CITY OF PACIFICA
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA
Council Chambers
2212 Beach Blvd
Pacifica, CA 94044
Mayor Christine Boles
Vice Mayor Greg Wright
Councilmember Sue Beckmeyer
Councilmember Mary Bier
Councilmember Mayra Espinosa
City Council Regular Meeting 1 May 11, 2026
REGULAR MEETING
May 11, 2026 (MONDAY) – 6:00 PM
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 May 11, 2026
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 Espinosa
SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS
A. Special Presentation - Peninsula Clean Energy
B. Proclamation: Wildfire Preparedness Month - May 2026 C. Proclamation: Emergency Medical Services Week (May 17 - 23, 2026) D. Proclamation: National Public Works Week (May 17 - 23, 2026) E. Proclamation: Small Business Month - May 2026
CONSENT CALENDAR
Persons wishing to address the Council on any Consent Calendar item may do so at this time. Each speaker will be allotted three minutes. Those wishing to address the Council on any item listed on the agenda should submit a speaker card to the City Clerk.
Public meetings are a limited public forum, meaning that there are rules for commenting at these meetings. Comments on consent agenda items must relate to that specific item.
If comments do not relate to a specific agenda item, then City will provide you with an initial warning to stay on topic. If the warning is not followed, the Mayor will direct the City Clerk to cut off the microphone.
Items on the consent calendar will be adopted by one motion unless a Councilmember requests, before the vote on the motion, to have an item discussed. Time limit on comments is three minutes or less.
1. Approval of Disbursements for 4/1/26 through 4/30/26 PROPOSED ACTION: Receive and file the Monthly Check Register Report for the month of April 2026.
City Council Regular Meeting 3 May 11, 2026
2. Approval of Minutes
PROPOSED ACTION: Move to approve the minutes for the February 23, 2026 City Council Special and Regular Meeting.
3. Continuation of Proclamation of Local Emergency of the Pacifica Coastline from Westline Drive to the End of Beach Boulevard
PROPOSED ACTION: Accept report and make a determination that conditions of local emergency continue to exist within the Pacifica Coastline from Westline Drive to the end of Beach Boulevard.
4. 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.
5. Fourth Amended Joint Exercise of Powers Agreement which amends the name of Peninsula Clean Energy Authority to WestLight Energy, the new agency name approved by the Peninsula Clean Energy Authority Board of Directors on October 23, 2025.
PROPOSED ACTION: Adopt a Resolution approving the Fourth Amended Joint Exercise of Powers Agreement which amends the name of Peninsula Clean Energy Authority to WestLight, Energy the new agency name approved by the Peninsula Clean Energy Authority Board of Directors on October 23, 2025.
6. Quarterly Treasurer’s Report for the quarter ending March 31, 2026 PROPOSED ACTION: Review and accept the Quarterly Treasurer’s Report for the quarter ending March 31, 2026.
7. Adopt a list of projects for Fiscal Year 2026-27 funded by SB 1: Road Repair and Accountability Act of 2017.
PROPOSED ACTION: Adopt the Resolution of the City Council of the City of Pacifica Adopting a list of projects for Fiscal Year 2026-27 funded by SB 1: Road Repair and Accountability Act of 2017.
8. Approval of Consultant Services Agreement with BKF Engineers for Feasibility Study Services for the Oceana Bike Lanes Project
PROPOSED ACTION: Adopt the Resolution Approving the Consultant Services Agreement with BKF Engineers for feasibility study services for the Oceana Bike Lanes Project in the amount of $91,446 and authorize the City Manager to execute all documents related to the project.
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 City Council Regular Meeting 4 May 11, 2026
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
9. Presentation from San Mateo County Transit District (SamTrans) regarding SB 63 (Connect Bay Area Act) and the Local Investment Plan.
PROPOSED ACTION: Receive a presentation from San Mateo County Transit District (SamTrans) regarding SB 63 (Connect Bay Area Act) and the Local Investment Plan and provide further direction to staff, as desired.
10. Approve the updated City of Pacifica 2023 to 2030 Strategic Plan Mission, Vision, Values, Goals and Strategies
PROPOSED ACTION: Approve the updated City of Pacifica 2023 to 2030 Strategic Plan Mission, Vision, Values, Goals and Strategies.
11. Fiscal Year 2026-27 Base Budget and Introduction of the 2026-31 Capital Improvement Program
PROPOSED ACTION: Accept the report and provide feedback and direction on the proposed Fiscal Year 2026-27 Base Budget, and introduction of the FY 2026-31 Capital Improvement Program.
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.
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:
City Council Regular Meeting 5 May 11, 2026
[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 Christine Boles, [email protected]
• Vice Mayor Greg Wright, [email protected]
• Councilmember Sue Beckmeyer, [email protected]
• Councilmember Mary Bier, [email protected]
• Councilmember Mayra Espinosa, [email protected]
CITY OF PACIFICA
COUNCIL AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT
5/11/2026
1 SUBJECT:
Approval of Disbursements for 4/1/26 through 4/30/26
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Receive and file the Monthly Check Register Report for the month of April 2026.
STAFF CONTACT:
Lucy Xie, Deputy Finance Director
(650) 501-6014
[email protected]
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION:
Staff has submitted the following Monthly Check Register Report per California Government Code, Title 4, Division 3, Part 3, Chapter 3, Section 41004:
Disbursements dated 4/1/26 through 4/30/26 are in the amount of $1,517,340.23 (Attachment 1). There is no fiscal impact associated with acceptance of the Monthly Check Register Report.
ALTERNATIVE ACTION:
RELATION TO CITY COUNCIL GOALS AND WORK PLAN:
Approval of Monthly Check Register Report is consistent with the following Council adopted Goals:
· Enhance organizational and fiscal stability: Preparation of the Monthly Check Register Report supports sound financial oversight, transparency, and adherence to adopted fiscal controls. · Broaden public communications and collaboration: Filing of the Monthly Check Register Report promotes transparency and accountability in City financial operations.
FISCAL IMPACT:
There is no fiscal impact associated with acceptance of the Monthly Check Register Report.
ORIGINATED BY:
Finance Department
ATTACHMENT LIST:
Monthly Check Register Report April 2026 (PDF)
1 Packet Pg. 6
1.a
Packet Pg. 7
Attachment: Monthly Check Register Report April 2026 (6208 : Disbursements)
1.a
Packet Pg. 8
Attachment: Monthly Check Register Report April 2026 (6208 : Disbursements)
1.a
Packet Pg. 9
Attachment: Monthly Check Register Report April 2026 (6208 : Disbursements)
1.a
Packet Pg. 10
Attachment: Monthly Check Register Report April 2026 (6208 : Disbursements)
1.a
Packet Pg. 11
Attachment: Monthly Check Register Report April 2026 (6208 : Disbursements)
1.a
Packet Pg. 12
Attachment: Monthly Check Register Report April 2026 (6208 : Disbursements)
1.a
Packet Pg. 13
Attachment: Monthly Check Register Report April 2026 (6208 : Disbursements)
CITY OF PACIFICA
COUNCIL AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT
5/11/2026
1 SUBJECT:
Approval of Minutes
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Move to approve the minutes for the February 23, 2026 City Council Special and Regular Meeting.
STAFF CONTACT:
Sarah Coffey, City Clerk
650-738-7307
[email protected]
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION:
Move to approve the minutes for the February 23, 2026 City Council Special and Regular Meeting with edits indicated in the tracked changes (Attachment A).
FISCAL IMPACT:
Within budgeted operational expenses.
ORIGINATED BY:
City Clerk
ATTACHMENT LIST:
Attachment A: Minutes of 2-23-2026 City Council Special & Regular Meeting (PDF) 2 Packet Pg. 14
CITY OF PACIFICA
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
Council Chambers
2212 Beach Blvd
Pacifica, CA 94044
Mayor Christine Boles
Vice Mayor Greg Wright
Councilmember Sue Beckmeyer
Councilmember Mary Bier
Councilmember Mayra Espinosa
City Council Regular Meeting 1 February 23, 2026
SPECIAL AND REGULAR MEETING
February 23, 2026 (MONDAY)
www.cityofpacifica.org
Mayor Christine Boles called the study session to order on February 23, 2026 at 5:03 PM 5:00 PM - STUDY SESSION
Overview of Pacifica’s Economic Development Workplan and Activities.
PROPOSED ACTION: Accept the update on Pacifica’s Economic Development activities and workplan and provide additional direction to inform the upcoming strategic planning and budget development process.
Asst. City Manager Carter, Consultant Alex Greenwood, Economic & Housing Development Manager Heckman, and Management Analyst Corsetti completed the presentation.
Mayor Boles appreciated the signage done by the Economic Development Committee and asked if staff can talk about where work overlaps and where it does not and where Council might be able to direct some particular tasks to the Committee.
Asst. City Manager Carter stated that the wayfinding signage program came up in Economic Development Committee discussion and was not an originally budgeted project. The City took it over because there was some confusion on how it is executed and funded it as a pilot project in Sharp Park only. If there is further consideration of expanding the signage program, it may come back to Council for budget allocation and discussion, possibly as a Capital Improvement Project.
As far as the work plan for the Economic Development Committee, we usually have this discussion with the committee at the beginning of the fiscal year but can start this discussion sooner to align with the City’s Strategic Plan.
Mayor Boles opened public comment.
Pete Shoemaker, Pacifica, stated that this is an excellent plan, but the Chamber of Commerce was absent in it. He shared that he would join the Chamber of Commerce and expand their work and shared his thoughts on how the City and business would benefit if they became successfully functioning, like the Chamber of Commerce in Half Moon Bay.
Cindy Abbott, Pacifica, gave shoutouts to previous Economic Development Managers Ann Stedler and Thomas Myers and encouraged the City Council to revisit a 1% for the Arts program.
She also approved of the wayfinding signs and encouraged more signage in the City.
2.a
Packet Pg. 15
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of 2-23-2026 City Council Special & Regular Meeting (6210 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 2 February 23, 2026
Chris Redfield, Pacifica, shared his concerns about CalTrans not maintaining Highway One and thus obscuring signage and leading to public safety issues along the highway.
Kimberly Finale, Pacifica, referenced a public comment from a previous meeting regarding the lack of the cleanliness of the City and stated to encourage visitors the City needs to be inviting and clean. She also mentioned an article in the Coastside News on Half Moon Bay hiring a consultant to do their city staff restructuring and get an analysis of their city government.
Bryan Reinero, Pacifica, mentioned that the Zoom audio was cutting out.
Sam Casillas, Pacifica, shared his concerns on the City’s focus on residential development as the answer to the city’s structural deficit without a cost-of-service study. He emphasized the need for more commercial development, better metrics for the Economic Development Committee, and questions about the Chamber of Commerce’s role in the City.
Mayor Boles closed public comments.
City Manager Woodhouse stated that several of the speakers talked about Highway One, Caltrans, and signage. He stated Councilmembers were involved in meetings over years where we worked with Caltrans for improved signage on Highway One and that has been a difficult organization but there has been some improvement and room for improvement in the future.
Mayor Boles asked if that included maintenance of the medians and landscaping.
City Manager Woodhouse stated that the City has been working with CalTrans on all those issues as well.
Mayor Boles stated that it is getting close to 6:00 p.m., and she asked if we continue past 6:00 or stop and continue to another meeting.
Asst. City Attorney Bazzano stated it is Council’s discretion. If they have more to discuss, they can continue it to the end of the meeting or to a certain or uncertain future date or give direction or feedback to staff and it could be agendized for a future meeting.
Councilmember Bier gave a shoutout to EDC for their work on the signage. She referred to exploring internships and technology solutions to enhance social media presence and expand digital engagement capacity. She added that it might be a good idea to personalize the information going out by using community champions to be the messengers. She thinks there are many other areas in Pacifica that also need some attention.
Vice Mayor Wright disagreed with some of the public comments regarding statements about City staff and stated such comments dissuade people from wanting to do public service. He stated that it is easy to cast stones but hard to get stuff done.
Councilmember Beckmeyer thanked the Economic Development team for all their work. She concurred with Vice Mayor Wright regarding the negativity in public comments, which on some levels comes from frustration and exhaustion and there has been a desire for things for a long time. She appreciated the hopeful comments in the presentation about being positioned for action. She was excited to hear that Pete Shoemaker is joining the Chamber of Commerce board.
2.a
Packet Pg. 16
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of 2-23-2026 City Council Special & Regular Meeting (6210 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 3 February 23, 2026
Councilmember Espinosa appreciated the signage work done by EDC and would like to see more signage, especially on Manor intersection, and see Highway One maintained. She felt there are so many things to look at, such as cleaning the city, before we do anything. She hopes we can all work together toward that goal.
Mayor Boles had some suggestions that referenced some comments from the public. She knows the previous Economic Development Manager was working with Half Moon Bay in the Coastside Chamber and encouraged our team to reach out to them as well in order to capture tourists coming in regionally. She also shared that a Chamber of Commerce can be self-supporting if it is funded properly and hoped the board would be a big help to our limited staff. She was in support of the arts program as well and referenced a project in Millbrae with a similar grant opportunity for arts. We have a great art community here and that’s a great tie in supporting our businesses and our arts. The Economic Opportunity Study had a list of opportunities and timing, including experiential centers, and said there may be things like that that we can try to bring in and fill some of our large empty retails. She stated that the SamTrans Park and Ride lot was not on the priority list but that is also a Housing Element site for affordable housing. She thinks the affordable housing piece is important to economic development as we need places for people who do not earn high salaries to live and work in town. That site in the Housing Element is prioritized because it is a public site but it would also be a great site for a restaurant and bar on the roof with views of the ocean. We need more of that for residents and our visitors. She has talked to a lot of people about the concept of Blue Zones. She states what sets us apart is our coast and natural resources. She stated that there is an opportunity for partnership with the AgeFriendly people for drawing for longevity. It is something special we could be, not necessarily an official Blue Zone that you have to pay for, but as a way of identifying who we are, thinking about Native American tribes, the Quarry area, and our whales, and how do we capitalize and use what we have as the marketing terminology. She hears a lot of complaints from residents that they find out about events afterwards. She knows the Economic Development Committee has been talking about a calendar for awhile but she thinks that would be a great resource, whether it is official or not. We talked for a long time about Councilmembers walking in districts with Economic Development staff and meeting the businesses. She knows that is something she wanted to do for three years and she hoped we can start that now that we have staff. She encouraged temporary uses, such as food trucks, that can draw people in a region. She asked if there is an update on the Sharp Park Specific Plan because that will catalyze a lot of new development in Sharp Park with the Coastal Commission.
City Manager Woodhouse knows the Specific Plan has been submitted but we may not have heard back from Coastal Commission staff yet.
Mayor Boles stated that the Strong Towns event talked about trees and would love to see that looked at again. She knows the Beautification Advisory Committee may be looking at an Adopta-Tree program and there may be places where we can work across committees.
Vice Mayor Wright loves the idea of adding social media like some whale TV cameras. He wonders if EDC had a goal for how much increase they were thinking about in terms of sales tax revenue. He was wondering what additional staff’s accounts would take to help kick off the Sharp Park Specific Plan and what they could do to help further the goals of all that work that was done to develop that mixed use space. He sees that as being the future of what is going to make Pacifica sustainable. He wondered if the $15.4 million in the presentation included the VLF fees that we may not get next year or if that number is actually bigger.
Mayor Boles thanked everyone, adding that she loved the idea of doing this regularly.
2.a
Packet Pg. 17
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of 2-23-2026 City Council Special & Regular Meeting (6210 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 4 February 23, 2026
RESULT: NO VOTE REQUIRED
6:00 PM OPEN SESSION
Call to Order
Mayor Boles convened the regular meeting at 6:13 p.m.
Attendee Name Title Status Arrived
Christine Boles Mayor Present
Greg Wright Vice Mayor Present
Sue Beckmeyer Councilmember Present
Mary Bier Councilmember Present
Mayra Espinosa Councilmember Present
City Clerk Coffey took a verbal roll call.
Staff Present: Kevin Woodhouse, City Manager; Denise Bazzano, Asst. City Attorney; Yulia Carter, Asst. City Manager; Marisol Gómez, Finance and Administrative Services Director; Maria Sarasua, Police Chief; Melissa Tigbao, PW Director; Scott Leslie, PB&R Director; Gretchen Heckman, Economic and Housing Development Manager; Samantha Updegrave, Community Development Director; Michael Christensen, Community Development Dep. Director; Daniel Patten, PW Interim Dep. Director-Wastewater; Roland Yip, PW Dep. Director-Field Services/Engineering; Alyssa Corsetti, Management Analyst; Sarah Coffey, City Clerk; Emily La, Dep. City Clerk.
Reading of Land Acknowledgment
Mayor Boles read the Land Acknowledgment.
Salute to the Flag led by Councilmember Bier
SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS
Mayor Boles stated that it has been requested to change the order of agenda regarding Item #8.
Asst. City Attorney Bazzano clarified that it would be moving Item #8 before Item #7 on public hearing, so the item would be Item #7 and the public hearing would be Item #7A.
There were no public comments.
Vice Mayor Wright so moved; seconded by Councilmember Beckmeyer.
2.a
Packet Pg. 18
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of 2-23-2026 City Council Special & Regular Meeting (6210 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 5 February 23, 2026
REORDER ITEMS ON THE AGENDA (MOVE AGENDA ITEM #8 BEFORE AGENDA ITEM #7)
RESULT: ADOPTED [UNANIMOUS]
MOVER: Greg Wright, Vice Mayor
SECONDER: Sue Beckmeyer, Councilmember
AYES: Boles, Wright, Beckmeyer, Bier, Espinosa
A. Proclamation: Pacifica Sports Hall of Fame Week Feb. 23 - 28, 2026 Mayor Boles read the proclamation for Pacifica Sports Hall of Fame Week.
Horace Hinshaw, Pacifica, thanked her for the proclamation and commented that this is the 35th year of honoring over 175 athletes. He stated that, without the support of Pacifica, they could not go on, adding that they are the only one in San Mateo County that has City support and owns the City’s Sports Hall of Fame.
Councilmember Beckmeyer thanked him as he is an inspiration and looks forward to the event.
Councilmember Bier stated the event is so fun and they love him for it.
Vice Mayor Wright knows that sports is so much more than just playing games and is a big part of the learning experience and he gives them the recognition of the culmination of all those years of learning and he is a real tribute to this community.
Mayor Boles stated she is looking forward to the event on Saturday.
Mr. Hinshaw thanked them.
There were no public comments.
CONSENT CALENDAR
City Clerk Coffey stated there was a correction on Item #6, Memorandum of Understanding with the County of San Mateo for Participation in the Compost for Climate Solutions Program, on the resolution. On packet page 315, there were a few words missing in the resolution in the last clause of the resolution, “Be It Further Resolved that the City Manager or their designee is authorized to approve annual program authorization letters and funding contributions pursuant to the MOU, subject to the availability” and it gets cut off there and they should add the words, “of funds” to that sentence.
There were no public comments.
Mayor Boles requested some corrections to the minutes. She stated on page 32, in the middle of Director Yip’s paragraph, where it states “We lost some momentum by losing the BRIC grant that is $15 million,” that should be $50 million. Then, in the second paragraph on page 35, it says “Mayor Boles stated, besides the flooding, it is also a hazard” and it should state “Mayor Boles stated, besides the flooding, overtopping is also a hazard.” She added that she does not have the exact wording but at some point they were asking their consultant Aaron Holloway when the last time the Coastal Commission staff had been consulted about the sea wall and he made the point that it was before our new LCLUP was approved. She thinks that is important and suggested
2.a
Packet Pg. 19
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of 2-23-2026 City Council Special & Regular Meeting (6210 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 6 February 23, 2026
to add that in at the bottom of page 36 before it states “Consultant Holloway stated that is something we will work through as part of the CDP and what it will look like in the future”.
City Manager Woodhouse stated we will re-agendize the approval of minutes for the next meeting.
Vice Mayor Wright commended staff on the budget briefings and he was impressed with their depth of understanding of our financial situation.
Mayor Boles thanked him for saying that and thanked staff on doing a great job on our financial statements.
Councilmember Bier moved to approve the Consent Calendar, excluding Item #1, with Item #6 as amended; seconded by Councilmember Beckmeyer.
CONSENT CALENDAR (EXCLUDING CONSENT ITEM #1)
RESULT: ADOPTED AS AMENDED [UNANIMOUS]
MOVER: Mary Bier, Councilmember
SECONDER: Sue Beckmeyer, Councilmember
AYES: Boles, Wright, Beckmeyer, Bier, Espinosa
1. Approval of Minutes
PROPOSED ACTION: Move to approve the minutes for the January 12, 2026 City Council Special and Regular Meeting.
2. Pacifica Police Officers Association (PPOA) MOU Amendment for CalPERS Reporting Compliance
PROPOSED ACTION: Adopt the Resolution Approving an Amendment to the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between the City of Pacifica and the Pacifica Police Officers Association for the period of July 1, 2025 through June 30, 2028, and clarifying Longevity Pay provisions in prior MOUs for the period of July 1, 2007 through June 30, 2012 for California Public Employee’s Retirement System (CalPERS) reporting compliance.
3. Annual Comprehensive Financial Report (ACFR) for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2025 PROPOSED ACTION: Accept the City of Pacifica's Annual Comprehensive Financial Report (ACFR), Independent Auditor’s Report, and other related documentation for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2025.
4. Quarterly Financial Report for the General Fund for the quarter ending December 31, 2025 PROPOSED ACTION: Review and accept the Quarterly Financial Report for the General Fund for the quarter ending December 31, 2025
5. Quarterly Treasurer’s Reports for the quarter ending December 31, 2025 PROPOSED ACTION: Review and accept the Quarterly Treasurer’s Report for the quarter ending December 31, 2025.
6. Approval of Memorandum of Understanding with the County of San Mateo for Participation in the Compost for Climate Solutions Program
PROPOSED ACTION: Adopt a resolution entitled, "Resolution of the City Council of the City of Pacifica Approving the Memorandum of Understanding with the County of
2.a
Packet Pg. 20
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of 2-23-2026 City Council Special & Regular Meeting (6210 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 7 February 23, 2026
San Mateo for Participation in the San Mateo County Compost for Climate Solutions Program to Support Senate Bill 1383 Procurement Compliance."
PUBLIC COMMENTS ON ITEMS NOT ON THE POSTED AGENDA
Cindy Abbott, Pacifica, stated she wanted to bring an ongoing request about transparency related to STRs and shared how it is being handled differently from other cities. She also stated it is difficult for community members to report issues related to STRs and obtain issue resolution for those reports.
Sean Stack, Pacifica, stated he is part of a Pacifica non-profit, Pacifica Bicycle Park, and requested the City’s help to support their progress, especially in regards to the TOP survey.
Michael Malone, Pacifica, stated he is on the Board of Directors of Pacifica Resource Center and shared information on various programs, like the Tax Prep program and grocery distribution.
Lyla Reinero, Pacifica, echoed the comments on transparency, not just for STRs, and shared her concerns on 1987 Beach Blvd. as well as the pending retaining wall at 400 Belfast Ave.
Bryan Reinero, Pacifica, echoed everything Cindy Abbott and Lyla Reinero stated regarding transparency, and shared his concerns on the 1987 Beach Blvd. and the safety issue regarding the tree and slope at 400 Belfast Ave.
Sam Casillas, Pacifica, shared his concerns on a builder’s application for Shamrock Ranch and possible problems with providing sewage services to that development.
Caitlin Quinn, Pacifica, shared her concerns on 1987 Beach Blvd. and asked for more transparency on the investigation and help for the neighbors.
Mayor Boles closed public comments.
Vice Mayor Wright asked if there is an investigation on an STR if we lay out everything to the public to view.
Asst. City Attorney Bazzano stated it is not something we do for code enforcement matters. If someone were to make a public record request, we would provide those records subject to production related to the code enforcement matter that are not exempt.
City Manager Woodhouse stated for code enforcement violations as well as other criminal cases the City does not comment publicly on those. The notice of violation for cases is a public document and that has already been provided regarding 1987 Beach Blvd. particularly but, in terms of the case and the investigation, that is not something that is public until it is resolved and becomes public and the same goes for other activities. Transparency and due process are two incredibly important values and they need to be balanced.
Vice Mayor Wright thought sometimes they conflict with each other.
City Manager Woodhouse agreed.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
2.a
Packet Pg. 21
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of 2-23-2026 City Council Special & Regular Meeting (6210 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 8 February 23, 2026
7. Consideration of rezoning, development plan, and a specific plan, to allow for single family residential use for currently existing residential use and uses consistent with single family residential use in order to obtain a grading permit for the unpermitted grading that was subject to the Notice of Violation and a 400 sq. ft. detached carport at 650 Cape Breton Drive (APN 018-170-060, 022-320-200) (File No. 2022-037).
PROPOSED ACTION: Conduct a public hearing and: (1) introduce an Ordinance entitled “An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Pacifica approving Rezoning RZ-211-22 and Development Plan DP-87-22 to establish a Planned Development (P-D) zoning district with development plan;” (2) adopt a Resolution to approve Specific Plan SP-180-22 at 650 Cape Breton Drive (APN 018-170-060, 022-320-200); and (3) find the approval of the project exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines sections 15301(Class 1-“Existing Facilities”), 1504(Class 4-“Minor Alteration to Land”) and 15061(b)(3) (Common Sense Exemption).
Mayor Boles asked if there were any ex-parte communications or any conflict by Councilmembers.
Councilmember Beckmeyer stated there were no ex-parte communications with the owners.
Mayor Boles stated there were conversations with community members also.
Community Development Director Updegrave stated she is joined by Community Development Dep. Director Christiansen and Planning Commissioner Davis. She presented the staff report.
Mayor Boles referred to page 357 in the staff report and stated that this drawing shows the Hillside Preservation calculations as well as the uses of the various buildings. She stated that Nos. 9 and 10 are shown as single-family residences and she asked if No. 9 is being used as storage now.
Community Development Director Updegrave believes that is correct.
Mayor Boles asked, in the future, can this be used as a residence.
Community Development Director Updegrave believes it could be as it is a single family that is already existing and permitted, but is currently being used for storage.
Mayor Boles assumed, if they wanted to clear out the storage and have someone move in, it would not need to come back to staff or the Planning Commission for approval.
Community Development Director Updegrave does not believe so as it is an existing residential use that has been on the site for decades.
Mayor Boles asked if that was used as a residence, then it would need the covered parking also.
Community Development Director Updegrave stated that it is technically legally non-conforming without the covered parking. As part of the rezoning, staff was looking for more alignment with the HPD, hence the carport for the building that is actively being used as a single family and has been in continuous use as a single family.
Councilmember Espinosa asked if the storage is a residential zoning designation.
2.a
Packet Pg. 22
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of 2-23-2026 City Council Special & Regular Meeting (6210 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 9 February 23, 2026
Community Development Director Updegrave agreed, adding that it was built as a residential structure. It may require a building permit, but it is a residential occupancy building that was built and historically used as a single family.
Vice Mayor Wright stated, to the best of his knowledge, there were multiple bedrooms upstairs, a kitchen, living room, bathroom and, in the downstairs, the site of an old restaurant. He thought it is potentially still very viable for use as a residential structure.
Asst. City Attorney Bazzano referred to Director Updegrave’s confirmation that one of the parcels is zoned residential so it is appropriate that residential use take place in a residential zone.
Mayor Boles understood but she asked because HCD requires covered parking for residents and, if they are applying it for one, she is not sure why we are not applying it to the other. She referred to the HPD site coverage. It says zero, so no new development is allowed on the site.
Community Development Director Updegrave stated that it would require a variance.
Mayor Boles pointed out the arena building, No. 1, where there is no disturbance calculated. She referred to packet page 355. The area where the soil was moved goes beyond the HPD coverage.
Her reading of this is that this project and the illegal grading is a violation of HPD because they already are above their coverage maximum. The HPD ordinance, 9-4-2257, land coverage control, talks about what is included in that C-number coverage: “site coverage D shall include all areas of the site occupied or covered by building pavement and grading except recreation facilities and active recreation areas”. She does not see how Council could approve the grading without granting a variance as they exceeded their coverage.
Community Development Director Updegrave stated staff’s understanding is that these soils were relocated to areas that have already been disturbed.
Mayor Boles stated that is not part of the pictures or calculation.
Community Development Director Updegrave stated it was moved to along the perimeter of the covered arena. Staff spoke with NGO to confirm that the soil has been moved to the perimeter and these are areas that have been previously disturbed.
Asst. City Attorney Bazzano reaffirmed that Director Updegrave spoke with NGO to confirm and it was considered.
Mayor Boles stated disturbed in terms of land is different than disturbed in terms of construction and activity. What we are supposed to look at is the condition when the permit is applied for.
She stated that it was open land and they additionally disturbed it by putting the soil outside the arena, which is her understanding from looking at these pictures.
Vice Mayor Wright stated, looking at those pictures, he would agree with her, but he would also agree with staff’s interpretation from practical reality from having been there 20 years ago.
Mayor Boles stated that the disturbance happened as a result of their illegal work.
Vice Mayor Wright understands that, but that was a previously disturbed area.
Mayor Boles stated that we can go back to the HPD and she just wanted to clarify that question.
2.a
Packet Pg. 23
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of 2-23-2026 City Council Special & Regular Meeting (6210 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 10 February 23, 2026
Mayor Boles opened the public hearing and invited the Applicant to speak.
Applicant Bernard Daos referred to when the Church of Christ became the owner of the property in Pacifica. They bought the property in 2020 during the COVID-19 pandemic and their intention in every community where they establish congregations, houses of worship, etc. was to bring services to the community. This was evident when they reached out and had a project with Terra Nova Education Foundation and the Church of Christ donated $10,000 and resources to help with all of the needs of the Pacifica School District during that challenging time. They are here tonight because of actions taken in 2021 of a project manager that was overseeing their project. They want to state for the record that, when the leadership and administration of their church came to be aware of that project manager’s action, not only was he removed but he is also no longer a member of their organization. Thus, through the order that was issued and all the work that has been done, working with City staff, they have been trying to remedy the situation. There is good faith effort to correct things that happened in the past. They want to take the opportunity to thank City staff, to continue to work with them, and they hope they are able to comply with everything the City is asking of them. The application is not something they planned or recommended but is following the instructions of the City so they can comply with the laws and ordinance. They hope to work with the community and serve their needs.
Mayor Boles thanked him for explaining that this was not intentional and they have made corrections within their organization. She assumes they want to fix this issue and whatever is needed to rectify the legal grading. She asked if rezoning, carports, and other details are important to him or the church to happen as part of this process.
Mr. Daos stated that what is important to the administration of the Church is to prove to the community that they respect the community and everything that has been asked of them. If the carport is important for them to comply with the City’s instructions, then it is important for them.
Mayor Boles asked if the matter of the rezoning was important as well.
Mr. Daos stated what is important to them is whatever the instruction is by the City so they can comply with the order. He stated they respect the community and residents and thank the City for giving them the opportunity to rectify what is needed.
Vice Mayor Wright stated that Mr. Daos is looking to make amends. He appreciated staff trying to work with an antiquated code system that did not properly consider this. They have a quandary, and Mr. Daos is interested in collaborating to get to a solution that gets everybody what they need.
Mr. Daos stated that is their position.
Councilmember Espinosa stated that the community thinks that they might want to do something else and Council wants to hear from him if it is their plan to do something else.
Mr. Daos stated that what is in the staff report is perfectly clear. Any other future development or variation would need to come back before Council and community once again. He does not have the authority to make any decisions. However, because of everything that has transpired and the time, effort, and resources their organizations have been spent, they are looking at alternatives.
Councilmember Espinosa reiterated they are trying to fix the problem and that is it. They are not hoping to do anything else on that project.
2.a
Packet Pg. 24
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of 2-23-2026 City Council Special & Regular Meeting (6210 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 11 February 23, 2026
Mr. Daos stated, if they would put the property up for sale because of the order, they would be seriously disadvantaged by presenting it to anyone and not disclosing the current condition. If they can work with the City to remove that and show that they comply and satisfy the order, they can be made whole if they look to dispose of the property to move on to another project. He stated, at this moment and for this application, they have no other plans but to fix this order.
Mayor Boles stated that, for clarification, Council is processing the application before us and we cannot require them to tell us what they might be planning in 20 years.
Mr. Daos stated they know it is a concern of the community, so they want to be forthcoming.
Mayor Boles opened public comments.
Lori Yap, Pacifica, suggested to remove the retroactive grading permit requirement and thereby remove the rezoning, carport, and other changes to the property. She stated this proposal undermines the community’s desire to keep the current zoning on the property. She opposed approving the proposal without knowing the full scope of the future usage for the property.
Mark Hubbell, Pacifica, expressed his frustration with access to the trails through the property.
He stated the Church would open access to the trail, but approving the plan would cut the community off entirely. He opposed approving the plan.
Lisa Funkhouser, Pacifica, shared her concerns on the problems connected to this issue as an adjacent property owner and the cost of damages to their home and opposed approving this item.
Trent Wakenight, Pacifica, shared his concerns on a situation that happened in February 2022 as well as other negative interactions of INC with neighbors over time and asked for an extensive evaluation of this owner’s plans.
Joy Hitzeman, Pacifica, understood the concerns about conducting a mega church in the neighborhood and thought the best solution was for them to sell the property but they also need the permits.
Kathy Moresco, Pacifica, shared her positive thoughts about past ownership and her concerns regarding many existing problems with this new ownership and she opposed approving permits for them to move forward.
Kelly Moresco, Pacifica, shared her experiences growing up and working with the previous owners and her concerns about the present owners and their intentions for the property. She asked that the City listen to the neighbors and allow the property to return to being stables.
Eric Edhammer, Pacifica, shared his concerns on the soil problem and problems if the church moves forward. He opposed approval of this item.
Clif Lawrence, Pacifica, shared concerns about the Church’s trespasses against the community and opposed approval of this item. He suggested granting this item at the escrow closing when they sell the property.
2.a
Packet Pg. 25
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of 2-23-2026 City Council Special & Regular Meeting (6210 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 12 February 23, 2026
Richard Zuromski, Pacifica, shared his concerns on the approval on a prior illegal action and possible standards set for future approvals for use of the site. He emphasized the disruption to the neighborhood regarding traffic, noise, etc.
Dinah Verby, Pacifica, asked for more evidence of staff’s interpretation of the HPD coverage ordinance. She considered this issue as an abatement of a violation, not as a development.
Kimberly Finale, Pacifica, mentioned that this area is ecologically sensitive and inappropriate for an event center.
Mayor Boles invited the Applicant for a rebuttal period.
Mr. Daos heard many of the concerns asked to consider the actions of the Church since they have been working hand in hand with City staff. He stated that the application now is the instruction of the City to comply with the ordinance. They respect the community and will do their best to show that and approve that going forward.
Mayor Boles asked if he had a response to the public comment concerning flooding damage.
Asst. City Attorney Bazzano stated that is not before Council this evening. She stated that the applicant can answer the question if he desires. That is not an issue before Council but a private matter between them and the resident.
Mr. Daos stated he had no personal knowledge of that, but he would like to extend an olive branch and say he would like to discuss it with her if she is willing to.
Vice Mayor Wright asked if the applicant is aware that this whole process has cost the City more in terms of staff time and money than what the permit fees were.
Mr. Daos stated that they are aware and their Church has expended significant resources to fix the problem they created. Mr. Daos wholeheartedly thanked staff for their hard work. If there is another way they can clear the violation, they are all ears and open.
Mayor Boles closed the public hearing. She invited staff to respond to comments.
Community Development Director Updegrave wanted to reiterate that there is no proposed changes of use with this application. It is the rezoning Development Plan and Specific Plan required in order for the owner to obtain the retroactive grading permit.
Asst. City Attorney Bazzano stated that there were a number of comments requesting that the applicant provide some sort of indication of what their future development will be at this site and that is not something that the City can demand of an applicant. Council needs to consider is what is before Council this evening. The application plans are speculative and any future development of the property is speculative at this point. The Council needs to consider the application that is before them for the retroactive grading permit. She reiterated that this process was as a result of code enforcement action by the City. The City indicated to the property owner that there was a violation and the way to correct the violation was to obtain a retroactive grading permit. As Director Updegrave mentioned, because the property is located in the HPD, based on staff’s interpretation of the HPD ordinance, that required a rezoning, a General Development Plan preparation, and Specific Plan preparation. All of these steps the applicant has taken is because City staff believe
2.a
Packet Pg. 26
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of 2-23-2026 City Council Special & Regular Meeting (6210 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 13 February 23, 2026
that the only way to rectify the grading was to obtain a retroactive grading permit; because it is in the HPD, there were all these other steps that needed to occur before that permit could be issued.
