where an officer reasonably expects the need to meet or exceed a suspect's firepower.
(4) When an officer reasonably believes that there may be a need to fire on a barricaded person or a person with a hostage.
(5) When an officer reasonably believes that a suspect may be wearing body armor. (6) When authorized or requested by a supervisor.
Fiscal Impacts: None. Equipment owned, maintained, and operated by DCPD SWAT Legal/Procedural Rules Governing Use: All applicable Local, State, and Federal laws governing police use of force. All applicable Daly City Police Department Policies on Use of Force and Firearms
Training Required: None. Equipment owned, maintained, and operated by DCPD SWAT Other Notes: None
Breaching Apparatuses (Breaching Shotgun)
Equipment Name: Breaching Apparatuses (Breaching Shotgun) Quantity Owned/Sought: None (2 Owned by DCPD SWAT) Lifespan: Approximately 15 years Equipment Capabilities: The Royal Arms Breaching Shotgun is capable of firing 12-gauge shotgun ammunition. It is a compact and modified version of the Remington 870 platform designed for breaching purposes. It is specifically intended to fire frangible compressed copper slugs to breach doorway locking mechanisms while minimizing overpenetration or risk of injury to persons in close proximity to the doorway or lock.
Manufacturer Product Description: Royal Arms Breaching Shotgun starts out with the triedand-true Remington 870 Police Model 12 Ga Shotgun as its base. We then completely modify it with our custom CNC machined parts to be the ultimate Breaching Shotgun. Royal Arms invented the Breachers and Breaching shotguns, why settle for an imitation or knock off when you can buy the best American Made Breaching Shotgun for all Tactical Operators and discerning individuals. Royal Arms Tesar-2 Black Cap Slugs: 425 grain compressed copper slug, frangible. Slug Material: Copper powder. Velocity: 1,525 feet per second. Use:
For metal doors, locks, and hinges. Defeats: Heavy locks, dead-bolts and hinges (solid oak – steel doors).
Purpose/Authorized Uses: The breaching shotguns are intended for use as a breaching option during tactical entry into a dwelling or other enclosed space when other breaching options have failed, or when authorized by a supervisor.
Fiscal Impacts: None. Equipment owned, maintained, and operated by DCPD SWAT
7.b
Packet Pg. 131 Attachment: Attachment B - Military Equipment Policy #705 (6045 : AB481 Ordinance, Policy, and Annual Report) Legal/Procedural Rules Governing Use: All applicable Local, State, and Federal laws governing police use of force. All applicable Daly City Police Department Policies on Use of Force and Firearms.
Training Required: None. Equipment owned, maintained, and operated by DCPD SWAT Other Notes: None
Chemical Agents (Tear-Gas)
Equipment Name: Chemical Agents (Tear Gas)
Quantity Owned/Sought: None (130 Owned by DCPD SWAT) Lifespan: Varies on storage conditions
Equipment Capabilities: Chemical agents, sometimes referred to as “tear gas” or riot control agents, are less-lethal chemical compounds that temporarily induce discomfort to an individual in the form of one or more of the following: Irritation to the skin, eyes, mouth, throat, and lungs. The goal of which is to gain compliance, dispersal, or direct the movement of one or more individuals.
The Daly City Police Department owns multiple types of chemical agents in various forms, totaling 154 individual units at present. The units are expendable items; therefore, the quantities will vary. Each chemical agent type has different capabilities. The types and manufacturers are as follows:
1. Defense Technologies Speed-Heat CS gas grenade, 81.2g, 20-40 second burn time
2. Defense Technologies Flameless Tri-Chamber CS gas grenade, 20.0g, 20-30 second burn time
3. Combined Tactical Systems Indoor Baffled CS gas grenade, 25.0g, 20-40 second burn time, launchable through outfitted less-lethal shotgun apparatus, requires specific blank 12 gauge launching cartridge manufactured by Combined Tactical Systems
4. Defense Technologies 40mm Liquid Ferret Round, liquid CS projectile dispersed upon impact, 8.0g, launchable though 40mm launcher
5. Defense Technologies Pocket Tactical CS gas grenade, 20.0g, 20-40 second burn time
6. Defense Technologies Maximum Smoke HC (Hexachloroethane) grenade, smoke screen, 1 ½ - 2 minute burn time
Defense Technologies Triple-Chaser, CS gas canister, 90.7g, 20-30 second burn time Manufacturer Product Description: Defense Tech Spede-Heat CS Grenade: The SpedeHeat™ CS Grenade is a high volume, continuous burn it expels its payload in approximately 20-40 seconds. The payload is discharged through four gas ports on top of the canister, three on the side and one on the bottom. This launchable grenade is 6.12 in. by 2.62 in. and holds approximately 2.9 oz. of active agent.
Defense Tech Flameless Tri-Chamber CS Grenade: The design of the Tri-Chamber Flameless CS Grenade allows the contents to burn within an internal can and disperse the agent safely with reduced risk of fire. The grenade is designed primarily for indoor tactical situations to detect and/or dislodge a barricaded subject. This grenade will deliver
7.b
Packet Pg. 132 Attachment: Attachment B - Military Equipment Policy #705 (6045 : AB481 Ordinance, Policy, and Annual Report) approximately .70 oz. of agent during its 20-25 seconds burn time. The Tri-Chamber Flameless Grenade can be used in crowd control as well as tactical deployment situations by Law Enforcement and Corrections but was designed with the barricade situation in mind. Its applications in tactical situations are primarily to detect and/or dislodge barricaded subjects. The purpose of the Tri-Chamber Flameless Grenade is to minimize the risks to all parties through pain compliance, temporary discomfort, and/or incapacitation of potentially violent or dangerous subjects. The Tri-Chamber Flameless Grenade provides the option of delivering a pyrotechnic chemical device indoors, maximizing the chemicals’ effectiveness via heat and vaporization, while minimizing or negating the chance of fire to the structure. The Tri-Chamber Flameless Grenade is NOT to be launched utilizing a launching cup.
Combined Tactical Systems Indoor Baffled CS Grenade: Pyrotechnic grenade designed for indoor use delivering a maximum amount of irritant smoke throughout multiple rooms with minimal risk of fire.
Combined Tactical Systems 12 gauge Launching Cartridge: The Model 2600 Launching Cartridge is a 12-gauge cartridge much shorter than standard full-sized 12-gauge cartridges.
Therefore, to prevent weapon malfunctions, each cartridge must be manually loaded into the chamber for each shot.
Effective range is dependent on the launching cup, launcher, and weight of munitions being launched. The baseline for performance of a Model 2600 Launching Cartridge is that it will launch a Model 9230 CS Grenade a minimum of 100 yards (91M), with cylinder bore and 18" bbl.
Defense Technologies 40mm Liquid Ferret Round: The Ferret® 40mm Round is non-burning and suitable for indoor use. Used primarily by tactical teams, it is designed to penetrate barriers, such as windows, hollow core doors, wallboard and thin plywood. Upon impacting the barrier, the nose cone ruptures and instantaneously delivers a small chemical payload inside of a structure or vehicle. In a tactical deployment situation, the 40mm Ferret is primarily used to dislodge barricaded subjects from confined areas. Its purpose is to minimize the risks to all parties through pain compliance, temporary discomfort and/or incapacitation of potentially violent or dangerous subjects.
Defense Technologies Pocket Tactical CS Gas Grenade: The Pocket Tactical CS Grenade is small, and lightweight. The 0.9 oz. of active agent will burn approximately 20-40 seconds.
At 4.75 in. by 1.4 inches in size, it easily fits in most tactical pouches. This is a launchable grenade; however, it is normally used as a signaling or covering device. Though this device is slightly over four inches in length, it produces a smoke cloud so fast it appears to be an enveloping screen produced by a full-size tactical grenade.
Defense Technologies Maximum Smoke HC Grenade: The Maximum Smoke Grenade is designed specifically for outdoor use in crowd control situations with a high-volume continuous burn that expels its payload in approximately 30-40 seconds through four gas
7.b
Packet Pg. 133 Attachment: Attachment B - Military Equipment Policy #705 (6045 : AB481 Ordinance, Policy, and Annual Report) ports located on the top of the canister. This grenade can be used to conceal tactical movement or to route a crowd. The volume of smoke and agent is vast and obtrusive. This launchable colored smoke grenade is 6.0 in. by 2.35 in. and holds approximately 2.9 oz. of active agent.
Defense Technologies Triple-Chaser CS Gas Canister: The Triple-Chaser® CS consists of three separate canisters pressed together with separating charges between each. When deployed, the canisters separate and land approximately 20 feet apart allowing increased area coverage in a short period of time. This grenade can be hand thrown or launched from a fired delivery system. The grenade is 6.5 in. by 2.7 in. and holds an approximately 3.2 oz. of active agent payload. It has an approximate burn time of 20-30 seconds.
Purpose/Authorized Uses: Chemical agents are intended for use as a less-lethal force response option. They can be deployed by trained Department personnel for riot control purposes, during tactical operations involving barricaded suspects, or in other situations where lesser means are reasonably believed to be ineffective or involve substantially more risk to Department personnel.
Fiscal Impacts: None. Equipment owned, maintained, and operated by DCPD SWAT Legal/Procedural Rules Governing Use: All applicable Local, State, and Federal laws governing police use of force. All applicable Daly City Police Department Policies on Use of Force.
Training Required: None. Equipment owned, maintained, and operated by DCPD SWAT Other Notes: The Daly City Police Department presently employs four trained and qualified Chemical Agent Instructors who are authorized to train SWAT Team members and Crowd Control Unit personnel on the use of chemical agents.
Flashbang (Diversionary) Devices
Equipment Name: Flashbang Grenades
Quantity Owned/Sought: None (51 Owned by DCPD SWAT) Lifespan: Varies on storage conditions
Equipment Capabilities: The flashbang, sometimes referred to as “stun grenade,” is a diversionary device that delivers a bright flash and loud explosive-type noise when deployed.
This is a non-lethal handheld grenade that does not fragment or produce any shrapnel.
Manufacturer Product Description: Defense Technologies Low Roll 4-gram Distraction Device: The reloadable distraction device unit incorporates a model 7007 type fuse with hex design gun steel body. This is a compact version of the 8933 Low Roll® body Distraction Device and is the newest version of the first reusable non-bursting canister that limits movement and rolling once deployed. The compact Distraction Device fits safely in your hand and packs all the power of the full-size Distraction Device. The 4-Gram Distraction Device® Reload produces a reduced light, and sound output ideal for when the full effects of the 12-gram charge are not desirable.
Purpose/Authorized Uses: Diversionary devices are intended for use as a distraction option used during high-risk entries into a dwelling or similar structure by SWAT operators. They can be deployed by trained Department SWAT operators when
7.b
Packet Pg. 134 Attachment: Attachment B - Military Equipment Policy #705 (6045 : AB481 Ordinance, Policy, and Annual Report) authorized by the SWAT Commander or in the event of
exigent circumstances.
Fiscal Impacts: None. Equipment owned, maintained, and operated by DCPD SWAT.
Legal/Procedural Rules Governing Use: All applicable Local, State, and Federal laws governing police use of force. All applicable Daly City Police Department Policies on Use of Force.
Training Required: None. Equipment owned, maintained, and operated by DCPD SWAT Other Notes: None
40mm Launchers and Kinetic Energy Munitions
Equipment Name: 40mm Launchers and Kinetic Energy Munitions Quantity Owned/Sought: None (15 Owned by DCPD SWAT) Lifespan: Approximately 15 years
Equipment Capabilities: The Defense Technology 40mm LMT is a single-shot launcher capable of firing 40mm kinetic energy munitions, also commonly referred to as specialty impact munitions (SIM), which are less-lethal projectiles. The 40mm launcher is also capable of firing 40mm chemical agent munitions, commonly referred to as “tear gas” or CS gas.
Refer to “Tear Gas and Chemical Agents” page for further details on these munitions. The Daly City Department has outfitted the launchers with Trijicon optics for aiming and targeting purposes.
Manufacturer Product Description: The Penn Arms CTS multi-shot 40mm launchers is a pump action advance magazine drum launcher, with a six-shot capacity and rifled barrel.
The approved 40mm impact munition for patrol use is the CTS Tactical 4557 40mm Point Control Impact Munitions. This lightweight, high-speed projectile incorporates a plastic body and closed cell neoprene material which is spin stabilized via the incorporated rifling collar and the 40mm launcher's rifle barrel. The round uses smokeless powder as the propellant and has velocities that are extremely consistent. The CTS Tactical 4556 40mm Frangible Impact OC powder are designed to disperse marking powder on and around the target following deployment. The frangible Impact+ munitions are spin-stabilized projectile and deliver multi-effects of blunt trauma and dispersal of irritant powder on and around target. Although it is extremely accurate and consistent, accuracy is dependent on the launcher, using open sights vs. an improved sight, environmental conditions, and the operator. Effectiveness depends on many variables, such as distance, clothing, stature, and the point where the projectile impacts.
Purpose/Authorized Uses: The 40mm Launchers, kinetic energy munitions, and chemical agent munitions are intended for use as a less-lethal force response option.
Fiscal Impacts: None. Equipment owned, maintained, and operated by DCPD SWAT Legal/Procedural Rules Governing Use: All applicable Local, State, and Federal laws governing police use of force. All applicable Daly City Police Department Policies on Use of Force and Firearms.
Training Required: None. Equipment owned, maintained, and operated by DCPD SWAT
7.b
Packet Pg. 135 Attachment: Attachment B - Military Equipment Policy #705 (6045 : AB481 Ordinance, Policy, and Annual Report) Other Notes: The Daly City Police Department presently employs four trained and qualified Chemical Agent Instructors who are authorized to train SWAT Team members and Crowd Control Unit personnel on the use of chemical agent munitions with the 40mm launcher.
Less Lethal Shotguns
Equipment Name: Kinetic Energy Munitions (Less Lethal Shotguns) Quantity Owned/Sought: 39 owned by DCPD SWAT Lifespan: 15 years Equipment Capabilities: Capable of firing “less-than-lethal” 12-gauge CTS Super Sock rounds Manufacturer Product Description: The Remington Model 870 Police Magnum is a pumpaction 12- gauge shotgun. Featuring an ultra-durable parkerized matte finish, synthetic stocks, 18-inch barrel with front sight and a 4-round magazine.
Hogue 870 Conversion Kit: Hogue rubber grips are molded from durable synthetic rubber that is neither spongy nor tacky yet provides a soft recoil absorbing feel without affecting accuracy. This modern rubber requires a completely different molding process than ordinary neoprene, resulting in a superior grip. The flexibility of our materials and molding process has allowed us to produce rubber grips with features that outperform all other makes.
The approved 12-gauge munitions for patrol use is the The CTS Tactical 12-Guage Bean Bag “Super-sock”,. Round is comprised of a translucent 12-Gauge shell loaded with a 40 gram, tear-shaped bag made of shot filled ballistic fiber. The 12-Gauge Bean Bag Round utilizes smokeless powder as a propellant.
Purpose/Authorized Uses: The Less Lethal shotguns and kinetic energy munitions are intended for use as a less-lethal force response option.
Fiscal Impacts: None. Equipment owned, maintained, and operated by DCPD SWAT Legal/Procedural Rules Governing Use: All applicable Local, State, Federal laws governing police use of force. All applicable DCPD Policies on Use of Force and Firearms.
Training Required: None. Equipment owned, maintained, and operated by DCPD SWAT.
Other Notes: The department currently has four trained and qualified Chemical Agent Instructors who are authorized to train SWAT Team members and Crowd Control Unit personnel on the use of chemical agent munitions with the less lethal shotgun.
7.b
Packet Pg. 136 Attachment: Attachment B - Military Equipment Policy #705 (6045 : AB481 Ordinance, Policy, and Annual Report)
CITY OF PACIFICA
COUNCIL AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT
10/27/2025
1 SUBJECT:
Appointments to the Climate Action and Resilience Committee and Beautification Advisory Committee
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Move to appoint:
A) nine (9) applicants to the Climate Action and Resilience Committee: four (4) individuals to 4-year full terms to expire October 2029, plus three (3) individuals to 2-year terms to expire October 2027, plus two (2) youth to 1-year terms to expire October 2026; and B) two (2) applicants to the Beautification Advisory Committee for partial terms to expire March 2026.
STAFF CONTACT:
Sarah Coffey, City Clerk
650-738-7307
[email protected]
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION:
At the City Council meeting held on September 8, 2025, the City Council approved Resolution No. 85-2025 creating the Climate Action and Resilience Committee. The City has recruited applicants for the Climate Action and Resilience Committee to fill nine (9) positions to the Climate Action and Resilience Committee. Two of the nine positions on the Climate Action and Resilience Committee are designated for Youth Members between the ages of 14 - 25; term duration for Youth Members shall be one year, which can be renewed for additional one-year terms up to a total of four years. The non-youth member positions shall have a full term of four years. Due to the action undertaken tonight with the appointment of members to form the newlyestablished Climate Action and Resilience Committee, it is recommended that initial terms be appointed to create staggered expiration dates by appointing four (4) non-youth members to full 4-year terms to expire October 2029 and three (3) non-youth members to an initial term with a 2-year duration to expire October 2027.
The City also recruited applicants for the Beautification Advisory Committee due to two (2) vacancies for partial terms to expire March 2026.
In addition to recruiting for the newly established Climate Action and Resilience Committee, the City recruited for vacancies and expiring terms for the following City Committees and Commissions: Beautification Advisory Committee, Economic Development Committee, Emergency Preparedness & Safety Commission, and Library Advisory Committee. Recruitment Notices for the existing Committees / Commissions were posted on the City website on August 26, 2025, and published in the San Mateo Daily Journal on August 27, 2025, and September 3, 2025. These recruitments were also advertised in the City's weekly Connect With Pacifica enewsletter and the City's social media accounts. The application deadline of September 12, 8 Packet Pg. 137
Pacifica City Council 2
October 27, 2025
2025, was extended two times to September 29, 2025, and October 10, 2025. Applicant interviews were conducted by the City Council at a Special City Council Meeting held on October 20, 2025.
Recruitment notices for the Climate Action and Resilience Committee were posted on the City website on September 9, 2025, and published in the San Mateo Daily Journal on September 10, 2025. These recruitments were also advertised in the City's weekly Connect With Pacifica enewsletter and the City's social media accounts. The application deadline of September 29, 2025, was extended one time to October 10, 2025.
The City received thirteen (13) timely applications for the Climate Action and Resilience Committee and four (4) timely applications for the Beautification Advisory Committee. The lists of applicants under consideration for each committee and commission are attached.
Applicant interviews for applicants indicating interest in the Climate Action and Resilience Committee and/or the Beautification Advisory Committee were conducted by the City Council at a Special City Council Meeting held on October 20, 2025.
Due to the number of positions under recruitment and the number of total applicants, an additional applicant interview date has been scheduled for Tuesday, October 28, 2025 to conduct interviews for applicants indicating interest in the Economic Development Committee, Emergency Preparedness and Safety Commission, and Library Advisory Committee.
Appointments for those committees / commission are scheduled to be held at the regular City Council meeting on November 10, 2025. Some applicants indicated interest in both the Climate Action and Resilience Committee or the Beautification Advisory Committee and one or more of the committees for which interviews will be held on October 28. Those indicating interest in either Climate Action and Resilience Committee or the Beautification Advisory Committee were scheduled for interviews on October 20, so that they could be considered for appointments for either of those bodies tonight and/or for those scheduled for selections on November 10.
Pacifica Municipal Code Section 2-2.103 (Membership: Eligibility) sets forth guidelines for City Commissions and Committees membership eligibility as follows:
2-2.103(a) Membership on the commissions provided for in this chapter shall represent a broad cross-section of the entire community.
2-2.103(b) To be eligible for appointment to any commission or committee, a person shall be a qualified elector of the City, except for the following persons:
(1) Members who are under the age of eighteen (18) years at the time of their appointment; provided, however, they shall be residents of the City; and (2) Members of committees who are not qualified electors or residents of the City but who may be appointed by the Council where they are deemed to be able to provide expertise or where they may be representative of a section of the community (i.e., commercial).
Selection Process
Lists of all applicants under consideration for each committee / commission are attached for Climate Action and Resilience Committee (Attachment A) and Beautification Advisory 8 Packet Pg. 138
Pacifica City Council 3
October 27, 2025
Committee (Attachment B).
Council may choose to deliberate as to the candidates that they would support to nominate for appointments to each of the open Committee seats. Council should then make a formal motion to appoint named applicants to each committee. Each formal motion should specify which named individual(s) are nominated for appointment to full terms and which named individual(s) are nominated for appointment to a partial term of specified duration and or to the Youth Member position(s), if there are multiple positions of differing terms to be filled.
Recommended Action tonight is to appoint the following:
1. Two (2) Youth Member positions to expire October 2026 for the Climate Action and Resilience Committee. Note: Those indicating interest in the Youth Member position have been noted on Attachment A.
2. Three (3) individuals to initial 2-year terms to expire October 2027 for the Climate Action and Resilience Committee.
3. Four (4) individuals to full 4-year terms to expire October 2029 for the Climate Action and Resilience Committee.
4. Two (2) individuals to partial terms to expire March 2026 for the Beautification Advisory Committee.
FISCAL IMPACT:
None associated with this item.