Councilmember Beckmeyer referred to packet page 326, Numeral 2, the Hearing Officer’s requirements. One of the things was limiting the use of the covered arena to its occupancy classification and subject to the approval of the Building Official. She does not know what the use of the covered arena occupancy classification is.
Community Development Director Updegrave believes they were holding events within the arena and that structure has not been reviewed for that type of occupancy. There may be different code requirements based on what the occupancy of a structure is.
Asst. City Attorney Bazzano stated that there is in the packet a letter from the City Attorney’s Office, starting at packet page 574, issued February 25, 2022, to INC that speaks to the sports events that occurred on the February 13, 2022; that letter indicates that the covered arena is classified as a Group U for utility and miscellaneous and the category U includes building and structures of an accessory character and miscellaneous structures not classified in any specific occupancy including agricultural buildings and that INC has hosted an event that was not consistent with that Group U classification. The City Attorney’s Office sent a letter indicating that was contrary to the Hearing Officer’s order. Since that time, she is not aware of any further violations occurring on the property of a misuse of classification.
Councilmember Beckmeyer asked if there was currently a permit for the property once INC took possession.
Asst. City Attorney Bazzano stated she is not aware of any use permit for the property.
Community Development Director Updegrave stated there was an application that was withdrawn.
Asst. City Attorney Bazzano stated that any development application that was submitted and withdrawn is not before Council at this point. It sounds like they did submit a special use permit or some type of discretionary permit but that was withdrawn.
Councilmember Beckmeyer concluded it was withdrawn prior to going through that process.
Community Development Director Updegrave responded affirmatively.
Mayor Boles referred to the classification for assembly, anything over 49 people, is an A occupancy. The calculation is not allowed to be 102 because the building is not designed with the right fire grading, etc., for an assembly occupancy over 49 people. It is not allowed to be used as that.
Vice Mayor Wright was uncomfortable with what they have seen in terms of zoning and the State stepping in and insisting we build more housing and taking away and mandating less local control.
If we grant the zoning change, we diminish the restrictions of HPD in even the slightest way or, if the State sees it and comes down later and says in PD zones, because you changed it from HPD, now you lose more local control if we do not build the right amount, he feels uncomfortable with that in the future and setting that precedence or appearance or real granting of a benefit for doing something wrong. He asked if we were to continue this and, if the applicant was agreeable to it, do they think there would be any benefit to the two of them having the opportunity to work
2.a
Packet Pg. 27
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of 2-23-2026 City Council Special & Regular Meeting (6210 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 14 February 23, 2026
something out that would allow the property to remain in the existing zoning and still get some way through a collaborative effort for them to make amends for what they did.
Community Development Director Updegrave clarified that the HPD overlay is not proposed for removal and the proposed rezoning would be PD with an HPD overlay. She stated, in terms of alternative pathways, staff has examined this based on what is in the Municipal Code, and it appears to require the rezoning and the subsequent permit.
Asst. City Attorney Bazzano stated that Director Updegrave is correct this has been discussed at the Planning Commission as well, with potential alternatives.
Vice Mayor Wright stated that staff cannot change the code, but Council can.
Asst. City Attorney Bazzano stated he is correct. Staff’s interpretation is that this is development under the HPD and, if it is development under the HPD, grading requires all of these things.
Vice Mayor Wright asked if we can make a finding that it is not and is it within Council’s purview.
Asst. City Attorney Bazzano stated that it is within Council’s purview to decide to take a different interpretation than staff.
Councilmember Bier appreciated the simplicity. She asked if this is the only way we can do this.
She wants to hear from Commissioner Davis a summary of the Planning Commission.
Planning Commissioner Davis stated that this came before PC twice. At the last meeting, there were five commissioners present and they all voted for recommending denial. The two overarching concerns expressed by the Commission were that they did not want the applicant to benefit from the situation that was created by grading being done without a permit and one commissioner referred to that as rewarding a violation. They also agreed that rezoning the PD would be a beneficial outcome and they were all opposed to the PD rezone. It almost felt like the project was created around the zoning which was an element of the project in order to get this accomplished. They asked, as indicated by City Attorney and Director Updegrave, that they look at some alternatives, which is one of the outcomes of the first meeting. Several voiced the opinion that a variance seemed logical. The variance option is something they thought should be explored closely and they could take care of the unpermitted grading and yet not have to rezone the PD.
Councilmember Bier thanked her and agreed.
Councilmember Espinosa suggested to send the proposal back to Planning to find an administrative solution, like a variance, to solve this issue.
Vice Mayor Wright asked to confirm the response to a potential opportunity with the applicant’s agreement to try to resolve something.
Community Development Director Updegrave’s understanding is that staff would need direction from Council to do something different.
Asst. City Attorney Bazzano thinks staff is happy to do whatever Council directs, but the problem will inevitably be that it comes back with code requirements that are legal constraints and the applicant has filed an application for these legislative acts.
2.a
Packet Pg. 28
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of 2-23-2026 City Council Special & Regular Meeting (6210 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 15 February 23, 2026
Vice Mayor Wright asked what if we open up a new classification of permitting with the HPD overlay and said that it is an NOV abatement permit.
Asst. City Attorney Bazzano thinks he is referring to amending the HPD ordinance.
Vice Mayor Wright asked if that would require a vote of the people.
Asst. City Attorney Bazzano responded affirmatively.
Vice Mayor Wright asked if there is some other way and would staff and the applicant both benefit trying to figure out a way around this issue.
Mayor Boles agreed with the Planning Commission that she cannot make the findings. She also referred to the permitting of the grading. As seen in the plan, the place where the soil was moved was not considered disturbed/coverage in the application and Council are being asked to approve grading in an area where they have zero coverage allowed. If Council granted a permit for grading, that would require a variance. She referred to a response from a previous Planning Director:
“What happens if the site has previously been graded or otherwise disturbed? Article 22.5 does not address situations where a site is no longer in its natural state. The City has approached the situation by applying the HPD coverage control to the project site in its condition at the time of the development application unless the City has a record of prior HPD approval.” She stated that the HPD calculations do not show the area outside of the arena as being coverage. She asks if we have any record that shows that it was previously approved disturbance.
Community Development Director Updegrave stated that staff interpretation is that this is a disturbed area where the covered arena and the areas where it was moved. Therefore, staff does not believe that this is considered new coverage.
Mayor Boles stated that the application and the drawings do not show that as previously disturbed.
Here they have disturbed an area beyond their building and the definition. It is not paved. HPD also says areas that are not considered coverage shall remain in their natural state. By putting the soil there, it did not remain in its natural state. She respectfully disagreed and she does not think Council can approve this permit. She agreed with other councilmembers that we need to find a way around this. The intent of HPD is to protect our steep hillsides from excessive grading and try to leave things in a natural state, not develop more than we need to. Moving soil out of an area under a roof on a flat ground is not covered in principle by the ordinance. She knows we are looking at the letter of the law, but she thinks we have to look at the spirit of the law. She agreed with Chair Hauser that we should not be allowing rezoning for people doing work illegally. She cannot make these findings and cannot approve this, and she would hope to send it back to the City Attorney to try to find a creative solution to resolve the illegal work.
Asst. City Attorney Bazzano thinks it sounds like there is some question as to how development is interpreted. If there are some questions that Council wants to ask staff about potentially how that term has been used in the past for other HPD projects or what the legislative history is on how that term has been applied to projects in the HPD, she is sure staff will be happy to look at that and, if Council wants to continue the matter, we can come back with that information. As she mentioned, whether the applicant is willing to discuss things with staff does not negate the fact that we have an application that is pending before Council and staff interpretation is that essentially the code does not allow for any other process besides rezoning the planned development and the general development.
2.a
Packet Pg. 29
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of 2-23-2026 City Council Special & Regular Meeting (6210 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 16 February 23, 2026
Vice Mayor Wright suggested that the size of footings outside the covered arena is approximately three feet across. That extends out into the area that is represented on the map. He asked if that is a benefit that allows the City to negotiate with the applicant.
Councilmember Bier also asked for the difference between sending it back to City Attorney vs.
Planning Commission.
Mayor Boles reopened the public hearing.
Mr. Daos stated that they are ready to work with City staff and residents to resolve this situation.
Mayor Boles closed the public hearing. She thinks it is more a question for staff and legal as the Planning Commission has asked these questions and were not able to get the answers that they wanted and why they voted to deny the project.
Councilmember Espinosa thought we have to be careful when discussing interpretations and thought we need to revisit them.
Mayor Boles called for a break.
Asst. City Attorney Bazzano stated it sounded like there is an interest in continuing this item and, if Council wants staff to look at some questions, such as what interpretation of development is, etc., staff would be happy to look at that.
Mayor Boles thought that would be a good path forward as she thinks it is clear that Council would rather not have to do the rezoning which seems inappropriate for the work that was done. She asked if we need to continue it to a date certain or uncertain.
Asst. City Attorney Bazzano stated continuing it to a date uncertain.
Mayor Boles asked if it means it will be a full hearing again with public comment again.
Asst. City Attorney Bazzano stated that Council closed the public hearing and no further public comment would be required if they are considering the same substantive issues, but it is within Council’s discretion to reopen the public hearing.
Mayor Boles mentioned someone said that there were some church services happening in the homes with 8-10 cars or so. She asked if that is permitted currently under the existing zoning for a single-family resident.
Councilmember Beckmeyer asked if she was talking about home occupation.
Asst. City Attorney Bazzano stated that they are entitled to home occupational use and they can have gatherings like anybody in a residential home.
Mayor Boles stated worship services are not prohibited but, when it becomes a larger gathering, what is the cutoff for it to become something that is not permitted.
Asst. City Attorney Bazzano was not sure that the City has any sort of regulations that delineates what a church service is. She has not heard of any complaints relating to the property in the last one or two years.
2.a
Packet Pg. 30
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of 2-23-2026 City Council Special & Regular Meeting (6210 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 17 February 23, 2026
Vice Mayor Wright stated he has heard complaints.
Mayor Boles knows they are in a hard position. She read that Planning Commission asked about the easement for the trail and there were public comments about that at this meeting. She understands that there is not a formal easement but, legally, if a trail is open and the public is using it for a certain amount of time, something could be a prescriptive easement. She asked if we could look at if there is a possibility for reopening that trail.
Asst. City Attorney Bazzano stated that staff looked at whether there was any recorded easements, but there is no such easement. She does not know whether there is a prescriptive easement or not, as there are legal requirements. That is not up to the City to decide but between members of the public who are asserting that right and the property owners.
Mayor Boles concluded it will be something for the public to research and document.
Asst. City Attorney Bazzano stated staff provided an answer on whether there was any type of recorded easements against the property and the answer was no.
Community Development Director Updegrave stated she would have to research information about gatherings.
Councilmember Beckmeyer moved to continue this matter to a date uncertain; seconded by Mayor Boles.
CONTINUE AGENDA ITEM #7 TO DATE UNCERTAIN
RESULT: ADOPTED [UNANIMOUS]
MOVER: Sue Beckmeyer, Councilmember
SECONDER: Christine Boles, Mayor
AYES: Boles, Wright, Beckmeyer, Bier, Espinosa
CONSIDERATION
8. Resolution Authorizing Master Agreement for Consultant Services and Task Order No. 1 with Woodard Curran for Consulting Services for the Wastewater Facilities Master Plan Project
PROPOSED ACTION: Adopt a Resolution approving a Master Agreement for Consultant Services and Task Order No. 1 with Woodard and Curran for consulting services in the amount of $699,142 for the Wastewater Facilities Master Plan Project; Approve budget authority in the amount of $769,057 which includes 10% contingency in the amount of $69,915; and Authorize the City Manager to execute all documents related to the project.
PW Director Tigbao and PW Acting Dep. Director Daniel Patten presented the staff report. They were joined by Consultants Gregory Sands of Woodard & Curran and Bryan Burnitt of Carollo Engineers.
Vice Mayor Wright knows we are working on replacing the solar eventually at the plant and he wondered if we plan on expanding that or if there ways we can do more panels on pump station.
2.a
Packet Pg. 31
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of 2-23-2026 City Council Special & Regular Meeting (6210 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 18 February 23, 2026
He appreciated that we have solar panels, but what are we doing to make that more energy independent.
PW Interim Dep. Director Patten stated that today we got back the two-year agreement with a consultant to upgrade our existing solar array which will potentially double our existing generation capacity. In the future, we will be looking into additional sources of energy generation.
Consultant Sands stated for this specific plan in that criteria stage, energy efficiency will be part of that. Pacifica has a track record of doing this with the Wastewater facilities. When we consider what we can do to modify those, we will also look at opportunities to increase efficiency, redundancy, and look out alternative supplies if that is viable.
Vice Mayor Wright stated, when we review our payouts, there are large PG&E numbers and he appreciated that they are addressing some of that concern. He would also like to hear a little bit about how to consider future growth in plans.
Consultant Sands stated that they will also be working with the Planning Department. As part of the flow and loads updates, which will largely look at historical trends and try to see where both average uses are but also those peak events where you might see high I & I and things that you need to be considering for their worst case scenario, they will also be looking to see where they think they might have additional flows coming into the plant. In terms of the evaluation, he thinks the idea is not to change the plant’s rating in any way. In theory, the design facility should not meet the growth that had been projected long term, but they are seeing some inefficiencies with the current process and they want to look for ways that they can either optimize the existing sequencing batch reactors (SBRs) or add some sort of optimization enhancement to them. That compounded with these more extreme events are causing a capacity crunch.
Vice Mayor Wright asked, when they say more extreme events, if they are talking more frequent 100-year storms or what level.
Consultant Sands stated it is specifically the intensity of the storms that they are worried about.
Even if it is a 15-minute or 30-minute duration event, they want to make sure the facilities are as well-equipped as reasonable and as they can afford to handle those. The facility has been doing a great job trying to attenuate those events but sometimes it means that the performance in terms of the water quality is not as high as they would like to see. They want to make sure we are providing the same level of service through as many of these events as possible.
Vice Mayor Wright appreciated their attempts to handle multiple variables in order to get what is best for our community.
Councilmember Beckmeyer is looking at packet page 680 and she has a question about Task
3.4, Stormwater Pump Station Condition Assessment and Recommended Projects. She stated that the proposal outlines the methodology, including staff interviews, visual inspections, etc. She stated that we have lost some key staff members to other cities in recent years who were very knowledgeable about our system and she wonders if it is outside the bounds of normal to reach out to key former staff who may be able to weigh in on some of this.
City Manager Woodhouse stated that is outside of what is normal. He thinks our historic record and the institutional knowledge that the department has should be able to cover that. Those people are no longer City employees and input from them, if they were to give input, would need to be as a member of the public, not as a member of staff.
2.a
Packet Pg. 32
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of 2-23-2026 City Council Special & Regular Meeting (6210 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 19 February 23, 2026
Asst. City Attorney Bazzano added that the City is supposed to have the universe of information about its facilities, processes, etc., and going outside to members of the public creates other levels of complexity as they may bring their biases or specific issues they may have for or against the City in their responses. They are also members of the public who are not required to respond.
Councilmember Beckmeyer understood, adding that if there was any desire or need on the part of anyone to weigh in who is no longer employed here, it would come at the end of the process during the presentations with public comment.
City Manager Woodhouse stated it depends on how and at what phase public input is being sought in the project.
PW Acting Dep. Director Patten stated as far as past staff, a number of those who left the City have downloaded quite a bit of knowledge to existing staff so he believes we will be sufficient with our in-house knowledge.
Councilmember Beckmeyer stated, in terms of public comment on the process, is that built in at any point or just when the final presentation is given to Council.
PW Interim Dep. Director Patten stated it is his understanding that it is the final presentation given to Council.
Councilmember Beckmeyer assumed under Task 6, final report and 20-year project roadmap.
PW Acting Dep. Director Patten responded affirmatively.
Councilmember Beckmeyer thought, from what she saw on the slides, that is happening in Q4.
PW Acting Dep. Director Patten stated ideally yes.
Councilmember Beckmeyer thought maybe there will be another member of the public coming forward if after Q4. She has a question on packet page 680, stating City Manager and she discussed the optional stormwater station relocation analysis. That was in regard to planning for 2212 Beach Blvd. In the future work laid out that we are doing on a Coastal Resilience Plan, our Adaptation Plan, etc., and her question is if this is the place where we need to ask for that optional to happen. She stated that the Sharp Park Pump Station is not listed and she does not know if that is a separate optional or folded into this project.
City Manager Woodhouse thought it might have a different name and he believes it is included.
PW Acting Dep. Director Patten responded affirmatively.
PW Director Tigbao stated it is included as a part of this to analyze the pump station.
Councilmember Beckmeyer stated that on Task 3.3 on packet page 679 there is the relocation analysis. She asked how that is different from 3.4.
Consultant Sands stated that it is bifurcated so wastewater facilities are going to be looked at as discrete issues as they have related conveyance which is different from the storm water
2.a
Packet Pg. 33
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of 2-23-2026 City Council Special & Regular Meeting (6210 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 20 February 23, 2026
conveyance. There are five pump stations that will be looked at on the wastewater basis and two on the stormwater basis.
Mayor Boles appreciated that this work will be starting and helping us with our climate adaptation work. She asked what time period of climate change and what impacts are they looking at, i.e. immediate high scenarios or increasing storms and convergence with king tides. She asked what the scope and determining factor they are looking at.
Consultant Sands stated that would occur in the criteria development phase of the project. There are workshops incorporated as part of this where they want to integrate with other departments to try to see what their latest and best thinking is for this planning and whether it is appropriate to be staffing these discrete things or treating them as individual events. Trying to come up with those appropriate scenarios that will be the critical subpoints for determining whether or not the station is able to maintain the level of service that you want it to do or in its current location is not able to meet that level of service. Being so close to water for a lot of these pump stations is compounded as you have the effect of the hillsides which create a lot of high I & I and you also have the proximity to the ocean where you have sea level rise, potential tsunamis, king tides, etc.
Making sure they stack those appropriately at the criteria stage is what they want to do as a group.
Mayor Boles asked, in terms of Council and public input on any of that, it is not until it comes before them.
Consultant Sands stated there are interim deliverables as part of this project and if Council would like reports on the interim deliverables as they are developed, they can do that.
Mayor Boles thinks that would be great as they will be working on their adaptation planning and these are issues that are important to our community. She noticed they will be looking at some alternate locations. She knows that is difficult and he mentioned they were looking at available land. She stated that we do not have too much available land and she asked if there were certain times when they might say all the sewers converge here and this location might be the best and maybe they have to look at eminent domain or redevelopment of something.
Consultant Sands stated, from a planning perspective, they try to avoid those situations, but if Council wants them to broaden out they will look at other City-owned lots. He thinks a high level planning document can be pretty sensitive to identify specific parcels and propose something there when it is conceptual. They would not want to convey any sort of certainty with that.
Mayor Boles understands but she thinks, as we are looking at long-term planning and we have all this development potentially coming up, it might be good for them to know.
Consultant Sands agreed that they could be broad and he thought there were always opportunities for creativity. It is the rate payers that are using these services and paying for these services and they want to make sure it is something they are supportive of.
Councilmember Beckmeyer agreed and stated that is why we are acting on these questions. She stated that we do not get to do this very often in Pacifica and that is why this is critical.
There were no public comments.
2.a
Packet Pg. 34
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of 2-23-2026 City Council Special & Regular Meeting (6210 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 21 February 23, 2026
Mayor Boles attended OneShoreline, our San Mateo County flood and sea level rise resiliency district meeting, and they hired a consultant to work on guidance for all 20 cities in the County for resilient public infrastructure. She encouraged them to work with and talk with OneShoreline.
Councilmember Beckmeyer moved to adopt the resolution approving the agreement as stated in the packet; seconded by Vice Mayor Wright.
RESULT: ADOPTED [UNANIMOUS]
MOVER: Sue Beckmeyer, Councilmember
SECONDER: Greg Wright, Vice Mayor
AYES: Boles, Wright, Beckmeyer, Bier, Espinosa
9. Adoption of Resolution Ratifying Denial of Appeal of Planning Commission’s Decision and Approving Site Development Permit PSD-838-18 and Tree Removal Permit TP-4-24, Subject To Conditions, For The Construction of an Approximately 3,180-Square Foot (Sf) Single-Family Residence With An Approximately 668-Sf Attached Three-Car Garage And Associated Improvements On An Approximately 26,055-Sf, Undeveloped Lot Located Approximately 330 Feet East-Northeast Of The Intersection Of Rockaway Beach Avenue And Bay View Road (APN 022-062-550).
PROPOSED ACTION: Adopt Resolution Ratifying Denial of Appeal and upholding Planning Commission’s CEQA Determination and approval of Site Development Permit PSD-838-18 and Tree Permit TP-4-24.
Community Development Director Updegrave presented the staff report.
Mayor Boles stated, when the motion was made at the last meeting, she did not realize part of the motion was voting to deny the appeal. She knows Council did not deliberate on the conditions on the appeal items and they just went through the project questions and the COAs. She stated staff confirmed that Council is allowed to deliberate tonight and, if that results in any changes to the resolution, that is something we can bring back to the next meeting. The other point she was confused about was the problems with the renderings and the plans. She heard the majority of Council ask for the renderings to be brought back and she thought they were coming to this meeting. If any Councilmembers feel that was important to their decision-making or understanding of the project, she wants to open that up again. She stated that City Attorney Kenyon specifically said we cannot use renderings to apply other conditions that are not objective. She thinks it is hard to understand these detailed grading plans and to know what they are approving and for the community to understand the project and its impact.
Councilmember Espinosa stated the applicant said the sloping grade is 49.23% and she saw a public comment saying that the building site is 56%. She visited the site and noticed that the property next to the driveway is in distress. She stated that there is another property on the other side with stress there. It is very steep, and she is concerned about the house next door to the driveway. The fence on the other side of the lot is tilting toward the driveway and she knows the people who own the house on the other side are concerned. She does not know much about the elevation and the grading but she does not know what the approval cutoff is.
Mayor Boles saw that public comment where the drawing said something but the geotechnical report said something else about the average slope. She does not think, other than HPD, we have a maximum slope by which they don’t approve projects, but she asked staff to confirm.
2.a
Packet Pg. 35
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of 2-23-2026 City Council Special & Regular Meeting (6210 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 22 February 23, 2026
Community Development Director Updegrave stated she was correct.
Asst. City Attorney Bazzano wanted to clarify that what is before Council tonight is the potential resolution ratifying the denial of the appeal and the amended conditions of approval that were previously discussed. Her understanding is that the public hearing at the last meeting was closed and what is before Council tonight is whether or not to ratify that resolution with the amended conditions of approval that have been prepared by staff, not revisiting the project as a whole. It is whether or not this ratification for denial should be approved by Council and the conditions of approval meet the discussions previously made by Council. She emphasized that Council can deliberate on the item that is before Council as presented on the agenda. If Council wants to do something different besides the ratification for denial, Council can give direction to staff to bring back whatever it is that Council wants. She stated that tonight’s item is not intended to be a rehearing of the appeal.
Mayor Boles concluded that Council is allowed to talk to the appeal.
Asst. City Attorney Bazzano understands that there was going to be a discussion of what was before Council to decide whether it was adequate and whether the conditions of approval were as discussed previously. She stated that is what is before Council this evening. If Council does not want to accept the resolution that has been prepared or has issues with the conditions of approval that have been prepared by staff, Council can give direction to a first step to do something different and staff can bring back whatever Council desires.
Mayor Boles invited feedback from Councilmembers.
Councilmember Bier agreed that it was so late and she is a little confused about what is before Council tonight and she thinks more clarification is needed. She is not ready to vote on a resolution ratifying the denial of the appeal.
Vice Mayor Wright stated his memory of what happened was that Council did deny the appeal and had asked staff to draft these conditions. Council voted to deny the appeal subject to having staff prepare the conditions they asked for.
Mayor Boles stated that is what happened and City Attorney Kenyon provided the language for the modified motion. Council had gotten through comments on the resolution and conditions of approval but not to any deliberation about the project and she did not understand that Council was denying the appeal as part of that motion.
Vice Mayor Wright stated it was late but he did understand it.
Councilmember Beckmeyer stated she has the same recollection as Vice Mayor Wright with regard to the question of renderings. She is the one who brought it up and her concern was for the neighborhood to understand what is going to be and what it looks like, how high it is, how wide it is, and that is why she asked about renderings being distributed to the neighborhood. She did not think the renderings were coming back here.
City Manager Woodhouse recalled that we were at the point of making detailed revisions to the conditions and it was too late to be able to do that at the moment and have Council consider that at the moment. Council wanted to look at those conditions with fresh eyes and that is what staff are bringing back. Concerning the renderings, he stated that there was discussion about that and, from his perspective, it was that renderings as the condition says would be created and distributed
2.a
Packet Pg. 36
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of 2-23-2026 City Council Special & Regular Meeting (6210 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 23 February 23, 2026
to the neighbors, but that is in the future. He does not think he would have been able to say they are going to continue this meeting to a date certain two weeks from now without consulting with the applicant about the development of renderings in time for this meeting. He would have said that we need to confirm with the applicant whether it is even feasible before we decide on a date.
Mayor Boles concluded Council’s interpretations were different from each other and from staff.
She would like to see new renderings, not just the driveway.
Vice Mayor Wright asked what views of elevations is she considering.
Mayor Boles referred to the line drawing model to show whether the drawings match the rendering.
Vice Mayor Wright also thought to put a gate at the bottom to break up the driveway as a way to address one of the concerns, but that is not for Council to decide. He wondered if, due to the late hour and excessive amount of work put into it, if Council did a disservice to this.
Mayor Boles did not think we gave the neighbors a fair shot.
Councilmember Espinosa knows the neighbors are concerned and, if we could make sure that, in every step of the building process, the neighbors can see that this process was done the way it was supposed to be done. She felt the same way and, if she lived next door, she would be very worried about her house.
Mayor Bole asked if further conversations about the plans and building process need to come back to another meeting.
Vice Mayor Wright asked if the inspection report as we go through the process is the public document.
Community Development Director Updegrave believes someone could file a PRA request for job cards but was unsure what the process is while it is ongoing.
Asst. City Attorney Bazzano stated that she believes that information would be available for the public if they wanted to make a public records request and if the City has that information.
Mayor Boles stated that Council can give some feedback on the COAs.
Asst. City Attorney Bazzano agreed.
Mayor Boles stated if we want to talk about other things in the project, like the appeal, we then need to bring this back.
Asst. City Attorney Bazzano agreed, adding that Council can look at the conditions of approval that have been amended by staff and give any feedback, if Council desires. In terms of the resolution ratifying the denial of the appeal, Council does not have to take any action on that and Council can give staff direction to bring the appeal back for further consideration by Council.
Council voted to deny the appeal at the last meeting, but that was an indication of where Council was going to go with the appeal. This ratification of the resolution would make a final determination on the appeal. If Council does not want to do that, they can give different directions to staff.
2.a
Packet Pg. 37
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of 2-23-2026 City Council Special & Regular Meeting (6210 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 24 February 23, 2026
Councilmember Bier apologized for the confusion from the last meeting.
Mayor Boles asked if she would like to bring it back.
Councilmember Bier stated she would.
Councilmember Espinosa stated we need to make sure not to go that late on these meetings.
Mayor Boles thought Council should honor the community by deliberating and understanding what it is that they are voting on.
Vice Mayor Wright stated he asked so many questions in order to condition the project in a way that would then make it palatable to him. His intent was to make the project safe for the neighbors in the conditions.
Mayor Boles heard the majority of Council say to bring this back with the renderings whenever that can happen. She asked if there were any other comments on the conditions of approval that have been brought back to them.
Vice Mayor Wright was pleased about the closer look at the magnolia tree.
Councilmember Espinosa does not know how that tree can stay if they are going to have a driveway there.
Mayor Boles stated that the arborist is going to opine on what is written and bring that condition back up but what is written in the condition is that, if it cannot survive, they have to do a 2-1 tree replacement.
Vice Mayor Wright stated that, at the same time, these were conceptual plans not meant as builder’s sets or as specific as he thinks Council is wanting.
Mayor Boles stated that dimension matches but if the things do not work in dimension, they are not going to work later on.
Vice Mayor Wright stated that they need to make them work or the builder’s set will not get approved.
Mayor Boles stated COA 48 said no grubbing or tree removal shall take place prior to the issuance of a grading or building permit, but you would need both.
Community Development Director Updegrave stated that staff can add that. She stated that the building permit cannot be issued either ahead of the improvement agreement but it makes sense to have those noted with the grading and building permit noted here.
Mayor Boles referred to the rendering which showed a fence next to 125 Bay View. From her studying of the grades along that, it does not need a guard rail until it is 30 inches above ground.
She thinks some kind of fence screening is important. She does not know if Council can add a condition that the applicant work with the neighbor at 125 Bay View to finalize the design for the guard rail/fence.
2.a
Packet Pg. 38
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of 2-23-2026 City Council Special & Regular Meeting (6210 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 25 February 23, 2026
Community Development Director Updegrave stated that the fire access roadway and any improvement in that area needs to be reviewed and approved in coordination with North County Fire. She does not know about adding a requirement for a fence within that access. There is already a condition of approval for interdepartmentally to work with the applicant on improvements to that design. For adding something prescriptive, like a fence, she cannot speak to whether that is going to be approvable by Fire. She stated there are a lot of requirements that need to be met within there that Fire is working closely on. That includes surfacing, the ability to hold the weight of the truck, the surface material, the slope, any plantings, retaining walls, etc.
Mayor Boles stated that the 18 feet is clear and the curbs go up the two sides presumably so the fence will be on top of that curb and not within the fire access. She does not think it is a problem with Fire. Mr. Chavarria had stated that he would work with the neighbors and she wanted to encourage them to work with the residents who have been so impacted. The condition of approval could be written so anything the Fire Department would say would take priority.
Vice Mayor Wright stated we are looking at a good neighbor resolution to a visual obstruction.
Councilmember Espinosa stated that we need good neighbors because, if a car is parked on the other side of the street, the fire truck could not get out of the driveway.
Mayor Boles stated that we will have to paint the curbs red. She would like to see that as a condition. She felt it was important to try to be a good neighbor too.
Councilmember Beckmeyer stated there were some public comments giving her great concern.
She recalled the conditions of approval being more aesthetic and impacting driving in the neighborhood. She asked about the condition of approval where the Planning Commission requested a bond for protection from dereliction, property destruction or abandoning. She asked what the purpose of the bond would be and whose interest is that bond in.
Community Development Director Updegrave stated that the Planning Commission added a condition of approval related to what happens if they start the work on this project, what if they start grading, what if they put in a retaining wall, and then they abandon the project. They required an improvement agreement to make sure, if that were to happen that the project was abandoned, some site abatement or restoration work would happen in order to protect surrounding properties and to not leave an unfinished hole in the ground or whatever it may be.
Councilmember Beckmeyer referred to restoring property and thought of a scenario such as a drainage requirement for building this house that would impact the neighborhood if it is not completed. She asked Asst. City Attorney if there is a process by which the project can be conditioned to protect the neighbors.
Vice Mayor Wright stated that is what the Planning Commission did. He believes it was Planning Commissioner Hauser’s idea, and it was well placed.
Councilmember Beckmeyer agreed.
Community Development Director Updegrave read Condition No. 45 on packet page 723: “Prior to the issuance of a grading or building permit involving grading, retaining walls, or slope disturbance, the applicant shall enter into an improvement agreement with the City to require the completion of the retaining walls and other related improvements (“Retaining Wall Improvements”) and shall provide security in an amount necessary to complete the Retaining Wall Improvements,
2.a
Packet Pg. 39
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of 2-23-2026 City Council Special & Regular Meeting (6210 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 26 February 23, 2026
as determined by the City Engineer. The agreement shall be recorded against the property prior to the issuance of a grading or building permit and shall be in a form approved by the City Attorney.”
Vice Mayor Wright asked why the first sentence ends in “and other related improvements” (like gravel and collection system) and the second sentence does not.
Community Development Director Updegrave stated that the first sentence provides a longer list and then, in parentheses says, “retaining wall improvements.” This means that, moving forward, that is how as referred to are defined.
Vice Mayor Wright concluded that it does include all the other things that make it safe.
Councilmember Beckmeyer stated that goes to the point that Councilmember Espinosa made about slopes. She referred to worries about incomplete construction of “retaining walls or slope disturbance” that would impact the neighbors’ properties. That is why she is asking this question.
Community Development Director Updegrave does not think we can get that detailed within this condition. This condition is meant to globally address the safety of the site, should construction stop midway. That is going to include whatever the factors are based on the state or condition.
Councilmember Beckmeyer asked if it would be appropriate to add language like “around the perimeter” and she asked if they have to be more specific in the condition of approval.
Community Development Director Updegrave stated she might ask Chair Hauser if she would like to speak to this.
Asst. City Attorney Bazzano added that the scope of the improvement agreement would address all of these issues. The improvement agreement is where we will have the details on what it includes and what the requirements are for the security and when the security gets implicated, such as when the City gets to pull down on the bond or pull down on the security to come in and make the improvements by the City if the project is abandoned, to make it safe.
Chair Hauser added that improvement agreements are a defined mechanism in our codes, Section 10-1-1007. It gives a detailed list of what is required and what the forms of the bonds are. The City would be the beneficiary of the bond. A surety would issue a bond that would be satisfactory to the City Engineer in the amount satisfactory to the City Engineer for performance and warranties. Grading, drainage and retaining walls are all included in it. She thinks it is already covered the way it is written but, if it would make Council more comfortable, they could add that.
She pointed out that the Planning Commission added a different condition that requires that, biannually or a higher incidence to be determined by the City Engineer, all of the stormwater drainage features would be inspected and the property owner would be required to maintain them in a way that was satisfactory to the City. Erosion control and bonds would also cover that.
Councilmember Beckmeyer stated that she feels like Council wants to look at adding more specific language.
Mayor Boles agreed with Councilmember Beckmeyer about adding the words “retaining walls, drainage and other related improvements”.
2.a
Packet Pg. 40
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of 2-23-2026 City Council Special & Regular Meeting (6210 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 27 February 23, 2026
City Clerk Coffey reminded Council that it is 10:11 PM and Council should decide whether they will complete this item tonight or extend the meeting beyond 11:00 PM.
Mayor Boles thought it will be coming back. She thought Council can complete the COAs.
Vice Mayor Wright asked if it is implied that we have permission to go on the applicant’s lot to deal with taking the bond money and fix it or is it written someplace that we have permission to their property and do work on their property.
Community Development Director Updegrave stated that will all be part of the agreement. The agreement is where all the specificity is going to come in.
Asst. City Attorney Bazzano agreed.
PW Dep. Director Yip commented that the bond that is requested is fairly common, usually for larger developments. A subdivision improvement agreement is used in case a developer runs out of money and they abandon the project. There was a cash deposit in this case because of the amount they could choose to do, and a cash deposit would be easy for the City to pull and do the improvements to stabilize the site and all the improvements they have done.
Councilmember Beckmeyer stated stabilizing the site is the issue that she is concerned about.
She asked how we make the neighborhood is well taken care of and protected. She wants to make sure whatever we have in there covers that.
PW Dep. Director Yip thinks it is a valid point and he is in agreement to add the drainage into this condition 45 to be explicit to allow them to take in a security deposit or bond for that as well.
Councilmember Beckmeyer appreciated that, especially in light of possible existing and/or inoperable drainage or storm drains.
Councilmember Bier added there have been problems with drainage all the way down to Rockaway Avenue. She felt it was a huge concern.
Councilmember Espinosa stated that the conditions not only apply to the neighbors next door but everyone around.
Councilmember Beckmeyer asked how to make sure we encapsulate the scope of what we are talking about now in that relatively short language in the conditions of approval.
Mayor Boles stated this requires the completion of retaining walls and other related improvements, but hypothetically, if they start work, they build two retaining walls and then they decide to abandon the project, we do not necessarily want them to finish all the retaining walls.
We want them to restore the site to a safe condition. She wanted to make sure it does not lock them into a place where they are forced to build all the retaining walls that are identified as part of this project.
PW Dep. Director Yip stated that we will likely start with their subdivision improvement agreement that we normally use for larger developments and our goal is not to build the project but to stabilize the site. There is to be language in there that allows us to do that. The pulling of a bond and secure the project is not to finish the improvements for the next home but to stabilize the site.