ORIGINATED BY:
City Clerk
ATTACHMENT LIST:
Attachment A: List of Applicants Climate Action and Resilience Committee (PDF) Attachment B: List of Applicants Beautification Advisory Committee (PDF) Attachment C: Resolution 85-2025 Establishing Climate Action and ResilienceCommittee (PDF)
8 Packet Pg. 139
CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING
OCTOBER 27, 2025
APPOINTMENT TO
CLIMATE ACTION AND RESILIENCE COMMITTEE
NEED 9:
4 full 4-year terms to expire October 2029
3 staggered terms to expire October 2027
2 one-year youth terms to expire October 2026
Applicants Youth Applicants
Floriane Gramlich Calvin Chan
Micaela Jennings Ethan Ng
Celeste Langille Maile Velichko
Deirdre Martin
Margo Meiman
Lauren Murphy
Ellen Natesan
Joy Richardson
Remi Tan
Michael Wahlman
8.a
Packet Pg. 140 Attachment: Attachment A: List of Applicants Climate Action and Resilience Committee (6060 : Appointments to City Committees /
CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING
OCTOBER 27, 2025
APPOINTMENT TO
BEAUTIFICATION ADVISORY COMMITTEE
NEED 2:
2 partial terms to expire March 2026
Applicant
Floriane Gramlich
Deborah Soliz
Remi Tan
Maile Velichko
8.b
Packet Pg. 141 Attachment: Attachment B: List of Applicants Beautification Advisory Committee (6060 : Appointments to City Committees / Commissions:
8.c
Packet Pg. 142 Attachment: Attachment C: Resolution 85-2025 Establishing Climate Action and ResilienceCommittee (6060 : Appointments to City Committees RESOLUTION NO. 85-2025
Exhibit A
Climate Action and Resilience Committee Charter
1. Purpose
Under the direction of the Pacifica City Council and as administered by City staff, the CARC shall serve as an advisory body to the City Council. Its purpose is to provide guidance and recommendations on the implementation of the CARP for consideration in the City Council’s annual Strategic Goal Setting process.
2. Duties
The Committee’s duties are designed to guide its advisory role to the City Council, helping inform CARP implementation decisions through consultation with the community and other stakeholders to guide its recommendations. During its annual goal-setting process, City Council may determine which CARP action items to pursue in the upcoming year, along with any ongoing actions.
In carrying out its responsibilities below, the Committee shall engage the Pacifica community by fostering inclusive participation, promoting transparency, and incorporating community perspectives into its recommendations to the City Council. • Advise the City Council on issues pertaining to GHG emissions reduction, environmental sustainability and resilience, and related areas identified in the CARP.
• Provide recommendations to support City efforts to implement the goals and actions of the CARP, including identifying potential funding sources. • Prepare and present to the City Council each May4, an annual work plan for the CARC for Council consideration, aligning priorities with the General Plan, Local Coastal Land Use Plan, and other guiding policy documents, along with a report on work plan progress, including greenhouse gas emissions reduction data, if available.
• If directed by Council as part of the annual work plan, prepare and submit to the City Council each February recommendations on CARP implementation actions for consideration during the Council’s annual Strategic Goal Setting in March. • Prepare a full update of the CARP beginning in year four of the five-year plan, ensuring continuity of climate action in Pacifica.
3. Staff Support and Responsibilities
Staff liaison(s) shall provide administrative and technical support to the Committee, including preparing agendas, maintaining records, and providing subject matter expertise necessary for the Committee’s deliberations. Staff shall collaborate with the Committee to facilitate its advisory role to the City Council. 4 The months identified in the “Duties” section may change as identified by the Council agenda.
8.c
Packet Pg. 143 Attachment: Attachment C: Resolution 85-2025 Establishing Climate Action and ResilienceCommittee (6060 : Appointments to City Committees RESOLUTION NO. 85-2025
The Committee’s role is advisory only and does not include directing the work of staff.
Day-to-day operations and allocation of staff resources remain under the authority of the City Manager. Requests for significant staff time or new initiatives must be coordinated through the City Manager and limited to Council-approved activities.
4. Size and Representation
The Committee shall be appointed by Council and be comprised of nine (9) voting members, including two (2) youth members between the ages of 14 – 25 and seven (7) non-youth members.
The Membership Eligibility shall be as described in Pacifica Municipal Code 2-2.103 and Members may be selected to represent a broad cross-section of the community.
Members should bring knowledge, experience, or lived perspective related to GHG emissions reduction, environmental sustainability and resilience, or related areas, or demonstrated commitment to these areas.
The City Manager or a designee shall serve as staff liaison to the Committee. One Councilmember shall be appointed by the City Council as Committee Liaison, and one Councilmember may be designated as the Alternate Liaison.
5. Length of Service
Term duration for non-youth Committee members shall be four years. Term duration for designated youth members shall be one year, which can be renewed for additional oneyear terms up to a total of four (4) years.
6. Meetings
The Committee shall determine the date/time that the Committee will convene for its regular meeting as a body which shall not be less than monthly and all meetings of the Committee shall be open to the public, subject to the Brown Act.
7. Governance
The Committee shall abide by the rules set out in the Commission and Committee Handbook and the City of Pacifica Municipal Code as amended by the City Council from time to time.
The Committee shall select one of its members to act as Chair and another to act as Vice Chair on an annual cycle in January. The Committee shall exist until disbanded by action of the City Council.
All other provisions regarding member removal, quorum, and other governance matters shall follow Chapter 2 of the Municipal Code.
8.c
Packet Pg. 144 Attachment: Attachment C: Resolution 85-2025 Establishing Climate Action and ResilienceCommittee (6060 : Appointments to City Committees
CITY OF PACIFICA
COUNCIL AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT
10/27/2025
1 SUBJECT:
Discussion of local amendments to the 2025 Edition of the California Building Standards Code including options for Electric Vehicle readiness, load storage, water efficient landscaping, and bicycle parking requirements.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Receive a presentation and provide final direction regarding preparation of the ordinance.
STAFF CONTACT:
Samantha Updegrave, LEED AP, Community Development Director 650.738.7341
[email protected]
Greg McFann, Certified Building Official
CSG Consulting
[email protected]
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION:
The standards for construction of buildings are contained in Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations, Building Standards Code, more commonly known as the “California Building Code” (CBC). The CBC includes 12 parts addressing a range of regulations that comprehensively address building safety, energy efficiency, and other factors. State law requires local agencies including the City of Pacifica to adopt updated versions of the CBC every three years, which is referred to as the “triennial code updates.” The City of Pacifica must adopt the next triennial CBC update (2025 CBC) so that it can be effective as of January 1, 2026. State law also allows local agencies to amend the CBC, which is standardized across the state of California, to make changes that are reasonably necessary because of local climatic, geological, or topographical conditions.
Governor Gavin Newsom signed Assembly Bill (AB) 130, a budget trailer bill, on June 30, 2025.
It became effective immediately and made significant changes to a city or county’s ability to adopt amendments to the California Building Standards by essentially placing a moratorium on the adoption or modification of new state and local building standards affecting residential units.
AB 130, among other changes, amends Health and Safety Code sections 17958 and 17958.5, 17958.7, and 18941.5 to prohibit a city or county from making changes or adopting more restrictions (e.g., Reach Codes) to the State Building Standards applicable to residential units from October 1, 2025 to June 1, 2031, unless one of the following conditions is met:
• The changes or modifications are substantially equivalent to changes or modifications previously filed by the city/county and were in effect as of September 30, 2025; • The Commission deems the change or modification necessary as an emergency standard to protect health and safety;
• The changes or modifications relate to home hardening; • The building standards relate to home hardening and are proposed for adoption by a fire 9 Packet Pg. 145
Pacifica City Council 2
October 27, 2025
prevention district;
• The changes or modifications are necessary to implement a local code amendment that is adopted to align with a general plan approved on or before June 10, 2025, and that permits mixed-fuel (i.e., electric and natural gas, etc.) residential construction consistent with federal law while also incentivizing all-electric construction as part of an adopted greenhouse gas emissions reduction strategy; or
• Where the changes or modifications are related to administrative practices, are proposed for adoption during the time between Building Code updates, and exclusively results in any of the following:
o Reductions in time for a local agency to issue a post-entitlement permit; o Alterations to a local agency’s post-entitlement fee schedule; o Modernization of, or adoption of, new permitting platforms and software utilized by the local agency;
o Reductions in cost of internal operation for a local agency; or o Establishment, alteration or removal of local programs related to enforcement of building code violations or complaints alleging building code violations.
On September 22, 2025, City Council conducted a study session to discuss changes in State law under Senate Bill (SB) 130 and potential local amendments for the 2025 triennial updates, as well as considerations for further study over the next fiscal year to explore exceptions under SB 130.
For several CBC update cycles, the City has also adopted other local amendments to various components of the CBC. These have included the Building Code, Residential Code, Electrical Code, Plumbing Code, Energy Code, and Green Building Standards Code (codified in Pacifica Municipal Code [PMC] Title 8), as well as the Fire Code (codified in PMC Title 4, Chapter 3). As discussed in the study session on September 22, 2025, staff intend to carry forward most of these local amendments in largely the same form as in prior updates with minor amendments to eliminate typos, improve organization of sections to align with the 2025 CBC, and other minor amendments detailed in the September 22, 2025 staff report. Amendments to be carried forward include the amendments made in the 2022 CBC update related to geotechnical hazard assessments, underground utility installation, and Electric Vehicle (EV) parking and readiness for residential and non-residential development.
However, the requirements related to all-electric new construction (PMC Sections 8-7.04 and 8-
7.06), would not be carried forward. Due to the Ninth Circuit’s holding in California Restaurant Association v. City of Berkeley (CRA), which expressly struck down Berkeley’s Reach Code prohibiting the installation of natural gas piping in all new buildings because the Ninth Circuit determined that Berkeley’s ordinance was preempted by the Energy Policy and Conservation Act (“EPCA”) and that, by its plain text and structure, EPCA’s preemption provision encompasses building codes that regulate natural
gas use by covered products. By prohibiting natural gas piping into buildings, Berkeley ordinance created an indirect regulation, which rendered the gas appliances useless, and thus the Ninth Circuit found the regulation to be one that fell within EPCA’s preemption provision.
After discussion of this case, Council gave the City Manager direction to omit the City’s requirements related to all-electric new construction.
During the study session, Council asked for additional information about Electric Vehicle (EV) requirements, load storage, water efficient landscaping, and bicycle parking requirements, which are discussed in greater detail in the following sections of this staff report.
Electric Vehicle Charging and Readiness: Low Power Level 2 Chargers Council expressed interest in greater flexibility in the types of EV chargers for residential uses, 9 Packet Pg. 146
Pacifica City Council 3
October 27, 2025
specifically allowances for “Low Power Level 2” that are permitted under the CBC. Chargers range from Level 1, which is slow and uses a standard 120-volt outlet to Level 3 direct current commercially accessible chargers.
Level 2 chargers use either a 240-volt outlet or a hard-wired charger, which are compatible with all EVs, best for daily use, and preferred for home installation since they allow overnight charging, gaining between 12 to 40 miles per hour. All Level 2 chargers require a 240-volt outlet however, the low power Level 2 chargers use a lower amperage circuit (20 amp), and place less demand on home electrical systems. This leads to slower charging rates compared to the standard higher-powered Level 2 option (40-amp circuit) but is still a significant upgrade to the standard 120-volt outlet which can only charge at a rate of 3 - 5 miles per hour. A low power 20- amp Level 2 charger would charge a 60kWh EV battery in 12 hours, whereas the higher-power 40-amp Level 2 charger would take 6 hours.
For multi-family development, the CBC requires one low power Level 2 receptacle for all assigned EV parking spaces. Pacifica’s code goes beyond that and requires multi-family developments to provide 15 percent of EV spaces to be equipped with Level 2 receptacles, and 85 percent to be equipped with low power Level 2 chargers (PMC section 8-7.03).
The City Manager is seeking direction from City Council whether to include a local amendment in the CBC update that would modify or eliminate the percentage of standard Level 2 receptacles to allow more or all low-power Level 2 receptacles. The reduction or elimination of standard Level 2 receptacles could reduce both the cost of installation and operational costs for users. Staff recommend City Council either maintain the current PMC requirement for a 15/85 split, or reduce the requirement for standard Level 2 receptacles down to between 5 to 10 percent, as the ability to modify or re-instate the current requirement is limited for the next two code cycles under SB 130.
Automatic Load Management Systems
Council asked for additional information on Automatic Load Management Systems (ALMS). An ALMS manages power distribution across multiple EV chargers and thereby allows a reduction in the maximum required electrical capacity to each EV charger/EV ready parking space.
Rather than wiring every charger (or EV-ready receptacle) at full 40-amp capacity, an ALMS shares one circuit (or service) among multiple charging points and distributes power as needed, as long as each active charger gets at least 3.3 kW under simultaneous use. The wiring must still be robust (40-amp minimum) even if not always delivering full power, so that future upgrades or maximal use don’t overburden the infrastructure. Chargers installed under ALMS must support at least 30-amp output, meaning they can use more of the available capacity when conditions allow.
The use of ALMS reduces the peak load demand on the building’s service, potentially reducing the size of transformers, switchgear, and feeder capacity required. However, ALMS doesn’t allow for under sizing the main service or distribution - the building and transformer still need sufficient capacity for expected maximum loads, even if they’re managed / staggered.
Within the CGBSC, ALMS is optional in many contexts (“may be used”) for multi-family and hotel and motel developments, meaning projects can choose between full-capacity individual wiring or a more managed / shared approach, depending on cost and performance tradeoffs.
The above discussion of ALMS was requested as information only.
Electric Bicycle Charging
City Council requested information about requirements for charging receptacles proximate to 9 Packet Pg. 147
Pacifica City Council 4
October 27, 2025
bicycle parking to allow for E-bike charging. There are no provisions in the 2025 CBC requiring bike charging or outlets at bike parking.
The use of E-bikes for transportation and recreation continues to grow. E-bikes use lithium-ion batteries, and recent legislation such as SB 712 (2023) and SB 1271 (2024) address, among others, issues related to E-bike storage and battery safety. Provisions related to E-bike charging should consider safety issues, including but not limited to, storage and charging locations, electrical supply, spacing and separation, temperatures, and fire-safety.
The City Manager seeks direction on inclusion of receptacles for E-bike charging proximate to bicycle parking. Due to the limitations on new REACH Codes affecting residential units imposed by SB 130, these regulations could only apply to bike parking for non-residential uses. Staff does not recommend inclusion of required charging outlets at this time due to the limited applicability and need for further analysis.
Outdoor Potable Water Use in Landscape Areas
Council wanted clarification on local water efficient landscape ordinances, including whether the current Reach Codes would prevent an agency such as the North Coast County Water District (NCCWD) from enforcing local regulations.
California Government Code Section 65595 mandates that local agencies adopt water-efficient landscape ordinances to conserve water. If a local agency does not adopt its own ordinance by January 1, 2010, the state's model ordinance automatically applies within its jurisdiction. The California Green Building Standards Code (CGBSG) requires residential developments to “comply with a local water efficient landscape ordinance or the current California Department of Resources’ Model Water Efficient Landscaping Ordinance (MWELO), whichever is more stringent” (CGBSC Section 4.304.1). Pacifica does not have a local MWELO and has adopted the State’s MWELO, however, the City’s 2022 Reach Codes allows smaller projects an alternative compliance pathway. “Projects with aggregate landscape areas less than 2,500 square feet may comply with the MWELO's Appendix D Prescriptive Compliance Option” (PMC Section 8-7.05).
The City can only enforce what is within its municipal code. In the context of the CGBSC referenced above, a “local ordinance” would mean codified provisions within Title 8 Building Regulations, and not the requirements of another public agency. In compliance with the Government Code, Pacifica enforces the State MWELO, and provides an allowance for smaller projects to use the prescriptive compliance option provided in the State’s MWELO. Even if the North Coast County Water District has regulations relating to outdoor potable water use in landscaped areas, they would be responsible for enforcing those regulations, not the City.
The City Manager seeks direction on eliminating the local amendment that allows a prescriptive compliance pathway for smaller projects. Staff recommend no changes and carrying the local amendment forward. Removing flexibility for smaller projects would increase the costs of residential development and would not impact the regulatory authority of other public agencies.
Next Steps
The City of Pacifica must adopt the next triennial CBC update (2025 CBC) so that it can be effective as of January 1, 2026. Based on the direction provided to the City Manager, staff will prepare the 2025 Triennial Building and Fire Code Ordinance update and introduce it for consideration by the City Council at the meeting on November 10, 2025, and bring to Council for adoption on November 24, 2025.
9 Packet Pg. 148
Pacifica City Council 5
October 27, 2025
ALTERNATIVE ACTION:
This is a study session for City Council to provide direction. Any decision to adopt local amendments would be considered by the City Council at a future public hearing.
RELATION TO CITY COUNCIL STRATEGIC GOALS:
Adoption of the triennial 2025 building standards update, including re-adoption of local amendments and Reach Codes would support the following Council-adopted goals:
• Goal 2: “Improve and steward City infrastructure, streets, and facilities;” and • Goal 4: “Pursue climate change adaptation and mitigation.” FISCAL IMPACT:
The Fiscal Year 2025-2026 adopted budget included $15,000 for costs associated with the 2025 California Building Code update. Staff estimate that the budgeted amount should be sufficient for analysis and adoption given the limitations imposed by AB 130. Although there will likely be remaining budget, Council direction to analyze additional Reach Codes has the potential to incur additional costs that were not anticipated in the adopted budget. Accordingly, staff will need to prepare an updated fiscal impact analysis once City Council provides direction to the City Manager on the extent of Reach Code analysis that is desired, if any.
ORIGINATED BY:
Community Development Department
ATTACHMENT LIST:
9 Packet Pg. 149
CITY OF PACIFICA
COUNCIL AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT
10/27/2025
1 SUBJECT:
Amendments to Mayor and Vice Mayor Selection Process
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Adopt the Resolution titled, “A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Pacifica Rescinding Administrative Policy No. 17 ‘Selection of Mayor and Mayor Pro Tem’ and Amending the City Council Rules and Code of Ethics to Add Guidelines for Selection of Mayor and Vice Mayor”.
STAFF CONTACT:
Sarah Coffey, City Clerk
(650) 738-7307
[email protected]
Kevin Woodhouse, City Manager
(650) 738-7409
[email protected]
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION:
At the regular meeting of the City Council on January 27, 2025, the City Council appointed a two-Councilmember Ad-Hoc Subcommittee consisting of Councilmember Bier and Councilmember Espinosa to evaluate policies for annual selection process for Mayor and Vice Mayor and to develop recommendations for amendments to the process with the intent to set forth clear and transparent procedural guidelines and criteria to assist the Council in this annual process.
The Council Ad-Hoc Subcommittee held several working meetings and met with staff to discuss and identify and refine recommendations, policy considerations, constraints and key decision points to be brought forward for full Council policy direction.
At a regular meeting on October 13, 2025, the City Council discussed a summary of key policy considerations, options and recommendations that were identified by the Ad-Hoc Subcommittee in collaboration with staff. The City Council reviewed the following areas:
• Background Information on Councilmember Term Limits and District-Based Elections: Information on the City’s transition from at-large elections to district-based elections starting with the November 2020 election, the district-based election sequencing and the Pacifica Municipal Code Section 2-8.04 which imposes term limits and a maximum length of time a Councilmember may serve on the City Council in order to provide context, clarity and constraints that would impact policy decisions for the Mayor and Vice Mayor selection process.
• Qualifying Eligibility Criteria for Mayor / Vice Mayor: The City Council reviewed options for qualifying criteria for eligibility for nominations for Mayor and Vice Mayor, including provisions for experience on City Council, prior experience in the role of Mayor 10 Packet Pg. 150
Pacifica City Council 2
October 27, 2025
/ Vice Mayor, time left in relation to term / term limits, and prior deferral / declining of nomination. The City Council directed that the eligibility criteria for Mayor would be having served at least 11 months as Vice Mayor in the preceding year or having deferred the nomination of Mayor in the immediately preceding year. They directed that the eligibility criteria for Vice Mayor would be having served at least 11 months on City Council and not serving in the final year of their second term on City Council. • Selection Method Options for Mayor / Vice Mayor: The City Council reviewed and discussed options for the selection method for Mayor and Vice Mayor, including a district-based rotation sequence in conjunction with eligibility criteria, a random public drawing in conjunction with eligibility determination, and Council discretion in the nomination selection based on eligibility and/or expressed interest. • Deferring and Declining Nominations: The City Council discussed deferring and declining nominations and the ramifications and guidelines for each. A Councilmember may defer a nomination and be considered for the same role in the following year, with no expectation of priority provided to the deferring Councilmember. A Councilmember may not defer nomination in two consecutive years. A deferral may be made for any reason and the reason need not be stated by the Councilmember. A Councilmember may decline a nomination for any reason and the reason need not be stated. If a Councilmember declines a nomination, they may not be considered for the same role in the following year. Deferrals and declinations may not be rescinded. • Special Circumstances: Special circumstances that are not addressed in the policy may arise from time to time, and will be addressed at Council’s discretion at the time the circumstance arises.
• Diverging from Policy Requires Supermajority Vote: The proposed amendments include a provision for the City Council to choose to diverge from the established selection criteria and process by a supermajority vote of those Councilmembers present.
Rescinding Administrative Policy No. 17 “Selection of Mayor and Mayor pro Tem” The Recommended Action proposes rescinding Administrative Policy No. 17 “Selection of Mayor and Mayor pro Tem” and incorporating the provisions and guidelines for the process of selection of Mayor and Vice Mayor into the City Council Rules and Code of Ethics.
Updates to the City Council Rules and Code of Ethics:
Based on City Council direction from the October 13, 2025 regular meeting, the provisions and guidelines for the process of selection of the Mayor and Mayor pro Tem are incorporated into the proposed amendments to the City Council Rules and Code of Ethics inserted as Section 9 “Selection of Mayor and Vice Mayor” and to re-number subsequent section headings. The amendments are marked in the proposed City Council Rules and Code of Ethics attached as Exhibit A to the Resolution proposing the amendments. Below is a summary of the Section 9 inserted into the Council Rules and Code of Ethics, which addresses the Selection of Mayor and Vice Mayor:
1. Timing for Selection of Mayor and Vice Mayor
The City Council selects the Mayor and Vice Mayor among its membership annually at the first regular meeting in December or a special meeting in December. In those years of a General Municipal Election the City Council meeting at which the selection of the Mayor and Vice Mayor occurs will be held as soon as practical after the election results 10 Packet Pg. 151
Pacifica City Council 3
October 27, 2025
are certified by the County Clerk.