2.a
Packet Pg. 41
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of 2-23-2026 City Council Special & Regular Meeting (6210 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 28 February 23, 2026
Mayor Boles asked if we should change it so it does not say to require the completion of retaining walls or other necessary or optional sites for stabilization to leave the option open.
PW Dep. Director Yip stated the security deposit is there so they have to give a full amount to build the retaining wall. They have a full bond for all the improvements, not just the retaining wall.
Mayor Boles asked what is our motion if we are finishing this but bringing the item back.
Asst. City Attorney Bazzano stated she is hearing that a majority of Council wants to not take any action on the resolution ratifying the denial of the appeal. She stated Council can give direction to staff on what to bring back in the future for further consideration. It sounds like Council would be interested in considering and deliberating further on the actual appeal.
Mayor Boles added we would like to see two renderings updated, one of the driveway and one from the street view that were presented before.
Councilmember Beckmeyer added that she wanted the neighborhood to all receive a rendering that shows them what the impact will be, including the driveway, red curb, etc..
Community Development Director Updegrave stated the red curbing is the right of the City within the right-of-way but is not something that the applicant does. The Fire Chief has not done the full review and identified where all of those things were going to be and the rendering for the next hearing would be speculation and not something within the applicant’s control.
Vice Mayor Wright recalled that Fire Marshall Wittner specifically stated he was not concerned about that.
Mayor Boles emphasized that the neighbors were concerned. She agreed that we cannot bring it back to the next meeting. She stated that Council added a condition that the neighbors would be shown the rendering before the building permit is issued and could add that the Fire Chief’s site plan showing the determination also be communicated.
Community Development Director Updegrave added that the red curbing is not part of the applicant so the condition of approval would be the City is required to provide notice.
Asst. City Attorney Bazzano iterated that Council would be asking the applicant to do something that is unrelated to the application itself. That would be something on the City’s part, not the applicant’s part.
Mayor Boles concluded it is not appropriate to put that in a condition of approval.
Asst. City Attorney Bazzano agreed, adding that it is not within the applicant’s control and they do not have any control over where the curb is painted red.
Councilmember Beckmeyer asked if the City can make that determination whenever it wants to.
Asst. City Attorney Bazzano responded affirmatively.
Councilmember Beckmeyer stated what she is sensitive to on behalf of the neighborhood and what was expressed is the fact that the project is being built is what is triggering that to happen.
2.a
Packet Pg. 42
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of 2-23-2026 City Council Special & Regular Meeting (6210 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 29 February 23, 2026
She wanted to know, if not the applicant’s responsibility but the City, how we notify the neighborhood.
Vice Mayor Wright stated we are applying a different standard to the site but agreed with her about the concern regarding the neighbors.
Mayor Boles stated that, at some point, they can ask to see the building permit that are drawings.
She stated that we are saying it is on the neighbors to find that information.
Councilmember Beckmeyer feels they will be keenly paying attention to this project.
Vice Mayor Wright asked about a timeframe on condition 45.
Community Development Director Updegrave stated that she does not have the construction schedule in front of her and does not know if that has been worked out.
PW Dep. Director Yip stated the building permit can get extended. He thinks the biggest concern here is the grading. On the erosion control plan, they are required to do work in the dry season.
This is not a significant amount of work so they should be able to accomplish it in one summer.
Vice Mayor Wright asked what if they run out of money at the end of the summer and when does the City get the opportunity to step in and how do the neighbors know that winter is not coming and they are not protected.
PW Dep. Director Yip stated that staff would have to look at the building permit closely on the extension as well as the improvement agreement and their timeframes in that. The City Engineer may not grant extensions on the permit and he can proceed to pull bond if he does not see progress on the project.
Vice Mayor Wright reiterated that, if in the opinion of the City Engineer, if there is risk or hazard to the neighbors, the City Engineer will have the ability to take the money out of the bond and get the City to execute on making the neighbors safe.
PW Dep. Director Yip stated the improvement agreement for this is to ensure that they do the retaining wall, the grading and the drainage. It is not about the safety. If they exceed timeframes on this improvement agreement, that is when the City can take action and try to pull bond or take security deposit so we can stabilize the site. If they are out there and they are not safe, then it is a building permit code enforcement issue that we can give them stop work notices.
Vice Mayor Wright stated that does not solve the problem, as we need those walls built in order to make sure the downhill neighbors are safe in the event of impending rains. That was the root of his question, i.e., what happens in the event that they are not getting that work done in time and what is the timeframe and who is the decider of when rains are coming and they are not safe.
PW Dep. Director Yip stated one concern could be they have exposed and stockpiled dirt and they will have to cover it up if getting into the winter season. Specifically you do not do grading operations in the wintertime because it will require so much work to get that work done. That is why there is a note in the erosion control plan to do this during the summertime. He believes the single-family home can be accomplished in the summertime. However, if not, staff would tell them that they have to stabilize the site for the winter to prevent erosion impacts on the neighbors.
2.a
Packet Pg. 43
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of 2-23-2026 City Council Special & Regular Meeting (6210 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 30 February 23, 2026
Community Development Director Updegrave asked for clarification on what information is being requested on the updated renderings. The previous hearing two weeks ago iterated that objective design standards are not evaluated based on renderings. Renderings are a visual tool but compliant objective standards is based on the actual plan. She needs to be clear on the revised renderings and what that is tied to in regards to an objective standard that the City has adopted for Council’s decision-making.
Vice Mayor Wright stated his consideration would be on the driveway pitch safety because of the fall and wanting to consider the obstructions.
Community Development Director Updegrave stated the safety considerations are going to be based on the plans and not the renderings.
Vice Mayor Wright asked if that is not an objective standard.
Mayor Boles stated Council needs to see the renderings and the plan match. She felt it impacts the conditions of approval, etc., that Council might want to opine on and are having a hard time visualizing now.
Asst. City Attorney Bazzano reiterated that the renderings are not final specific detailed plans.
They are artistic depictions of what is expected to occur at the site. Comparing the two may not be the right approach because the plans are always going to be the more specific tool by which things are measured. Those would be the standards by which the project is reviewed.
Mayor Boles agreed, adding that she thinks the renderings need to show the construction accurately on the site. She read the plans and noticed the renderings are wrong. She stated it is not fair to be giving these complicated drawings to the decision makers who are not able to read those drawings. The renderings help Council understand what is in the plans.
Vice Mayor Wright stated Council wants to understand what reality is going to be.
Mayor Boles stated that the Planning Commission also asked for story poles. The applicant said they were going to try and they could not because there were potential grading issues.
Community Development Director Updegrave asked if Council is looking for the same renderings but checked for accuracy of the elevations and the landscaping.
Mayor Boles added, if there are significant trees they are planting as part of the screening, that would be helpful, as well as driveway, curbs, swales, etc. to understand the impact to neighbors.
Community Development Director Updegrave clarified that story poles came up in public comment but was not something that was requested or required by Planning Commission. She needs to understand that the renderings are information needed to assess objective standards as part of the decision-making. Otherwise, she has concerns about continuing the hearing for information not used to assess the objective standards. The previous hearing was very explicit about what information needs to be on the revised rendering and what they are tied to in terms of the objective standard for the project. This is the fourth hearing and the continuation will be the fifth and final hearing where Council has to take action.
Asst. City Attorney Bazzano thinks there have to be some objective basis to require the renderings. Staff want to make sure they understand what Council is directing them to go back to
2.a
Packet Pg. 44
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of 2-23-2026 City Council Special & Regular Meeting (6210 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 31 February 23, 2026
applicant to see if they can provide those renderings. Stating that it helps Council understand the scope of the project does not tie the rendering to an objective standard.
Mayor Boles stated she does not have a list of the objective standards.
Asst. City Attorney Bazzano referred to the previously mentioned discrepancy in the plans.
Mayor Boles stated that the previous driveway rendering was wrong with the grading plans. It showed a retaining wall that was much higher than what was there. It was a matter of height and relationship of the construction on the grades. She also knows the City does not have jurisdiction regarding retaining walls that are related to Fire Department access, but there are other retaining walls that are part of the site grading close to the setback lines.
Community Development Director Updegrave stated the submittal requirements broadly include perspective renderings and it does not require information like landscaping, swales, etc. but she is hearing that there are inaccuracies in the elevation renderings.
Councilmember Beckmeyer referred to the driveway and asked how high is it, how steep is it, etc. in regards to objective standards. Council wants to give people a sense of what is going to happen to the best of their ability.
Community Development Director Updegrave reiterated updated renderings from the street and the driveway, including the windows.
Mayor Boles stated windows, guardrail, curb height, protection for cars falling off the driveway, actual height of the retaining wall, etc.
Councilmember Bier appreciated how Councilmember Beckmeyer explained all that as that is exactly how she has been feeling. She wants to make sure we have every bit of information we can give to the community, and while it is frustrating she feels she has to do her due diligence.
Councilmember Espinosa thought the project is not straightforward.
Asst. City Attorney Bazzano recognized that Council closed the public hearing for the appeal at the February 9 meeting but we have gone a bit beyond in discussing conditions of approval and the renderings. She recommended opening public comment on those specific issues with the understanding that Council is going to give direction to have this come back for further deliberation on the appeal and she assumes there will be an opportunity for public comment at that appeal hearing.
Councilmember Beckmeyer moved to extend the meeting to 11:30 PM; seconded by Councilmember Bier.
EXTEND MEETING TO 11:30 PM
RESULT: ADOPTED [UNANIMOUS]
MOVER: Sue Beckmeyer, Councilmember
SECONDER: Mary Bier, Councilmember
AYES: Boles, Wright, Beckmeyer, Bier, Espinosa
Vice Mayor Wright clarified whether Council is conditioning the project and/or denying the appeal.
2.a
Packet Pg. 45
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of 2-23-2026 City Council Special & Regular Meeting (6210 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 32 February 23, 2026
Mayor Boles stated Council will discuss the appeal at the next meeting and continue that.
Mayor Boles opened public comments.
Vera Toth-Fejel, Pacifica, asked Council to look at the slope again as it looks like the objective information turned in is different, as well as the driveway width and where it is for a fire truck coming in without things going to her property completely.
Susan Woo, Pacifica, referred to the different driveways in two renderings and shared her concerns and thoughts for safety for everyone in the area, just as Council has mentioned.
Mayor Boles closed public comments. She stated that one request was to confirm the actual slopes, as the drawings differ from the geotechnical report. She asked that staff look at that and confirm the numbers are correct.
Vice Mayor Wright believed he asked that question of the geotechnical engineer at the last meeting, who explained the way he makes those determinations and represented that the number was, in fact, correct.
Councilmember Bier asked about the point of it being equal distance between houses.
Mayor Boles stated that we asked the applicant to look at moving the driveway to the north to see if they can give a little bit more space. However, that would require going back to the easement discussion with the other neighbors.
Community Development Director Updegrave added that it would also require additional review by North County Fire. North County Fire and the applicant have been working on this design and there is a condition of approval on the building permit but, at this point, changing the representation on the plan to reflect a potential shift in that would require the review of the Fire Department for feasibility.
Vice Mayor Wright believed this was where the good neighbor discussion came in at the last meeting.
Mayor Boles stated that it is a condition of approval to try to move the driveway but Council might not have that decision and it would need to be reviewed by Fire. She thinks that is not something we can ask for.
Asst. City Attorney Bazzano confirmed with Director Updegrave that staff have clear direction on the renderings and confirmed that there are three councilmembers who support that direction.
Community Development Director Updegrave stated what she has for the street view renderings from Rockaway and Bay View is to ensure the accurate height of the new building, driveway, and retaining wall from each view. She added a revised driveway rendering with an accurate slope, as well as retaining walls, guardrails, curb on the driveway going up the hill, and windows.
PW Dep. Director Yip stated on packet page 803, you can see cross sections of that driveway and it has a curb and retaining wall.
2.a
Packet Pg. 46
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of 2-23-2026 City Council Special & Regular Meeting (6210 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 33 February 23, 2026
Mayor Boles stated she pointed out that to the Fire Marshall as that reduced the 18-foot width, but it is not showing in the rendering and she thought it would be helpful to all of them.
Asst. City Attorney Bazzano concluded that a Council majority supports that direction. The other direction staff has is to bring the appeal back for further deliberation by Council and that can be a motion to a date uncertain. She thought we would have to agendize it as a new hearing.
Community Development Director Updegrave recommends continuing to a date certain to avoid further delay of action on the housing development project.
Mayor Boles called a break and then reconvened the meeting.
Community Development Director Updegrave spoke with the applicant who felt the information being requested goes beyond the capabilities of their model, which is based on a survey of the site. The additional details being requested would require some type of surveying of the surrounding area and surrounding houses. She stated that the renderings are focused on the site and it is not something they can necessarily produce based on the information they have.
Mayor Boles asked if we can limit the amount of information outside the site. She thinks the important things are the windows at 125 Bay View.
Community Development Director Updegrave stated that the windows sounded like they were okay but the additional renderings from the street view have been provided as accurately as possible with the tools they have based on the site survey. She thinks the point was that they are accurately depicted as shown. If an additional level of detail and the accuracy is what is being required, then they need to do surveying of adjacent lots to include in the modeling.
Mayor Boles does not think Council is asking for that. She thinks to show the retaining walls and curbs on the driveway accurately, the windows is enough for the driveway elevation as well as the height of the walls. She asked at the last meeting to see a bird’s eye view of the model. She wants to see the house on the site in three dimensions to verify the massing on the site in relation to the grading.
Mayor Boles open public comments again.
Mr. Chavarria stated he would like to clarify the different aspects that they are talking about. He stated that the driveway itself is no problem if they are focusing on the driveway and two adjacent walls. He was concerned when it was mentioned that the houses did not represent exactly what the house looked like. Those were placeholders, as they do not have a survey of the adjacent properties. They have accurate information of the driveway and their site and they can easily prepare a 3D review of the property from the top, but cannot show all the neighborhood around.
They can provide a bird’s eye view of the building alone, in addition to a depiction of the driveway with a proper retaining wall and showing the wall of the adjacent building with the window properly located. He thinks they mentioned to verify the view from Rockaway Beach. The way they created that view, they took one elevation point at Rockaway. They took a photo and, based on the coordinates of that point, they superimposed buildings on that area. That is as accurate as they get now.
Mayor Boles stated that Council is not asking them to hire anyone professionally but to use what they have in their capability. There were sections that she highlighted at the last meeting, i.e. a section through the ADU that had the neighbor’s house next door where they had grade points of
2.a
Packet Pg. 47
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of 2-23-2026 City Council Special & Regular Meeting (6210 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 34 February 23, 2026
the neighbor’s roof, etc. That is what she is looking for, i.e. to make sure the house is in the same general height as the neighbor’s house because that is what the numbers are in their sections and elevations.
Mr. Chavarria stated that they only have the location of those retaining walls. They remotely measured with the surveying instruments the heights of the building because they did not have access to the adjacent property. He also referred to some confusion regarding the slope of the site. The Municipal Code, the HPD area, has a very specific way to measure the slope: It requires to measure the length of all the contours as it goes on the property and divide that by the area.
The traditional way to measure a slope is the difference of elevation between two points and divide that by the length. That is why you may get different elements. What they are representing in the plans is what the Municipal Code calls for. When the survey was done, there were over 500 points of elevation they were taking over the site and those were used to generate contours. Then those contour lengths added throughout the site and divided by the area is what gives them the slope.
Mayor Boles added that it is an average slope.
Mr. Chavarria responded affirmatively.
Asst. City Attorney Bazzano stated staff have directions on the renderings based on what the applicant indicated they can provide and what staff also discussed was a date uncertain for potentially bringing it back for deliberations on the appeal.
Councilmember Bier moved to continue deliberations on the appeal at a future date uncertain; seconded by Councilmember Beckmeyer.
CONTINUE DELIBERATIONS ON THE APPEAL TO A DATE UNCERTAIN RESULT: ADOPTED [UNANIMOUS]
MOVER: Mary Bier, Councilmember
SECONDER: Sue Beckmeyer, Councilmember
AYES: Boles, Wright, Beckmeyer, Bier, Espinosa
COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS
Councilmember Beckmeyer referred to AB 1708, which is better access to funding for unhoused for cities of our size (under 300,000 residents) and they are looking for letters of support.
Mayor Boles asked the City Manager regarding the letter of support. Now she is not so certain because the money goes through the County and then goes through the City. Council can consider that.
Mayor Boles shared that OneShoreline approved sending out our application for offshore reefs to the Department of Boating and Waterways.
Vice Mayor Wright wished his wife a happy birthday.
Mayor Boles also shared that Goal Setting is on March 7 at 9:00am.
2.a
Packet Pg. 48
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of 2-23-2026 City Council Special & Regular Meeting (6210 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 35 February 23, 2026
STAFF COMMUNICATIONS
City Manager Woodhouse reiterated that Goal Setting is on March 7 and provided general information about location and public comment period.
ADJOURN
Mayor Boles adjourned the meeting at 11:25 p.m.
Transcribed by Barbara Medina, Public Meeting Stenographer.
Respectfully Submitted,
Sarah Coffey, City Clerk
__________________________
Christine Boles, Mayor
2.a
Packet Pg. 49
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of 2-23-2026 City Council Special & Regular Meeting (6210 : Approval of Minutes)
CITY OF PACIFICA
COUNCIL AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT
5/11/2026
1 SUBJECT:
Continuation of Proclamation of Local Emergency of the Pacifica Coastline from Westline Drive to the End of Beach Boulevard
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Accept report and make a determination that conditions of local emergency continue to exist within the Pacifica Coastline from Westline Drive to the end of Beach Boulevard.
STAFF CONTACT:
Roland Yip, Deputy Director of Public Works/City Engineer 650-738-3767
[email protected]
Sarah Coffey, City Clerk
650-738-7307
[email protected]
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION:
On January 22, 2016, the Director of Emergency Services proclaimed the existence of a local emergency along the Pacifica coastline from Westline Drive to the end of Beach Boulevard due to El Nino storm activity. Extreme wave heights for extended periods of time caused top-of-bluff retreat at several locations along the Pacifica coast and damage to City infrastructure. Since this date, the Director of Emergency Services has proclaimed the existence of other local emergencies along this same stretch of coastline. These emergencies are described below:
• The January 22, 2016 storm caused a failure of the Beach Blvd. seawall near Santa Maria Avenue, which has been repaired.
• The January 22, 2016 storm also caused the undermining of an eight-foot diameter storm drain outfall and concrete headwall for the discharge of Milagra Creek into the Pacific Ocean near 700 Palmetto Avenue from the. The project was completed on April 24, 2023.
• During the 2016-2018 storms, the 300 & 400 blocks of Esplanade Avenue experienced episodic bluff erosion. The bluff erosion has progressed to a point where the erosion is now threatening public infrastructure and utilities.
• On December 16, 2020, a failure of the Beach Blvd. seawall near Santa Rosa Avenue and the Pier created a large void (approx. 25’ w x 25’ l ). The repairs were completed by February 22, 2021.
• On December 29, 2020, another void ( approx. 10’ w x 15’ l) around 150-200 feet north of the intersection of Beach Blvd. and Santa Rosa Avenue. The repairs were completed by February 2021.
3 Packet Pg. 50
Pacifica City Council 2
May 11, 2026
• On January 14, 2021, a combination of high tides and large waves damaged a forty-foot section of the Pacifica Municipal Pier’s west facing deck and concrete railing. The railing repair was beyond what had been funded for the project, the City pivoted to do further inspections on the pier before a sizable investment is made in fixing the rails, since it was prudent for the City to understand the full needs of the pier. The 2023 Pier Condition Assessment Report has been finalized and is able to be viewed at www.cityofpacifica.org/pier. A rough order of magnitude of up to $20 million for the repairs is and design and permitting. The structural engineers recommended limiting public access on the pier to approximately half of the main pier deck until repairs to the more severely damaged areas.
• In November of 2023, a failure behind the seawall was discovered at the intersection of Beach Blvd. and Salada Ave. A void (approx. 2’-7’ w x 40’ l) was found behind the seawall and was repaired with concrete and cement slurry. The repairs were completed by the end of December 2023.
• On December 29, 2023, another failure (approx. 300 sf) behind the seawall was discovered at Beach Blvd. and San Jose Ave. and was temporarily plugged. The repairs were completed by January 10, 2024. This also caused damage to the Milagra storm drain outfall and left substantial sand deposits on the Beach Boulevard Prominade and on the southern Beach Boulevard rock revetment.
• In March of 2024, City staff received an Emergency Coastal Development Permit (ECDP) from the California Coastal Commission (CCC) for removal of the substantial sand deposits left on Beach Boulevard Promenade and southern rock revetment as well as for the repair of the damage to the Milagra outfall. Repairing the outfall and removal of the sand on the Beach Boulevard Promenade and removal of the sand from the southern Beach Boulevard Rock Revetment was completed by mid-May of 2024. • In May 2024, a sink hole (approx. 5’ w x 25’ l) was discovered behind the seawall on Beach Blvd. to the north of Santa Maria. The hole was repaired through an emergency contractor.
• In November 2024, a new sink hole (approx. 8’ w x 30’ l) was discovered behind the seawall on Beach Blvd. between Carmel Ave and Santa Maria Ave. The hole was repaired through an emergency contractor by December 16, 2024. • On November 13th, 2025, two sink holes (approx. 3’ w x 16’ l and 8’ w x 10’ l) were discovered behind the seawall on Beach Blvd and between Santa Maria Avenue and San Jose Avenue. Another sink hole (approx. 12’ w x 16’ l) was discovered behind the seawall near Chit Chat Cafe while making repairs to the first 2 sink holes. All sinkholes were repaired through an emergency contractor by December 16, 2025. Revetment 300' south of the Chit Chat Cafe had moved and left the seawall exposed. The restacking of the revetment was performed by an emergency contractor by February 9th, 2026.
The City Council first ratified this proclamation (Attachment A) at its regular meeting of January 25, 2016. Since that date, additional damage has occurred along Beach Boulevard and Esplanade Avenue as noted above.
Pursuant to Government Code section 8630(c), the City Council must review the need for continuing the local emergency at least every 60 days until the City Council terminates the local emergency. Conditions of local emergency still exist since the City Council first acted to declare 3 Packet Pg. 51
Pacifica City Council 3
May 11, 2026
a local emergency on January 25, 2016, and since that time staff have brought the continuance of Proclamation confirming the existence of local emergency exists within the Pacifica Coastline from Westline Drive to the end of Beach Boulevard every 30 days with April 13, 2026 being the most recent.
The City is using a combination of city staff, contractors, and consultants to manage the discussed emergency work. Staff will bring recommendations to the Council to end the emergency designation for projects on the list once conditions stabilize and the projects are no longer in need of the emergency designation.
The City Manager recommends that the City Council make a determination that conditions of local emergency continue to exist within the Pacifica Coastline from Westline Drive to the end of Beach Boulevard.
FISCAL IMPACT:
None.
ORIGINATED BY:
Public Works
ATTACHMENT LIST:
Proclamation of Local Emergency Regarding Pacifica Coastline from Westline Drive to End of Beach Blvd. (PDF)
3 Packet Pg. 52
"ATTACHMENT 1"
3.a
Packet Pg. 53
Attachment: Proclamation of Local Emergency Regarding Pacifica Coastline from Westline Drive to End of Beach Blvd. (6206 : Continuation of "ATTACHMENT 1"
3.a
Packet Pg. 54
Attachment: Proclamation of Local Emergency Regarding Pacifica Coastline from Westline Drive to End of Beach Blvd. (6206 : Continuation of
CITY OF PACIFICA
COUNCIL AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT
5/11/2026
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:
Dan Patten, P.E., Interim Deputy Director of Public Works – Wastewater Division (650) 738-4660
[email protected]
Melissa Tigbao, P.E., Director of Public Works
(650) 501-6016
[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 public infrastructure for replacement as part of the Vallemar and Rockaway Beach Boulevard 4 Packet Pg. 55
Pacifica City Council 2
May 11, 2026
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 have been expeditiously working towards a permanent repair solution.
• Design documents were completed in September, staff issued 100% plans for informal bidding in October and received two bids, and selected the apparent low bidder, Ranger Pipelines.
• Staff have finalized contract documents and scheduled a pre-construction meeting on November 13, 2025.
• Staff issued a Notice to Proceed on December 1, 2025. • Contractor mobilized, completed stormwater Best Management Practices and tree protection work in the Vallemar neighborhood.
• Contractor installed new sewer mains, manholes and the three creek crossings between December 2025 and early March 2026.
• The project is substantially complete, as of March 18, 2026 • Punch-list items were completed in April 2026.
• Staff anticipates bringing a resolution to Council for adoption on May 26, 2026, to:
o Terminate the Proclamation of Local Emergency.
o Approve the Agreement for Construction with Ranger Pipelines Inc. o File a Notice of Completion.
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 March 9, 2026, 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. 4 Packet Pg. 56
Pacifica City Council 3
May 11, 2026
ALTERNATIVE ACTION:
Council may choose 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 proclaimed.
ORIGINATED BY:
Public Works - Wastewater Division
ATTACHMENT LIST:
Attachment 1 - PROCLAMATION OF LOCAL EMERGENCY at Calera Creek Oneonta - Minerva (PDF)
Attachment 2 - ResolutionNo74-2025_RatifyingProclamationLocalEmergency_SewerMainVallemar_EXECUTED (PDF) 4 Packet Pg. 57
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
4.a
Packet Pg. 58
Attachment: Attachment 1 - PROCLAMATION OF LOCAL EMERGENCY at Calera Creek Oneonta - Minerva (6192 : 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
4.b
Packet Pg. 59
Attachment: Attachment 2 - ResolutionNo74-2025_RatifyingProclamationLocalEmergency_SewerMain-Vallemar_EXECUTED (6192 :
4.b
Packet Pg. 60
Attachment: Attachment 2 - ResolutionNo74-2025_RatifyingProclamationLocalEmergency_SewerMain-Vallemar_EXECUTED (6192 :
RESOLUTION NO. 74-2025
ATTACHMENT A
4.b
Packet Pg. 61
Attachment: Attachment 2 - ResolutionNo74-2025_RatifyingProclamationLocalEmergency_SewerMain-Vallemar_EXECUTED (6192 :
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
4.b
Packet Pg. 62
Attachment: Attachment 2 - ResolutionNo74-2025_RatifyingProclamationLocalEmergency_SewerMain-Vallemar_EXECUTED (6192 :
CITY OF PACIFICA
COUNCIL AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT
5/11/2026
1 SUBJECT:
Fourth Amended Joint Exercise of Powers Agreement which amends the name of Peninsula Clean Energy Authority to WestLight Energy, the new agency name approved by the Peninsula Clean Energy Authority Board of Directors on October 23, 2025.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Adopt a Resolution approving the Fourth Amended Joint Exercise of Powers Agreement which amends the name of Peninsula Clean Energy Authority to WestLight, Energy the new agency name approved by the Peninsula Clean Energy Authority Board of Directors on October 23, 2025.
STAFF CONTACT:
Melissa L. Tigbao, Director of Public Works
(650) 501-6016
[email protected]
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION:
On October 23, 2025, the Peninsula Clean Energy Authority Board of Directors voted to adopt a new market-facing agency name of WestLight Energy following extensive research and a lengthy stakeholder engagement process. The name was selected in part to address several challenges that limit the effectiveness of the name Peninsula Clean Energy with deeper decarbonization goals across Peninsula Clean Energy’s service territory, including ongoing confusion with PG&E. The acronym “PCE” is often mistaken for PG&E, causing persistent brand confusion. Further, Peninsula Clean Energy reflects a geographic limitation given that the word “Peninsula” no longer reflects PCE’s full service territory. The Peninsula Clean Energy Board of Directors’ October 23, 2025 action included direction to amend the Joint Powers Agreement (JPA) to formally reflect the new name.
The action before the City Council is not a reconsideration of the name itself. The Peninsula Clean Energy Board of Directors has already approved the name change. Member agencies are now required to approve an administrative amendment to Paragraph 2.2 of the JPA to formally update the agency’s legal name in that paragraph and throughout the JPA document.
Approval of the Resolution ensures the City of Pacifica remains aligned with the governing documents of the Joint Powers Authority and allows Peninsula Clean Energy the opportunity to implement the name transition in coordination with its 10-year anniversary and broader brand rollout.
ALTERNATIVE ACTION:
Not approving the resolution would leave the PCE Joint Powers Agreement outdated and may create minor administrative inefficiencies for the City of Pacifica. 5 Packet Pg. 63
Pacifica City Council 2
May 11, 2026
RELATION TO CITY COUNCIL GOALS AND WORK PLAN:
Approval of the resolution is consistent with the following Council adopted Goals:
• Improve and steward City Infrastructure, streets and facilities. • Pursue climate change adaptation and mitigation.
FISCAL IMPACT:
None to the City of Pacifica. Costs associated with the rebranding effort are borne by the Peninsula Clean Energy Authority and were included in its adopted budget.
ORIGINATED BY:
Public Works
ATTACHMENT LIST:
EXHIBIT A: JPA - v4.1 Draft Fourth Amended (PDF)
5 Packet Pg. 64
Pacifica City Council 3
May 11, 2026
RESOLUTION NO. ___
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PACIFICA APPROVING A
FOURTH AMENDED JOINT EXERCISE OF POWERS AGREEMENT RELATING TO THE
AND CREATING WESTLIGHT ENERGY (FORMERLY PENINSULA CLEAN ENERGY
AUTHORITY) THE NEW AGENCY NAME APPROVED BY THE PENINSULA CLEAN
ENERGY AUTHORITY BOARD OF DIRECTORS
WHEREAS, the Peninsula Clean Energy Authority (“Peninsula Clean Energy” or “Authority”) was formed as a community choice aggregation agency (“CCA”) on February 29, 2016, under the Joint Exercise of Powers Act, California Government Code sections 6500 et seq., among the County of San Mateo and its cities and towns, and later expanded to include the City of Los Banos in Merced County; and
WHEREAS, the Authority has grown to serve a diverse customer base across San Mateo County and the City of Los Banos; and
WHEREAS, on October 23, 2025, the Board of Directors of the Peninsula Clean Energy Authority (PCEA) adopted Resolution No. 2025-36 approving the selection of the new marketfacing name of WestLight Energy and authorizing the amendment of its Joint Powers Agreement to reflect the same; and
WHEREAS, Paragraph 2.2 of the Peninsula Clean Energy Joint Powers Agreement sets forth the name of the Authority; and
WHEREAS, a Fourth Amended Joint Exercise of Powers Agreement relating to and creating WestLight Energy (formerly Peninsula Clean Energy Authority) requires approval of each a Joint Powers Authority member including the City of Pacifica; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Pacifica finds that approving the amendment to Paragraph 2.2 of the Joint Powers Agreement reflecting Peninsula Clean Energy Authority’s new market-facing name of WestLight Energy is in the best interest of the City and its residents.
BASED UPON THE EVIDENCE PRESENTED, the City Council of the City of Pacifica hereby finds and determines that the amendment of the Peninsula Clean Energy Joint Powers Agreement reflecting its new market-facing name of WestLight Energy is appropriate and consistent with the City’s participation in the Authority.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Pacifica does hereby:
1. Approve the Fourth Amended Joint Exercise of Powers Agreement related to and creating WestLight Energy to reflect the PCE Board of Directors adopted Resolution No. 2025-36 approving the selection of the new market-facing name of WestLight Energy attached hereto as Exhibit “A”; and
5 Packet Pg. 65
Pacifica City Council 4
May 11, 2026
2. Authorize the Mayor or City Manager to execute any documents and take any actions necessary to effectuate the amendment of paragraph 2.2 of the Peninsula Clean Energy Joint Powers Agreement consistent with this Resolution. • • • • •
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Pacifica, California, held on the 11th day of May 2026, by the following vote:
AYES, Councilmembers:
NOES, Councilmembers:
ABSENT, Councilmembers:
ABSTAIN, Councilmembers:
_________________________________
Christine Boles, Mayor
ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
______________________________ _________________________________ Sarah Coffey, City Clerk Michelle Kenyon, City Attorney 5 Packet Pg. 66
Pacifica City Council 5
May 11, 2026
EXHIBIT A
Fourth Amended Joint Exercise of Powers Agreement related to and creating WestLight Energy
5 Packet Pg. 67
2075 Woodside Road | Redwood City, CA 94061 | 866-966-0110 | PenCleanEnergy.com April 24, 2026
Dear Honorable County and City Clerks and Managers,
As required by Section 7.4 of the Peninsula Clean Energy Authority (PCE) Joint Powers Agreement, I write to you to provide notice that the PCE Board will be voting at its May 28, 2026 Board Meeting on proposed amendments to its Joint Powers Agreement (Fourth Amendment). Please find attached a copy of the redlined version of the proposed changes.
No action from you is necessary. However, if you have any concerns, please give me a call.
These changes are administrative and operational updates related to the name change to WestLight Energy. These are non-substantive changes and do not impact jurisdictional rights, obligations, and/ or duties under the Joint Powers Agreement. As you are also aware, the proposed edit to Section 2.2 is undergoing a review process by each member jurisdiction. Approximately twelve (12) jurisdictions have reviewed and approved the proposed administrative amendment to Section 2.2 and the remainder are scheduled on or before May 13, 2026. The further administrative amendments contained in the attached redline, if approved by the Board of Directors, would take effect on May 28, 2026.
Please let me know if you have any questions.
Sincerely,
Shawn Marshall
Chief Executive Officer
Peninsula Clean Energy
(415) 786-9118
Attachments:
Proposed Fourth Amended Joint Powers Authority Agreement – Redlined
5.a
Packet Pg. 68
Attachment: EXHIBIT A: JPA - v4.1 Draft Fourth Amended [Revision 1] (6185 : Resolution - Approving an amendment to Peninsula Clean
10/22/20, and 09/26/24 and 05/28/26
THIRD FOURTH AMENDED JOINT EXERCISE OF POWERS AGREEMENT RELATING TO
AND CREATING THE
PENINSULA CLEAN ENERGYWESTLIGHT ENERGY
(FORMERLY PENINSULA CLEAN ENERGY AUTHORITY)AUTHORITY
This Joint Exercise of Powers Agreement, effective on the dateFebruary 29, 2016 as determined by Section 2.1, is made and entered into pursuant to the provisions of Title 1, Division 7, Chapter 5, Article 1 (Sections 6500 et seq.) of the California Government Code relating to the joint exercise of powers among the Parties set forth in Exhibit B, and establishes Peninsula Clean EnergyWestLight Energy, a Joint Powers Authority, Authority (hereinafter, “AuthorityWestLight” or the “Authority”) , is by and between the County of San Mateo (“County”) and those counties, cities, and towns within the State of California who become signatories to this Agreement, and relates to the joint exercise of powers among the signatories hereto.
RECITALS
A. The Parties share various powers under California law, including but not limited to the power to purchase, supply, and aggregate electricity for themselves and customers within their jurisdictions.
B. In 2006, the State Legislature adopted AB 32, the Global Warming Solutions Act, which mandates a reduction in greenhouse gas emissions in 2020 to 1990 levels. The California Air Resources Board is promulgating regulations to implement AB 32 which will require local governments to develop programs to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
C. The purposes for entering into this Agreement include:
a. Reducing greenhouse gas emissions related to the use of power in San Mateo County and the State of California;
b. Providing electric power and other forms of energy to customers at a competitive cost;
c. Carrying out programs to reduce energy consumption;
d. Stimulating and sustaining the local economy by developing local jobs in renewable energy; and
e. Promoting long-term electric rate stability and energy security and reliability for residents through local control of electric generation resources.
D. It is the intent of this Agreement to promote the development and use of a wide range of renewable energy sources and energy efficiency programs, including but not limited to solar, wind, and biomass energy production. The purchase of renewable power and greenhouse gas-free energy sources will be the desired approach to decrease regional greenhouse gas
5.a
Packet Pg. 69
Attachment: EXHIBIT A: JPA - v4.1 Draft Fourth Amended [Revision 1] (6185 : Resolution - Approving an amendment to Peninsula Clean
10/22/20, and 09/26/24 and 05/28/26
emissions and accelerate the State’s transition to clean power resources to the extent feasible. The Agency Authority will also add increasing levels of locally generated renewable resources as these projects are developed and customer energy needs expand.
E. The Parties desired to establish a separate public agency, known as WestLight Energy, formerly the Peninsula Clean EnergyEnergy Authority Authority, under the provisions of the Joint Exercise of Powers Act of the State of California (Government Code Section 6500 et seq.) (“Act”) in order to collectively study, promote, develop, conduct, operate, and manage energy programs.