2. Eligibility Criteria for Mayor and Vice-Mayor
A member of the City Council will be eligible to be considered for Mayor if they have served as Vice Mayor for at least 11 months in the preceding year. A member of the City Council will be eligible to be considered for Vice Mayor if they have served at least 11 months on City Council and they are not serving in the final year of their second full term on City Council. If a Councilmember deferred the nomination for Mayor or Vice-Mayor in the immediately preceding year, they may be considered for nomination for the same appointment in the subsequent year. However, a Councilmember who has declined the nomination for Mayor or Vice-Mayor in the immediately preceding year, cannot be considered for nomination for the same role until the second year following declination.
3. Presiding over Selection of Mayor and Vice-Mayor
The currently seated Mayor will be the presiding Chair for the process of the selection of Mayor. The newly selected Mayor will become the presiding Chair for the selection of the Vice-Mayor. The selection of Vice-Mayor will occur following the selection of Mayor.
In an election year, the selection of Mayor and Vice-Mayor will occur following the oath of office being taken by newly elected Councilmembers and the new Councilmembers being seated at the dais. If the Mayor is an outgoing Councilmember, the Vice-Mayor will preside as Chair for the process of the selection of Mayor.
4. Selection Process for Mayor and Vice-Mayor
Based on the Eligibility Criteria for Mayor and Vice-Mayor, the City Clerk will determine which Councilmembers are eligible for consideration as Mayor and Vice-Mayor. As a courtesy, the City Clerk will inform eligible Councilmembers of their eligibility prior to the release of the Agenda Packet for the City Council meeting at which the selection of Mayor and Vice Mayor will be agendized. The Agenda Staff Report will include the names of Councilmembers eligible for consideration for Mayor and Vice-Mayor based on the eligibility criteria and will include any information regarding prior year’s deferrals or declining of nominations, if applicable. Prior to any vote on selection of Mayor or ViceMayor, the City Council shall allow public comment, deliberate on the appointment of Mayor or Vice-Mayor, and then vote on selection of Mayor or Vice-Mayor by majority vote of seated Councilmembers.
5. Declining Nomination for Mayor or Vice Mayor
A member of City Council who is eligible for nomination for Mayor or Vice Mayor may decline the nomination for any reason. The Councilmember must make a statement declining the nomination prior to any motion being made for the appointment of Mayor or Vice-Mayor. There is no requirement for the Councilmember to state a reason for declining the nomination. However, once a member declines the nomination for Mayor or Vice Mayor the declination cannot be rescinded and that member cannot be considered for nomination in the immediately following year.
6. Deferring a Nomination for Mayor or Vice Mayor
A member of City Council who is eligible for nomination for Mayor or Vice- Mayor may defer the nomination for any reason. There is no requirement to state a reason for deferring the nomination. If a Councilmember defers the nomination for Mayor or Vice Mayor, they may be considered for nomination for that role in the immediately following year. The Councilmember must make a statement deferring the nomination prior to any motion being made for the appointment of Mayor or Vice-Mayor and once made a deferral cannot be rescinded. A Councilmember may not defer the nomination for Mayor or Vice-Mayor two years in a row.
10 Packet Pg. 152
Pacifica City Council 4
October 27, 2025
7. Vacancies and Partial Terms
The City Council may select a new Mayor or Vice Mayor outside of the annual process as a result of vacancies or City Council discretion. If the role of Mayor becomes vacant, the Vice Mayor will serve as the Mayor in the interim until the City Council appoints a new Mayor. If there is a vacancy for Vice Mayor during their year of service, the City Council shall appoint a new Vice Mayor in accordance with this Section 9 SELECTION OF MAYOR AND VICE-MAYOR.
8. Supermajority Vote Required to Deviate from Policy
Any deviation from the rules in this Section 9 SELECTION OF MAYOR AND VICEMAYOR must be made by a supermajority vote of the Councilmembers present.
RELATION TO CITY COUNCIL STRATEGIC PLAN:
Review of this issue is not part of the FY 2024-25 workplan and does not directly relate to the City Council 2023-2030 Strategic Plan.
FISCAL IMPACT:
There is no fiscal impact related to amending the Mayor and Vice Mayor Selection Process.
ORIGINATED BY:
City Clerk
ATTACHMENT LIST:
Exhibit A: Proposed Revisions to City Council Rules and Code of Ethics (redline version)(PDF) 10 Packet Pg. 153
Pacifica City Council 5
October 27, 2025
RESOLUTION NO. _____
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PACIFICA RESCINDING ADMINISTRATIVE POLICY NO. 17 “SELECTION OF MAYOR AND MAYOR PRO TEM” AND
AMENDING THE CITY COUNCIL RULES AND CODE OF ETHICS TO ADD GUIDELINES
FOR SELECTION OF MAYOR AND VICE MAYOR
WHEREAS, the City of Pacifica has certain Administrative Policies to set forth specific policy, regulations, and to establish procedural guidelines on various subject matters; and
WHEREAS, the City Council Rules and Code of Ethics has been established to define the roles, responsibilities and expectations of the City Councilmembers and staff with regard to the organization and process for the operation of City Council meetings; and WHEREAS, periodic review of the City Council Rules and Code of Ethics will assist all City Councilmembers to better understand their role and responsibilities and will help to make City Council meetings as productive as possible; and
WHEREAS, the City of Pacifica’s Administrative Policy No. 17 (AP#17) “Selection of Mayor and Mayor pro Tem” was previously adopted to set forth the procedural guidelines for the annual selection of Mayor and Mayor pro Tem; and WHEREAS, at a regular meeting held on October 13, 2025 the City Council directed amendments to the process, policy and procedural guidelines for the selection of Mayor and Vice Mayor.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Pacifica does hereby rescind the City of Pacifica’s Administrative Policy No. 17 (AP#17) “Selection of Mayor and Mayor Pro Tem” and the procedural guidelines directed by Council for the selection of Mayor and Vice Mayor will be included in the “City Council Rules and Code of Ethics”.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Pacifica hereby approves the amendments to the procedural guidelines for the selection of Mayor and Vice Mayor and incorporates them into the revised “City Council Rules and Code of Ethics” which is attached hereto and incorporated in Exhibit A.
• • • • •
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Pacifica, California, held on the 27th day of October, 2025, by the following vote:
AYES, Councilmembers:
NOES, Councilmembers:
ABSENT, Councilmembers:
10 Packet Pg. 154
Pacifica City Council 6
October 27, 2025
ABSTAIN, Councilmembers:
_________________________________
Sue Beckmeyer, Mayor
ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
______________________________ _________________________________ Sarah Coffey, City Clerk Michelle Kenyon, City Attorney 10 Packet Pg. 155
Pacifica City Council 7
October 27, 2025
EXHIBIT A
10 Packet Pg. 156
CITY COUNCIL RULES
AND CODE OF ETHICS
Proposed October 27, 2025
10.a
Packet Pg. 157 Attachment: Exhibit A: Proposed Revisions to City Council Rules and Code of Ethics (redline version) (6061 : Amendments to Mayor and Vice
10.a
Packet Pg. 158 Attachment: Exhibit A: Proposed Revisions to City Council Rules and Code of Ethics (redline version) (6061 : Amendments to Mayor and Vice Table of Contents
Section 1. GENERAL RULES ........................................................................................................................................... 6 Section 2. OPERATION OF CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS.................................................................................................... 6
1. Regular City Council meetings. ............................................................................................................................. 6
2. Time Limit on Comments by the Public. ............................................................................................................... 6
3. Public Comments on Items Not on the Posted Agenda........................................................................................ 6
4. Addressing the Council on Regular Agenda Items. ............................................................................................... 8
5. Public Hearings – Appeals..................................................................................................................................... 8 Section 3. PUBLIC DECORUM........................................................................................................................................ 9 Section 4. CITY COUNCIL DECORUM............................................................................................................................. 9 Section 5. ORDER OF THE AGENDA............................................................................................................................. 10 Section 6. REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS .......................................................................................................................... 10
1. Special Presentations.......................................................................................................................................... 10
2. Consent Calendar................................................................................................................................................ 11
3. Public Comments on Items Not on the Posted Agenda...................................................................................... 11
4. Council Communications. ................................................................................................................................... 11
5. Council Considerations. ...................................................................................................................................... 11 Section 7. DELIBERATION AND VOTING...................................................................................................................... 12
1. Order of Deliberation.......................................................................................................................................... 12
2. Expression of Council Viewpoints....................................................................................................................... 12
3. Call for Staff Report and Council Questions........................................................................................................ 12
4. Council Deliberations.......................................................................................................................................... 12
5. Speaking Audibly................................................................................................................................................. 12
6. Mayor’s Rights and Privileges. ............................................................................................................................ 12
7. Division of a motion............................................................................................................................................ 12
8. Withdrawal of motion......................................................................................................................................... 13
9. Correction of vote............................................................................................................................................... 13
10. Voting.................................................................................................................................................................. 13
11. Silence constitutes affirmative vote. .................................................................................................................. 13
12. Abstention from vote.......................................................................................................................................... 13
13. Not participating................................................................................................................................................. 13
14. Tie votes.............................................................................................................................................................. 13
15. Motion to reconsider.......................................................................................................................................... 13
16. Appeal from the decision of Mayor. ................................................................................................................... 14
17. Getting the floor. ................................................................................................................................................ 14
10.a
Packet Pg. 159 Attachment: Exhibit A: Proposed Revisions to City Council Rules and Code of Ethics (redline version) (6061 : Amendments to Mayor and Vice
18. Interruptions....................................................................................................................................................... 14
19. Secret Ballot........................................................................................................................................................ 14 Section 8. MOTIONS.................................................................................................................................................... 14
1. Statement of Motion. ......................................................................................................................................... 14
2. Motions defined.................................................................................................................................................. 15 A. The main motion. ........................................................................................................................................... 15 B. Fix the time to which to adjourn the meeting to another date. .................................................................... 15 C. Motion to raise a question of personal privilege. .......................................................................................... 15 D. Motion to lay on the table.............................................................................................................................. 15 E. Motion to call the question............................................................................................................................ 15 F. Motion to continue to a certain time............................................................................................................. 15 G. Motion to refer to a City Commission, Committee, officer or City Council ad-hoc subcommittee. .............. 16 H. Motion to amend or substitute...................................................................................................................... 16 Section 9. SELECTION OF MAYOR AND VICE MAYOR...................................................................................................... 16
1. Timing for Selection of Mayor and Vice Mayor .................................................................................................. 16
2. Eligibility Criteria for Mayor and Vice-Mayor ..................................................................................................... 16
3. Presiding over Selection of Mayor and Vice-Mayor ........................................................................................... 16
4. Selection Process for Mayor and Vice-Mayor..................................................................................................... 17
5. Declining Nomination for Mayor or Vice Mayor................................................................................................. 17
6. Deferring a Nomination for Mayor or Vice Mayor.............................................................................................. 17
7. Vacancies and Partial Terms............................................................................................................................... 17
8. Supermajority Vote Required to Deviate from Policy......................................................................................... 18 Section 910. CLOSED SESSIONS....................................................................................................................................... 18
1. Purpose............................................................................................................................................................... 18
2. Rule of Confidentiality. ....................................................................................................................................... 18
3. Breach of Confidentiality. ................................................................................................................................... 18
4. Permissible Topics............................................................................................................................................... 19
5. Scheduling Closed Sessions................................................................................................................................. 19
6. Persons Permitted to Attend. ............................................................................................................................. 19
7. Rules of Decorum................................................................................................................................................ 19
8. Penalties.............................................................................................................................................................. 19 Section 1011. CITY COUNCIL RELATIONSHIP WITH CITY STAFF ................................................................................. 19 Section 1112. ADMINISTRATIVE MATTERS ................................................................................................................ 20
10.a
Packet Pg. 160 Attachment: Exhibit A: Proposed Revisions to City Council Rules and Code of Ethics (redline version) (6061 : Amendments to Mayor and Vice WHEREAS, it is important to the successful operation of any public organization that standards be established to define the roles, responsibilities and expectations of the governing board and staff in the operation of the organization; and
WHEREAS, the establishment of standards by the City Council will promote communication, understanding and trust among members of the City Council and staff concerning their roles, responsibilities and expectations for the operation of the City; and WHEREAS, the establishment and periodic review of these City Council rules will assist all City Councilmembers to better understand their role and responsibilities and will help to make City Council meetings as productive as possible; and
WHEREAS, established standards by an adopted City Council Rules and Code of Ethics provides an understanding for the members of the community for expectations of the roles and responsibilities of members of the City Council and standards for conducting City Council meetings.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Pacifica that the following City Council Rules and Code of Ethics are adopted and that all City Councilmembers will comply therewith.
10.a
Packet Pg. 161 Attachment: Exhibit A: Proposed Revisions to City Council Rules and Code of Ethics (redline version) (6061 : Amendments to Mayor and Vice
CITY COUNCIL RULES OF OPERATION
Section 1. GENERAL RULES
The rules will be equally applicable to regular and special meetings of the City Council. Any act that the Mayor is authorized to perform may be performed by the Vice Mayor in the Mayor’s absence.
Section 2. OPERATION OF CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS
1. Regular City Council meetings.
Regular City Council meetings will be held on the second and fourth Mondays of each month. The meetings will begin at 6:00 p.m. Meetings will conclude by 11:00 P.M unless a super-majority of Councilmembers present vote to extend the time of the meeting. The Council, beginning at 10:00 p.m. and thereafter if the majority requests it, will determine which issues will be completed at that meeting and which items will be continued to the next regular or special Council meeting. The meeting may proceed past 11:00 p.m. only if a super-majority of the Councilmembers in attendance vote to extend the meeting to a time certain because it is necessary or in the public interest to do so. All City Councilmembers will use their best efforts to see that the agenda proceeds as promptly and efficiently as possible so that all scheduled items can be heard in the time allotted. The Mayor may call a recess every two hours. Additional recesses may be called as needed.
2. Time Limit on Comments by the Public.
In order to ensure that all members of the public have an opportunity to speak and that the Council is able to complete the public’s business, there will be a three-minute limitation on comments by the public unless otherwise approved by a majority of the Council. In order to effectively enforce this rule, the Mayor will monitor the time for each speaker and inform the Council when the three-minute limitation has been reached. The Mayor will strictly enforce the three-minute time limit. Persons representing organizations or groups of persons may be granted additional time upon consent of a majority of the Council. Individualspeakers may not use the three-minute allocation of other persons. Individual speakers may not speak twice on the same item.
3. Public Comments on Items Not on the Posted Agenda.
10.a
Packet Pg. 162 Attachment: Exhibit A: Proposed Revisions to City Council Rules and Code of Ethics (redline version) (6061 : Amendments to Mayor and Vice A. There will be an opportunity for Public Comments on Items Not on the Posted Agenda on each regular City Council agenda.
B. Any person wishing to address the Council shall be recognized by the Mayor during Public Comments, provided, however, that during the “Public Comments on Items Not on the Posted Agenda” portion of the agenda, only items not on the agenda for that meeting may be addressed. All remarks shall be addressed to the Council as a body and not to any member thereof. Councilmembers shall not enter into debate with speakers under Public Comments.
C. The Mayor will state at the beginning of each meeting the Council’s policy regarding the three-minute limitation on comments by the public. The Mayor, or staff assigned to time-keeping, will announce when the three minutes have expired. The Mayor may adjust the time allotted per speaker, with consent of a majority of the Council, based on the estimated number of speakers requesting to comment during Public Comments.
D. Management of Public Comments: The cards requesting to speak during Public Comments will be received by the Mayor. There may also be an option for members of the public to comment via phone or call-queue. The order in which speakers are called upon will be determined by the Mayor in his or her sole discretion. The Mayor may seek the assistance of the Vice Mayor with meeting management, including managing speaker cards for public comment.
E. Citizens who anticipate their public comment may exceed three minutes are encouraged to submit comments in writing in advance to the City Clerk for prior distribution to the Council. Whenever possible, the material should be submitted by noon on the date of the City Council meeting or by any submission deadline otherwise specified in the meeting Agenda. Written comments received by the specified deadline will be distributed to the Council and posted on the City ’s website prior to the meeting. All written comments that are submitted after the specified deadline, will be made part of the public record for that particular agenda item.
F. Concerns should be limited to items within the subject matter jurisdiction of the City Council only. Submission of comments in writing is encouraged in lieu of lengthy oral presentations.
10.a
Packet Pg. 163 Attachment: Exhibit A: Proposed Revisions to City Council Rules and Code of Ethics (redline version) (6061 : Amendments to Mayor and Vice G. If there are a number of people requesting to speak on a particular subject under Public Comments, the Mayor may request that the speakers assist the Council in having the Council meeting proceed efficiently. To that end, the Mayor may request that a spokesperson be designated to represent an organization or group and may request that other speakers in the group limit their comments to indicating their agreement with the spokesperson. A show of hands may also be requested.
H. In order to comply with the Brown Act, no action can be taken on items raised under the “Public Comments on Items Not on the Posted Agenda” section of the agenda for Regular Meetings. Upon conclusion of “Public Comments on Items Not on the Posted Agenda”, City Councilmembers may briefly respond to statements or may ask a question for clarification, refer the matter to staff, or request staff to report back to the Council at a subsequent meeting.
4. Addressing the Council on Regular Agenda Items.
A. Time limits for individuals. Persons wishing to address the Council are requested to give their name for the record and, unless further time is granted by the City Council, their remarks shall not exceed three minutes or the limit imposed at the Mayor’s discretion with consent of a majority of the Council.
B. Spokesperson for a group of persons. When any group of persons wishes to address the Council on the same subject matter, it shall be proper for the Mayor to request that a spokesperson be chosen by the group to address the Council.
C. Addressing the Council after the time for public input has closed. After the Mayor has closed the public comment period or public hearing and Council has commenced deliberation on an item, no person shall address the Council without first securing the permission of the Mayor to do so, subject to approval of the City Attorney with respect to any hearing required by law. During Council deliberation, Councilmembers may ask questions of speakers to clarify points made during the public input portion of the hearing after securing the permission of the Mayor to do so.
5. Public Hearings – Appeals.
A. In the case of a hearing required by law, applicants or their agents and appellants should generally be given up to ten minutes for their opening presentation and three minutes for rebuttal before the hearing is closed. In a hearing required by law, upon advice of the City Attorney, the City Council
10.a
Packet Pg. 164 Attachment: Exhibit A: Proposed Revisions to City Council Rules and Code of Ethics (redline version) (6061 : Amendments to Mayor and Vice may grant sufficient additional time to allow an adequate presentation by the applicant or appellant.
Section 3. PUBLIC DECORUM
1. Councilmembers will address the public and staff in a courteous manner.
2. It is the policy of the Council that all members of the public have the right to address the Council including the right to make remarks that members of the City Council may find critical, unpleasant or even offensive. However, it is also important that a proper standard of behavior be maintained during meetings and that the City Council is able to complete the public’s business in a timely manner. Therefore, the public should respect the order, procedures and decorum of City Council meetings. Persons addressing the City Council shall adhere to time limits, not disrupt the conduct of the meeting, and not make threats against any person or the public order.
3. The Mayor, or their designee, may remove or cause the removal of an individual for disrupting the meeting, after providing the necessary warning pursuant to California Government Code Section 54957.95. Prior to any removal, the Mayor or their designee, shall confirm with the City Attorney that removal of an individual is appropriate.
Section 4. CITY COUNCIL DECORUM
1. Respect for each individual Councilmember’s interpersonal style will be a standard of operation. Courtesy and respect for individual points of view will be a standard of operation. All City Councilmembers will respect each other’s right to disagree. All City Councilmembers will expect a high degree of decorum and courtesy during City Council meetings in interactions between and among Councilmembers, from Councilmembers towards the public and staff, and from the public towards Councilmembers and staff.
2. The Mayor will use his or her discretion to encourage Councilmembers and public to abide by these rules. Councilmembers and staff will be polite, even under tense situations, and will refrain from impolite or disrespectful remarks and body language at public meetings either towards a City Councilmember, staff or the public.
3. Councilmembers should not get into a hostile or adversarial debate with a member of the public or staff at a Council meeting, since these types of debates seldom resolve concerns and many times inflame feelings. If a speaker from the public makes inflammatory or erroneous statements, after the conclusion of public input, the Mayor may then provide the Council or staff with the opportunity to correct such statements if any City Councilmember wishes.
10.a
Packet Pg. 165 Attachment: Exhibit A: Proposed Revisions to City Council Rules and Code of Ethics (redline version) (6061 : Amendments to Mayor and Vice
4. Councilmembers willstrive to keep open minds on all issues prior to a vote. Individual Councilmembers will maintain as near neutral a position as possible to assure the openness that is required to carry out the Council’s community responsibility.
5. There will be no “grandstanding” on any issue. “Grandstanding” is the use of an individual Council seat on the Council dais in a disrespectful and inappropriate manner to state a point of view in a negative manner. Negative manner includes: personally attacking another Councilmember, staff or member of the public, walking off the Council dais or leaving any meeting in anger or disgust; emphasizing a political point of view solely for the purpose of playing to the audience unrelated to the issue before the Council; using the dais for a strictly personal purpose; addressing the media for political purposes rather than addressing the Council as a body; purposely misstating the facts of an issue for political purposes; or monopolizing discussion time in a manner that does not facilitate or further deliberation, general understanding or bring the issue to a conclusive decision.
6. If a Councilmember requires more information on a specific agenda item, Councilmembers are encouraged to direct specific questions to staff through the City Manager prior to the meeting. Staff, as directed by the City Manager, will make all reasonable efforts to research questions posed prior to the meeting and provide clarifying information to Councilmembers.
7. The City Council respects that the decision of the City Council is made by the majority and not by any individual City Councilmember. Members who are in the minority on an issue will respect the authority of the majority. Members who are in the majority will respect the right of the minority to express their disagreement with the majority decision. Once the agenda item has been voted upon, the City Council minority after making his/her position known for the record, must respect the decision of the majority.
Section 5. ORDER OF THE AGENDA
1. Matters will be heard in the order printed on the City Council agenda. However, with majority Council approval, the City Council may hear agenda items out of their prescribed order on the printed agenda, if a large number of the public are present to speak on that specific agenda item, or if the City Council otherwise determines that it is in the public interest to change the order of the agenda.