F. The Parties anticipate adopting aneach adopted an ordinance electing to implement through the Authority a common Community Choice Aggregation (CCA) program, an electric service enterprise available to cities and counties pursuant to California Public Utilities Code Sections 331.1(c) and 366.2. The first priority of the Authority is the Authority will be the consideration of those actions necessary to implementation of the CCA Program.
AGREEMENT
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises, covenants, and conditions hereinafter set forth, it is agreed by and among the Parties as follows:
ARTICLE 1: DEFINITIONS AND EXHIBITS
1.1 Definitions. Capitalized terms used in the Agreement shall have the meanings specified in Exhibit A, unless the context requires otherwise.
1.2 Documents Included. This Agreement consists of this document and the following exhibits, all of which are hereby incorporated into this Agreement.
Exhibit A: Definitions
Exhibit B: List of the Parties
Exhibit C: Annual Energy Use
Exhibit D: Voting Shares
Exhibit E: Signatures
ARTICLE 2: FORMATION OF PENINSULA CLEAN ENERGYWESTLIGHT ENERGY (FORMERLY PENINSULA CLEAN ENERGY AUTHORITY)AUTHORITY
2.1 Effective Date and Term. This Agreement shall become effective and Peninsula Clean EnergyWestLight Energy Authority, formerly Penisula Clean Energy Authority, shall exist as ashall exist as a separate public agency on February 29, 2016 or when the County of San Mateo and at least two municipalities execute this Agreement, whichever occurs later. The AuthorityThe Authority shall provide notice to the Parties of the Effective Date. The Authority shall continue to exist, and this Agreement shall be effective, until this Agreement is terminated in accordance with Section 6.4,
5.a
Packet Pg. 70
Attachment: EXHIBIT A: JPA - v4.1 Draft Fourth Amended [Revision 1] (6185 : Resolution - Approving an amendment to Peninsula Clean
10/22/20, and 09/26/24 and 05/28/26
subject to the rights of the Parties to withdraw from the Authority.
2.1 2.2 Formation. There is formed as of the Effective Date a public agency named the Peninsula Clean EnergyWestLight Energy Authority. Pursuant to Sections 6506 and 6507 of the Act, the Authority is a public agency separate from the Parties. Pursuant to Sections 6508.1 of the Act, the debts, liabilities or obligations of the Authority shall not be debts, liabilities or obligations of the individual Parties unless the governing board of a Party agrees in writing to assume any of the debts, liabilities or obligations of the Authority. A Party who has not agreed to assume an Authority debt, liability or obligation shall not be responsible in any way for such debt, liability or obligation even if a majority of the Parties agree to assume the debt, liability or obligation of the Authority.
Notwithstanding Section 7.4 of this Agreement, this Section 2.2 may not be amended unless such amendment is approved by the governing board of each Party.
2.3 Purpose. The purpose of this Agreement is to establish an independent public agency in order to exercise powers common to each Party to study, promote, develop, conduct, operate, and manage energy, energy efficiency and conservation, and other energy-related programs, and to exercise all other powers necessary and incidental to accomplishing this purpose. Without limiting the generality of the foregoing, the Parties intend for this Agreement to be used as a contractual mechanism by which the Parties are authorized to participate in the CCA Program, as further described in Section 4.1. The Parties intend that other agreements shall define the terms and conditions associated with the implementation of the CCA Program and any other energy programs approved by the Authority.
2.4 Powers. The Authority shall have all powers common to the Parties and such additional powers accorded to it by law. The Authority is authorized, in its own name, to exercise all powers and do all acts necessary and proper to carry out the provisions of this Agreement and fulfill its purposes, including, but not limited to, each of the following powers, subject to the voting requirements set forth in Section 3.7 through 3.7.5:
2.4.1 to make and enter into contracts;
2.4.2 to employ agents and employees, including but not limited to a Chief Executive Officer;
2.4.3 to acquire, contract, manage, maintain, and operate any buildings, infrastructure, works, or improvements;
2.4.4 to acquire property by eminent domain, or otherwise, except as limited under Section 6508 of the Act, and to hold or dispose of any property; however, the Authority shall not exercise the power of eminent domain within the jurisdiction of a Party over its objection without first meeting and conferring in good faith.
2.4.5 to lease any property;
2.4.6 to sue and be sued in its own name;
2.4.7 to incur debts, liabilities, and obligations, including but not limited to loans from private lending sources pursuant to its temporary borrowing powers such as Government
5.a
Packet Pg. 71
Attachment: EXHIBIT A: JPA - v4.1 Draft Fourth Amended [Revision 1] (6185 : Resolution - Approving an amendment to Peninsula Clean
10/22/20, and 09/26/24 and 05/28/26
Code Sections 53850 et seq. and authority under the Act;
2.4.8 to form subsidiary or independent corporations or entities if necessary, to carry out energy supply and energy conservation programs at the lowest possible cost or to take advantage of legislative or regulatory changes;
2.4.9 to issue revenue bonds and other forms of indebtedness;
2.4.10 to apply for, accept, and receive all licenses, permits, grants, loans or other aids from any federal, state, or local public agency;
2.4.11to submit documentation and notices, register, and comply with orders, tariffs and agreements for the establishment and implementation of the CCA Program and other energy programs;
2.4.12 to adopt Operating Rules and Regulations; and
2.4.13 to make and enter into service agreements relating to the provision of services necessary to plan, implement, operate and administer the CCA Program and other energy programs, including the acquisition of electric power supply and the provision of retail and regulatory support services.
2.4.14 to permit additional Parties to enter into this Agreement after the Effective Date and to permit another entity authorized to be a community choice aggregator to designate the Authority to act as the community choice aggregator on its behalf.
2.5 Limitation on Powers. As required by Government Code Section 6509, the power of the Authority is subject to the restrictions upon the manner of exercising power possessed by San Mateo County.
2.6 Compliance with Local Zoning and Building Laws and CEQA. Unless state or federal law provides otherwise, any facilities, buildings or structures located, constructed, or caused to be constructed by the Authority within the territory of the Authority shall comply with the General Plan, zoning and building laws of the local jurisdiction within which the facilities, buildings or structures are constructed and comply with the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”).
ARTICLE 3: GOVERNANCE AND INTERNAL ORGANIZATION
3.1 Board of Directors. The governing body of the Authority shall be a Board of Directors (“Board”). The Board shall consist of 2 (two) directors appointed by the San Mateo County Board of Supervisors and 1 (one) director appointed by each County, City, or Town that becomes a signatory to the Agreement (“Directors”). Each Director shall serve at the pleasure of the governing board of the Party who appointed such Director and may be removed as Director by such governing board at any time. If at any time a vacancy occurs on the Board, a replacement shall be appointed to fill the position of the previous Director within 90 days of the date that such position becomes vacant.
Directors must be members of the Board of Supervisors or members of the governing board of the municipality that is the signatory to this Agreement. Each Party may appoint an alternate(s) to serve
5.a
Packet Pg. 72
Attachment: EXHIBIT A: JPA - v4.1 Draft Fourth Amended [Revision 1] (6185 : Resolution - Approving an amendment to Peninsula Clean
10/22/20, and 09/26/24 and 05/28/26
in the absence of its Director(s). Alternates may be either (1) members of the Board of Supervisors or members of the governing board of the municipality that is the signatory to this Agreement, or (2) staff members of the County or any such municipality.
3.2 Quorum. A majority of the appointed Directors shall constitute a quorum, except that less than a quorum may adjourn from time to time in accordance with law.
3.3 Powers and Functions of the Board. The Board shall exercise general governance and oversight over the business and activities of the Authority, consistent with this Agreement and applicable law. The Board shall provide general policy guidance to the CCA Program. Board approval shall be required for any of the following actions:
3.3.1 The issuance of bonds or any other financing even if program revenues are expected to pay for such financing.
3.3.2 The hiring or termination of the Chief Executive Officer and General Counsel.
3.3.3 The appointment or removal of officers described in Section 3.9, subject to Section
3.9.3. 3.3.4 The adoption of the Annual Budget.
3.3.5 The adoption of an ordinance.
3.3.6 The approval of agreements, except as provided by Section 3.4.
3.3.7 The initiation or resolution of claims and litigation where the Authority will be the defendant, plaintiff, petitioner, respondent, cross complainant, or cross petitioner, or intervenor; provided, however, that the Chief Executive Officer or General Counsel or by delegation thereof, on behalf of the Authority, may intervene in, become a party to, or file comments with respect to any proceeding pending at the California Public Utilities Commission, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, or any other administrative agency, without approval of the Board as long as such action is consistent with any adopted Board policies.
3.3.8 The setting of rates for power sold by the Authority and the setting of charges for any other category of service provided by the Authority.
3.3.9 Termination of the CCA Program.
3.4 Chief Executive Officer. The Board of Directors shall appoint a Chief Executive Officer for the Authority, who shall be responsible for the day-to-day operation and management of the Authority and the CCA Program. The Chief Executive Officer, may exercise all powers of the Authority, including the power to hire, discipline, and terminate employees as well as the power to approve any agreement if the total amount payable under the agreement is equal to or less than the amount specified in the Operating Rules and Regulations (Policy 14 , “Delegation of Non-Energy Contract Authority”) except for the powers specifically set forth in Section 3.3 or those powers
5.a
Packet Pg. 73
Attachment: EXHIBIT A: JPA - v4.1 Draft Fourth Amended [Revision 1] (6185 : Resolution - Approving an amendment to Peninsula Clean
10/22/20, and 09/26/24 and 05/28/26
which by law must be exercised by the Board of Directors.
3.5 Commissions, Boards, and Committees. The Board may establish any advisory commissions, boards, and committees as the Board deems appropriate to assist the Board in carrying out its functions and implementing the CCA Program, other energy programs and the provisions of this Agreement which shall comply with the requirements of the Ralph M. Brown Act. The Board may establish rules, regulations, policies, bylaws or procedures to govern any such commissions, boards, or committees if the Board deems appropriate to appoint such commissions, boards or committees, and shall determine whether members shall be compensated or entitled to reimbursement for expenses.
3.6 Director Compensation. Directors shall serve without compensation from the Authority.
However, Directors may be compensated by their respective appointing authorities. The Board, however, may adopt by resolution a policy relating to the reimbursement by the Authority of expenses incurred by Directors.
3.7 Voting In general, as described below in Section 3.7.3, action by the Authority Board will be taken solely by a majority vote of the Directors present. However, as described below in Section
3.7.4, upon request of a Director, a weighted vote by shares will also be conducted. When such a request is made, an action must be approved by both a majority vote of Directors present and a majority of the weighted vote by shares present. No action may be approved solely by a vote by shares. The voting shares of Directors and approval requirements for actions of the Board shall be as follows:
3.7.1. Voting Shares.
Each Director shall have a voting share as determined by the following formula: (Annual Energy Use/Total Annual Energy) multiplied by 100, where:
(a) “Annual Energy Use” means, (i) with respect to the first year following the Effective Date, the annual electricity usage, expressed in kilowatt hours (“kWh”), within the Party’s respective jurisdiction and (ii) with respect to the period after the anniversary of the Effective Date, the annual electricity usage, expressed in kWh, of accounts within a Party’s respective jurisdiction that are served by the Authority; and
(b) “Total Annual Energy” means the sum of all Parties’ Annual Energy Use. The initial values for Annual Energy Use will be designated in Exhibit C, and shall be adjusted annually as soon as reasonably practicable after January 1, but no later than March 1 of each year. These adjustments shall be approved by the Board. (c) The combined voting share of all Directors representing the County of San Mateo shall be based upon the annual electricity usage within the unincorporated area of San Mateo County.
For the purposes of Weighted Voting, if a Party has more than one director, then the voting shares allocated to the entity shall be equally divided amongst its Directors.
5.a
Packet Pg. 74
Attachment: EXHIBIT A: JPA - v4.1 Draft Fourth Amended [Revision 1] (6185 : Resolution - Approving an amendment to Peninsula Clean
10/22/20, and 09/26/24 and 05/28/26
3.7.2. Exhibit Showing Voting Shares. The initial voting shares will be set forth in Exhibit D. Exhibit D shall be revised no less than annually as necessary to account for changes in the number of Parties and changes in the Parties’ Annual Energy Use. Exhibit D and adjustments shall be approved by the Board.
3.7.3. Approval Requirements Relating to CCA Program. Except as provided in Sections
3.7.4 and 3.7.5 below, action of the Board shall require the affirmative vote of a majority of Directors present at the meeting.
3.7.4. Option for Approval by Voting Shares. Notwithstanding Section 3.7.3, any Director present at a meeting may demand that approval of any matter related to the CCA Program be determined on the basis of both voting shares and by the affirmative vote of a majority of Directors present at the meeting. If a Director makes such a demand with respect to approval of any such matter, then approval of such matter shall require the affirmative vote of a majority of Directors present at the meeting and the affirmative vote of Directors having a majority of voting shares present, as determined by Section 3.7.1 except as provided in Section 3.7.5.
3.7.5. Special Voting Requirements for Certain Matters. (a) Two-Thirds and Weighted Voting Approval Requirements Relating to Sections
6.2 and 7.4. Action of the Board on the matters set forth in Section 6.2 (involuntary termination of a Party), or Section 7.4 (amendment of this Agreement) shall require the affirmative vote of at least two-thirds of Directors present; provided, however, that (i) notwithstanding the foregoing, any Director present at the meeting may demand that the vote be determined on the basis of both voting shares and by the affirmative vote of Directors, and if a Director makes such a demand, then approval shall require the affirmative vote of both at least two-thirds of Directors present and the affirmative vote of Directors having at least two-thirds of the voting shares present, as determined by Section 3.7.1; (ii) but, at least two Parties must vote against a matter for the vote to fail; and (iii) for votes to involuntarily terminate a Party under Section 6.2, the Director(s) for the Party subject to involuntary termination may not vote, and the number of Directors constituting two-thirds of all Directors, and the weighted vote of each Party shall be recalculated as if the Party subject to possible termination were not a Party.
(b) Seventy Five Percent Special Voting Requirements for Eminent Domain and Contributions or Pledge of Assets.
(i) A decision to exercise the power of eminent domain on behalf of the Authority to acquire any property interest other than an easement, right-of-way, or temporary construction easement shall require a vote of at least 75% of all Directors. (ii) The imposition on any Party of any obligation to make contributions or pledge assets as a condition of continued participation in the CCA Program shall require a vote of at least 75% of all Directors and the approval of the governing boards of the Parties who are being asked to make such contribution or pledge.
5.a
Packet Pg. 75
Attachment: EXHIBIT A: JPA - v4.1 Draft Fourth Amended [Revision 1] (6185 : Resolution - Approving an amendment to Peninsula Clean
10/22/20, and 09/26/24 and 05/28/26
(iii) Notwithstanding the foregoing, any Director present at the meeting may demand that a vote under subsections (i) or (ii) be determined on the basis of voting shares and by the affirmative vote of Directors, and if a Director makes such a demand, then approval shall require both the affirmative vote of at least 75% of Directors present and the affirmative vote of Directors having at least 75% of the voting shares present, as determined by Section 3.7.1, but at least two Parties must vote against a matter for the vote to fail. For purposes of this section, “imposition on any Party of any obligation to make contributions or pledge assets as a condition of continued participation in the CCA Program” does not include any obligations of a withdrawing or terminated party imposed under Section 6.3.
3.8 Meetings and Special Meetings of the Board. The Board shall hold at least six regular meetings per year, but the Board may provide for the holding of regular meetings at more frequent intervals. The date, hour and place of each regular meeting shall be fixed by resolution or ordinance of the Board. Regular meetings may be adjourned to another meeting time. Special and Emergency Meetings of the Board may be called in accordance with the provisions of California Government Code Sections 54956 and 54956.5. Directors may participate in meetings telephonically, with full voting rights, only to the extent permitted by law. All meetings shall be conducted in accordance with the provisions of the Ralph M. Brown Act (California Government Code Sections 54950 et seq.).
3.9 Selection of Board Officers.
3.9.1 Chair and Vice Chair. The Directors shall select, from among themselves, a Chair, who shall be the presiding officer of all Board meetings, and a Vice Chair, who shall serve in the absence of the Chair. The term of office for and term limits of the Chair and Vice Chair shall be set forth in the policies and procedures established by the Board. The office of either the Chair or Vice Chair shall be declared vacant and a new selection shall be made if:
(a) the person serving dies, resigns, or the Party that the person represents removes the person as its representative on the Board or
(b) the Party that he or she represents withdraws from the Authority pursuant to the provisions of this Agreement.
3.9.2 Secretary. The Board shall appoint a Secretary, who need not be a member of the Board, who shall be responsible for keeping the minutes of all meetings of the Board and all other official records of the Authority.
3.9.3 Treasurer and Auditor. The Chief Financial Officer shall, among other duties, act as the Treasurer for the Authority. Unless otherwise exempted from such requirement, the Authority shall cause an independent audit to be made by a certified public accountant, or public accountant, in compliance with Section 6505 of the Act. The Treasurer shall act as the depository of the Authority and have custody of all the money of the Authority, from whatever source, and as such, shall have all of the duties and responsibilities specified in Section 6505.5 of the Act. The Treasurer shall report directly to the Board and shall comply with the requirements of treasurers of incorporated municipalities. The Board may transfer
5.a
Packet Pg. 76
Attachment: EXHIBIT A: JPA - v4.1 Draft Fourth Amended [Revision 1] (6185 : Resolution - Approving an amendment to Peninsula Clean
10/22/20, and 09/26/24 and 05/28/26
the responsibilities of Treasurer to any person or entity as the law may provide at the time.
The duties and obligations of the Treasurer are further specified in Article 5.
3.10 Administrative Services Provider. The Board may appoint one or more administrative services providers to serve as the Authority’s agent for planning, implementing, operating and administering the CCA Program, and any other program approved by the Board, in accordance with the provisions of an Administrative Services Agreement. The appointed administrative services provider may be one of the Parties. An Administrative Services Agreement shall set forth the terms and conditions by which the appointed administrative services provider shall perform or cause to be performed all tasks necessary for planning, implementing, operating and administering the CCA Program and other approved programs. The Administrative Services Agreement shall set forth the term of the Agreement and the circumstances under which the Administrative Services Agreement may be terminated by the Authority. This section shall not in any way be construed to limit the discretion of the Authority to hire its own employees to administer the CCA Program or any other program.
ARTICLE 4: IMPLEMENTATION ACTION AND AUTHORITY DOCUMENTS
4.1 Preliminary Implementation of the CCA Program.
4.1.1 Enabling Ordinance. To be eligible to participate in the CCA Program, each Party must adopt an ordinance in accordance with Public Utilities Code Section 366.2(c)(12) for the purpose of specifying that the Party intends to implement a CCA Program by and through its participation in the Authority.
4.1.2 Implementation Plan. The Authority shall cause to be prepared an Implementation Plan meeting the requirements of Public Utilities Code Section 366.2 and any applicable Public Utilities Commission regulations as soon after the Effective Date as reasonably practicable. The Implementation Plan shall not be filed with the Public Utilities Commission until it is approved by the Board in the manner provided by Section 3.7.3.
4.1.3 Termination of CCA Program. Nothing contained in this Article or this Agreement shall be construed to limit the discretion of the Authority to terminate the implementation or operation of the CCA Program at any time in accordance with any applicable requirements of state law.
4.2 Authority Documents. The Parties acknowledge and agree that the affairs of the Authority will be implemented through various documents duly adopted by the Board through Board resolution.
The Parties agree to abide by and comply with the terms and conditions of all such documents that may be adopted by the Board, subject to the Parties’ right to withdraw from the Authority as described in Article 6.
4.3 Addition of Parties. Other incorporated municipalities and counties may become Parties subject to all applicable terms of this Agreement, including but not limited to those in Article 6, upon (a) the adoption of a resolution by the governing body of such incorporated municipality or such county requesting that the incorporated municipality or county, as the case may be, become a member
5.a
Packet Pg. 77
Attachment: EXHIBIT A: JPA - v4.1 Draft Fourth Amended [Revision 1] (6185 : Resolution - Approving an amendment to Peninsula Clean
10/22/20, and 09/26/24 and 05/28/26
of the Authority, (b) the adoption, by an affirmative vote of the Board satisfying the requirements described in Section 3.7, of a resolution authorizing membership of the additional incorporated municipality or county, specifying the membership payment, if any, to be made by the additional incorporated municipality or county to reflect its pro rata share of organizational, planning and other pre-existing expenditures, and describing additional conditions, if any, associated with membership, (c) the adoption of an ordinance required by Public Utilities Code Section 366.2(c)(12) and execution of this Agreement and other necessary program agreements by the incorporated municipality or county as required by the Board, (d) payment of the membership payment, if any, and (e) satisfaction of any conditions established by the Board.
4.3.1 Continuing Participation. The Parties acknowledge that membership in the Authority may change by the addition and/or withdrawal or termination of Parties. The Parties agree to participate with such other Parties as may later be added, as described in Section 4.3. The Parties also agree that the withdrawal or termination of a Party shall not affect this Agreement or the remaining Parties’ continuing obligations under this Agreement.
4.3.2 Termination by Additional Parties. In addition to any financial obligations under Article 6, and in the events that the Board does not require a membership payment to reflect the additional party’s pro rata share of organizational planning and other pre-existing expenditures as allowed by Section 4.3(b) and the additional party withdraws its membership in the Authority within the first five years of becoming a party, the party shall be obligated to reimburse the Authority for all the costs related to the cost of launch, including but not limited to the costs of updating the Implementation Plan and mailings to party’s accounts.
ARTICLE 5: FINANCIAL PROVISIONS
5.1 Fiscal Year. The Authority’s fiscal year shall be 12 months commencing July 1 or the date selected by the Authoritygency and ending June 30. The fiscal year may be changed by Board resolution.
5.2 Depository.
5.2.1 All funds of the Authority shall be held in separate accounts in the name of the Authority and not commingled with funds of any Party or any other person or entity.
5.2.2 All funds of the Authority shall be strictly and separately accounted for, and regular reports shall be rendered of all receipts and disbursements, at least quarterly during the fiscal year. The books and records of the Authority shall be open to inspection by the Parties at all reasonable times. The Board shall contract with a certified public accountant or public accountant to make an annual audit of the accounts and records of the Authority, which shall be conducted in accordance with the requirements of Section 6505 of the Act.
5.2.3 All expenditures shall be made in accordance with the approved budget and upon the approval of any officer so authorized by the Board in accordance with its Operating Rules and Regulations. The Treasurer shall draw checks or warrants or make payments by other
5.a
Packet Pg. 78
Attachment: EXHIBIT A: JPA - v4.1 Draft Fourth Amended [Revision 1] (6185 : Resolution - Approving an amendment to Peninsula Clean
10/22/20, and 09/26/24 and 05/28/26
means for claims or disbursements not within an applicable budget only upon the prior approval of the Board.
5.3 Budget and Recovery of Costs.
5.3.1 Budget. The annual budget shall be approved by the Board. Staff shall report to the Board quarterly budget results and any significant budget variances. The Board may revise the budget as needed to address any significant changes and/or unexpected expenses incurred.
5.3.2 Funding of Initial Costs. The County of San Mateo has funded certain activities necessary to implement the CCA Program. If the CCA Program becomes operational, these Initial Costs paid by the County of San Mateo shall be included in the customer charges for electric services as provided by Section 5.3.3 to the extent permitted by law, and the County of San Mateo shall be reimbursed from the payment of such charges by customers of the Authority. Prior to such reimbursement, the County of San Mateo shall provide such documentation of costs paid as the Board may request. The Authority may establish a reasonable time period over which such costs are recovered. In the event that the CCA Program does not become operational, the County of San Mateo shall not be entitled to any reimbursement of the Initial Costs it has paid from the Authority or any Party.
5.3.3 CCA Program Costs. The Parties desire that all costs incurred by the Authority that are directly or indirectly attributable to the provision of electric, conservation, efficiency, incentives, financing, or other services provided under the CCA Program, including but not limited to the establishment and maintenance of various reserves and performance funds and administrative, accounting, legal, consulting, and other similar costs, shall be recovered through charges to CCA customers receiving such electric services, or from revenues from grants or other third-party sources.
ARTICLE 6: WITHDRAWAL AND TERMINATION
6.1 Withdrawal.
6.1.1 Right to Withdraw. A Party may withdraw its participation in the CCA Program, effective as of the beginning of the Authority’s fiscal year, by giving no less than 12 months advance written notice of its election to do so, which notice shall be given to the Authority and each Party. Withdrawal of a Party shall require an affirmative vote of the Party’s governing board.
6.1.2 Right to Withdraw After Amendment. Notwithstanding Section 6.1.1, a Party may withdraw its membership in the Authority following an amendment to this Agreement adopted by the Board which the Party’s Director(s) voted against provided such notice is given in writing within thirty (30) days following the date of the vote. Withdrawal of a Party shall require an affirmative vote of the Party’s governing board and shall not be subject to the twelve month advance notice provided in Section 6.1.1. In the event of such withdrawal,
5.a
Packet Pg. 79
Attachment: EXHIBIT A: JPA - v4.1 Draft Fourth Amended [Revision 1] (6185 : Resolution - Approving an amendment to Peninsula Clean
10/22/20, and 09/26/24 and 05/28/26
the Party shall be subject to the provisions of Section 6.3.
6.1.3 The Right to Withdraw Prior to Program Launch. After receiving bids from power suppliers, the Authority must provide to the Parties the report from the electrical utility consultant retained by the Authority that compares the total estimated electrical rates that the Authority will be charging to customers as well as the estimated greenhouse gas emissions rate and the amount of estimated renewable energy used with that of the incumbent utility. If the report provides that the Authority is unable to provide total electrical rates, as part of its baseline offering, to the customers that are equal to or lower than the incumbent utility or to provide power in a manner that has a lower greenhouse gas emissions rate or uses more renewable energy than the incumbent utility, a Party may immediately withdraw its membership in the Authority without any financial obligation, as long as the Party provides written notice of its intent to withdraw to the Authority Board no more than fifteen days after receiving the report.
6.1.4 Continuing Financial Obligation; Further Assurances. Except as provided by Section
6.1.3, a Party that withdraws its participation in the CCA Program may be subject to certain continuing financial obligations, as described in Section 6.3. Each withdrawing Party and the Authority shall execute and deliver all further instruments and documents, and take any further action that may be reasonably necessary, as determined by the Board, to effectuate the orderly withdrawal of such Party from participation in the CCA Program.
6.2 Involuntary Termination of a Party. Participation of a Party in the CCA program may be terminated for material non-compliance with provisions of this Agreement or any other agreement relating to the Party’s participation in the CCA Program upon a vote of Board members as provided in Section 3.7.5. Prior to any vote to terminate participation with respect to a Party, written notice of the proposed termination and the reason(s) for such termination shall be delivered to the Party whose termination is proposed at least 30 days prior to the regular Board meeting at which such matter shall first be discussed as an agenda item. The written notice of proposed termination shall specify the particular provisions of this Agreement or other agreement that the Party has allegedly violated. The Party subject to possible termination shall have the opportunity at the next regular Board meeting to respond to any reasons and allegations that may be cited as a basis for termination prior to a vote regarding termination. A Party that has had its participation in the CCA Program terminated may be subject to certain continuing liabilities, as described in Section 6.3.
6.3 Continuing Financial Obligations; Refund. Except as provided by Section 6.1.3, upon a withdrawal or involuntary termination of a Party, the Party shall remain responsible for any claims, demands, damages, or other financial obligations arising from the Party membership or participation in the CCA Program through the date of its withdrawal or involuntary termination, it being agreed that the Party shall not be responsible for any financial obligations arising after the date of the Party’s withdrawal or involuntary termination. Claims, demands, damages, or other financial obligations for which a withdrawing or terminated Party may remain liable include, but are not limited to, losses from the resale of power contracted for by the Authority to serve the Party’s load. With respect to such financial obligations, upon notice by a Party that it wishes to withdraw from the CCA Program, the Authority shall notify the Party of the minimum waiting period under which the Party would have no costs for withdrawal if the Party agrees to stay in the CCA Program for such period. The waiting period will be set to the minimum duration such that there are no costs transferred to remaining
5.a
Packet Pg. 80
Attachment: EXHIBIT A: JPA - v4.1 Draft Fourth Amended [Revision 1] (6185 : Resolution - Approving an amendment to Peninsula Clean
10/22/20, and 09/26/24 and 05/28/26
ratepayers. If the Party elects to withdraw before the end of the minimum waiting period, the charge for exiting shall be set at a dollar amount that would offset actual costs to the remaining ratepayers, and may not include punitive charges that exceed actual costs. In addition, such Party shall also be responsible for any costs or obligations associated with the Party’s participation in any program in accordance with the provisions of any agreements relating to such program provided such costs or obligations were incurred prior to the withdrawal of the Party. The Authority may withhold funds otherwise owing to the Party or may require the Party to deposit sufficient funds with the Authority, as reasonably determined by the Authority and approved by a vote of the Board of Directors, to cover the Party’s financial obligations for the costs described above. Any amount of the Party’s funds held on deposit with the Authority above that which is required to pay any financial obligations shall be returned to the Party. The liability of any Party under this section 6.3 is subject and subordinate to the provisions of Section 2.2, and nothing in this section 6.3 shall reduce, impair, or eliminate any immunity from liability provided by Section 2.2.
6.4 Mutual Termination. This Agreement may be terminated by mutual agreement of all the Parties; provided, however, the foregoing shall not be construed as limiting the rights of a Party to withdraw its participation in the CCA Program, as described in Section 6.1.
6.5 Disposition of Property upon Termination of Authority. Upon termination of this Agreement, any surplus money or assets in possession of the Authority for use under this Agreement, after payment of all liabilities, costs, expenses, and charges incurred under this Agreement and under any program documents, shall be returned to the then-existing Parties in proportion to the contributions made by each.
ARTICLE 7: MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS
7.1 Dispute Resolution. The Parties and the Authority shall make reasonable efforts to informally settle all disputes arising out of or in connection with this Agreement. Should such informal efforts to settle a dispute, after reasonable efforts, fail, the dispute shall be mediated in accordance with policies and procedures established by the Board.
7.2 Liability of Directors, Officers, and Employees. The Directors, officers, and employees of the Authority shall use ordinary care and reasonable diligence in the exercise of their powers and in the performance of their duties pursuant to this Agreement. No current or former Director, officer, or employee will be responsible for any act or omission by another Director, officer, or employee.
The Authority shall defend, indemnify and hold harmless the individual current and former Directors, officers, and employees for any acts or omissions in the scope of their employment or duties in the manner provided by Government Code Sections 995 et seq. Nothing in this section shall be construed to limit the defenses available under the law, to the Parties, the Authority, or its Directors, officers, or employees.
7.3 Indemnification of Parties. The Authority shall acquire such insurance coverage as is necessary to protect the interests of the Authority, the Parties, and the public. The Authority shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the Parties and each of their respective Board or Council members, officers, agents and employees, from any and all claims, losses, damages, costs, injuries, and liabilities of every kind arising directly or indirectly from the conduct, activities, operations, acts,
5.a
Packet Pg. 81
Attachment: EXHIBIT A: JPA - v4.1 Draft Fourth Amended [Revision 1] (6185 : Resolution - Approving an amendment to Peninsula Clean
10/22/20, and 09/26/24 and 05/28/26
and omissions of the Authority under this Agreement.
7.4 Amendment of this Agreement. This Agreement may not be amended except by a written amendment approved by a vote of Board members as provided in Section 3.7.5. The Authority shall provide written notice to all Parties of amendments to this Agreement, including the effective date of such amendments, at least 30 days prior to the date upon which the Board votes on such amendments.
7.5 Assignment. Except as otherwise expressly provided in this Agreement, the rights and duties of the Parties may not be assigned or delegated without the advance written consent of all of the other Parties, and any attempt to assign or delegate such rights or duties in contravention of this Section
7.5 shall be null and void. This Agreement shall inure to the benefit of, and be binding upon, the successors and assigns of the Parties. This Section 7.5 does not prohibit a Party from entering into an independent agreement with another agency, person, or entity regarding the financing of that Party’s contributions to the Authority, or the disposition of proceeds which that Party receives under this Agreement, so long as such independent agreement does not affect, or purport to affect, the rights and duties of the Authority or the Parties under this Agreement.
7.6 Severability. If one or more clauses, sentences, paragraphs or provisions of this Agreement shall be held to be unlawful, invalid or unenforceable, it is hereby agreed by the Parties, that the remainder of the Agreement shall not be affected thereby. Such clauses, sentences, paragraphs or provision shall be deemed reformed so as to be lawful, valid and enforced to the maximum extent possible.
7.7 Further Assurances. Each Party agrees to execute and deliver all further instruments and documents, and take any further action that may be reasonably necessary, to effectuate the purposes and intent of this Agreement.
7.8 Execution by Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in any number of counterparts, and upon execution by all Parties, each executed counterpart shall have the same force and effect as an original instrument and as if all Parties had signed the same instrument. Any signature page of this Agreement may be detached from any counterpart of this Agreement without impairing the legal effect of any signatures thereon, and may be attached to another counterpart of this Agreement identical in form hereto but having attached to it one or more signature pages.
7.9 Parties to be Served Notice. Any notice authorized or required to be given pursuant to this Agreement shall be validly given if served in writing either personally, by deposit in the United States mail, first class postage prepaid with return receipt requested, or by a recognized courier service.
Notices given (a) personally or by courier service shall be conclusively deemed received at the time of delivery and receipt and (b) by mail shall be conclusively deemed given 48 hours after the deposit thereof (excluding Saturdays, Sundays and holidays) if the sender receives the return receipt. All notices shall be addressed to the office of the clerk or secretary of the Authority or Party, as the case may be, or such other person designated in writing by the Authority or Party. Notices given to one Party shall be copied to all other Parties. Notices given to the Authority shall be copied to all Parties.
5.a
Packet Pg. 82
Attachment: EXHIBIT A: JPA - v4.1 Draft Fourth Amended [Revision 1] (6185 : Resolution - Approving an amendment to Peninsula Clean
10/22/20, and 09/26/24 and 05/28/26
Exhibit A
Definitions
“Act” means the Joint Exercise of Powers Act of the State of California (Government Code Section 6500 et seq.)
“Administrative Services Agreement” means an agreement or agreements entered into after the Effective Date by the Authority with an entity that will perform tasks necessary for planning, implementing, operating and administering the CCA Program or any other energy programs adopted by the Authority.
“Agreement” means this Joint Powers Agreement.
“Annual Energy Use” has the meaning given in Section 3.7.1. “Authority” means the Peninsula Clean EnergyWestLight Energy (formerly Peninsula Clean Energy Authority) Authority.
“Authority Document(s)” means document(s) duly adopted by the Board by resolution or motion implementing the powers, functions, and activities of the Authority, including but not limited to the Operating Rules and Regulations, the annual budget, and plans and policies. “Board” means the Board of Directors of the Authority.
“CCA” or “Community Choice Aggregation” means an electric service option available to cities and counties pursuant to Public Utilities Code Section 366.2. “CCA Program” means the Authority’s program relating to CCA that is principally described in Sections 2.3, 2.4, and 4.1.
“Director” means a member of the Board of Directors representing a Party. “Effective Date” means February 29, 2016 or when the County of San Mateo and at least two municipalities execute this Agreement, whichever occurs later, as further described in Section
2.1. “Implementation Plan” means the plan generally described in Section 4.1.2 of this Agreement that is required under Public Utilities Code Section 366.2 to be filed with the California Public Utilities Commission for the purpose of describing a proposed CCA Program. “Initial Costs” means all costs incurred by the County and/or Authority relating to the establishment and initial operation of the Authority, such as the hiring of a Chief Executive Officer and any administrative staff, and any required accounting, administrative, technical, or legal services in support of the Authority’sinitial activities or in support of the negotiation, preparation, and approval of one or more Administrative Services Agreements.
5.a
Packet Pg. 83
Attachment: EXHIBIT A: JPA - v4.1 Draft Fourth Amended [Revision 1] (6185 : Resolution - Approving an amendment to Peninsula Clean
10/22/20, and 09/26/24 and 05/28/26
Exhibit A (cont.)
Definitions
“Operating Rules and Regulations” means the rules, regulations, policies, bylaws and procedures governing the operation of the Authority.
“Parties” means, collectively, any municipality or county that executes this Agreement. “Party” means a signatory to this Agreement.