Section 6. REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS
1. Special Presentations.
Ceremonial items such as commendations, proclamations and special presentations, if any, will be handled prior to consideration of Consent Calendar items pursuant to the City of Pacifica Administrative Policy No. 1 as stated in the Council Agenda Format
10.a
Packet Pg. 166 Attachment: Exhibit A: Proposed Revisions to City Council Rules and Code of Ethics (redline version) (6061 : Amendments to Mayor and Vice – Order of Business. There should be an attempt to limit all commendations, proclamations and special presentations to no more than 20 minutes.
2. Consent Calendar.
Items may be placed upon the “Consent Calendar” by the City Manager whenever, in his or her judgment, such items are expected to be routinely approved without requiring substantial discussion or debate. The “Consent Calendar” shall be voted upon as one item. Any Councilmember may ask brief questions to clarify an issue prior to voting on the “Consent Calendar” and there may be brief Council discussion of an item without the need to remove any items off of consent. If further discussion or debate is desired, any Councilmember may request that an individual item be removed from the “Consent Calendar” in which case the item shall be considered on the regular agenda immediately after the “Consent Calendar” unless otherwise determined by the Council. Any Councilmember may request that such member’s vote be recorded as other than yes on any individual item without having to remove the same from the “Consent Calendar.”
All items on the “Consent Calendar” will have staff reports sufficient to adequately inform the public of the nature of the items on the “Consent Calendar.”
3. Public Comments on Items Not on the Posted Agenda.
The purpose of “Public Comments on Items Not on the Posted Agenda” is for any member of the public to address the City Council on any issue that is not on the Agenda. See Section 2-3 for management of “Public Comments on Items Not on the Posted Agenda.”
4. 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.
City Councilmembers should generally adhere to a three-minute time limit for “Council Communications” unless additional time is granted by a majority of the City Council.
5. Council Considerations.
Routine items for Council consideration which are not likely to require extensive discussion shall be agendized before Public Hearings. The remainder of items for Council consideration shall be heard after Public Hearings.
10.a
Packet Pg. 167 Attachment: Exhibit A: Proposed Revisions to City Council Rules and Code of Ethics (redline version) (6061 : Amendments to Mayor and Vice Section 7. DELIBERATION AND VOTING
1. Order of Deliberation.
The Mayor will call upon individual Councilmembers and give them the floor in the order the deliberation lights are turned on. In the event the Mayor cannot determine the order of the lights the Mayor will grant the floor from the left side of the dais to the right. The Vice Mayor will monitor the lights and assist the Mayor in setting the order of deliberation and making sure the speaker cards are in proper order.
2. Expression of Council Viewpoints.
It is not necessary for all Councilmembers to speak or give their viewpoints on every issue or item on the agenda, especially if their concerns have already been addressed by other Councilmembers. On critical or significant issues, all members of Council will undoubtedly want to indicate individual opinions on the issue but City Councilmembers should avoid repetition and should strive to move the deliberation along promptly.
3. Call for Staff Report and Council Questions.
When an agenda item is called, the Mayor will call for a staff report. After the staff report, the City Councilmembers may ask staff brief questions to clarify facts, but should not engage in discussion or debate of the issue prior to public input.
4. Council Deliberations.
At the conclusion of public input and during City Council deliberations, the Mayor may request preliminary straw votes if it will assist the City Council in framing motions.
5. Speaking Audibly.
The Council shall discuss issues audibly into the microphone and avoid “off-mike” and individual conversations during public input and debate.
6. Mayor’s Rights and Privileges.
The Mayor shall not be deprived of any of the rights and privileges of a Councilmember. The Mayor customarily will take the floor after other Councilmembers who wish to speak have spoken. The Mayor may move, second and discuss from the chair, subject only to these rules.
7. Division of a motion.
If a motion contains two or more divisible parts, each of which is capable of standing as a complete motion, the Mayor may, and upon request of a member shall, divide the same.
10.a
Packet Pg. 168 Attachment: Exhibit A: Proposed Revisions to City Council Rules and Code of Ethics (redline version) (6061 : Amendments to Mayor and Vice
8. Withdrawal of motion.
A motion may not be withdrawn by the maker without the consent of the Councilmember seconding it.
9. Correction of vote.
Councilmembers may correct an erroneously cast or recorded vote before the next item on the agenda is called.
10. Voting.
On the passage of every motion, the vote shall be taken by voice or electronic voting device and entered in full upon the record.
11. Silence constitutes affirmative vote.
Councilmembers who are silent during a voice vote shall have their vote recorded as an affirmative vote, except when individual Councilmembers have stated in advance they will not be voting.
12. Abstention from vote.
An abstention for reasons of legal disqualification to vote shall not be counted for any purpose. Non-legal abstentions for personal reasons (such as friendship or appearance) shall not count for any purpose other than a quorum.
13. Not participating.
A Councilmember who has disqualified himself or herself pursuant to the Political Reform Act of 1974 because of any financial interest shall disclose the nature of the conflict and may not participate in the discussion or the vote, unless required by the Rule of Necessity 1.
14. Tie votes.
Tie votes generally mean that no action has been taken on a matter. In the case of an appeal or a land use decision, a tie vote generally signifies that the underlying action stands. Tie votes may be reconsidered on a motion by any member of the Council before the next item on the agenda. In the event of a tie vote, any member of the Council may make a motion to continue the matter to another date. Nothing herein shall be construed to prevent any Councilmember from agendizing a matter which resulted in a tie vote for a subsequent meeting unless the matter involves an appeal or a land use decision or the City Attorney opines is not legally allowed.
15. Motion to reconsider.
A motion to reconsider any action taken by the Council may be made only during the meeting when the action was taken. A motion to reconsider requires a second, is 1 Government Code section 83112; FPPC Regulation 18705.
10.a
Packet Pg. 169 Attachment: Exhibit A: Proposed Revisions to City Council Rules and Code of Ethics (redline version) (6061 : Amendments to Mayor and Vice debatable and is not amendable. Such motion must be made by a Councilmember who was on the prevailing side, but may be seconded by any Councilmember. A motion to reconsider may be made at any time during the meeting and shall have precedence over all other motions. If a motion to reconsider fails, it may not itself be reconsidered. Reconsideration may not be moved more than once on the same motion.
Nothing in this section would preclude a Councilmember from bringing an item back to consider at a future Council meeting as a new agenda item.
16. Appeal from the decision of Mayor.
The Mayor shall decide all questions of debate and voting procedure. Any procedural decision or ruling of the Mayor may be appealed by any Councilmember to the whole Council and a final decision on the ruling by the Mayor will be determined by majority vote of the Council. If the councilmember appeal fails or results in a tie vote, the Mayor’s ruling shall stand. If said vote passes, the decision or ruling of the Mayor is reversed.
In addition, prior to making an initial ruling on any procedural matter, the Mayor may submit the question to the Council in the first instance, in which case a majority vote shall prevail.
17. Getting the floor.
Every Councilmember desiring to speak shall push the debate button and, upon recognition by the Mayor, every Councilmember shall be confined to the question under debate, avoiding disrespectful remarks or body language.
18. Interruptions.
Except for being called to order, a Councilmember once recognized, shall not be interrupted when speaking, except as otherwise provided for in these rules. A Councilmember called to order while speaking shall cease speaking until the question or order is determined, and if in order, said Councilmember shall be permitted to proceed.
19. Secret Ballot.
There shall be no voting by secret ballot.
Section 8. MOTIONS
1. Statement of Motion.
The Mayor shall ensure that all motions are clearly stated before allowing debate to begin and also immediately before a vote is taken. The Mayor may request a City Councilmember to restate a motion for clarification, may restate the motion or direct staff to restate the motion.
10.a
Packet Pg. 170 Attachment: Exhibit A: Proposed Revisions to City Council Rules and Code of Ethics (redline version) (6061 : Amendments to Mayor and Vice
2. Motions defined.
The following motions may be made by the City Council:
A. The main motion.
A main motion is a motion on the issue before the Council. It needs a second, is amendable and is debatable.
B. Fix the time to which to adjourn the meeting to another date.
A motion to fix the time to which to adjourn requires a second, is amendable and is debatable only at the time to which the meeting is adjourned. The purpose is to set a time for continuation of the meeting to another date.
C. Motion to raise a question of personal privilege.
The right of a Councilmember to address the council on a question of personal privilege shall be limited to cases in which the Councilmember’s integrity, character or motives are directly questioned by another Councilmember during debate. The maker of the motion may interrupt another speaker if the Mayor recognizes the “privilege”. The motion does not require a second, is not amendable and is not debatable.
D. Motion to lay on the table.
The purpose is to interrupt discussion of the item at hand for more urgent business or to end consideration of an item without action. A motion to lay on the table requires a second, is not amendable and is not debatable. It shall preclude all amendments or debate of the subject under consideration. If the motion prevails, and the subject is tabled, the matter may be taken from the table at any time prior to the end of the meeting. Any Councilmember can agendize the subject of a tabled matter for a later City Council meeting.
E. Motion to call the question.
The purpose of this motion is to close debate on the pending motion. A motion to call the question requires a second, is not debatable and is not amendable.
It applies to all previous motions on the subject unless otherwise specified by the maker of the motion. If the motion fails, debate is reopened; if the motion passes, then the City Council votes on the pending motion. A motion to call the question requires a majority vote of those Councilmembers present and voting.
F. Motion to continue to a certain time.
A motion to continue to a certain time is amendable and is debatable as to propriety of postponement and time set. Purpose is to continue the matter to another specified time.
10.a
Packet Pg. 171 Attachment: Exhibit A: Proposed Revisions to City Council Rules and Code of Ethics (redline version) (6061 : Amendments to Mayor and Vice G. Motion to refer to a City Commission, Committee, officer or City Council ad-hoc subcommittee.
A motion to refer requires a second, is amendable, and is debatable only as to the propriety of referring. Purpose of the motion is to send subject to another city agency, body, committee, board, commission or officer for further study and report back to council, at which time subject is fully debated.
H. Motion to amend or substitute.
A motion to amend a motion or to substitute one motion for another requires a second, is amendable, and is debatable only if the motion to which it applies is debatable. A motion to amend an amendment is also in order. An amendment can modify a motion but should not raise an entirely different or independent question. An amendment must be relevant to the main motion.
Section 9. SELECTION OF MAYOR AND VICE MAYOR
1. Timing for Selection of Mayor and Vice Mayor
The City Council selects the Mayor and Vice Mayor among its membership annually at the first regular meeting in December or a special meeting in December. In those years of a General Municipal Election the City Council meeting at which the selection of the Mayor and Vice Mayor occurs will be held as soon as practical after the election results are certified by the County Clerk.
2. Eligibility Criteria for Mayor and Vice-Mayor
A member of the City Council will be eligible to be considered for Mayor if they have served as Vice Mayor for at least 11 months in the preceding year. A member of the City Council will be eligible to be considered for Vice Mayor if they have served at least 11 months on City Council and they are not serving in the final year of their second full term on City Council. If a Councilmember deferred the nomination for Mayor or Vice-Mayor in the immediately preceding year, they may be considered for nomination for the same appointment in the subsequent year. However, a Councilmember who has declined the nomination for Mayor or Vice-Mayor in the immediately preceding year, cannot be considered for nomination for the same role until the second year following declination.