“Total Annual Energy” has the meaning given in Section 3.7.1.
5.a
Packet Pg. 84
Attachment: EXHIBIT A: JPA - v4.1 Draft Fourth Amended [Revision 1] (6185 : Resolution - Approving an amendment to Peninsula Clean
10/22/20, and 09/26/24 and 05/28/26
Exhibit B
List of Parties
Parties:
Atherton
Belmont
Brisbane
Burlingame
Colma
County of San Mateo
Daly City
East Palo Alto
Foster City
Half Moon Bay
Hillsborough
Los Banos
Menlo Park
Millbrae
Pacifica
Portola Valley
Redwood City
San Bruno
San Carlos
San Mateo
South San Francisco
Woodside
5.a
Packet Pg. 85
Attachment: EXHIBIT A: JPA - v4.1 Draft Fourth Amended [Revision 1] (6185 : Resolution - Approving an amendment to Peninsula Clean
10/22/20, and 09/26/24 and 05/28/26
Exhibits C and D
Annual Energy Use and Voting Shares
ANNUAL ENERGY USE WITHIN PCE
JURISDICTIONS AND VOTING SHARES
Twelve Months Ended November [date]
Party Total kWh Voting
Share
SAN MATEO
COUNTY
Total 100
5.a
Packet Pg. 86
Attachment: EXHIBIT A: JPA - v4.1 Draft Fourth Amended [Revision 1] (6185 : Resolution - Approving an amendment to Peninsula Clean
CITY OF PACIFICA
COUNCIL AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT
5/11/2026
1 SUBJECT:
Quarterly Treasurer’s Report for the quarter ending March 31, 2026 RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Review and accept the Quarterly Treasurer’s Report for the quarter ending March 31, 2026.
STAFF CONTACT:
Marisol Gómez, Director of Finance and Administrative Services (650) 501-0257
[email protected]
Lucy Xie, Deputy Finance Director
(650) 501-6014
[email protected]
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION:
The City Council adopted Administrative Policy 39 - Investment Policy to reflect current law and best practices in accordance with Government Code Section 53600 et seq. The policy provides guidelines for prudent investments and efficient cash management and requires the City to provide the governing body a report regarding the City’s investment activities on a quarterly basis to ensure “compliance” with the statement of investment policy.
The investment policies and practices of the City of Pacifica are strictly based on state law and prudent money management. The investment of funds for the City is directed to the goals of safety, liquidity, and yield while meeting the cash flow needs of the City through prudent investment of unexpended cash.
All funds are invested in accordance with the City’s Investment Policy and the authority governing investments set forth in the California Government Code, Sections 53601 through 53659. The investment policy for bond proceeds is contained in the relevant bond documents approved by the City Council at the time of the issuance of the debt.
As shown in the Treasurer’s Report (Attachment 1), the City holds various investments in external investment pools and fiscal agent accounts and they are listed at par value, cost, as well as their fair value. Par value represents the original issue amount for securities or investments purchased. There were no securities or investments that are held by the City where they were purchased at a discount or premium, so the par value is equal to the book value. The fair market value presented in the report shows the current market value of the investment as of March 31, 2026, accordingly. In accordance with GASB 31, the State provides a factor that can be multiplied by the City’s share of the LAIF pool to determine the market value each quarter. Other than LAIF, the fair market value of all other investments is equal to the book and par value.
6 Packet Pg. 87
Pacifica City Council 2
May 11, 2026
The City’s cash and investment portfolio, at fair market value, as of March 31, 2026, is $54,383,241, of which $4,549,708 is in the Tri Counties Bank various accounts, and $2,250 in Petty Cash held by various departments. $44,199,658 is placed with the State Controller’s Local Agency Investment Fund (LAIF), $2,501,880 is in Roy Davies Trust, $836,970 is in the PARS Trust, $133,802 is placed in Bank of New York (BNY Mellon), and $2,158,974 is placed with US Bank. Although operating checking accounts are not typical investment accounts, the City includes those balances as part of this report to show the total cash on hand for the quarter.
The City’s investment portfolio decreased by $1,286,741, from $55,669,982 reported in the last quarter ending December 31, 2025 to this reporting quarter ending March 31, 2026. The $1.2 million decrease of cash and investment position is a combination of factors: receiving $15.6 million in cash receipts from various revenue sources, and the expending of $16.8 million in expenditures broken down as follows: $9.0 million in employee payroll and benefits, $7.2 million in vendor payments by check, and $0.6 million in wire payments to vendors and purchase card services.
The Treasurer’s Report includes details of cash and investments which are held by institutions.
The report also summarizes the City’s cash position and distribution across funds for both quarters. Historical cash flow trends are compared to current cash flow requirements on an ongoing basis to ensure the City’s investment portfolio will remain sufficiently liquid to enable the City to meet all reasonable anticipated operating requirements. At the end of the quarter, the portfolio contained sufficient liquidity to meet the next six months of expected expenditures.
ALTERNATIVE ACTION:
There is no reasonable alternative to this informational item, as not accepting the 3rd Quarter Treasurer’s Report will not change the City’s cash position as of the end of the quarter ending March 31, 2026.
RELATION TO CITY COUNCIL GOALS AND WORK PLAN:
Approval of the 3rd Quarter Treasurer’s Report is consistent with the following Council adopted Goals:
• Enhance organizational and fiscal stability: Preparation and presentation of the Quarterly Treasurer’s Report support prudent cash management, financial oversight, and adherence to the City’s adopted Investment Policy and fiscal controls. • Broaden public communications and collaboration: Filing of the Quarterly Treasurer’s Report promotes transparency and accountability by providing the City Council and community with timely information regarding the City’s cash position and investment activity.
FISCAL IMPACT:
There is no fiscal impact associated with this report, as it is retrospective in nature and reflects prior-period activity; however, the Quarterly Treasurer’s Report outlines fiscal transactions that directly affect the City’s financial standing.
ORIGINATED BY:
6 Packet Pg. 88
Pacifica City Council 3
May 11, 2026
Finance Department
ATTACHMENT LIST:
Attachment 1 - Treasurer's Report 3-31-2026 (PDF)
Attachment 2 – City of Pacifica Glossary of Cash and Investment Terms (PDF) 6 Packet Pg. 89
City of Pacifica
Q3 Treasurer's Report
as of March 31, 2026
Reconciliation to General Ledger
Description Bank Account # Bank Amount
TRI COUNTIES GENERAL CHECKING ACCOUNT xx0541 4,741,728
TRI COUNTIES PAYROLL ACCOUNT xx6915
TRI COUNTIES WORKERS COMP ACCOUNT xx1341 -
TRI COUNTIES SENIOR SERVICES ACCOUNT xx5996 -
TRI COUNTIES TURBO DATA ACCOUNT xx9758 14,388
PETTY CASH PETTY CASH 2,250
CITY NATIONAL BANK ROY DAVIES TRUST-PRINCIPAL xx5367 2,501,880 LOCAL AGENCY INVESTMENT FUND (LAIF) xx1614/xx1007 44,200,506 BNY- RDA xx0166/xx0167 133,802
US BANK - 2014 WASTEWATER BONDS 2126700 4,878
US BANK - 2016 REFUNDING 24953500 285
US BANK - 2017 WASTEWATER REVENUE BOND-PROJECT FUND 27843200 1,983 US BANK - 2019 TAXABLE PENSION OBLIGATION BOND 267004000-3 1 US BANK - 2023 WW IBANK LOAN 207877539 2,151,827
PARS- PENSION&OPEB PACIFICA 836,970
DEPOSIT IN TRANSIT 124,593
OUTSTANDING AP CHECKS at 3/31/26 (329,779)
OUTSTANDING PR CHECKS at 3/31/26 (1,223)
TOTAL ADJUSTED BANK BALANCE 54,384,089
Description ORG OBJECT Book Amount
CASH IN GENERAL ACCOUNT 101 10001 4,538,059
CASH IN BANK - PAYROLL 101 10002 (1,223)
CASH IN BANK - TURBO 101 10003 14,388
PETTY CASH 101/518 10020 2,250
INVESTMENTS - LAIF 101 10101 44,200,506
PARS TRUSTS-PENSION 101 11001 836,970
R DAVIES TRUST 227 11003 2,501,880
BNY- RDA 2004 BONDS FISCAL AGENT 791 11204 133,802
RESERVE CASH-2014 WASTEWATER REVENUE REFUNDING 518 11214 4,878 CASH RESERVE - 2016 LEASE PAYMENT 440 11216 285
RESERVE CASH-2017 WASTEWATER REVENUE REFUNDING
PROJECT
518 11217 1,983
RESERVE CASH-2019 POB BONDS 440 11219 1
US BANK-2023 WASTE WATER BANK LOAN 518 11223 2,151,827
Unposted MissionSquare contribution (1,516)
TOTAL ADJUSTED BOOK BALANCE 54,384,089
6.a
Packet Pg. 90
Attachment: Attachment 1 - Treasurer's Report 3-31-2026 (6200 : Q3 Treasurer's Report) City of Pacifica
Q3 Treasurer's Report
as of March 31, 2026
Portfolio Summary
Par Value
GASB 31 Fair
Market Value BOOK Value
% of
Portfolio
Cash
Tri Counties Bank-General Account $ 4,536,543 $ 4,536,543 $ 4,536,543 8.34% Tri Counties Bank-Payroll Account (1,223) (1,223) (1,223) 0.00% Tri Counties Bank-Turbo Data 14,388 14,388 14,388 0.03% Petty Cash - Held by various Departments 2,250 2,250 2,250 0.00% Total Cash $ 4,551,958 $ 4,551,958 $ 4,551,958 8.37%
Investments
California Local Agency Investment Fund
(LAIF)* $ 44,200,506 $ 44,199,658 $ 44,200,506 81.27%
City National Bank-Roy Davies Trust 2,501,880 2,501,880 2,501,880 4.60% PARS PENSION** 836,970 836,970 836,970 1.54%
Bank of New York Mellon-RDA 2004 Bonds 133,802 133,802 133,802 0.25% US Bank - Money Market Fund 2,158,974 2,158,974 2,158,974 3.97% Total Investments $ 49,832,132 $ 49,831,284 $ 49,832,132 91.63% Total Cash and Investments $ 54,384,089 $ 54,383,241 $ 54,384,089 100.00% * LAIF FAIR VAUE RATE 0.999980831 https://www.treasurer.ca.gov/pmia-laif/reports/valuation.asp ** PARS TRUST - PUBLIC AGENCY RETIREMENT SERVICES - INVESTS IN CAPITAL APPRECIATION
FUNDS FOR THE CITY'S OPEB TRUST AND MODERATE INDEX FUNDS
6.a
Packet Pg. 91
Attachment: Attachment 1 - Treasurer's Report 3-31-2026 (6200 : Q3 Treasurer's Report) 1 | P a g e
City of Pacifica
Glossary of Cash and Investment Terms
Agency: Federal agency securities and /or Government-sponsored enterprises.
Annual Comprehensive Financial Report (ACFR): The official annual financial report for the City of Pacifica. It includes a combined set of statements for each individual fund and account group prepared with the accounting requirements established by the Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB) and in conformity with Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP). It also includes supporting schedules necessary to demonstrate compliance with finance-related legal and contractual provisions, extensive introductory material, and a detailed Statistical Section.
Bankers’ Acceptance (BA): A draft or bill or exchange accepted by a bank or trust company.
The accepting institution guarantees payment of the bill, as well as the issuer.
Book Value: The value at which a security or investment is carried on the financial records of its owner. This value may be the original cost of acquisition of the security or original cost adjusted by amortization of a premium or accretion of a discount. The book value may differ from the security’s current market value.
Broker: A broker brings buyers and sellers together for a commission.
California Local Government Debt: Is bonds, notes, warrants, or other evidences of indebtedness of any local agency within California. California local government debt is a permitted investment under the California Government Code. The Government Code does not specify minimum credit ratings for local government debt in which local agencies may invest.
Certificate of Deposit (CD): A time deposit with a specific maturity evidenced by a certificate.
Large-denomination CD’s are typically negotiable.
Collateral: Securities, evidence of deposit of other property which a borrower pledges to secure repayment of a loan. Also refers to securities pledged by a bank to secure deposits of public monies.
Coupon: (a) The annual rate of interest that a bond’s issuer promises to pay the bondholder on the bond’s face value. (b) A certificate attached to a bond evidencing interest due on a payment date.
Dealer: A dealer, as opposed to a broker, acts as a principal in all transactions, buying and selling for his own account.
Debenture: A bond secured only by the general credit of the issuer.
Delivery versus Payment: There are two methods of delivery of securities: delivery versus payment and delivery versus receipt. Delivery versus payment is delivery of securities with an
6.b
Packet Pg. 92
Attachment: Attachment 2 – City of Pacifica Glossary of Cash and Investment Terms (6200 : Q3 Treasurer's Report) 2 | P a g e
exchange of money for the securities. Delivery versus receipt is delivery of securities with an exchange of a signed receipt for the securities.
Derivatives: (1) Financial instruments whose return profile is linked to, or derived from, the movement of one or more underlying index or security, and may include a leveraging factor, or (2) financial contracts based upon notional amounts whose value is derived from an underlying index or security (interest rates, foreign exchange rates, equities or commodities).
Discount: The difference between the cost price of a security and its maturity when quoted at lower than face value. A security selling below original offering price shortly after sale also is considered to be at a discount.
Diversification: Dividing investment funds among a variety of securities offering independent returns.
Federal Credit Agencies: Agencies of the Federal government set up to supply credit to various classes of institutions and individuals, e.g., S&L’s, small business firms, students, farmers, farm cooperatives, and exporters.
Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC): A federal agency that insures bank deposits, currently up to $250,000 per deposit.
Federal Funds Rate: The rate of interest at which Fed funds are traded. This rate is currently pegged by the Federal Reserve through open-market operations.
Federal Home Loan Banks (FHLB): Government sponsored wholesale banks (currently 12 regional banks) which lend funds and provide correspondent banking services to member commercial banks, thrift institutions, credit unions and insurance companies. The mission of the FHLB is to liquefy the housing related assets of its members who must purchase stock in their district Bank.
Federal National Mortgage Association (FNMA): FNMA, like GNMA was chartered under the Federal National Mortgage Association Act in 1938. FNMA is a federal corporation working under the auspices of the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). It is the largest single provider of residential mortgage funds in the United States. Fannie Mae, as the corporation is called, is a private stockholder-owned corporation. The corporation’s purchases include a variety of adjustable mortgages and second loans, in addition to fixed-rate mortgages.
FNMA’s securities are also highly liquid and are widely accepted. FNMA assumes and guarantees that all security holders will receive timely payment of principal and interest.
Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC): Consists of seven members of the Federal Reserve Board and five of the twelve Federal Reserve and Presidents. The President of the New York Federal Reserve Bank is a permanent member, while the other Presidents serve on a rotating basis. The Committee periodically meets to set Federal Reserve guidelines regarding purchases and sales of Government Securities in the open market as a means of influencing the volume of bank credit and money.
6.b
Packet Pg. 93
Attachment: Attachment 2 – City of Pacifica Glossary of Cash and Investment Terms (6200 : Q3 Treasurer's Report) 3 | P a g e
Federal Reserve System: The central bank of the United States created by Congress and consisting of a seven-member Board of Governors in Washington, D.C., 12 regional banks and about 5,700 commercial banks that are members of the system.
Government National Mortgage Association (GNMA or Ginnie Mae): Securities influencing the volume of bank credit guaranteed by GNMA and issued by mortgage bankers, commercial banks, savings and loan associations, and other institutions. Security holder is protected by full faith and credit of the U.S. Government. Ginnie Mae securities are backed by the FHA, VA or FmHA mortgages. The term “pass-throughs” is often used to describe Ginnie Maes.
Issuer: Any corporation, government unit or financial institution which borrows money through the sale of securities.
Liquidity: A liquid asset is one that can be converted easily and rapidly into cash without a substantial loss of value. In the money market, a security is said to be liquid if the spread between bid and asked prices is narrow and reasonable size can be done at those quotes.
Local Agency Investment Fund (LAIF): A special fund in the State Treasury which local agencies may use to deposit funds for investment. All interest is distributed to those agencies participating on a proportionate share determined by the amounts deposited and the length of time they are deposited. Interest is paid quarterly via direct deposit to the LAIF account. The State keeps an amount for reasonable costs of making the investments, not to exceed one-quarter of one per cent of the earnings.
Local Government Investment Pool (LGIP): The aggregate of all funds from political subdivisions that are pooled together for investment and reinvestment.
Market Value: The price at which a security is trading and could presumably be purchased or sold.
Master Repurchase Agreement: A written contract covering all future transactions between the parties to repurchase – reverse repurchase agreements that establishes each party’s rights in the transactions. A master agreement will often specify, among other things, the right of the buyerlender to liquidate the underlying securities in the event of default by the seller-borrower.
Maturity: The date upon which the principal or stated value of an investment becomes due and payable.
Money Market: The market in which short-term debt instruments (bills, commercial paper, bankers’ acceptances, etc.) are issued and traded.
Mutual Funds: Referred to in the Government Code, Section 53601(l) as “shares of beneficial interest issued by diversified management companies.” The Mutual Fund must be restricted by its by-laws to the same investments as the local agency by the Government Code. These investments are Treasury issues, Federal Agency issues, State of California and City (within California) debt obligations, Bankers Acceptances, Commercial Paper, Certificates of Deposit, Negotiable Certificates of Deposit, Repurchase Agreements, Reverse Repurchase Agreements,
6.b
Packet Pg. 94
Attachment: Attachment 2 – City of Pacifica Glossary of Cash and Investment Terms (6200 : Q3 Treasurer's Report) 4 | P a g e
and Medium Term Corporate Notes. The quality rating and percentage restrictions in each investment category applicable to the local agency also apply to the Mutual Fund.
Negotiable: Term used to designate a security, the title to which is transferable by delivery.
Offer: The price asked by a seller of securities. (When you are buying securities, you ask for an offer). See Asked and Bid.
Open Market Operations: Purchases and sales of government and certain other securities in the open market by the New York Federal Reserve Bank as directed by the FOMC in order to influence the volume of money and credit in the economy. Purchases inject reserves into the bank system and stimulate growth of money and credit; sales have the opposite effect. Open market operations are the Federal Reserve’s most important and most flexible monetary policy tool.
Par Value: The amount of principal of a security that must be paid at maturity. The par value may also be referred to as the “face amount” of a security.
Portfolio: Collection of securities held by an investor.
Primary Dealer: A group of government securities dealers who submit daily reports of market activity and positions and monthly financial statements to the Federal Reserve Bank of New York and are subject to its informal oversight. Primary dealers included Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) – registered securities broker-dealers, banks, and a few unregulated firms.
Principal: Describes the original cost of a security. It represents the amount of capital or money which the investor pays for the investment.
Prudent Person Rule: An investment standard. In some states the law requires that a fiduciary, such as a trustee, may invest money only in a list of securities selected by the custody state – the so-called legal list. In other states the trustee may invest in a security if it is one which would be bought by a prudent person of discretion and intelligence who is seeking a reasonable income and preservation of capital.
Qualified Public Depositories: A financial institution which does not claim exemption from the payment of any sales or compensating use or ad valorem taxes under the laws of this state, which has segregated for the benefit of the commission eligible collateral having a value of not less than its maximum liability and which has been approved by the State to hold public deposits.
Rate of Return: The yield obtainable on a security based on its purchase price or its current market price. This may be the amortized yield to maturity on a bond the current income return.
Repurchase Agreement (RP or Repo): A holder of securities sells these securities to an investor with an agreement to repurchase them at a fixed price on a fixed date. The security “buyer” in effect lends the “seller” money for the period of the agreement, and the terms of the agreement are structured to compensate him for this. Dealers use RP extensively to finance their positions. Exception: When the Fed is said to be doing RP, it is lending money, that is, increasing bank services.
6.b
Packet Pg. 95
Attachment: Attachment 2 – City of Pacifica Glossary of Cash and Investment Terms (6200 : Q3 Treasurer's Report) 5 | P a g e
Safekeeping: A service to customers rendered by banks for a fee whereby securities and valuables of all types and descriptions are held in the bank’s vaults for protection.
Secondary Market: A market made for the purchase and sale of outstanding issues following the initial distribution.
Security: An investment instrument, other than an insurance policy or fixed annuity, issued by a corporation, government, or other organization which offers evidence of debt or equity.
Securities & Exchange Commission: Agency created by Congress to protect investors in securities transactions by administering securities legislation.
SEC Rule 15C3-1: See Uniform Net Capital Rule.
Structured Notes: Notes issued by Government Sponsored Enterprises (FHLB, FNMA, SLMA, etc.) and Corporations which have imbedded options (e.g., call features, step-up coupons, floating rate coupons, derivative-based returns) into their debt structure. Their market performance is impacted by the fluctuation of interest rates, the volatility of the imbedded options and shifts in the shape of the yield curve.
Treasury Bills: A non-interest bearing discount security issued by the U.S. Treasury to finance the national debt. Most bills are issued to mature in three months, six months, or one year.
Treasury Notes: Medium-term coupon-bearing U.S. Treasury securities issued as direct obligations of the U.S. Government and having initial maturities from two to ten years.
Uniform Net Capital Rule: Securities and Exchange Commission requirement that member firms as well as nonmember broker-dealers in securities maintain a maximum ratio of indebtedness to liquid capital of 15 to 1; also called net capital rule and net capital ratio.
Indebtedness covers all money owed to a firm, including margin loans and commitments to purchase securities, one reason new public issues are spread among member of underwriting syndicates. Liquid capital includes cash and assets easily converted into cash.
Yield: The rate of annual income return on an investment, expressed as a percentage. (a) Income Yield is obtained by dividing the current dollar income by the current market price for the security. (b) Net Yield or Yield to Maturity is the current income yield minus any premium above par or plus any discount from par in purchase price, with the adjustment spread over the period from the date of purchase to the date of maturity of the bond.
6.b
Packet Pg. 96
Attachment: Attachment 2 – City of Pacifica Glossary of Cash and Investment Terms (6200 : Q3 Treasurer's Report)
CITY OF PACIFICA
COUNCIL AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT
5/11/2026
1 SUBJECT:
Adopt a list of projects for Fiscal Year 2026-27 funded by SB 1: Road Repair and Accountability Act of 2017.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Adopt the Resolution of the City Council of the City of Pacifica Adopting a list of projects for Fiscal Year 2026-27 funded by SB 1: Road Repair and Accountability Act of 2017.
STAFF CONTACT:
Roland Yip, P.E., DPW Deputy Director/City Engineer
(650) 738-3771
[email protected]
Melissa Tigbao, P.E., Public Works Director
(650) 501-6016
[email protected]
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION:
On April 28, 2017, the Governor signed Senate Bill (SB) 1 (Beall, Chapter 5, Statutes of 2017).
To address basic road maintenance, rehabilitation, and critical safety needs on both the state highway and local streets and road system, SB 1 increases per gallon fuel excise taxes, increases diesel fuel sales taxes and vehicle registration fees, and provides for inflationary adjustments to tax rates in future years.
The State Controller (Controller) deposits various portions of this new funding into the newly created Road Maintenance and Rehabilitation Account (RMRA). A percentage of this new RMRA funding will be apportioned by formula to eligible cities and counties pursuant to Streets and Highways Code Section 2032(h) for basic road maintenance, rehabilitation, and critical safety projects on the local streets and roads system.
SB 1 emphasizes the importance of accountability and transparency in the delivery of California’s transportation programs. Therefore, to be eligible for RMRA funding, statute requires cities and counties to annually provide basic project reporting to the Commission for projects anticipated for and funded through the RMRA. The City will receive approximately $1,085,164.00 for street rehabilitation for Fiscal Year (FY) 2026-27.
The Streets and Highways Code requires that prior to receiving an apportionment of RMRA funds from the Controller in a fiscal year, all eligible cities or counties shall submit to the California Transportation Commission (Commission) a list of projects proposed to be funded with these funds pursuant to an adopted resolution by the applicable City Council or County Board of Supervisors at a regular public meeting. The attached resolution is in the strict format 7 Packet Pg. 97
Pacifica City Council 2
May 11, 2026
provided by the Commission and includes a list of all streets that are eligible for SB1 funding.
These streets are part of the City’s 5-Year Street Maintenance program for FY 2026-27.
This year, the City Manager recommends the following project for SB1 funding for Fiscal Year 2026-27. The project will follow the City’s approved 5-year street maintenance program and resurface approximately 7.28 miles of City pavement and the overall project scope will include rubber cape seals, double slurry seals, slurry seals, asphalt concrete grinding and paving, microsurfacing base repairs, pavement striping and markings and other miscellaneous related work.
ALTERNATIVE ACTION:
Council may choose not to adopt the resolution and it will result in the City not meeting statutory requirements for the SB1 Funds. Therefore, staff does not recommend this alternative action.
RELATION TO CITY COUNCIL GOALS AND WORK PLAN:
Approval of the resolution is consistent with the following Council adopted Goals:
• Enhance organizational and fiscal stability: SB1 Funding will provide vital financing mechanisms to improve City infrastructure.
• Improve and steward City infrastructure, streets and facilities: Adopting the resolution and approving the Proposed Project List meets statutory requirements that will allow the City to repair City infrastructure.
FISCAL IMPACT:
There is no Fiscal Impact associated with the Adoption the Resolution. Separate Council action is required for appropriation of funds for each of the projects listed.
ORIGINATED BY:
Public Works
ATTACHMENT LIST:
Pacifica FY 26-27 Resurfacing Street List (PDF)
7 Packet Pg. 98
Pacifica City Council 3
May 11, 2026
RESOLUTION NO. __________
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PACIFICA ADOPTING A LIST OF PROJECTS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2026-27 FUNDED BY SB 1: ROAD REPAIR AND ACCOUNTABILITY ACT OF 2017
WHEREAS, Senate Bill 1 (SB 1), the Road Repair and Accountability Act of 2017 (Chapter 5, Statutes of 2017) was passed by the Legislature and Signed into law by the Governor in April 2017 to address the significant multi-modal transportation funding shortfalls statewide; and
WHEREAS, SB 1 includes accountability and transparency provisions that will ensure the residents of the City of Pacifica are aware of the projects proposed for funding in our community and which projects have been completed each fiscal year; and WHEREAS, the City of Pacifica must adopt by resolution a list of projects proposed to receive fiscal year funding from the Road Maintenance and Rehabilitation Account (RMRA), created by SB 1, which must include a description and the location of each proposed project, a proposed schedule for the project’s completion, and the estimated useful life of the improvement; and
WHEREAS, the City of Pacifica, will receive an estimated $1,085,164.00 in RMRA funding in Fiscal Year 2026-27 from SB 1; and
WHEREAS, this is the tenth year in which the City of Pacifica is receiving SB 1 funding and will enable the City of Pacifica to continue essential road maintenance and rehabilitation projects, safety improvements, repairing and replacing aging bridges, and increasing access and mobility options for the traveling public that would not have otherwise been possible without SB 1; and
WHEREAS, the City of Pacifica has undergone a robust public process to ensure public input into our community’s transportation priorities/the project list; and WHEREAS, the City of Pacifica used a Pavement Management System to develop the SB 1 project list to ensure revenues are being used on the most high-priority and cost-effective projects that also meet the communities’ priorities for transportation investment; and WHEREAS, the funding from SB 1 will help the City of Pacifica maintain and rehabilitate several streets/roads throughout the City of Pacifica this year and other similar projects into the future; and
WHEREAS, the 2023 California Statewide Local Streets and Roads Needs Assessment found that the City of Pacifica streets and roads are in an “poor” condition and this revenue will help us increase the overall quality of our road system and over the next decade will bring our streets and roads into a “at risk” condition; and
WHEREAS, the SB 1 project list and overall investment in our local streets and roads infrastructure with a focus on basic maintenance and safety, investing in complete street 7 Packet Pg. 99
Pacifica City Council 4
May 11, 2026
infrastructure, and using cutting-edge technology, materials and practices, will have significant positive co-benefits statewide.
NOW, THEREFORE IT IS HEREBY RESOLVED, ORDERED AND FOUND by the City Council of the City of Pacifica, State of California, as follows:
1. The foregoing recitals are true and correct.
2. The following list of newly proposed projects will be funded in-part or solely with Fiscal Year 2026-27 Road Maintenance and Rehabilitation Account revenues:
Project Title: FY 2026-27 Pavement Resurfacing
Project
Project Description: The project will resurface approximately 7.28 miles of City pavement and the overall project scope will
include rubber cape seals, double slurry seals,
slurry seals, asphalt concrete grinding and paving,
microsurfacing base repairs, pavement striping and
markings and other miscellaneous work.
Project Location: Various Streets and Roads, See Attachment A.
Estimated Project Schedule: July 2026 – June 2027
Estimated Project Useful Life: 5 to 20 Years
• • • • •
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Pacifica, California, held on the 11th day of May 2026, by the following vote:
AYES, Councilmembers:
NOES, Councilmembers:
ABSENT, Councilmembers:
ABSTAIN, Councilmembers:
_________________________________
Christine Boles, Mayor
ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
______________________________ _________________________________ Sarah Coffey, City Clerk Michelle Kenyon, City Attorney 7 Packet Pg. 100
Pacifica City Council 5
May 11, 2026
ATTACHMENT A
7 Packet Pg. 101
Attachment A
Street Name From To Field Treatment
ARCADIA COURT DEL MONTE DR CUL DE SAC DOUBLE SLURRY
ARCADIA DRIVE DEL MONTE DR CITY LIMITS DOUBLE SLURRY
CORAL RIDGE DRIVE BEACHVIEW AVE BEAUMONT BLVD DOUBLE SLURRY
CRENSHAW COURT PALMETTO AVE CUL DE SAC DOUBLE SLURRY
CRENSHAW DRIVE PALMETTO AVE SKYLINE DR/CITY LIMITS DOUBLE SLURRY
DEL MONTE DRIVE ARCADIA DR MAGELLEN DR DOUBLE SLURRY
EL DORADO DRIVE EDGEWOOD DR SUNSHINE DR DOUBLE SLURRY
FARALLON AVENUE CHANNING WAY CORAL RIDGE DR DOUBLE SLURRY
FOREST PARK COURT PALMETTO AVE CUL DE SAC DOUBLE SLURRY
FOREST PARK DRIVE PARADISE DR PALMETTO AVE DOUBLE SLURRY
FREMONT AVENUE MONTEREY RD CHANNING WAY DOUBLE SLURRY
HOLIDAY COURT CORAL RIDGE DR CUL DE SAC DOUBLE SLURRY
MAGELLAN COURT DEL MONTE DR CUL DE SAC DOUBLE SLURRY
MAGELLAN DRIVE PALMETTO AVE DEL MONTE DR DOUBLE SLURRY
MOON GATE COURT FOREST PARK DR CUL DE SAC DOUBLE SLURRY
PARADISE DRIVE GOLDEN BAY DR PALMETTO AVE DOUBLE SLURRY
SEA HAVEN COURT EDGEWOOD DR CUL DE SAC DOUBLE SLURRY
WESTCLIFF COURT GATEWAY DR CUL DE SAC DOUBLE SLURRY
WINWOOD AVENUE FREMONT AVE BONNIE LANE DOUBLE SLURRY
CHANNING WAY FREMONT AVE FARALLON AVE DOUBLE SLURRY + 10% BR CLIFTON ROAD WATERFORD ST BEAUMONT BLVD DOUBLE SLURRY + 10% BR GOLDEN BAY DRIVE PARADISE DR PALMETTO AVE DOUBLE SLURRY + 10% BR PALMETTO AVENUE WEST AVALON DR WEST MANOR DR DOUBLE SLURRY + 10% BR Street List
City of Pacifica
FY 2026-27 Pavement Resurfacing Project
7.a
Packet Pg. 102 Attachment: Pacifica FY 26-27 Resurfacing Street List (6201 : Adopt a list of projects for Fiscal Year 2026-27 funded by SB 1: Road Repair and Attachment A
Street List
City of Pacifica
FY 2026-27 Pavement Resurfacing Project
BEVERLY PLACE CHANNING AVE BEAUMONT BLVD MULTI-LAYER
EASTRIDGE CIRCLE GATEWAY DR GATEWAY DR MULTI-LAYER
EASTRIDGE COURT EASTRIDGE CIRCLE CUL DE SAC MULTI-LAYER
SEA BREEZE COURT GATEWAY DR CUL DE SAC MULTI-LAYER
DOLPHIN DRIVE WEST AVALON DRIVE CUL DE SAC RUBBER CAPE SEAL
EDGEWOOD DRIVE GATEWAY DR SUNSHINE DR RUBBER CAPE SEAL
PARKVIEW CIRCLE HICKEY BLVD (SOUTH
INTERSECTION)
HICKEY BLVD (NORTH
INTERSECTION) RUBBER CAPE SEAL
PARKVIEW COURT PARKVIEW CIRCLE CUL DE SAC RUBBER CAPE SEAL
SUNSHINE DRIVE EDGEWOOD DR EDGEWOOD DR RUBBER CAPE SEAL
BANCROFT WAY WATERFORD ST BEAUMONT BLVD SLURRY SEAL
BEAUMONT BOULEVARD MONTEREY BLVD CORAL RIDGE DR SLURRY SEAL
BILL DRAKE WAY ESPLENADE AVE PALMETTO AVE SLURRY SEAL
EDNA LANE BEAUMONT BLVD FARALLON AVE SLURRY SEAL
FARALLON AVENUE HICKEY BLVD CHANNING WAY SLURRY SEAL
GATEWAY DRIVE FIRECREST AVE CITY LIMITS/ST HWY 1
OVERPASS SLURRY SEAL
WATERFORD STREET MONTEREY RD WINWOOD AVE SLURRY SEAL
WEST AVALON DRIVE ESPLANADE AVE PALMETTO AVE SLURRY SEAL
WEST MANOR DRIVE ESPLANADE AVE PALMETTO AVE SLURRY SEAL
7.a
Packet Pg. 103 Attachment: Pacifica FY 26-27 Resurfacing Street List (6201 : Adopt a list of projects for Fiscal Year 2026-27 funded by SB 1: Road Repair and
CITY OF PACIFICA
COUNCIL AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT
5/11/2026
1 SUBJECT:
Approval of Consultant Services Agreement with BKF Engineers for Feasibility Study Services for the Oceana Bike Lanes Project
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Adopt the Resolution Approving the Consultant Services Agreement with BKF Engineers for feasibility study services for the Oceana Bike Lanes Project in the amount of $91,446 and authorize the City Manager to execute all documents related to the project.
STAFF CONTACT:
Bryan Bautista, Assistant Civil Engineer
(650) 898-2233
[email protected]
Roland Yip, P.E., Deputy Director of Public Works/City
Engineer (650) 738-3771
[email protected]
Melissa Tigbao, P.E., Director of Public
Works (650) 501-6016
[email protected]
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION:
On August 26, 2024, the City Council adopted a resolution supporting the Oceana Bike Lanes Project, authorizing submittal of an application to the San Mateo County Transportation Authority (TA) for the 2024 Pedestrian and Bicycle Program Cycle 7 Grant Program and authorizing the City Manager to execute any documents required for the grant. The City of Pacifica applied for $2M in funding for design and construction of the Oceana Bike Lanes Project. The project was only awarded $135,214 for design.
The Class II bicycle lanes on Oceana Boulevard between Milagra Drive to Clarendon Road is a priority project from the Bicycle & Pedestrian Master Plan. The bicycle lanes will connect to key schools in the area and to the future bicycle lanes that are a part of the Manor Drive Overcrossing Improvements Project.
Due to the complexity of the project, it is necessary to select a consultant with expertise in civil and traffic design. To advance this effort, the City conducted an informal Request for Proposals (RFP) for full design and engineering services Plans, Specifications, and Estimates (PS&E).
Nine (9) companies on the approved Qualified On-call Consultant list for Traffic and Civil Engineering were invited to participate, and three (3) companies submitted proposals:
1. BKF
2. CSG
3. Fehr & Peers
8 Packet Pg. 104
Pacifica City Council 2
May 11, 2026
All proposals exceeded the grant funds. As a result, staff recommends proceeding with a reduced scope and awarding BKF Engineers to complete Task A only, which includes feasibility analysis and concept design in the amount of $91,446. The scope of work includes evaluation of existing conditions, development of conceptual alternatives, and preparation of planning-level cost estimates to support future PS&E. This phased approach allows the City to advance the project and position it for future design and construction grant funding opportunities.