3. Presiding over Selection of Mayor and Vice-Mayor
The currently seated Mayor will be the presiding Chair for the process of the selection of Mayor. The newly selected Mayor will become the presiding Chair for the selection of the Vice-Mayor. The selection of Vice-Mayor will occur following the selection of Mayor. In an election year, the selection of Mayor and Vice-Mayor will occur following the oath of office being taken by newly elected Councilmembers and the new Councilmembers being seated at the dais. If the Mayor is an outgoing
10.a
Packet Pg. 172 Attachment: Exhibit A: Proposed Revisions to City Council Rules and Code of Ethics (redline version) (6061 : Amendments to Mayor and Vice Councilmember, the Vice-Mayor will preside as Chair for the process of the selection of Mayor.
4. Selection Process for Mayor and Vice-Mayor
Based on the Eligibility Criteria for Mayor and Vice-Mayor, the City Clerk will determine which Councilmembers are eligible for consideration as Mayor and ViceMayor. As a courtesy, the City Clerk will inform eligible Councilmembers of their eligibility prior to the release of the Agenda Packet for the City Council meeting at which the selection of Mayor and Vice Mayor will be agendized. The Agenda Staff Report will include the names of Councilmembers eligible for consideration for Mayor and Vice-Mayor based on the eligibility criteria and will include any information regarding prior year’s deferrals or declining of nominations, if applicable. Prior to any vote on selection of Mayor or Vice-Mayor, the City Council shall allow public comment, deliberate on the appointment of Mayor or Vice-Mayor, and then vote on selection of Mayor or Vice-Mayor by majority vote of seated Councilmembers.
5. Declining Nomination for Mayor or Vice Mayor
A member of City Council who is eligible for nomination for Mayor or Vice Mayor may decline the nomination for any reason. The Councilmember must make a statement declining the nomination prior to any motion being made for the appointment of Mayor or Vice-Mayor. There is no requirement for the Councilmember to state a reason for declining the nomination. However, once a member declines the nomination for Mayor or Vice Mayor the declination cannot be rescinded and that member cannot be considered for nomination in the immediately following year.
6. Deferring a Nomination for Mayor or Vice Mayor
A member of City Council who is eligible for nomination for Mayor or Vice- Mayor may defer the nomination for any reason. There is no requirement to state a reason for deferring the nomination. If a Councilmember defers the nomination for Mayor or Vice Mayor, they may be considered for nomination for that role in the immediately following year. The Councilmember must make a statement deferring the nomination prior to any motion being made for the appointment of Mayor or Vice-Mayor and once made a deferral cannot be rescinded. A Councilmember may not defer the nomination for Mayor or Vice-Mayor two years in a row.
7. Vacancies and Partial Terms
The City Council may select a new Mayor or Vice Mayor outside of the annual process as a result of vacancies or City Council discretion. If the role of Mayor becomes vacant, the Vice Mayor will serve as the Mayor in the interim until the City Council appoints a new Mayor. If there is a vacancy for Vice Mayor during their year of service, the City Council shall appoint a new Vice Mayor in accordance with this Section 9 SELECTION OF MAYOR AND VICE-MAYOR.
10.a
Packet Pg. 173 Attachment: Exhibit A: Proposed Revisions to City Council Rules and Code of Ethics (redline version) (6061 : Amendments to Mayor and Vice
8. Supermajority Vote Required to Deviate from Policy
Any deviation from the rules in this Section 9 SELECTION OF MAYOR AND VICEMAYOR must be made by a supermajority vote of the Councilmembers present.
Section 910. CLOSED SESSIONS
1. Purpose.
It is the policy of the City Council to conduct its business in public to the greatest extent possible. However, the City Council recognizes that, in certain limited circumstances, public discussion jeopardizes the public interest, compromises the City’s position, and could cost the taxpayers of Pacifica a significant amount of money. Therefore, these rules provide for strict confidentiality of City Council discussion in certain circumstances allowed by law.
2. Rule of Confidentiality.
The City Council recognizes that breaches in confidentiality can severely prejudice the City’s position in litigation, labor relations and real estate negotiations. Further, breaches of confidentiality can create a climate of distrust among Councilmembers and can harm the Council’s ability to communicate openly in closed sessions, thereby impairing the Council’s ability to perform its official duties.
The City Council further recognizes that confidentiality of discussions and documents are at the core of a closed session. Confidentiality is essential if the closed session is to serve its purpose. Therefore, the City Council will adhere to a strict policy of confidentiality of closed sessions.
In accordance with the Brown Act, the City Council agenda will contain a brief general description of the items to be discussed at the closed session. City Councilmembers will keep all written materials and verbal information provided to them in closed session in complete confidence to ensure that the City’s position is not compromised.
No mention of information in these materials will be made to anyone other than Councilmembers, the City Attorney or City Manager, except where authorized by a majority of the City Council or otherwise required by law.
3. Breach of Confidentiality.
No person who attends a closed session may disclose any statements, discussions, documents or votes made in a closed session except where specifically authorized by these rules. Any authorized disclosure will be in strict compliance with these rules and the Ralph M. Brown Act. Violation of this rule shall be considered a breach of this rule of confidentiality and subject to penalties as described in Item 8 below.
10.a
Packet Pg. 174 Attachment: Exhibit A: Proposed Revisions to City Council Rules and Code of Ethics (redline version) (6061 : Amendments to Mayor and Vice
4. Permissible Topics.
All closed sessions will be held in strict compliance with the Brown Act.
5. Scheduling Closed Sessions.
Subject to the advice of the City Attorney, a closed session may be called by the Mayor, by the City Attorney or by the City Manager.
6. Persons Permitted to Attend.
The City Council, City Manager and City Attorney, or their designees, may attend closed sessions unless it is necessary to excuse them for conflict of interest. Only such additional staff or attorneys shall attend as are necessary. The department head whose department is most directly affected by the topic of the closed session may also attend.
7. Rules of Decorum.
The same high standard of respect and decorum as applied to regular meetings shall apply to closed sessions. There shall be courtesy, respect and tolerance for all viewpoints and for the right of Councilmembers to disagree. Councilmembers shall strive to make each other feel comfortable that it is safe to express their points of view.
All Councilmembers have the right to insist upon strict adherence to this rule.
8. Penalties.
In addition to any penalties applicable under the Brown Act, violation of these confidentiality rules may be punishable by resolution of the Council censoring the person or persons responsible for the disclosure.
Section 1011. CITY COUNCIL RELATIONSHIP WITH CITY STAFF
1. City staff acknowledge that the Councilmembers are the City’s policy makers and the City Council acknowledges that staff administers the Council’s policies. The Council is the overall policy body and holds the City Manager responsible for the administration of the City departments.
The overall internal administration by the City Manager is necessary in order to assure efficient and economic operations of the various departments pursuant to the Council’s direction. The practices of each department are subject to review and approval by the City Manager.
2. The Council will direct staff only through the City Manager. If a written report or research from staff is requested, Council should go through the City Manager.
3. The City Manager shall inform all Councilmembers when written informational material has been requested by a Councilmember. Copies are not necessary unless requested by a Councilmember. City Councilmembers should contact the City Manager as early as possible if they desire to have any additional written material prior to a City Council meeting. If Councilmembers have questions, need clarification, or need additional material, Councilmembers will advise the City Manager as early as possible before a City Council meeting so that staff can meet their needs.
10.a
Packet Pg. 175 Attachment: Exhibit A: Proposed Revisions to City Council Rules and Code of Ethics (redline version) (6061 : Amendments to Mayor and Vice
4. Council will not attempt to coerce or direct staff in the performance of their duties.
5. Staff reports should be provided to the City Council as early as possible before a meeting but no later than Friday before the next City Council meeting. Staff reports will give professional input on the issue, including areas of potential controversy and concern, will try to present all sides of an issue, and will recommend areas for discussion and decision by the City Council.
6. Once a decision is made by Council, it will be fully supported, accepted and implemented by staff.
7. Any concerns by a Councilmember over the performance of a City employee should be discussed privately with the City Manager. City Councilmembers should not engage in personal attacks on staff in public.
Section 1112. ADMINISTRATIVE MATTERS
1. The full Agenda Packet is made available in print format at City Hall and at Council Chambers during the meeting.
2. Study sessions and closed sessions will be scheduled before City Council meetings as needed. Whenever feasible, the City Council will receive seven (7) days’ notice of the scheduling of a study session or closed session.
3. City Councilmembers acknowledge that attendance at lawful meetings of the City Council is part of their official duties. Councilmembers shall attend all such meetings unless unable to do so.
4. An individual Councilmember may agendize an item for a City Council meeting by contacting the City Manager. Items that may require less than two hours of staff time to prepare for Council consideration can be agendized for Council consideration and decision. Items that may require more than two hours of staff time to prepare for Council consideration will first be agendized for discussion and Council direction on next steps. Requests from Councilmembers to place an item on the agenda shall be made to the City Manager a minimum of ten (10) days before the next City Council meeting, except for items where the Mayor and City Manager have determined a time urgency exists.
5. If a member of the City Council represents the City before another governmental agency, or organization, the Councilmember will first indicate the majority position of the Council.
The Councilmember must fairly and objectively represent the majority views of the City Council even if his/her personal opinion differs. When appearing in a personal capacity, a Councilmember may express his/her personal opinions and comments only if the Councilmember clarifies that these statements do not represent the position of the City Council. Councilmembers shall notify the City Manager of planned attendance at meetings where possible City issues could be discussed even if
10.a
Packet Pg. 176 Attachment: Exhibit A: Proposed Revisions to City Council Rules and Code of Ethics (redline version) (6061 : Amendments to Mayor and Vice attending as a private citizen in order to avoid the inadvertent attendance of a majority of the Council in violation of the Brown Act.
6. Any written correspondence or other materials received by the City Manager for the City Council will be stamped with the date of receipt and distributed to the City Council. If Councilmembers get a letter addressed to them individually and they feel the letter is of general interest to the Council, a Councilmember should ask the City Manager to distribute it to other Councilmembers. Councilmembers may ask the Mayor or City Manager to respond to such a letter.
If Councilmembers receive an email addressed to them individually and they feel the email is of general interest to the Council, the Councilmember may forward the email to “[email protected]” to be considered with the written record of public comments for a City Council meeting or forward to the City Manager and ask the City Manager to respond to the email.
7. The Mayor will be the ceremonial spokesperson on behalf of the Council in all matters except if directed to a specific individual.
8. The Mayor will represent the Council’s position/policy even if his or her personal opinion is different or if the issue did not have a unanimous vote.
9. The Council will rely on the Mayor to act in a manner that is courteous and welcoming to the public at all times, even under pressure or during controversial issues.
10. If the Mayor is not available to represent the Council at a community event or meeting, the Vice Mayor or another Councilmember will be available as back-up or to help lighten the Mayor’s schedule.
11. Any Councilmember who is unable to attend a committee meeting for which they are the designated Council liaison must notify the alternate to that committee prior to the meeting.
10.a
Packet Pg. 177 Attachment: Exhibit A: Proposed Revisions to City Council Rules and Code of Ethics (redline version) (6061 : Amendments to Mayor and Vice