BKF Engineers has extensive experience delivering transportation planning and design projects throughout the Bay Area, including multimodal corridor studies and bicycle and pedestrian improvements. Their familiarity with local conditions and regulatory requirements will support efficient delivery of the feasibility study.
To further supplement the project, The City also submitted a grant application in April 2026 for the Transportation Development Act (TDA) Article 3 program via City/County Association of Governments of San Mateo County and will continue to actively pursue additional grant funding opportunities to support future phases of design and construction.
ALTERNATIVE ACTION:
Council may choose not to authorize the feasibility study; however, this would delay the City’s ability to advance safety improvements along the Oceana corridor and pursue future grant funding. Staff does not recommend this alternative.
RELATION TO CITY COUNCIL GOALS AND WORK PLAN:
Approval of the agreement is consistent with the following Council adopted Goals:
· Improve and steward City infrastructure, streets and facilities: The Oceana Bike Lanes Project will enhance safety and accessibility for all roadway users.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The total project cost for the feasibility phase is $91,446. Funding will be provided through a grant from the San Mateo County Transportation Authority in the amount of $83,133, with a required City match of $8,313. No additional General Fund impact is anticipated at this time for this phase of the project.
Total Project Source of Funds
SMCTA Cycle 7 Grant $83,133
Fund 211 - Measure W Local Match (10%) $8,313
Total Source of Funds $91,446
ORIGINATED BY:
Engineering
ATTACHMENT LIST:
BKF Oceana Bike Lanes Consultant Services Agreement (PDF) 8 Packet Pg. 105
Pacifica City Council 3
May 11, 2026
RESOLUTION NO. ____
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PACIFICA APPROVING THE
CONSULTANT SERVICES AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF PACIFICA AND BKF
ENGINEERS FOR DESIGN AND ENGINEERING SERVICES IN THE AMOUNT OF $91,446 FOR OCEANA BIKE LANES PROJECT; APPROVE BUDGET AUTHORITY IN THE AMOUNT OF $91,446 AND AUTHORIZE THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE ALL
DOCUMENTS RELATED TO THE PROJECT
WHEREAS, the City desires to move forward with the feasibility study for the Oceana Bike Lanes Project using the Highway Call for Projects grant administered by the San Mateo County Transportation Authority; and
WHEREAS, the City issued a Request for Proposal for the Design and Engineering Services related to the Oceana Bike Lanes Project; and
WHEREAS, the City evaluated proposals from three companies, and selected BKF to complete the work;
THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Pacifica approves the Consultant Services Agreement with BKF Engineers for feasibility study services for the Oceana Bike Lanes Project in the amount of $91,446 and authorize the City Manager to execute all documents related to the project.
• • • • •
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Pacifica, California, held on the 11th day of May 2026, by the following vote:
AYES, Councilmembers:
NOES, Councilmembers:
ABSENT, Councilmembers:
ABSTAIN, Councilmembers:
_________________________________
Christine Boles, Mayor
ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
______________________________ _________________________________ Sarah Coffey, City Clerk Michelle Kenyon, City Attorney 8 Packet Pg. 106
4866-2656-6648 v1 - 1 -
AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL CONSULTANT SERVICES
This Agreement for Consultant Services (the "Agreement") is made and entered into this 11th day of May 2026, by and between THE CITY OF PACIFICA, a municipal corporation (hereinafter referred to as "CITY") and BKF (hereinafter referred to as "CONSULTANT").
CITY and CONSULTANT may be referred to individually as “Party” and collectively as the “Parties.”
RECITALS
WHEREAS, CITY requires services in connection with the City Council strategic planning facilitation;
WHEREAS, CONSULTANT is qualified to perform such services; and WHEREAS, CONSULTANT has agreed to provide CITY with such services on the terms and conditions set forth herein.
NOW, THEREFORE, for the considerations hereinafter set forth, CONSULTANT and CITY agree as follows:
ARTICLE 1 - SCOPE OF SERVICES
1.1. Scope of Work. CONSULTANT agrees to furnish the services set forth in Exhibit A, Scope of Work, which is attached hereto and incorporated herein (the "Services").
1.2. Compliance with Law. The Services shall be performed in accordance with all applicable federal, state and local laws, ordinances, rules, regulations and orders.
1.3. Professional Competence. CONSULTANT represents that it has the professional skills necessary to perform the Services and that it will perform the Services in a skillful and professional manner. CONSULTANT represents that it has all the necessary licenses to perform the Services and shall maintain them throughout the term of this Agreement.
CONSULTANT agrees that the Services shall be performed consistent with the professional skill and care ordinarily provided by practicing in the same or similar locality under the same or similar circumstances. CITY and CONSULTANT agree that CONSULTANT is in responsible charge of the Services. Acceptance by CITY of the Services does not operate as a release of CONSULTANT from professional responsibility for the Services performed.
1.4. Independent Contractor. CONSULTANT is an independent contractor and not an employee of CITY. CONSULTANT expressly warrants that it will not represent that it is an employee of CITY.
1.5. Confidentiality. CONSULTANT agrees to maintain in confidence and not disclose to any person, firm, governmental entity, or corporation, without CITY's prior written consent, any trade secret or confidential information, knowledge or data relating to the
8.a
Packet Pg. 107 Attachment: BKF Oceana Bike Lanes Consultant Services Agreement (6207 : Oceana Bike Lanes Feasibility Study) 4866-2656-6648 v1 - 2 -
products, process, or operation of CITY. CONSULTANT further agrees to maintain in confidence and not to disclose to any person, firm, governmental entity, or corporation any data, information, technology, or material developed or obtained by CONSULTANT during the performance of the Services. The covenants contained in this Section 1.6 shall survive the termination of this Agreement for whatever cause.
1.6. Ownership of Material. Any reports and other material prepared by or on behalf of CONSULTANT under this Agreement (collectively, the "Documents") and provided to the CITY shall be and remain the property of CITY. All Documents not already provided to CITY shall be delivered to CITY on the date of termination of this Agreement for any reason. The Documents may be used by CITY and its agents, employees, representatives, and assigns, in whole or in part, or in modified form, for all purposes CITY may deem appropriate without further employment of or payment of any compensation to CONSULTANT.
1.7. Documentation. CONSULTANT shall keep and maintain full and complete documentation and accounting records, employee time sheets, and correspondence pertaining to the performance of the Services, and CONSULTANT shall make such documents available for review and/or audit by CITY and CITY's representatives at all reasonable times for at least four years after the termination of this Agreement or completion of the Services.
1.8. Testimony. CONSULTANT agrees to testify at CITY's request if litigation is brought against CITY in connection with the Services. Unless the action is brought by CONSULTANT or is based upon CONSULTANT's negligence, CITY will compensate CONSULTANT for the preparation and the testimony at CONSULTANT's standard hourly rates.
ARTICLE 2 - COMPENSATION
2.1. Compensation. Compensation for the Services shall be in accordance with Exhibit B, Compensation, attached hereto and incorporated herein. It is agreed that the compensation for the Services shall not exceed $91,446.00 ("Cost Ceiling").
2.2. Invoices. CONSULTANT shall submit monthly invoices in a form satisfactory to CITY on or before the tenth day of each month for Services provided during the preceding month. CONSULTANT shall submit time and cost records as necessary to substantiate performance of the Services. Within 35 days after receipt of each such invoice, CITY shall verify the accuracy of the invoice, correct the charges where appropriate and as discussed and mutually agreed with CONSULTANT, and make payment to CONSULTANT in an amount equal to the amount of such invoice, as verified or corrected by CITY. No payment hereunder shall be construed as evidence of acceptance of any of CONSULTANT's work. CITY reserves the right to withhold payment from CONSULTANT on account of Services not performed satisfactorily, delays in CONSULTANT's performance of Services, or other defaults hereunder. CONSULTANT shall not stop or delay performance of the Services under this Agreement on account of payment disputes with CITY.
8.a
Packet Pg. 108 Attachment: BKF Oceana Bike Lanes Consultant Services Agreement (6207 : Oceana Bike Lanes Feasibility Study) 4866-2656-6648 v1 - 3 -
2.3. Status Reports. Together with each monthly invoice, CONSULTANT shall submit a status report detailing the amount expended on the Services to that date and the remaining amount to be expended before the Cost Ceiling is reached. CONSULTANT shall notify CITY in writing when payments have reached 90 percent of the Cost Ceiling.
2.4. Withholding. In lieu of holding retention, CITY shall withhold CONSULTANT's final payment until the Services are complete and CITY has received all Documents.
CONSULTANT shall diligently continue and complete performance of the Services if the Services are not complete at the time CONSULTANT has performed services up to the Cost Ceiling.
ARTICLE 3 - TIME OF PERFORMANCE
3.1. Effective Date. This Agreement shall become effective upon execution of the second signature and shall remain in full force and effect until the Services are completed (the "Term"). CONSULTANT agrees to complete all services by December 31, 2027.
3.2. Termination. This Agreement may be terminated at any time by CITY upon written notice to CONSULTANT.
3.3. Final Payment. CONSULTANT shall be entitled to compensation for Services performed up to the time of such termination, it being understood that any payments are full compensation for the Services rendered under this Agreement.
3.4. Other Remedies. Nothing in this Article 3 shall be deemed to limit the respective rights of the parties to terminate this Agreement for cause or otherwise to exercise any rights or pursue any remedies which may accrue to them.
ARTICLE 4 - DESIGNATED CONTACTS
4.1. CITY Contact. CITY designates Roland Yip, PE, DPW Deputy Director/City Engineer, as its contact who shall be responsible for administering and interpreting the terms and conditions of this Agreement, for matters relating to CONSULTANT's performance under this Agreement, and for liaison and coordination between CITY and CONSULTANT. In the event CITY wishes to make a change in CITY 's representative, CITY will notify CONSULTANT of the change in writing.
4.2. CONSULTANT Contact. CONSULTANT designates Dan Shafer, Principal-inCharge/Vice President as its contact, who shall have immediate responsibility for the performance of the Services and for all matters relating to performance under this Agreement. Any change in CONSULTANT's designated contact shall be subject to written approval by CITY.
ARTICLE 5 - INDEMNIFICATION AND INSURANCE
5.1. Indemnification. To the fullest extent allowed by law, CONSULTANT hereby agrees to defend, indemnify, and save harmless CITY, its Council, boards, commissions, officers,
8.a
Packet Pg. 109 Attachment: BKF Oceana Bike Lanes Consultant Services Agreement (6207 : Oceana Bike Lanes Feasibility Study) 4866-2656-6648 v1 - 4 -
employees, directors, volunteers and agents, from and against claims, suits, actions liability, loss, damage, expense, injury (including, without limitation, economic harm, injury to or death of any person, including an employee of CONSULTANT or its Subconsultants), cost (including, without limitation reasonable, costs and fees of litigation) of every nature, kind or description, at law or equity, which may be brought against, or suffered or sustained by, City of Pacifica, its Council, boards, commissions, officers, employees, directors, volunteers or agents that arise out of, pertain to, or relate to any negligence, recklessness, or willful misconduct of CONSULTANT, any Subconsultant, anyone directly or indirectly employed or retained by them, or anyone that they control. In the event one or more defendants is unable to pay its share of defense costs due to bankruptcy or dissolution of the business, the CONSULTANT shall meet and confer with other parties regarding unpaid defense costs.
The duty of CONSULTANT to indemnify and save harmless, as set forth herein, shall include the duty to defend as set forth in Section 2782.8 of the California Civil Code; provided, however, that nothing herein contained shall be construed to require CONSULTANT to indemnify City of Pacifica, its Council, boards, commissions, officers, employees and agents against any responsibility or liability in contravention of Section 2782 of the California Civil Code.
CONSULTANT’s responsibility for such defense and indemnity obligations shall survive the termination or completion of this Agreement for the full period of time allowed by law.
The defense and indemnification obligations of this agreement are undertaken in addition to, and shall not in any way be limited by, the insurance obligations contained within this Agreement.
If CONSULTANT is a “design professional,” as defined in California Civil Code Section 2782.8(c), CONSULTANT shall indemnify, defend, and hold the Indemnitees harmless against Liability only to the extent such Liability arises out of, pertains to, or relates to CONSULTANT’s negligence, recklessness, or willful misconduct. In such an event, the cost to defend charged to CONSULTANT shall not exceed CONSULTANT’s proportionate percentage of fault.
5.2. Health and Safety. CONSULTANT may perform part of the Services at sites which contain unknown working conditions and contaminated materials. CONSULTANT shall be solely responsible for the health and safety of CONSULTANT's employees during the performance of the Services.
5.3. Insurance. CONSULTANT and all of CONSULTANTS employees, subcontractors, consultants and other agency shall procure, provide and maintain at all times during the performance of this Agreement, and for such additional periods as described herein, the insurance listed below with insurers licensed to do business in the State of California and with a Best's rating of no less than A:VII.
8.a
Packet Pg. 110 Attachment: BKF Oceana Bike Lanes Consultant Services Agreement (6207 : Oceana Bike Lanes Feasibility Study) 4866-2656-6648 v1 - 5 -
A. Commercial Automobile Liability Insurance. Commercial Automobile Liability Insurance providing bodily injury liability and property damage, to protect against all liability arising out of the use of any owned, leased, passenger or commercial automobile at a minimum amount of $1,000,000 combined single limit and $2,000,000 aggregate. Coverage shall apply to hired and non-owned autos.
B. Commercial General Liability Insurance. Commercial General Liability Insurance, with limits providing a minimum amount of $1,000,000 combined single limit coverage for each occurrence, $2,000,000 general aggregate and $2,000,000 products/completed operations aggregate. The insurance shall cover all operations including but not limited to the following: (1) premises, operations and mobile equipment liability; (2) completed operations and products liability; (3) contractual liability insuring the obligations assumed by CONSULTANT in this Agreement; (4) broad form property damage liability; (5) personal injury liability endorsement, including death; and (6) automobile bodily injury and property damage insurance, including all owned, hired and non-owned equipment.
C. Workers Compensation Insurance. Workers Compensation insurance, occupational disease insurance and employer’s liability insurance shall be required with minimum limits as required by law, covering all workplaces involved in this Agreement.
D. Policy Terms. Concurrently with execution of this Agreement, CONSULTANT shall provide CITY with Certificates of Insurance evidencing that CONSULTANT has obtained or maintains the insurance required by this Section
5.3. The Certificates shall be on forms acceptable to CITY. CONSULTANT shall also furnish CITY with original endorsements with the following documentation:
• Precluding cancellation or reduction in coverage before the expiration of thirty (30) days after CITY shall have received written notification thereof from CONSULTANT by United States mail;
• Providing that CONSULTANT's insurance shall apply separately to each insured against whom claim is made or suit is brought, and include a “separation of insureds” or “severability” clause which treats each insured separately, except with respect to the limits of the insurer's liability (cross-liability endorsement);
• Excepting CONSULTANT’S professional liability insurance, naming CITY, its City Council, boards, commissions, committees, officers, employees and agents as additional insureds (“Additional Insureds”); and • Providing that for any claims relating to CONSULTANT's services hereunder, CONSULTANT's insurance coverage shall be primary insurance with respect to CITY, its City Council, boards, commissions, committees, officers, employees and agents, and that any insurance or self-insurance maintained by CITY for itself, its City Council, boards, commissions, committees, officers, employees and agents shall be in excess of CONSULTANT's insurance and shall not be contributory with it.
8.a
Packet Pg. 111 Attachment: BKF Oceana Bike Lanes Consultant Services Agreement (6207 : Oceana Bike Lanes Feasibility Study) 4866-2656-6648 v1 - 6 -
• It shall be a requirement under this Agreement that any available insurance proceeds broader than or in excess of the specified minimum insurance coverages requirements and/or limits shall be available to the Additional Insured, including but not limited to any umbrella or excess insurance.
Furthermore, the requirements for coverage and limits shall be the greater of:
(a) the minimum coverage and limits specified in this Agreement; or (b) the broader coverage and maximum limits of coverage of any insurance policy or proceeds available to the named insured.
E. Material Breach. If CONSULTANT fails to maintain insurance coverage or provided insurance documentation which is required pursuant to this Agreement, it shall be deemed a material breach of this Agreement. CITY, at its sole option, may terminate this Agreement and obtain damages from CONSULTANT resulting from said breach. Alternatively, CITY may purchase the required insurance coverage, and without further notice to CONSULTANT, may deduct from sums due to CONSULTANT any premium costs advanced by CITY for such insurance. These remedies shall be in addition to any other remedies available to CITY.
ARTICLE 6 - NOTICES
All notices or other communications required or permitted hereunder shall be in writing, and shall be personally delivered or sent by facsimile or reputable overnight courier and shall be deemed received upon the earlier of: (1) if personally delivered, the date of delivery to the address of the person to receive such notice; (2) if delivered by Federal Express or other overnight courier for next business day delivery, the next business day; (3) if sent by facsimile, with the original sent on the same day by overnight courier, the date on which the facsimile is received, provided it is before 5:00 P.M. Pacific Time; or (4) if sent electronically, the date of delivery on the confirmed read receipt. Notice of change of address shall be given by written notice in the manner described in this Article 6. Rejection or other refusal to accept or the inability to deliver because of a change in address of which no notice was given shall be deemed to constitute receipt of the notice or communication sent. Unless changed in accordance herewith, the addresses for notices given pursuant to this Agreement shall be as follows:
If to CITY: Sean Charpentier, City Manager
170 Santa Maria Avenue
Pacifica, CA 94404
Phone: (650) 738-7409
Email: [email protected]
If to CONSULTANT: Dan Schaefer
225 Shoreline Drive, Suite 200
Redwood City, CA 94065
Phone: (925)396-7750
Email: [email protected]
8.a
Packet Pg. 112 Attachment: BKF Oceana Bike Lanes Consultant Services Agreement (6207 : Oceana Bike Lanes Feasibility Study) 4866-2656-6648 v1 - 7 -
ARTICLE 7 - MISCELLANEOUS
7.1. Entire Agreement. This Agreement represents the entire understanding of CITY and CONSULTANT as to those matters contained herein. No prior oral or written understanding shall be of any force or effect with respect to those matters covered hereunder. This Agreement may only be modified by an amendment in writing signed by each party.
7.2. No Assignment. The Services are deemed unique and neither party shall assign, transfer, subcontract or otherwise substitute its interest in this Agreement or any of its obligations hereunder without the prior written consent of the other party. As limited by this Section
7.2, this Agreement is to be binding on the successors and assigns of the parties hereto.
7.3. Severability. If any part of this Agreement is determined to be unconstitutional, invalid or beyond the authority of either party, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remainder of this Agreement, which shall continue in full force and effect, provided that the remainder of this Agreement can be interpreted to give effect to the intentions of the parties.
7.4. Counterparts. This Agreement may be signed in counterparts and, when fully signed, such counterparts shall have the same effect as if signed in one document.
7.5. Choice of Law. This Agreement and all matters relating to it shall be governed by the laws of the State of California without reference to its choice of laws principles and venue shall be in the appropriate court in San Mateo County, California.
7.6. Waiver. No failure on the part of either Party to exercise any right or remedy hereunder shall operate as a waiver of any other right or remedy that party may have hereunder. A waiver by either CITY or CONSULTANT of any breach of this Agreement shall not be binding upon the waiving party unless such waiver is in writing. In the event of a written waiver, such a waiver shall not affect the waiving party's rights with respect to any other further breach.
7.7. Mediation. In the event the parties are unable to resolve a dispute arising under this Agreement through good faith negotiations, the parties agree to submit the matter to mediation with a mutually agreeable mediator. Prior to the mediation, the parties shall exchange any documents reasonably necessary to resolve the matter to be mediated.
Interpretation. In the event this Agreement is ever construed in any dispute between the parties, it and each of its provisions shall be construed without regard to the party or parties responsible for its preparation and shall be deemed to have been prepared jointly by the parties.
The rule of construction to the effect that ambiguities are to be resolved against the drafting party shall not be employed in interpreting this Agreement.
7.8. Authority. Each individual executing this Agreement on behalf of one of the parties represents that he or she is duly authorized to sign and deliver the Agreement on behalf of such party and that this Agreement is binding on such party in accordance with its terms.
8.a
Packet Pg. 113 Attachment: BKF Oceana Bike Lanes Consultant Services Agreement (6207 : Oceana Bike Lanes Feasibility Study) 4866-2656-6648 v1 - 8 -
7.9. Third Parties. Nothing contained in this Agreement shall create a contractual relationship with, or cause of action in favor of, a third party against either the CITY or CONSULTANT. CONSULTANT’s Services hereunder are being performed solely for the benefit of CITY.
7.11 Entire Agreement. This Agreement, including Exhibits A, B and B1 comprise the entire Agreement.
[Signature on Next Page]
8.a
Packet Pg. 114 Attachment: BKF Oceana Bike Lanes Consultant Services Agreement (6207 : Oceana Bike Lanes Feasibility Study) 4866-2656-6648 v1 - 9 -
7.10. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Agreement as of the date set forth above.
CITY OF PACIFICA
By:_________________________________________
Sean Charpentier, City Manager
Date:________________________________________
Approved As To Form
By:_________________________________________
Michelle Marchetta Kenyon, City Attorney
Date:________________________________________
CONSULTANT
BKF Engineers
By:_________________________________________
Dan Schaefer, Senior Vice President
Date:________________________________________
8.a
Packet Pg. 115 Attachment: BKF Oceana Bike Lanes Consultant Services Agreement (6207 : Oceana Bike Lanes Feasibility Study)
EXHIBIT A
SCOPE OF WORK
8.a
Packet Pg. 116 Attachment: BKF Oceana Bike Lanes Consultant Services Agreement (6207 : Oceana Bike Lanes Feasibility Study) BKF Engineers
255 Shoreline Drive, Suite 200
Redwood City, CA 94065
www.bkf.com
City of
Pacifica
Proposal to Provide Professional
Engineering Services for Planning
and Design of The Oceana Bike
Lanes Project
January 14, 2026
Contact
Dan Schaefer, PE, QSD, LEED AP Assoc. DBIA
650-280-0309
[email protected]
8.a
Packet Pg. 117 Attachment: BKF Oceana Bike Lanes Consultant Services Agreement (6207 : Oceana Bike Lanes Feasibility Study) January 14, 2026
Bryan Bautista
Project Manager
City of Pacifica
170 Santa Maria Ave.
Pacifica, CA 94044
Subject: Oceana Bike Lanes Project
Dear Mr. Bautista,
The key decision facing the City on the Oceana Bike Lanes Project is how to deliver meaningful bicycle improvements without creating unintended impacts to parking, operations, utilities, and adjacent properties.
Oceana Boulevard presents a constrained corridor with limited roadway width, existing utilities, transit stops, and segments of Caltrans right of way near Oceana High School and the adjacent school frontage. Decisions made during early feasibility will directly affect project cost, public acceptance, and the City’s ability to advance the project efficiently into PS&E.
BKF’s value to the City is our ability to guide these decisions early and defensibly. Our approach focuses on developing clear design alternatives, identifying trade-offs, and providing realistic cost and constructability input so the City can make informed decisions before committing to final design. This front-end clarity reduces risk and supports smoother delivery through environmental review and PS&E.
The project will be led by Jason Mansfield, PE, supported by BKF’s in-house roadway, traffic, surveying, stormwater, and utility specialists, with environmental services provided by David J. Powers & Associates. This integrated team structure allows us to maintain continuity from feasibility through final design while responding efficiently to City input and community considerations.
BKF has extensive experience delivering bicycle, pedestrian, and complete streets projects throughout San Mateo County and the Bay Area, including work for the City of Pacifica. Our familiarity with local processes, agency coordination, and corridor-level constraints allows us to provide practical solutions that align with funding, schedule, and community expectations.
As an authorized representative of BKF Engineers, I confirm that we have reviewed and understand the requirements of the RFP and are prepared to enter into an agreement with the City under the stated terms.
We appreciate the opportunity to support the City of Pacifica on this project and look forward to working with you.
Sincerely,
BKF ENGINEERS
Dan Schaefer, PE, QSD, LEED AP, Associate DBIA
Principal-in-Charge/Vice President (Point of Contact)
255 Shoreline Drive, Suite 200,
Redwood City, CA 94065
(w) 925-940-2214 | (m) 650-280-0309
(e) [email protected]
BKF ENGINEERS
255 Shoreline Drive, Suite 200, Redwood City, CA 94065 | t. 650.482.6300
8.a
Packet Pg. 118 Attachment: BKF Oceana Bike Lanes Consultant Services Agreement (6207 : Oceana Bike Lanes Feasibility Study)
TABLE OF CONTENTS
SECTION 7.1. COVER LETTER
SECTION 7.2. PROPOSAL
SECTION 7.3. PRICE PROPOSAL
SECTION 7.4. COMPLETED REPORTS
SECTION 7.5. MODIFICATIONS TO AGREEMENT
SECTION 7.6 EXCEPTIONS TO THE RFP
SECTION 7.7. VALUE ADDED SERVICES
SECTION 7.8. TYPE OF BUSINESS
SECTION 7.9. LEGAL COMPANY NAME
A. STATEMENT OF UNDERSTANDING AND APPROACH
B. COMPANY INFORMATION
C. COMPANY PERSONNEL
D. DISCLOSURE
E. EXPERIENCE AND REFERENCES
8.a
Packet Pg. 119 Attachment: BKF Oceana Bike Lanes Consultant Services Agreement (6207 : Oceana Bike Lanes Feasibility Study) City of Pacifica, Oceana Bike Lanes Project 1
7.2 Proposal
A. STATEMENT OF UNDERSTANDING AND APPROACH
PROJECT UNDERSTANDING
Oceana Boulevard, generally with a 50-foot right of way, was dedicated to the City in 1966 from the State of California (based on Caltrans record maps). Most of the Oceana vehicular pavement within the project limits is approximately 32’ wide, with a travel lane along the majority of the southbound side of the centerline, and a travel lane with parking along the majority of the northbound side of the centerline.
Sidewalks are intermittent on either side of the roadway, typically focused on significantly used frontage or to serve east-west connections and bus stops.
In order to accommodate Class II bike lanes on one or more sides of the street (south and northbound), it will be required to either remove parking and/or widen the roadway by relocating the existing curb line(s) in some locations. Where that occurs and how, and the attendant impact on adjacent infrastructure (utilities, residences, businesses, etc.) and parking availability, will be determined early in the planning/design process (feasibility study and concept design phase).
This determination will be based on the City evaluating, informing the appropriate entities, and making decisions regarding the project design before proceeding to formal PS&E development.
A small portion of the Oceana right of way near Oceana High School, and the majority of the area west of the western curb line, is owned by Caltrans.
While it is an objective of the project to provide dedicated Class 2 bike lanes throughout as much of the project area as feasible, it is likely that some sections may require bicyclists to share the road with vehicles due to a variety of physical and parking constraints.
PROJECT APPROACH
Right-of-Way Usage
The City’s Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan (adopted February 2020) identifies potential for shared-use pathways along this corridor. With 50-feet of right of way and 32-feet dedicated to vehicles, this appears to be a potential future option, particularly with the west side back of curb within Caltrans right of way. There are locations where 10-foot wide sidewalks exist on either side (frequently at bus stops) which demonstrates the potential for this throughout the corridor. Given a limited project budget assumed to be $1.5mil, shared-use
pathways would likely not be affordable.
Improvements with this project could lay
the groundwork for shared-use pathways
in the future and should not preclude
implementation of that design in the future.
On the left, an example
existing cross section for 50-
foot right of way from South
San Francisco demonstrates
existing utilities can be an
important constraint.
Stormwater Treatment
With the recent changes in MRP 3.0, projects like these with parallel bicycle and pedestrian improvements are more likely no longer exempt from stormwater treatment requirements. Given the large tributary areas ultimately comingling with improvements from this project, stormwater treatment areas will need to be larger than required for this project alone. That means that strategic locations for stormwater treatment measures could consider alternative compliance, for a practical solution that provides effective results. For purposes of this proposal, we have included budget for two (2) stormwater treatment planters (one at the north end and one at the south end) to intercept runoff from the more impervious developed areas on the east side.
8.a
Packet Pg. 120 Attachment: BKF Oceana Bike Lanes Consultant Services Agreement (6207 : Oceana Bike Lanes Feasibility Study) City of Pacifica, Oceana Bike Lanes Project 2
7.2 Proposal
A. STATEMENT OF UNDERSTANDING AND APPROACH
Topographic Survey / Basemap
The overall basis starting with the Feasibility Study and Concept design will be an aerial topographic survey. This will provide reliable and consistent linework throughout the corridor. The flight price and scheduling will be impacted because it’s in class B airspace. In concert with the aerial, we will delineate the right of way based on record maps.
Once a preferred alternative is identified, we will perform conventional topographic survey with a 2-or-3- person survey crew. This is anticipated to target up to 29 curb ramp locations and 10 bus stop locations.
Depending on how critical certain constraints might be, this time may be allocated to other features such as existing retaining walls or important utilities.
OPTIONAL SERVICES
Given the exact nature of the project is not yet defined, we wanted to offer optional services that could add value to the project development process and the final built results.
Grant funding services: We understand budgets often define the scope of a project, we can provide services that expand the budget and scope. We have successfully delivered projects that source grant funding outside of the local MPO fund programming by applying for federal or state grant money directly. With a “money is no object” visioning exercise, we can imagine Oceana being a welcoming corridor for bicyclists and pedestrians. This would provide a safe and easy east side commuting option along this critical north-south corridor, potentially removing vehicles from the frequently congested highway 1 corridor.
Public outreach: With a project that can transform the look and feel of an important corridor like Oceana, public stakeholder ownership of the changes can make the development process much easier. Additionally, the local representatives on Council or Commissions prefer to hear praise rather than criticisms. Our subconsultant, Callander Associates, can provide these optional services to engage the community and get buyoff on the changes. Sometimes, as we found on the Sidewalks on Santa Cruz Ave, the residents or frequent users of the project area can provide meaningful and preferable alternative design ideas.
Landscape design: Callander Associates can also provide optional services for landscape and irrigation design, as well as placemaking such as furniture, lighting, and hardscape design. This can create the welcoming environment that encourages multi-modal commute options.
PROJECT TASKS
The scope of services is anticipated to include, but not necessarily be limited to, the following tasks:
A. Feasibility Study and Concept Design
1. Consultant shall prepare concept design plans and a feasibility study report including the following tasks and addressing at minimum the following project factors. Consultant shall assume in its proposal the evaluation including the tasks below of at least three project options/alternatives to be evaluated in the feasibility report:
a. Proposed location of bike lane(s), vehicle lanes, parking stalls, etc. as reflected in concept plans to be prepared by the consultant.
b. Changes to curb line(s). Include in the feasibility report and concept drawings the impact to adjacent infrastructure.
c. Assessment of impact on parking of proposed bike lane(s) including a study evaluating the existing level of use (by performing counts at various times/days), determine number of existing and proposed spaces.
d. Concept level cost estimates of the three project options/alternatives.
B. Development of Biddable Plans, Specifications, and Estimate (PS&E)
2. Project Development shall include, but not be limited:
a. Schedule meetings with City staff to discuss the project before commencing work. b. Assemble and review existing plans, surveys, studies and other information regarding the project. c. Visit the project site to assess current conditions, identify potential opportunities and constraints, and confirm the location of existing facilities.
8.a
Packet Pg. 121 Attachment: BKF Oceana Bike Lanes Consultant Services Agreement (6207 : Oceana Bike Lanes Feasibility Study) City of Pacifica, Oceana Bike Lanes Project 3
7.2 Proposal
A. STATEMENT OF UNDERSTANDING AND APPROACH
d. Collaborate with both public and private utility owners within the project area(s) to minimize or prevent any potential damage to existing facilities in the vicinity. It is very likely that the project design will require relocation of PG&E and other utility owners’ utilities within the public right of way in order to accommodate the project improvements. Prepare notices to owners of required relocation under the Streets and Highways Code.
e. Perform additional topographic survey work as necessary to produce complete and accurate base sheets for the development of construction documents.
f. Perform utility location and depth verification potholing as warranted; City will horizontally locate City-owned utilities, sanitary sewer and storm drain mains, upon request.
3. Prepare 60% plans, specifications, and cost estimates in a format approved by the City for review.
Ensure that each component is clearly separated and presented in a manner acceptable to the City, with specifications distinct from the plans. The consultant will meet with City staff as necessary, typically on a biweekly basis, to address any concerns or details regarding plan development. a. Review project deliverables with City staff and incorporate any requested revisions. The City will provide feedback within two (2) working weeks upon receiving a complete set of 60% deliverables. b. Documented unit costs for the estimate should align with the anticipated construction schedule and must be updated periodically throughout the project’s design phase.
4. Environmental Document
a. The consultant will draft an environmental document for the project, to be filed with the City at the County of San Mateo. It’s anticipated that this project will qualify for a Categorical Exemption.
5. The finalization of PS&E for the project is required. Each element must be organized into components approved by the City. The consultant is responsible for conducting a comprehensive review of the plans, estimates, and specifications to guarantee coherence, comprehensiveness, and full coordination of all sections and references across the drawings, estimates, and specifications. a. Prepare Plans, Specifications, and Estimates (PS&Es) with submittals at the following percentages:
i. 60% Plans & Estimate (P&E)
ii. 95% Plans, Specifications, and Estimate (PS&E)
iii. 100% Bid Documents
b. The 100% Submittal shall include completely detailed and comprehensively specific information sufficient for construction and for the achievement of a high-quality project as well as the designer’s estimate of the number of working days required for construction. The bid package shall include bid alternatives which may be added to or deleted from the project depending upon bid prices and available budget.
c. Arrange meetings with City staff to discuss and address any comments on the 100% submittal.
Revise construction documents as needed before the City issues a Notice Inviting Bids. The City will provide feedback within two (2) working weeks upon receiving a complete 100% submittal. d. Consultant shall assume attendance at one public meeting. e. Prepare and submit Final Bid documents
i. All items identified in the 100% submittal reviewed by City staff and any applicable comments by staff, Planning Commission, or City Council shall be documented as responded to.
C. Bidding Assistance
1. Provide technical assistance to staff during the bidding process to review and respond to inquiries related to the referenced project.
2. Prepare bid addenda as may be necessary.
3. Prepare Conformed Sets of plans and specifications after Notice of Award is issued by the City to the construction contractor.
8.a
Packet Pg. 122 Attachment: BKF Oceana Bike Lanes Consultant Services Agreement (6207 : Oceana Bike Lanes Feasibility Study) City of Pacifica, Oceana Bike Lanes Project 4
ID Task Name Duration Start Finish Predecessors
1 Notice To Proceed 0 days Tue 2/17/26 Tue 2/17/26
2 Kick-off Meeting 0 days Mon 3/2/26 Mon 3/2/26 1FS+10 days 3 Holiday Break 6 days Fri 12/25/26 Fri 1/1/27
4 Surveying 50 days Tue 3/3/26 Mon 5/11/26
5 Utility Requests 30 days Tue 3/3/26 Mon 4/13/26 2
6 Topographic Survey 40 days Tue 3/3/26 Mon 4/27/26 2
7 Basemap Preparation 10 days Tue 4/28/26 Mon 5/11/26 5,6 8 Boundary Retracement 5 days Tue 4/28/26 Mon 5/4/26 2,6 9 Feasibility Study 80 days Tue 5/12/26 Mon 8/31/26
10 Concept Plan Alternatives 40 days Tue 5/12/26 Mon 7/6/26 7,8FF-5 days 11 Stakeholder Coordination 10 days Tue 7/7/26 Mon 7/20/26 10 12 Alternatives Evaluation 10 days Tue 7/21/26 Mon 8/3/26 11 13 Preferred Alternative 15 days Tue 8/4/26 Mon 8/24/26 12 14 Feasibility Study 20 days Tue 8/4/26 Mon 8/31/26 13FF+5 days 15 PS&E 140 days Tue 9/1/26 Mon 3/15/27
16 60% PS&E 40 days Tue 9/1/26 Mon 10/26/2614
17 QC Check, Revisions, and 60% Submittal10 days Tue 10/27/26 Mon 11/9/26 16 18 City Review 15 days Tue 11/10/26 Mon 11/30/2617
19 95% PS&E 40 days Tue 12/1/26 Mon 1/25/27 18
20 QC Check, Revisions, and 90% Submittal10 days Tue 1/26/27 Mon 2/8/27 19 21 City Review 10 days Tue 2/9/27 Mon 2/22/27 20
22 100% PS&E 15 days Tue 2/23/27 Mon 3/15/27 21
23 Final PS&E & Ready To List 15 days Tue 3/16/27 Mon 4/5/27 22 24 Bidding and Award 35 days Tue 4/13/27 Mon 5/31/27 23FS+5 days 25 Construction 120 days Tue 6/15/27 Mon 11/29/2724FS+10 days 26 Record Drawings 15 days Tue 11/30/27 Mon 12/20/2725
2/17
3/2
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1st Quarter 2nd Quarter 3rd Quarter 4th Quarter 1st Quarter 2nd Quarter 3rd Quarter 4th Quarter 1st Quarter Task
Split
Milestone
Summary
Project Summary
External Tasks
External Milestone
Inactive Task
Inactive Milestone
Inactive Summary
Manual Task
Duration-only
Manual Summary Rollup
Manual Summary
Start-only
Finish-only
Deadline
Critical
Critical Split
Progress
Manual Progress
OCEANA BIKE LANES PROJECT
CITY OF PACIFICA
Tentative Schedule
January 14, 2026
BKF #20241578-002
J.Mansfield
7.2 Proposal
A. STATEMENT OF UNDERSTANDING AND APPROACH 8.a
Packet Pg. 123 Attachment: BKF Oceana Bike Lanes Consultant Services Agreement (6207 : Oceana Bike Lanes Feasibility Study)
7.2 Proposal
City of Pacifica, Oceana Bike Lanes Project 5
B. COMPANY INFORMATION
255 Shoreline Drive
Suite 200
Redwood City, CA 94065
650.482.6300
PRIMARY OFFICE
SUBMITTING THE
PROPOSAL
TYPE OF
ORGANIZATION
C Corporation
Dan Schaefer, PE, LEED
AP, QSD, Associate DBIA
Principal-In-Charge/Vice
President
(o) 925-940-2214
(m) 650-280-0309
(e) [email protected]
255 Shoreline Drive,
Suite 200, Redwood City,
CA 94065
POINT OF CONTACT
175
Professional
Engineers &
Surveyors
Founded in
1915
500+
Employees
18 West Coast
Offices
BKF Engineers
BKF Engineers is a leading civil
engineering and surveying firm
serving the western United States
since 1915. Our transportation
business sector is focused on
connecting communities, designing and
delivering infrastructure that supports
safe, efficient, and equitable movement for
people and goods. This includes roadways,
highways, trails, seaports, airports, and rail
systems used by passenger vehicles, buses,
trucks, motorcycles, bicycles, pedestrians, boats,
trains, and airplanes.
Our team supports transportation projects of all sizes
and types, from neighborhood improvements and
safety enhancements to regional corridor upgrades
and multi-jurisdictional infrastructure programs.
We deliver planning, design, environmental, and
construction-phase services across a full range of
public infrastructure.
We bring extensive experience navigating complex
regulatory, environmental, and funding landscapes,
including projects that involve Caltrans, the
Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), Federal
Rail Administration (FRA), CPUC, Union Pacific
Railroad (UPRR), and the California Transportation
Commission. Our engineers regularly coordinate with these and other agencies on permitting, approvals, and funding authorizations to move projects forward.
When improvements are required within the State right-of-way or when federal funding is involved, BKF is a trusted advisor. Our engineers understand the expectations and procedures of Caltrans’ functional units, including Local Assistance, Permits, Project Management, Environmental, Design, and Right-of-Way. Our experience spans all phases of delivery: from planning and PID, to environmental (PA/ ED), design (PS&E), and construction support.
BKF Engineers affirms that it is independent of the City of Pacifica as defined by the U.S. Government Accountability Office’s Government Auditing Standards (1994).
8.a
Packet Pg. 124 Attachment: BKF Oceana Bike Lanes Consultant Services Agreement (6207 : Oceana Bike Lanes Feasibility Study) City of Pacifica, Oceana Bike Lanes Project 6
7.2 Proposal
B. COMPANY INFORMATION
▪ Planning, Grants, and
Funding Strategy
▪ Local Government Capital
Projects
▪ Local Roadways / State
Highways
▪ Pavement Rehabilitation and
Preservation
▪ ADA / PROWAG Accessibility
Improvements
▪ Complete Streets / Active
Transportation
▪ PID, PA&ED, PS&E Services
▪ Roundabouts and
Intersection Safety
▪ Rail and Grade Separations
▪ Traffic Signals and Lighting
▪ Right-of-Way Engineering
and Support
▪ Local Assistance / E-76 /
Funding Authorization
▪ Caltrans Facilitation Services
& Permit Support
▪ DEER and Design
Exception Preparation
SERVICES
▪ Redwood City
▪ Fresno
▪ Modesto
▪ Newport
Beach
▪ Oakland
▪ Pleasanton
▪ Portland
▪ Riverside
▪ Roseville
▪ San Francisco
▪ Sacramento
▪ Salinas
▪ San Diego
▪ San Jose
▪ San Luis
Obispo
▪ San Rafael
▪ Santa Rosa
▪ Walnut Creek
OFFICE LOCATIONS
BKF has proudly been serving the City of Pacifica, County of San Mateo, and surrounding communities, providing civil engineering and surveying services across various local projects. Our deep understanding of regional issues, permitting requirements, and agency needs, gained through frequent collaboration with the City, the County and other agencies, has been key to our continued success. With established relationships and proven familiarity with local processes, we bring insight that supports streamlined project delivery and practical solutions. BKF’s local presence allows us to mobilize quickly and allocate dedicated staff to meet tight timelines and evolving project needs.
EXPERIENCE WITH THE CITY OF PACIFICA AND COUNTY OF SAN MATEO In addition to key reference
projects listed in this proposal,
BKF has extensive experience
delivering similar services, with
hundreds of projects located
within the Bay Area. Our team’s
experience and expertise,
paired with our familiarity of
City of Pacifica, gives us greater
insight into regional challenges
to deliver custom-fit solutions
for the project needs under
this contract.
▪ Belmont Alameda de las
Pulgas Corridor
▪ Daly City John Daly Boulevard
▪ Belmont Old County Bike/Ped
▪ Wavecrest Coastal Trail
▪ Sharon Road Sidewalk Project
▪ Bicycle Safety Improvements with
Alpine Road/ 280 Interchange
▪ Belmont Safe Routes to School
▪ Devil’s Slide Trail Engr. Design
▪ Menlo Park Ravenswood
Resurfacing Project
▪ MROSD_Alpine Road Trail
▪ Bayfront Expressway
Pedestrian Overcrossing
SELECTION OF ADDITIONAL SIMILAR PROJECT EXPERIENCE IN THE BAY AREA 255 Shoreline Drive
Suite 200
Redwood City,
CA 94065
t. 650.482.6300
f. 650.482.6399
OFFICE SUBMITTING
THE PROPOSAL
8.a
Packet Pg. 125 Attachment: BKF Oceana Bike Lanes Consultant Services Agreement (6207 : Oceana Bike Lanes Feasibility Study) City of Pacifica, Oceana Bike Lanes Project 7
7.2 Proposal
B. COMPANY INFORMATION
LITIGATION
BKF Engineers has over 110 years of being financially conservative and is in excellent financial condition.
We strive to control risk through education and being prudent in providing our professional services. We thoroughly evaluate each and every assignment and assess potential risk factors that could be present. As a consequence of engaging in any business, there is always the potential for assertions of fault or claims which may or may not give rise to litigation, mediation, or arbitration.
Year 2021
Project Name Montecito Vista Project
Claim Name Lucky Nellen LLC vs. BKF Engineers
Description BKF Engineers is currently a defendant in an active civil litigation matter in Marin County Superior Court involving allegations of professional negligence related to services performed at 200 Nellen Avenue. The matter is ongoing and BKF is actively defending the case.
Status Pending
BKF ENGINEERS, SURVEYORS, PLANNERS
500+ SUPPORT STAFF
QUALITY CONTROL
PROJECT MANAGEMENT
Dan Schaefer, PE, QSD, LEED AP,
Associate DBIA
Principal-in-Charge
BKF ENGINEERS
Jason Mansfield, PE
Project Manager
BKF ENGINEERS
Jonathan Tang, PE LEED AP, QSD/P
QA/QC Manager
BKF ENGINEERS
ADDITIONAL SUPPORT SERVICES
Cuong Tran, PE, CPII, LEED AP
Project Engineer
BKF ENGINEERS
Ben Santos, PLS
Survey Lead
BKF ENGINEERS
Steven Dauterman, PE, TE,
PTOE, RSP1
Traffic Lead
BKF ENGINEERS
Will Burns, AICP
Environmental Lead
DAVID J. POWERS & ASSOCIATES
Brian Fletcher, PLA, ASLA, LEED AP
Landscape Architecture & Outreach Lead
(Optional)
CALLANDER
Arturo Gomez
Potholing Lead
(Optional)
BESS TESTLABS
SUBCONSULTANT TEAM
Key Personnel
Nellie Moussa PE, QSD/P
Utility Lead
BKF ENGINEERS
Erik Moreno, PE, QSD/P
Stormwater Lead
BKF ENGINEERS
Marley Mueller, JD
Grants Funding Lead
BKF ENGINEERS
C. COMPANY PERSONNEL
8.a
Packet Pg. 126 Attachment: BKF Oceana Bike Lanes Consultant Services Agreement (6207 : Oceana Bike Lanes Feasibility Study)
7.2 Proposal
COMPANY PERSONNEL
City of Pacifica, Oceana Bike Lanes Project
EXPERIENCE
- Bay Trail Gap Closures, Alameda & Contra Costa County - Cross Alameda Trail, Alameda
- Ironhorse Trail Extension and Highway 4 Undercrossing, Concord - California State Parks Trails & Access, California Coast (multiple locations)
DAN SCHAEFER, PE, QSD, LEED AP, ASSOCIATE
DBIA
Principal-In-Charge
REGISTRATION
Professional Civil Engineer, CA No. 51158,
OR No. 96877PE, WA No. 20100278,
UT No. 11644474-2202
PHONE NUMBER |
650-280-0309
AFFILIATIONS
LEED Accredited
Professional, U.S. Green
Building Council
TOTAL YEARS EXPERIENCE
37 years, 36 with firm
Dan Schaefer, PE, QSD, LEED AP, Assoc. DBIA will serve as Principal-in-Charge for the Oceana Bike Lanes Project and provide senior oversight throughout planning and design. His role will focus on overall accountability, quality assurance, and strategic guidance at key decision points, including feasibility and concept development, selection of a preferred alternative, and readiness to advance into PS&E. Dan will support the Project Manager by reviewing alternatives, evaluating tradeoffs related to parking, utilities, transit stops, and right-of-way constraints, and confirming that recommendations presented to the City are clear, defensible, and aligned with City objectives, funding, and schedule. With more than three decades of experience delivering bicycle, pedestrian, and complete streets projects throughout California, Dan brings seasoned judgment on corridor-level challenges similar to those along Oceana Boulevard, including constrained widths, community sensitivities, and multi-agency coordination.
Jason Mansfield, PE will serve as Project Manager and be responsible for day-to-day coordination and delivery of the Oceana Bike Lanes Project. Jason will lead the project team, manage schedule and scope, oversee technical deliverables, and serve as the City’s primary point of contact throughout planning and design.
Jason has extensive experience managing bicycle, pedestrian, and complete streets projects, including roadway design, signing and striping, traffic modifications, utility coordination, and active transportation improvements. He has led projects that require evaluation of alternatives, coordination with community members and multiple agencies, and resolution of corridor-level constraints. Jason focuses on clear communication, organized decision-making, and practical design solutions that support timely delivery and alignment with City goals.
EXPERIENCE
- Sharon Road Sidewalk Project Civil Engineering Services, Menlo Park - Redwood Avenue Sidewalk Curb & Gutter Improvement Project, Redwood City - Midcoast Multimodal Trail, El Granada
- Middlefield Road Re-Striping Project, Menlo Park
- Sidewalks on Santa Cruz Avenue, Menlo Park
- Bicycle Safety Improvements with Alpine Road/ 280 Interchange, County of San Mateo
JASON MANSFIELD, PE
Project Manager
REGISTRATION
Professional Civil Engineer, CA No. 59567
PHONE NUMBER | 650-482-6422
TOTAL
YEARS
EXPERIENCE
29 years, 24
with firm
8.a
Packet Pg. 127 Attachment: BKF Oceana Bike Lanes Consultant Services Agreement (6207 : Oceana Bike Lanes Feasibility Study)
7.2 Proposal
COMPANY PERSONNEL
City of Pacifica, Oceana Bike Lanes Project
Cuong Tran, PE, CPII, LEED AP will serve as Project Engineer and support day-to-day technical execution of the Oceana Bike Lanes Project. Cuong will be responsible for developing design documents, tracking and resolving technical issues, and coordinating design inputs across disciplines under the direction of the Project Manager. His experience includes roadway and trail design, utility coordination, signing and striping, and active transportation improvements on projects with similar corridor constraints. Cuong’s role is focused on maintaining organized documentation, supporting informed decision-making, and advancing design work efficiently in alignment with project scope, schedule, and City direction.
EXPERIENCE
- Midcoast Multimodal Trail, El Granada
- Stevens Creek Blvd & Phar Lap Dr Crosswalk Improvements, Cupertino - Alpine Road Trail Improvements, Portola Valley/Menlo Park - City of East Palo Alto Pedestrian Improvements, East Palo Alto - East Side Connect San Carlos, San Carlos
- Oyster Point and East Grand Avenue, South San Francisco
CUONG TRAN, PE, CPII, LEED AP
Project Engineer
REGISTRATION
Professional Civil Engineer, CA No. 74953
Certified Public Infrastructure Inspector
PHONE NUMBER | 650-482-6362
AFFILIATIONS
LEED AP, U.S. Green
Building Council
TOTAL YEARS
EXPERIENCE
19 years, 19 with firm
Steven Dauterman, PE, TE, PTOE will serve as Traffic Lead for the Oceana Bike Lanes Project and provide traffic engineering and operations support during planning and design. Steven will support development and evaluation of design alternatives related to lane configurations, striping, signage, transit stop interfaces, and multimodal safety considerations. His experience includes traffic analysis, safety assessments, traffic calming, and complete streets projects on constrained corridors similar to Oceana Boulevard. Steven will coordinate closely with the Project Manager and design team to ensure traffic-related elements are integrated clearly and support safe, implementable project solutions.
EXPERIENCE
- Lincoln Avenue/Middlefield Road Safety Audit, Palo Alto* - Hellen Drive Pedestrian Improvement Assessment, Millbrae* - South San Francisco On-Call Traffic Engineering and Transportation, South San Francisco - Canada College Traffic Improvements, San Mateo
- ELCO Yards Caltrans Processing, Redwood City
- S16250 Capitol Expressway Light Rail Project, San Jose - Mountain View SB-1 Streets, Mountain View
- Hamilton Avenue Resurfacing Design Project, Campbell
STEVEN MATTHEW DAUTERMAN, PE, TE,
PTOE, RSP1
Traffic Lead
REGISTRATION
PE (Traffic) - CA (TR3088)PE (Civil) - CA (95938) PE (Civil) - FL (96193), PE (Civil) - VA (063662)PE (Civil) - TX (147797) PHONE NUMBER | 925-396-7726 EXT:12472
AFFILIATIONS
Society of PTOE
TOTAL YEARS
EXPERIENCE
8 years, 1 with firm
*Projects completed with a previous firm
8.a
Packet Pg. 128 Attachment: BKF Oceana Bike Lanes Consultant Services Agreement (6207 : Oceana Bike Lanes Feasibility Study)
7.2 Proposal
COMPANY PERSONNEL
City of Pacifica, Oceana Bike Lanes Project
Ben Santos, PLS will serve as Survey Lead for the Oceana Bike Lanes Project and be responsible for managing all field and office survey activities. Ben will oversee preparation of topographic surveys and base mapping needed to support feasibility analysis, curb line evaluation, utility coordination, and development of PS&E. His role includes delineating existing right of way limits, including localized Caltrans-owned segments near Oceana High School, to support informed design decisions.
Ben brings extensive experience supporting roadway, sidewalk, and active transportation projects for local agencies, with a focus on delivering accurate, reliable survey data that enables efficient and coordinated project delivery.
Erik Moreno, PE, QSD/P will serve as Stormwater Lead for the Oceana Bike Lanes Project and provide stormwater and drainage engineering support during feasibility and design. Erik will evaluate drainage implications associated with curb relocation, roadway resurfacing, and bike lane improvements, and will support development of practical design solutions that maintain or improve existing drainage performance. His role includes coordination with the roadway and survey teams to confirm existing conditions, identify potential conflicts, and integrate stormwater considerations into concept alternatives and PS&E. Erik brings extensive experience supporting local agency roadway and active transportation projects throughout the Bay Area, with a focus on implementable designs that align with City standards and regulatory requirements.
EXPERIENCE
- San Jose Water-West Valley Construction, San Jose
- Lindsay Tract Roadway, Newark
- Coyote Valley Ridge Trail Connection Study, San Jose
- El Camino Real ADA Ramp Improvements, Palo Alto
- Stierlin Road Intersection Mountain View, Mountain View - Sharon Road Sidewalk Project, Menlo Park
EXPERIENCE
- Menlo Park Stormwater Master Plan, Menlo Park
- Alpine Trail Slip-Out, Portola Valley
- Dublin Storm Drain Master Plan, Dublin
- Redwood City Storm Drain Master Plan, Redwood City
- Santa Clara Hope Dr - Green Stormwater Inf., Santa Clara - East Meadow Circle C.3 Review, Palo Alto
BEN SANTOS, PLS
Survey Lead
REGISTRATION
Professional Land Surveyor, CA No. 9251
PHONE NUMBER | 408 467-9171
ERIK MORENO, PE, QSD/P
Stormwater Lead
REGISTRATION
Professional Civil Engineer, CA No. 81983
Qualified SWPPP Developer No. 26096
PHONE NUMBER | 650-482-6403
TOTAL YEARS
EXPERIENCE
25 years, 9 with
firm
TOTAL YEARS
EXPERIENCE
15 years, 10 with
firm
8.a
Packet Pg. 129 Attachment: BKF Oceana Bike Lanes Consultant Services Agreement (6207 : Oceana Bike Lanes Feasibility Study)
7.2 Proposal
C. COMPANY PERSONNEL
City of Pacifica, Oceana Bike Lanes Project 8
DAVID J. POWERS &
ASSOCIATES
The BKF project team includes subconsultants to bring the right resources to this project, even if team members are not all working under the same roof. Our approach hinges on treating subconsultants as integral members, fostering robust relationships, and promoting open collaboration. Our core and optional subconsultants added for this project effort include the following:
SUBCONSULTANTS
David J. Powers & Associates
(DJP&A) is a San Jose-based,
UDBE-certified, firm that has
been preparing environmental
documents to comply with
NEPA and CEQA since 1972.
The firm also has a secondary
office in Oakland that provides
staffing on transportation
projects. A specialty of the firm
is preparing environmental
documents on federally-funded
bridge, roadway, and bicycle
and pedestrian projects under
the direction of Caltrans.
BKF and DJPA has worked
together + 27 years on multiple
projects such as Ped/bike/trails,
street improvements, road
rehabilitations, highways, and
Interchanges.
(CALA) has been dedicated to
helping public clients design
and create meaningful outdoor
spaces that foster a strong
sense of place. With over 50
years of expertise, CALA offers
a comprehensive suite of
services that span from preproject feasibility and funding to construction management for
complete streets, trails, transit
systems, urban plazas, parks,
and other public works projects.
BKF and Callandar has worked
together + 27 years on multiple
projects such as Ped/bike/trails,
roadways, parks and grade
separations.
Bess Testlab is a certified
UNION Underground Utility
Service Company established
in 1995 as a privately
owned C-Corporation. BESS
provides a complete range
of underground utility
designation and utility
mapping services to both
private and public companies
throughout California,
Nevada, and Arizona. BESS is
committed to providing quality
service that exceeds our
client’s needs and expectations
using the most advanced
technologies available.
BKF and Bess Testlab has
worked together + 5 years
on multiple projects such as
Ped/bike/trails, roadways,
streetscape and highways.
ENVIRONMENTAL
LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURAL
OUTREACH POTHOLING
CALLANDER ASSOCIATES
LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE BESS TESTLAB
OPTIONAL OPTIONAL
Callander Associates
Landscape Architecture
BKF Engineers confirms that neither the firm nor any key personnel proposed for this project have any business, financial, or personal relationships with current City of Pacifica elected officials, appointed officials, or City staff that would create a conflict of interest. All proposed team members are properly licensed, in good standing, and have no disciplinary actions.
DISCLOSURE
EXPERIENCE AND REFERENCES
BKF Engineers has extensive experience delivering bicycle, pedestrian, and complete streets projects for cities and counties throughout the Bay Area. Our work includes planning, feasibility analysis, design, and PS&E for projects involving constrained corridors, parking tradeoffs, utility conflicts, and coordination with multiple agencies. These projects are often delivered within complex regulatory and environmental settings typical of coastal and urban corridors in California. BKF also has a strong understanding of working within state right of way where required. Our experience includes coordinating improvements within Caltrans owned corridors and supporting City led projects that require Caltrans Encroachment Permits, including work within Caltrans District 4. We understand the importance of early identification of state right of way limits, clear documentation of proposed improvements, and practical coordination to support permit review without expanding the process beyond what is necessary for the project. For the Oceana Bike Lanes Project, BKF brings direct experience delivering similar corridor improvements where early evaluation of alternatives, clear documentation of impacts, and practical design solutions were critical to project success.
The following examples highlight relevant projects that reflect the scale, complexity, and delivery approach anticipated for this project.
8.a
Packet Pg. 130 Attachment: BKF Oceana Bike Lanes Consultant Services Agreement (6207 : Oceana Bike Lanes Feasibility Study) E. EXPERIENCE AND REFERENCES
City of Pacifica, Oceana Bike Lanes Project 9
7.2 Proposal
The Redwood Avenue Sidewalk Curb and Gutter Improvement Project was intended to fix several deficiencies along Redwood Avenue between El Camino Real and Fairview Avenue. The City’s goal was to increase safety and accessibility for pedestrians by constructing City Standard improvement and eliminating localized low points while meeting project schedule and budget.
The sidewalk, curb and gutter between El Camino Real and Hudson Street had a curb that was significantly shorter than the City’s standard 6” curb for many portions of this section. This made it easier for vehicles to park partially on the sidewalk or in the landscape strip. During a site walk of the segment, staff saw that the existing slopes coming from the properties do not give much flexibility in raising the curb line while maintaining driveway access. However, combined with some grinding of the street pavement section, and some drainage improvements, the 6” standard curb was achievable. This required detailed surveying of existing conditions to determine what could be done to meet that standard.
PERIOD OF WORK
2022-2023
REFERENCE
James O’Connell
Senior Civil Engineer
City of Redwood City
joconnell@
redwoodcity.org
650-780-7000
REDWOOD AVENUE SIDEWALK CURB & GUTTER IMPROVEMENT
PROJECT Redwood City, CA
The Midcoast Multi-Modal Trail in El Granada, California, is a new, paved trail that runs along the east (inland) side of Highway 1 entirely within Caltrans right of way in unincorporated San Mateo County. The eight-foot-wide asphalt surface features two-foot-wide decomposed granite jogging paths on each side.
BKF served as the prime consultant, responsible for civil engineering, coordinating with the County and regulatory agencies, and leading the subconsultant team. The trail is 3/4-mile-long and provides residents with a safe route for commuting by bicycle or foot between El Granada and the east side of Miramar. The primary objective of the project was to create a safe transportation alternative that would reduce highway congestion, as well as associated carbon emissions and pollution. The project also aimed to provide a safe route to school for students by incorporating a secondary trail connecting to El Granada Elementary School. The design focused on minimizing environmental impact and enhancing safety for bicyclists and pedestrians, particularly where the trail intersects with driveways and roads.
PERIOD OF WORK
2015-2023
REFERENCE
Wency Ng
Senior Engineer
County of San Mateo
[email protected]
650-363-4100
MIDCOAST MULTIMODAL TRAIL
El Granada, CA
This sidewalk project spans Sharon Road between Alameda de las Pulgas and Altshul Ave in Menlo Park. The scope included installation of new sidewalk, driveways, curb and gutter, ramps, signing and striping, landscaping, and inlet modifications. The goal of the project was to create a defined walking path and minimize ponding issues along the project limits. The project aimed to improve pedestrian safety and the connection to La Entrada Middle School.
BKF prepared preliminary design for alignment of proposed curb and gutter, sidewalks, driveways, ramps, lane widths, asphalt overlays, and impact to frontage features. Concurrently, BKF prepared exhibits showing the frontage of each individual adjacent property to review potential impacts and improvements affecting each property owner. Final construction plans were prepared, as well as signing and striping plan, site construction details, an erosion control plan, an irrigation plan, and a planting plan.
PERIOD OF WORK
2021-2022
REFERENCE
Michael Fu
Associate Civil Engineer
City of Menlo Park
[email protected]
650-330-6706
SHARON ROAD SIDEWALK PROJECT CIVIL ENGINEERING SERVICES Menlo Park, CA
BKF PROJECTS EXPERIENCE
8.a
Packet Pg. 131 Attachment: BKF Oceana Bike Lanes Consultant Services Agreement (6207 : Oceana Bike Lanes Feasibility Study) 4866
-2656-6648 v1-2-
EXHIBIT B
COMPENSATION
8.a
Packet Pg. 132 Attachment: BKF Oceana Bike Lanes Consultant Services Agreement (6207 : Oceana Bike Lanes Feasibility Study) Consulting Fees
OCEANA BIKE LANES PROJECT
CITY OF PACIFICA
January 14, 2026
PrincipalDan Schaefer
Project Manag
er/Ex
ecutiv
e
Jason Mansfield
Lead Engine
er/P
M
Cuong TranSenior Project Engine
er
TBD
D
esign Engine
er
TBD
Associate/P
M (Surv
e
y)
Ben Santos
Project Surv
e
y
or
TBD
Surv
e
y
Cre
w (2-p
erson)
Varies
Task $333 $301 $287 $245 $188 $301 $215 $403 Hours Fee TOTAL A Feasibility Study and Concept Design 414 $91,446
Concept Designs and Costs of up to 3 Alternatives 2 24 12 80 240 358 $76,054 Feasibility Study 32 8 8 8 56 $15,392
B Development of PS&E 1,102 $258,018
Site visit and meetings 24 8 32 $9,184
Utility Coordination 2 16 24 24 66 $15,586
Topographic Survey 2 2 4 8 24 128 120 288 $86,764
Environmental Document 2 2 2 6 $1,666
60% PS&E 8 8 40 240 296 $59,624
95% PS&E 2 8 8 40 240 298 $60,290
100% Bid Documents 4 4 24 40 72 $15,752
Final Bid Package 2 2 8 32 44 $9,152
C Bidding Assistance 70 $15,058
Technical Assistance 2 8 4 16 30 $6,886
Conform Plan Set 2 2 4 32 40 $8,172
SUBTOTAL FEES $1,332 $33,712 $20,664 $60,270 $165,440 $7,224 $27,520 $48,360 $364,522 Reimbursable Expenses $1,000
Subconsultant (David J Powers & Associates) $11,550
Subconsultant (Aerial Survey) $13,200
Suggested Design Contingency - Additional Work (as-needed, 10% budget) $39,000 GRAND TOTAL $429,272
NOTES:
[1] BKF manager roles may also be served by others as needed to meet project needs, and as approved by the City. [2] BKF Project Engineer role may also be served by others as needed to meet project needs, including a combination of Project and Design Engineers. [3] Assumes project scope remains similar to initial concept. Changes to project limits, or revised concept, may require revisiting the number of hours required. [4] Subconsultant fee and expenses includes additional BKF 10% markup. [5] Reimbursable expense may include reproduction of plans, mileage, parking, and other directly related project expenses. [6] Optional Services (NOT IN CONTRACT) include public outreach, potholing, landscape design, electrical design, grant services.
BKF Engineers
Project Management, Surveying, and Civil Engineering Note: This scope and tasks may be tailored to match the budgets as needed. We anticipate that through
collaborative discussions with the City and project
development, the scope, tasks, and budget may be revisited to appropriately service the project. We have suggested a design contingency to account for project development and ease of City Staff administration of the contract. BKF's flexibility is a signfiicant strength when project scope needs to adjust with a project as it develops.
K:\2024\241578_Pacifica_On-Call_Civil_Engineering_2025-2027\241578-002_Oceana Bike Lanes Project\DOC\00-Pursuit\B-Proposal\02-Working_Docs\Project Cost, Fees and Charges\BKF-proposed-fees-Oceana-2026-01-14.xls Page 1 of 1
7.3 Price Proposal
PRICE PROPOSAL
City of Pacifica, Oceana Bike Lanes Project 10
8.a
Packet Pg. 133 Attachment: BKF Oceana Bike Lanes Consultant Services Agreement (6207 : Oceana Bike Lanes Feasibility Study)
CITY OF PACIFICA
COUNCIL AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT
5/11/2026
1 SUBJECT:
Presentation from San Mateo County Transit District (SamTrans) regarding SB 63 (Connect Bay Area Act) and the Local Investment Plan.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Receive a presentation from San Mateo County Transit District (SamTrans) regarding SB 63 (Connect Bay Area Act) and the Local Investment Plan and provide further direction to staff, as desired.
STAFF CONTACT:
Melissa L. Tigbao, Director of Public Works
(650) 501-6016
[email protected]
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION:
In February 2023, SamTrans staff contacted city staff to request a schedule to present their SB 63 Local Investment Plan to the City of Pacifica’s City Council and include a brief discussion and receive Council feedback.
This presentation is a part of the outreach to the City Councils in San Mateo County agencies, and the developed Local Investment Plan will be brought to the SamTrans Board on June 3, 2026.
At the conclusion of the presentation, the Council may provide direction to staff, if desired, on any actions or next steps regarding the proposal presented by SamTrans.
For reference, Attachments A and B include a letter from Vice Mayor Greg Wright and a letter from the City of Half Moon Bay to SamTrans with feedback regarding SB 63.
FISCAL IMPACT:
There is no fiscal impact on receipt of this presentation.
ORIGINATED BY:
Public Works
ATTACHMENT LIST:
Attachment A: Letter from Vice Mayor Greg Wright to SamTrans (PDF) Attachment B: Letter from City of Half Moon Bay to SamTrans re: SB 63 (PDF) 9 Packet Pg. 134
From: Wright, Greg
To: Public Comment; Beckmeyer, Sue; Wright, Greg
Subject: Sb 63 public comment
Date: Tuesday, May 5, 2026 6:36:15 PM
You don't often get email from [email protected]. Learn why this is important ATTENTION: This email came from an external source. Do not open attachments or click on links from unknown senders.
Honorable Sam Trans Board,
I am writing you today to speak for my over 7000 constituents in my district and 37,000 at large in my community. As vice mayor of Pacifica I want to be very clear about how we view the return to source funding included in SB 63. As a starting place I would like to point out that 5 of the six sales tax measures in the county serve transportation all with a heavy investment in public transit. Your proposal while being questionably called a citizens led initiative would be another and totally dedicated to public transit. While I totally support public transit and firmly believe if we build it they will come I question the choices you are making with the return to source funding. A survey of 1800 does not compare to the several thousand I represent and speak for. Pacifica is a transit dessert with some of the worst roads in the county. I would strongly advocate that 50% of the return to source funds be directed to roads along your transit routes. Additionally I would advocate for the other fifty percent be used to support express busses along route one meeting every train going north and south in Colma, Daly City and Millbrae with last mile micro transit connectivity to meet each of those busses. As you are aware and we have discussed we are not laid out on a grid system so efficient public transit is difficult at best this concept is meant to address that. Additionally the coast has traditionally been significantly underserved yet our tax dollars have gone to help support the public transit infrastructure that those cities fortunate enough to have incorporated within their bounds have benefited from for years. It is time to support the coast as well. This regressive tax will only add insult to injury if a more equitable approach is not taken. I look forward to being able to support a measure that addresses these challenges.
Regards,
Greg Wright
Pacifica Vice Mayor
Get Outlook for iOS
9.a
Packet Pg. 135 Attachment: Attachment A: Letter from Vice Mayor Greg Wright to SamTrans (6204 : Samtrans Presentation on SB 63 (Connect Bay Area Act) May 4, 2026
Chair Marie Chuang
SamTrans Board of Directors
1250 San Carlos Avenue
San Carlos, CA 94070
RE: Draft Local Investment Plan for Potential Senate Bill 63 Regional Tax Measure Return-toSource Funds for San Mateo County Transit Purposes Dear Chair Chuang and Board Members,
The City of Half Moon Bay is pleased to provide feedback on the Local Investment Plan for SB 63 Return to Source Funds, should the bill be approved by voters. We appreciated the opportunity to hear the SamTrans staff presentation to our Council in March, which provided valuable insight into the proposed measure and allowed us to share our initial priorities. We are grateful for the opportunity to reinforce that feedback and advocate for the residents of Half Moon Bay and the greater San Mateo County Coastside.
The Coastside remains one of the most geographically isolated areas in San Mateo County, with limited options for transportation outside of private vehicles and minimal fixed-route and on-demand transit service. Many of the services and amenities enjoyed by bayside residents, including healthcare, higher education, and retail, are either unavailable or limited on the Coastside, necessitating frequent trips “over-the-hill”. As a community with many seniors, families, service workers, and farmworkers, these limitations present ongoing challenges to accessing critical services and opportunities.
Should SB 63 be approved, the City strongly encourages that a fair and proportionate share of Returnto-Source funds be invested into the Coastside, with prioritization of the following investments:
• Expansion of Ride Plus services to serve the whole Coastside (Montara to Pescadero), including increased fleet capacity, longer hours of operation, and the ability to accommodate trips to the bayside.
• Increased bus service frequency and expanded routes serving the Coastside • Improvements to bus stops and shelters, with near-term focus on key locations such as Highway 92, Miramontes Point Road at Highway 1, and the Strawflower Village Shopping Center, as well as additional shelter installations and upgrades systemwide over time • Enhanced maintenance and cleanliness of buses and facilities to ensure a comfortable and safe rider experience that encourages more use of the existing system
9.b
Packet Pg. 136 Attachment: Attachment B: Letter from City of Half Moon Bay to SamTrans re: SB 63 (6204 : Samtrans Presentation on SB 63 (Connect Bay The City appreciates the continued partnership with SamTrans and recognizes the service improvements that have benefited our community in recent years. Our hope is that with this additional funding, the Coastside can realize a more robust and equitable public transit system that better serves the needs of all residents and visitors.
Thank you for your consideration.
Sincerely,
Mayor Debbie Ruddock
City of Half Moon Bay
CC:
Ray Mueller, District 4 Supervisor, San Mateo County
9.b
Packet Pg. 137 Attachment: Attachment B: Letter from City of Half Moon Bay to SamTrans re: SB 63 (6204 : Samtrans Presentation on SB 63 (Connect Bay
CITY OF PACIFICA
COUNCIL AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT
5/11/2026
1 SUBJECT:
Approve the updated City of Pacifica 2023 to 2030 Strategic Plan Mission, Vision, Values, Goals and Strategies
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Approve the updated City of Pacifica 2023 to 2030 Strategic Plan Mission, Vision, Values, Goals and Strategies (Attachment 1).
STAFF CONTACT:
Yulia Carter, Assistant City Manager
(650) 738-7409
[email protected]
BACKGROUND:
Since at least 2017 the City Council has convened annually to identify and review the key priorities to be considered during the development of the City’s next annual budget. This process has ensured that the City’s most important issues are addressed within the context of changing priorities, emergencies, and limited staffing and financial resources.
In 2023 the City Council elevated the prior annual priority setting process into a comprehensive Strategic Plan, which is a best practice for high-functioning organizations. The Strategic Plan includes a Mission, Vision, Values, and Goals to be focused on and achieved through 2030.
The Strategic Plan also includes the top Strategies necessary for achieving each Goal, with the Strategies subject to review, clarification, and prioritization during each annual process prior to the development of the City’s annual budget. This annual prioritization process to achieve longer term Goals helps focus and manage the City’s scarce resources.
A definition of each of the Strategic Plan elements is provided below:
Mission - The City’s Mission is a statement of what the City does and strives to do on an ongoing basis. It sets the boundaries and expectations for the City and its work.
Vision - The Vision statement is aspirational, identifying the desired outcome of the City’s efforts and changes over a long period of time.
Values - The listed Values for the City reflect how the City does its work, from the City Council through front-line staff. Values typically embody both current and desired approaches for internal and external performance.
Goals - The City’s Goal statements capture the primary focus for the City to 10 Packet Pg. 138
Pacifica City Council 2
May 11, 2026
achieve its Vision over the next seven years. Each Goal statement is ambitious, encompassing an aspirational set of work to be done, especially given that most City operations, funding, staffing, and time is devoted to day-to-day services and other non-discretionary work.
Strategies - The City Council has selected a limited set of top Strategies to achieve each Goal. Some Strategies may be accomplished over one to two years, while others may persist throughout the life of the Strategic Plan.
The Pacifica Strategic Plan, as adopted on May 8, 2023 and modified on May 13, 2024 and April 14, 2025, is on the City website at https://www.cityofpacifica.org/government/city-councilstrategic-plan.
DISCUSSION:
This year the City Council convened in a public workshop format on Saturday, March 7, to review progress on and possible changes to the Strategic Plan. The PowerPoint used to guide the Council workshop is provided as Attachment B.
Following a review and highlighting of the City’s many accomplishments this past year as detailed in the PowerPoint, the Council, City Manager, and City Attorney identified the following factors that have led to the City’s success over the past year:
• Council collaboration and teamwork; overcoming differences in pursuit of shared goals
• Council’s perseverance and hard work
• Community engagement and ‘showing up’ during unprecedented difficulties • Staff expertise, commitment, and hard work
• Local, regional, and federal support
• Intentionality: working together on what needs to be done • Council, staff, and community working together for shared love of community The City Council next reviewed the structure of Pacifica’s Strategic Plan and the adopted Mission, Vision and Values that guide the City. No changes were recommended or requested at this time. The facilitator indicated that 2027 or 2028 would likely be the time to for a more comprehensive review and update to the Strategic Plan given changing Council and staff leadership as well as the passage of time and emergence of new challenges and opportunities.
City staff then presented an overview of the Staff Work Program update, including the accumulation and performance on work program items by the adopted Strategic Plan Goals.
Also noted was the direct linkage between the Work Program and staff capacity, including staff vacancies. Based on the City Council’s direction during the workshop, staff will update the Work Program and present it for Council information with the City’s Proposed Budget.
The Council then received extensive public comment with the most comments received related to housing (especially affordable housing and the unhoused), climate action implementation, tree ordinance concerns, code enforcement, and infrastructure needs.
After a brief break, the facilitator and City staff reviewed and updated prior information regarding the City’s severe fiscal challenges for the years ahead, including not only extensive capital project and one-time needs, but also simply maintaining essential core services. The Council was aware of the challenges and prepared to address them during the budget 10 Packet Pg. 139
Pacifica City Council 3
May 11, 2026
discussions this year. It was recommended and agreed to retain Goal 1 - Enhance organizational and fiscal stability - as the City’s top priority as necessary to achieve any other goals and strategies.
Based on Council feedback received prior to the workshop, the Council then discussed an overall sense of exhaustion felt by every member of the Council, and by the staff and public as well. This shared exhaustion has resulted from not only the significant issues facing the City, but also the length and frequency of Council meetings, repeated delays in decision making, and a focus on consensus rather than resolution. The facilitator highlighted that even more significant challenges lie ahead during the next year, including:
• Tackling the fiscal challenges and difficult decisions, as previously discussed; • Council and staff leadership transitions through December; and • Ongoing significant policy issues and projects.
Although the Council’s annual teamwork session will be held following the arrival of the new City Manager, the facilitator highlighted a number of items carrying forward from last year’s Governance Workshop for mayoral and Council consideration, as detailed in the workshop PowerPoint, The Mayor and Council discussed possible Council meeting improvements and agreed to try them during the upcoming meetings. In addition, City staff will try additional approaches to both respond to Council inquiries in advance and to avoid loss of daytime staff capacity due to prolonged and frequent Council meetings.
After lunch the Council focused on reviewing the Strategic Plan Goals one-by-one.
Recommend deletions were accepted and possible additions were proposed. All changes requested by a majority of Council are included in the attached revised Strategic Plan summary, all under Goals and Strategies on page 2 (Attachment 1). A ‘red-lined’ version is also attached for easy identification of proposed changes (Attachment 2).
Several added clauses are included under various Strategies based on the Council’s discussion. However, the facilitator has suggested that these may best be addressed in the Work Program rather than as focused items within the Strategies. Staff request Council discussion and direction on placement of these focused items, whether within the Strategies language or as Work Program items.
Pursuant to Council discussion and direction, City staff recommends Council adoption of the updated City of Pacifica 2023 to 2030 Strategic Plan as provided in Attachment A.
Following the Council’s review of the Goals and Strategies, the facilitator again summarized the strategic plan best practices, many of which have been embraced by Pacifica:
• Posting the Mission, Vision, Values, Goals and Strategies on the City’s web page, around City Hall and other City facilities open to the public, and in the City Council Chambers.
• Incorporating the Strategic Plan in the City’s budget and other guiding documents. • Refer to the Strategic Plan Goals and Strategies as appropriate in Council staff reports. • Provide periodic updates on the Strategic Plan at Council meetings or in semiannual staff reports. • Council consideration of which Strategies to delay or drop when providing midcycle direction on new or emerging priorities. • Conduct annual reviews and updates to the Strategic Plan, focusing on achievements and changes related to the Strategies for each Goal. It is not uncommon in other agencies to drop and add Strategies each year in furtherance of 10 Packet Pg. 140
Pacifica City Council 4
May 11, 2026
the Strategic Plan.
At the end of the workshop, each Council member and the Council appointees were asked to submit and anonymously read a single top priority for Pacific during the year ahead. The responses included the following, in no particular order. • Implement a broad-based community wide long term visioning process for Pacifica’s coast in support of LCLUP certification
• Provide sustainable staffing with an average number of employees doing an average amount of work for an average check
• A bathroom at Fairmont Park, please!
• Guide Pacifica to a more sustainable future for the community we serve • Watch Pacifica continue to succeed!
• Take care of each other
• Assure that staff and Council have the support needed to make the City Manager transition go as smoothly as possible.
The City Council’s action on proposed updates to the Strategic Plan will be the culmination of a thorough and thoughtful consideration of the challenges and opportunities facing the City of Pacifica and will provide a guide for achieving the Council’s Vision and Goals for the City.
FISCAL IMPACT:
There is no direct or immediate fiscal impact associated with the City Council’s adoption of the Strategic Plan. However, the Strategic Plan will serve as the Council’s guide for allocation of resources in the budget process and for staff’s prioritization of work given limited resources.
ORIGINATED BY:
City Manager's Office
ATTACHMENT LIST:
Attachment 1 - PacificaStrategicPlanSummary-ProposedUpdate2026 (DOCX) Attachment 2 - PacificaStrategicPlanSummary-ProposedUpdates2026 - REDLINE (DOCX)
10 Packet Pg. 141
STRATEGIC PLAN - 2023 TO 2030
City of Pacifica
(adopted on May 8, 2023; updated on May 13, 2024 and April 14, 2025; PROPOSED UPDATES May 11, 2026) [Possibly move to Work Plan]
MISSION - What Do We Do?
The City of Pacifica provides exceptional services,
maintains the small-town feel and safety of its unique community, and stewards its environment, coastal beauty, and recreational opportunities.
VISION - What Are We Becoming?
Pacifica strives to be an inclusive and sustainable community:
environmentally, economically, socially, and holistically.
VALUES - How Do We Approach Our Work?
We are committed to:
• Collaborative Teamwork
• A Healthy Workplace
• Heartfelt Service
• Resource Stewardship
• Transparency and Responsiveness
• Visionary Planning
GOALS - How Will We Achieve Our Vision?
1. Enhance organizational and fiscal stability.
2. Improve and steward City infrastructure, streets, and facilities.
3. Prioritize protection and development of affordable housing.
4. Pursue climate change adaptation and mitigation.
5. Broaden public communications and collaboration.
10.a
Packet Pg. 142 Attachment: Attachment 1 - PacificaStrategicPlanSummary-ProposedUpdate2026 (6209 : Strategic Plan)
GOALS AND STRATEGIES
Pacifica Strategic Plan – 2023 to 2030
(adopted on May 8, 2023; updated on May 13, 2024 and April 14, 2025; PROPOSED UPDATES May 11, 2026) [Possibly move to Work Plan]
The Strategies listed under each Goal below are the City Council’s priorities to ensure progress on achieving the Strategic Plan while recognizing the ongoing services, management and
non-discretionary work that consume most City resources.
1. Enhance organizational and fiscal stability.
A. Improve staff retention, recruitment, mental health and wellness resources, and increase staffing for rising workloads.
B. Pursue possible tax, bond and other revenue opportunities, including tobacco and cannabis licensing.
C. Implement the Economic Development Workplan.
D. Prepare the Cost Allocation Plan and conduct the Development Impact Fee and Master Fee Studies, and consider provision of in-house building official and plan check services.
E. Increase public education about the City’s organizational capacity and fiscal needs.
2. Improve and steward City infrastructure, streets, and facilities.
A. Complete selected stormwater and flooding improvements citywide.
B. Advance the Beach Boulevard Resiliency Project, Esplanade Protection, and the Pier.
C. Complete the Facilities Assessment Study.
3. Prioritize protection and development of affordable housing.
A. Identify and advance viable affordable housing projects.
B. Fully implement the Short-Term Rental Ordinance.
C. Prioritize Housing Element program implementation, including interim housing solutions.
4. Pursue climate change adaptation and mitigation.
A. Begin implementation of the Climate Action and Adaptation Plan.
B. Continue the urban forestry plan, tree canopy goals, inventory, and projects, prioritizing refinement of the tree ordinance “loophole” language.
C. Begin implementation of Pacifica’s Local Coastal Plan and continue collaborations with the California Coastal Commission.
5. Broaden public communications and collaboration.
10.a
Packet Pg. 143 Attachment: Attachment 1 - PacificaStrategicPlanSummary-ProposedUpdate2026 (6209 : Strategic Plan) A. Creatively harness community expertise, advocates and volunteers to advance City priorities.
B. Increase communications, education, and connections
for community wellness resources.
C. Broaden community awareness of the Library projects.
D. Improve coordination and collaboration between City and regional commissions, boards and committees.
10.a
Packet Pg. 144 Attachment: Attachment 1 - PacificaStrategicPlanSummary-ProposedUpdate2026 (6209 : Strategic Plan) STRATEGIC PLAN - 2023 TO 2030
City of Pacifica
(adopted on May 8, 2023; updated on May 13, 2024 and April 14, 2025; PROPOSED UPDATES May 11, 2026) [Additions; Deletions as Comments on the right; Possibly move to Work Plan] MISSION - What Do We Do?
The City of Pacifica provides exceptional services,
maintains the small-town feel and safety of its unique community, and stewards its environment, coastal beauty, and recreational opportunities.
VISION - What Are We Becoming?
Pacifica strives to be an inclusive and sustainable community:
environmentally, economically, socially, and holistically.
VALUES - How Do We Approach Our Work?
We are committed to:
• Collaborative Teamwork
• A Healthy Workplace
• Heartfelt Service
• Resource Stewardship
• Transparency and Responsiveness
• Visionary Planning
GOALS - How Will We Achieve Our Vision?
1. Enhance organizational and fiscal stability.
2. Improve and steward City infrastructure, streets, and facilities.
3. Prioritize protection and development of affordable housing.
4. Pursue climate change adaptation and mitigation.
5. Broaden public communications and collaboration.
10.b
Packet Pg. 145 Attachment: Attachment 2 - PacificaStrategicPlanSummary-ProposedUpdates2026 - REDLINE (6209 : Strategic Plan)
GOALS AND STRATEGIES
Pacifica Strategic Plan – 2023 to 2030
(adopted on May 8, 2023; updated on May 13, 2024 and April 14, 2025; PROPOSED UPDATES May 11, 2026) [Additions; Deletions as Comments on the right; Possibly move to Work Plan] The Strategies listed under each Goal below are the City Council’s priorities to ensure progress on achieving the Strategic Plan while recognizing the ongoing services, management and
non-discretionary work that consume most City resources.
1. Enhance organizational and fiscal stability.
A. Improve staff retention, recruitment, mental health and wellness resources, and increase staffing for rising workloads.
B. Pursue possible tax, bond and other revenue opportunities, including tobacco and cannabis licensing.
C. Prioritize implementation of the Economic Opportunities Study.Implement the Economic Development Workplan.
D. Prepare the Cost Allocation Plan and conduct the Development Impact Fee and Master Fee Studies, and consider provision of in-house building official and plan check services.
D.E. Increase public education about the City’s organizational capacity and fiscal needs.
2. Improve and steward City infrastructure, streets, and facilities.
A. Complete selected stormwater and flooding improvements citywide.
B. Advance the Beach Boulevard Resiliency Project, Esplanade Protection, and the Pier.
C. Broaden community awareness of the Library projects.[NOTE - MOVE TO GOAL 5]
D. Complete a Facilities Assessment and prioritize the City’s facilities and equipment needs, including public safety, the Community Center, and other parks and recreation resources.Complete the Facilities Assessment Study.
3. Prioritize protection and development of affordable housing.
A. Complete the Housing Element Update. Identify and advance viable affordable housing projects.
B. Update andFully implement the Short-Term Rental Ordinance.
C. Prioritize Housing Element program implementation, including interim housing solutions.
4. Pursue climate change adaptation and mitigation.
A. Adopt and beginBegin implementation of the Climate Action and Adaptation Plan.
10.b
Packet Pg. 146 Attachment: Attachment 2 - PacificaStrategicPlanSummary-ProposedUpdates2026 - REDLINE (6209 : Strategic Plan) B. Continue the urban forestry plan, tree canopy goals, inventory, and projects, prioritizing refinement of the tree ordinance “loophole” language.
C. Certify and beginBegin implementation of Pacifica’s Local Coastal Plan and continue collaborations with the California Coastal Commission.
5. Broaden public communications and collaboration.
A. Creatively harness community expertise, advocates and volunteers to advance City priorities.
B. Increase communications, education, and connections
for community wellness resources.
C. Broaden community awareness of the Library projects.
B.D. Improve coordination and collaboration between City and regional commissions, boards and committees.
10.b
Packet Pg. 147 Attachment: Attachment 2 - PacificaStrategicPlanSummary-ProposedUpdates2026 - REDLINE (6209 : Strategic Plan)
CITY OF PACIFICA
COUNCIL AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT
5/11/2026
1 SUBJECT:
Fiscal Year 2026-27 Base Budget and Introduction of the 2026-31 Capital Improvement Program
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Accept the report and provide feedback and direction on the proposed Fiscal Year 2026-27 Base Budget, and introduction of the FY 2026-31 Capital Improvement Program.
STAFF CONTACT:
Yulia Carter, Assistant City Manager
650-501-6004
[email protected]
Marisol Gómez
Finance and Administrative Services Director
[email protected]
BACKGROUND:
This year's budget cycle launched on March 7, 2026, with the Council’s review of the City’s Strategic Plan and Priority-Setting workshop. The updated Strategic Plan will be presented for the Council’s adoption on May 11, 2026, in a separate agenda item, with the departmental workplans to follow on June 8th.
As part of this year’s outreach the City conducted a community survey to receive feedback on City service needs and priorities. In our tradition of transparency and engagement around the City’s budget process, the City is launching The Pacifica Discussion 2026 to ensure all residents have an opportunity to voice their priorities. Residents have identified community priorities such as maintaining public safety services, maintaining 911 police, fire and emergency medical response times, attracting and retaining experienced medical responders, preventing further deterioration of streets and roads by paving those in the worst conditions and qualifying for Pacifica’s fair share of matching funds from state and federal governments.
The City continues to work hard to ensure resident priorities are addressed but given the current structural budget deficit the City is facing, core city services will need to be reduced.
Without a new sustainable revenue source, Pacifica will be forced to reduce necessary city services, including public safety, public works, and community services. This could lead to fewer police officers and firefighters keeping our neighborhoods safe, popular community services, public works staff.
Despite the City’s best efforts, Pacifica still has among the worst rated roads in the entire Bay Area, with only 28% of the City’s streets rated as at least “good” and 27% rated as “failed” to “very poor.” Pacifica has a backlog of $84 million in needed street and road repairs and maintenance needs, and without additional locally controlled funding, more than one-third of 11 Packet Pg. 148
Pacifica City Council 2
May 11, 2026
Pacifica’s streets will be rated as “failed” to “very poor” in five years, with repair costs becoming even more expensive and pushing the backlog up to $123 million in five years.
As for the City’s 911 emergency response and fire services, the current fire stations have no dedicated space for firefighters returning from calls to decontaminate and store personal protection equipment, which increases risk of exposure to carcinogens. Pacifica seeks to provide firefighters facilities that can reduce their risk of exposure to hazardous materials.
The City appreciates the community members who took the time to participate and share their perspectives thus far. This input is an important part of the City’s ongoing engagement efforts.
As we move into this year’s budget process, the City will continue to keep the community informed and involved as discussions about long term fiscal sustainability and potential funding options move forward.
Each year, the City of Pacifica adopts an annual operating budget that reflects the planned activities for the next fiscal year based on the best information available to the City Council and staff at the time of adoption. Then, at mid-year, staff revisits the projections and reports to the Council any changes needed to reflect new information and keep the City on track. These revised budget estimates help shape the development of the budget assumptions for the following year’s budget. The FY 2025-26 Mid-Year adjustments were presented to the Council on March 9, 2026.
The City’s Long-Term Financial Forecast (LTFF) was developed based on the FY 2025-26 midyear review and presented to Council on March 7, 2026, as part of the Strategic Planning Study Session. At that time, the LTFF indicated that the City of Pacifica was facing an ongoing structural deficit at the current level of services, projected at $3.4 million for the upcoming FY 2026-27. Without corrective action, the forecast showed that the City’s reserves could fall below the GFOA-recommended two months of operating expenditures reserves as early as FY 2027- 28 and could be fully depleted by FY 2031-32.
The forecast reflects several ongoing fiscal pressures, including softening sales tax and cannabis revenues, reductions in Transient Occupancy Tax (TOT), business license and permit revenues associated with Short-Term Rental (STR) ordinance changes, and continued uncertainty surrounding Vehicle License Fee (VLF) in-lieu backfill payments from the State in the upcoming years. While the forecast included the $1.06 million VLF backfill that is due to the City in FY 2026-27, this amount is currently not included in the State’s proposed budget. The City is continuing to engage in coordinated, countywide advocacy efforts to secure this funding.
The preliminary forecast represented a “status quo” scenario at the current level of services, and did not assume ongoing General Fund contributions to the Capital Improvement Program (CIP). Even without additional CIP funding, the General Fund was projected to remain structurally imbalanced, underscoring the magnitude of the City’s fiscal challenges.
The City Council held study sessions on November 10, 2025 and November 24, 2025 to review Pacifica’s long term fiscal sustainability challenges and explore potential short and long-term strategies to address structural budget deficits, limited staffing capacity, and significant unfunded capital needs. These discussions established a shared understanding of the City’s fiscal baseline and identified a range of tools to address structural deficits, limited staffing capacity, and significant unfunded capital needs.
Consistent with the City’s multi-layered Fiscal Sustainability Framework, presented as a fivepiece puzzle requiring multiple strategies working together rather than a single solution, the 11 Packet Pg. 149
Pacifica City Council 3
May 11, 2026
discussion focused on a comprehensive set of interconnected short- and long-term approaches, including strengthening and diversifying revenue streams, maintaining appropriate organizational investment and staffing capacity, advancing economic development to revitalize commercial areas and opportunity sites, recognizing housing development as an economic driver, and leveraging community partnerships, grants, and financing tools to supplement local resources.
The Budget Study Session 1 was held on April 13, 2026, and staff presented the Narrative Budget report outlining the Budget planning process, methodology, timeline, and preliminary budget strategies. The Council reviewed and supported incorporating the following budget strategies into the budget development process:
1. Continue the allocation of Excess Educational Revenue Augmentation Funding (ERAF) to ensure they remain in the General Fund to help address the projected budget deficit.
The Council may provide further direction on whether a portion of these revenues should continue to be allocated to the Disaster Accounting and Housing Action funds.
2. Address Financial Uncertainties Related to Vehicle License Fee In-Lieu Backfill Payments from the State by assigning a portion of the General Fund reserves as assigned fund balance designation to offset the potential loss.
3. Prioritize Revenue-Generating Development to Strengthen the City's Long-Term Financial Base and address the ongoing structural deficit.
4. Complete the Citywide Cost Allocation Plan (CAP) to establish fully burdened service costs, improve transparency in how administrative and overhead costs are allocated across departments, and support more accurate cost recovery and long-term fiscal sustainability.
5. Update the City’s Development Impact Fees and User Fee Schedule to better align fees with the actual cost of services and growth-related impacts, while providing the City Council with policy options related to cost recovery levels and General Fund subsidies.
Collectively, the strategies outlined above are intended to help reduce the City’s structural deficit and improve long-term fiscal sustainability. However, while these actions are important and necessary, they will address only part of the challenge. 11 Packet Pg. 150
Pacifica City Council 4
May 11, 2026
Even with successful implementation, the City is likely to continue facing structural imbalance that will require broader evaluation of service levels and alignment of ongoing operating expenditures with available revenues. This process will require a thoughtful, measured, and transparent approach and will inevitably involve difficult choices.
As part of these discussions, the City Council also provided direction in November to further evaluate long-term funding strategies, including the potential feasibility of future revenue measures related to public safety and infrastructure funding, and to engage professional services to support community outreach, public education, and community opinion research efforts.
The goal of this work is to better understand community priorities, service expectations, and community perspectives regarding long-term fiscal sustainability and service priorities.
In response to that direction, the City initiated a community survey effort designed to provide additional insight into community priorities and service expectations. The survey results have since been published on the City’s website and shared through the City’s community newsletter.
The City appreciates the residents who took the time to participate and provide thoughtful feedback, which will continue to help inform ongoing fiscal sustainability and service-level discussions.
As part of the FY 2026-27 budget development process, the City also plans to launch the “Pacifica Discussion” community engagement initiative to continue gathering resident input regarding City service needs, priorities, and potential tradeoffs. The outreach effort is intended to foster continued community dialogue during a challenging economic environment facing both the City and residents alike, while ensuring that future policy and budget discussions remain informed by community values and priorities.
Initial outreach and survey feedback has highlighted strong community interest in maintaining public safety services, preserving police, fire, and emergency medical response times, attracting and retaining experienced emergency responders, and addressing the City’s significant infrastructure needs, particularly the condition of local streets and roads.
As the City moves forward through this year’s budget process, it will continue to prioritize transparency, public engagement, and ongoing communication with the community regarding long-term fiscal sustainability challenges, service priorities, and potential future funding strategies.
DISCUSSION:
This report presents the FY 2026-27 Base Budget reflecting the current level of services and operations and the Introduction of recommended non-discretionary FY 2026-27 Capital Improvement Plan projects included with the Base Budget.
Specific budget options and recommendations will be presented as part of the Recommended Budget at the next budget meeting on June 8th, preceding the final Budget adoption hearing on June 22nd.
A summary of the FY 2026-27 budget schedule is as follows:
11 Packet Pg. 151
Pacifica City Council 5
May 11, 2026
FY 2026-27 BASE BUDGET
The goal of the budget process is to develop a sustainable City Budget through a comprehensive analysis of the City's revenue and service level expenditures to identify necessary service enhancements and/or reduction options, which, when combined, will maintain a balanced budget and ensure fiscal responsibility and alignment with the Council’s strategic priorities.
Staff formulated various revenue and expenditure assumptions to construct the base budget for FY 2026-27. These assumptions were based on known projections and economic conditions and reflect the budget adjustments made by the Council during the mid-year budget review.
The resulting structural surplus or deficit at the base budget level is critical, as it informs discussions about departmental or other program funding beyond the baseline to accomplish identified priorities for the upcoming year.
The General Fund is the City's primary operating fund and is used to account for most day-today activities. It receives unrestricted revenues, and the City's general administrative services, public safety, and community development-related activities such as planning, building, and engineering are budgeted in the General Fund. Revenue sources include but are not limited to property tax, sales tax, transient occupancy tax (TOT), business license tax, and current fees for services. The FY 2026-27 General Fund Base Revenue budget is developed based on the current economic conditions and current projections of the City’s revenue base.
The City's FY 2026-27 General Fund Base Expenditure budget reflects the current level of services and operations. The base budget is not an exact duplication of the prior year's adopted Budget because of actions that the Council may have taken that modified the Budget over the course of the year and, most notably, because of the FY 2026-27 budget assumptions used to develop the base budget further described below.
This report presents the FY 2026-27 General Fund Base Revenue Budget of $53.2 million and Base Expenditure Budget of $57.1 million, resulting in an updated structural deficit of approximately $3.8 million between operating revenues and expenditures.
Consistent with previously approved Council direction provided during labor negotiations, the Base Budget also incorporates a projected 5% salary savings assumption, effectively reducing 11 Packet Pg. 152
Pacifica City Council 6
May 11, 2026
the projected net General Fund deficit to approximately $2.3 million at the current level of services.
This estimate reflects updated revenue and expenditure assumptions since the preliminary Long-Term Financial Forecast presented during Budget Study Session #1, including revised projections related to workers’ compensation premiums and CalPERS Unfunded Accrued Liability (UAL) costs.
The summaries of the General Fund Base Budget Revenues and Expenditures are provided in Attachments 1 and 2. In coordination with other city departments, Finance developed the FY 2026-27 Base Budget assumptions to include all strategies previously approved by the City Council and factor in inflationary conditions.
Below are some key assumptions applied to the FY 2026-27 Base Budget.
FY 2026-27 Base Budget General Fund Revenues Assumptions Revenue estimates have been modified based on the most current information available from department feedback, external sources, and further analysis.
The following revenues are projected to reflect significant changes over FY 2026-27:
• Property Tax is the City's largest revenue source. Historically, Pacifica's property tax base has shown slower growth compared to some other Bay Area cities. For the FY 2026-27 Budget, property taxes comprise approximately 35% of City General Fund revenues. Both secured and unsecured property taxes are levied based on the assessed real property valuation (the basis for property tax levy) as of January 1, 2026.
The FY 2026-27 property tax revenues are conservatively projected at $18.4 million or $0.6 million (3.7%) above the FY 2025-26 Mid-Year Revised Budget of $17.7 million based on the information provided by the County and HdL, the City's property tax consultant.
• Charges for Services are the second largest revenue category, comprising about 17% of the total General Fund revenue budget. They include building, planning, other permits, recreation revenues, rentals, fines, and reimbursements. This revenue category reflects an increase of $1.3 million or 18%. Approximately $0.9 million of that increase is due to incorporating the updated Wastewater Enterprise administrative service charge, derived from the updated cost allocation plan. The remaining charges received a modest increase of 1%. No additional revenue assumptions related to the comprehensive User Fee Study currently underway have been incorporated into the FY 2026-27 Base Budget at this time. The User Fee Study is expected to be presented to the City Council in early FY 2026-27; However, given the magnitude of the City’s projected structural deficit, staff may present preliminary fee adjustment assumptions as part of future balancing strategies for Council consideration during the next Budget Study Session, prior to completion of the full policy review and fiscal impact analysis associated with the study.
• Excess Educational Revenue Augmentation Fund (ERAF) is the third largest revenue category, comprising about 7.3% of the General Fund revenue budget. While Excess ERAF has remained stable in recent years, thus it’s continued use as a Budget Strategy, it was traditionally categorized as one-time funding, it is not considered a reliable revenue source in terms of amount from year to year. The City has seen firsthand how the State’s shifting fiscal policies, such as un-funding the VLF backfill 11 Packet Pg. 153
Pacifica City Council 7
May 11, 2026
obligations, can impact local revenues. Excess ERAF remains vulnerable to similar policy changes, particularly as the State faces its own ongoing budget challenges.
Consistent with the prior fiscal year budget strategy, the FY 2026-27 Base Budget assumes that Excess ERAF revenues will remain in the General Fund rather than being split between the General Fund, Housing Fund, and Disaster Accounting Fund under the City’s previous allocation methodology. While this approach provides additional support for ongoing General Fund operations and helps address immediate structural budget pressures, it also leaves the Housing and Disaster-related functions without an ongoing recurring revenue source at this time.
• Utility Users Tax (UUT) is now the fourth largest revenue category, comprising about 7% of the General Fund revenue budget. UUT Is projected to increase by 3.5%, based on trends reviewed at the mid-year, or $0.9 million to $3.7 million. The City collects UUT on Gas and Electric at 6.5%, but does not have authority over the utility rates charged by service providers. In recent years, PG&E customers in San Mateo County and throughout Northern California have experienced significant volatility and increases in utility costs associated with wildfire mitigation, infrastructure modernization, and statewide energy reliability investments, all of which directly influence the taxable utility base and resulting UUT revenues.
• Vehicle License Fee (VLF) in Lieu is the fifth largest revenue category that accounts for 6.6% of the General Fund revenues, down from third largest in the prior year. The challenges around the VLF in Lieu revenues have been discussed at length during the mid-year budget review. There has been insufficient ERAF to fund the VLF in Lieu allocation for the past six years, resulting in a ongoing revenue shortfall that are projected to continue.
In the past, the State has backfilled the VLF shortfall, but the State's payment lagged two years behind the shortfall year. The City’s FY 2026-27 gross VLF allocation is estimated at approximately $6.3 million. However, after accounting for the projected current-year shortfall of approximately ($3.9 million) and adding the anticipated FY 2024-25 State backfill payment of approximately $1.06 million expected to be received in FY 2026-27, the City’s net VLF revenue is projected at approximately $3.5 million.
This represents a decrease of approximately $1.1 million, or 24.6%, from the prior year’s net VLF revenue. County projections also indicate that the annual VLF shortfall is expected to continue increasing over time.
As indicated with budget strategy #2, staff will continue designating a portion of the General Fund reserves as assigned fund balance to temporarily offset the potential loss of the backfill if the State does not follow through on its obligations in FY 2026-27.
However, as previously discussed, this strategy is inherently short-term in nature.
Utilizing fund balance to address an ongoing revenue shortfall does not resolve the City’s structural imbalance and would effectively serve as a temporary patch. If the City permanently loses this revenue source, a sustainable, ongoing solution will be required, which may include identifying alternative renewable revenue sources, implementing cost containment measures, or reducing service levels to align expenditures with available revenues. Staff will continue working with regional partners on advocacy efforts, closely monitor developments in the State budget, and provide updates to the City Council throughout the FY 2026-27 budget development process as additional information becomes available.
• Sales Tax is the City's sixth largest revenue category. At the midyear budget review, staff reported that the sales tax revenues were down, resulting in just over $0.1 million 11 Packet Pg. 154
Pacifica City Council 8
May 11, 2026
reduction. Based on the most recent discussions with HdL, the City's sales tax advisor, and their sales tax projections, the local sales activities forecast is expected to slightly increase, projecting only a 1.5% or $47k increase over the already reduced FY 2025-26 Budget, leaving the sales tax revenues of $3.1 million essentially at the same level as the Revised FY 2025-26 Budget.
• Measure Y is a ½ cent Transaction & Use Tax that was passed by the voters in the City of Pacifica in November 2022 and went into effect April 1, 2023. Differentiating from the sales tax category above, HdL projects this revenue to increase slightly more over the reduced mid-year level by 2%, or to $2.6 million in FY 2026-27. Measure Y projections are slightly different, as they rely on the countywide pool allocation methodology for certain transactions, including online and out-of-area sales, which can fluctuate based on broader regional and statewide consumer spending trends rather than just local point-of-sale activity.
• Other Taxes have been reviewed for historical averages, economic trends, and the prior year's returns. This includes the following:
➢ Transient Occupancy Tax (TOT) revenue is projected to decline slightly anticipating the additional effects of the Short-Term Rental (STR) Ordinance implementation. At the mid-year the TOT category had shown an increase largely due to STR one-time tax catchup payments from previous cycles. TOT for hotels also showed favorable increases due to newly implemented voluntary compliance agreement with VRBO (HomeAway). STR amounts for the current cycle are trending closer to the projected decrease incorporated with the ordinance change. The FY 2026-27 TOT revenues are projecting a decrease of $0.2 million or 7.8%;
➢ Cannabis Operations Tax is estimated to stay flat at this time. However, staff will be closely monitoring this assumption due to reported decreases in cannabis sales tax revenues by HdL and potential changes to cannabis operators; ➢ Business License Tax is projecting a 2.6% increase to a total of $0.6 million based on continuing compliance efforts provided by HdL; ➢ Franchise Tax is estimated to stay flat with marginal increase of 1.8%, or $20k, to $1.1 million.
• Intergovernmental revenues comprise state and federal government reimbursements for the City’s childcare program, estimated at $2.4 million. However, this category is always reviewed at the midyear budget review following the completion of the audit and reimbursement filings.
• Operating Transfers In this year only includes a transfer from the Measure A Fund to cover a portion of the Public Works street maintenance staff budgeted in the General Fund. The transfer allocation was reduced by approx. $1m from prior years following a review of available Streets and NPDES funding sources as part of the cost allocation plan. Measure A and Measure W revenues allocated by the County have continued to trend downward due in part to population declines, reducing the availability of these restricted revenues to sustain prior-year transfer levels to the General Fund.
FY 2026-27 Base Budget General Fund Expenditures Assumptions Total General Fund Base Budget expenditures are projected at $57.1 million at the Base Budget level, $1.9 million, or 3.5% more than the FY 2025-26 Revised Budget.
Operating expenses are set to remain consistent with the prior year's actuals and mid-year 11 Packet Pg. 155
Pacifica City Council 9
May 11, 2026
revised budget adjustments. This includes removing one-time budget allocations from last year and accounting for expected inflationary increases.
Attachment 2 demonstrates the General Fund expenditure estimates for FY 2026-27 at the Base Budget level. Below are the key base budget expenditure assumptions:
• Salary and Benefits projections include funding for 202.25 full-time equivalent (FTE) positions citywide and include all current MOU provisions. Funding for overtime and part-time positions remains consistent with the prior year's allocation. • Vacant positions are budgeted at the top step with the "employee family" cafeteria plan assumption for health benefits. Projections also incorporate all current Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) provisions, including merit increases for eligible staff members on their performance anniversary dates.
• FY 2026-27 PERS retirement rates are budgeted as provided by CalPERS for classic miscellaneous and safety members and Public Employees' Pension Reform Act (PEPRA) rates for miscellaneous and safety employees without prior municipal experience or those who have had a break in public service.
Employer Plan FY 2026-27
Miscellaneous 11.86%
PEPRA Safety Fire 13.91%
PEPRA Safety Police 13.91%
CLASSIC Safety Fire 24.43%
CLASSIC Safety Police 27.42%
• PERS Unfunded Accrued Liability (UAL) payment is budgeted at $7.1 million for Safety and Miscellaneous employees, which is a $0.8 million or 13% increase from FY 2025-26. The Base Budget continues to align with the Pension Funding Policy adopted last year, which commits the City to making an additional annual contribution to the Section 115 Trust administered by Public Agency Retirement Services (PARS). The goal is to accumulate reserves equal to 1.5% of the accrued pension liability by FY 2044-45. In compliance with this policy, the FY 2026-27 contribution to the trust was reinstated at $236,000 to support long-term pension obligations. The Base Budget also includes a continuing contribution to PARS in the amount of $283,750, which represents the funding of the Actuarily Determined Contribution (ADC) per the most recent Actuarial Valuation to fund Other Post Employment Benefits (OPEB) unfunded liability, consistent with the Council funding strategy approved in 2022. Attachment 6 provides additional insight into the City’s funding policy. • Most Professional Services contractual obligations were increased by 1.5% over the FY 2025-26 Revised Budget to account for modest inflationary increases unless further cost increases were noted and factored into the Base Budget by operating departments. The 1.5% assumption remains below recent inflationary trends and reflects and effort constrain baseline expenditure growth where feasible. The category also shows a reduction of approx. $1.0 million or (-10.5)%, primarily due to the removal of previously approved one-time requests that are not part of the ongoing base budget assumptions.
• Similarly, most of the Material, Supplies, and Maintenance category assumes a modest 1.5% inflationary increase from the FY 2025-26 Mid-Year Revised Budget, which remains below recent inflationary trends and reflects efforts to constrain baseline expenditure growth where feasible. This category also removes one-time requests that are not part of ongoing base budget assumptions and keeps training and membership 11 Packet Pg. 156
Pacifica City Council 10 May 11, 2026
expenditures category flat. As a result, the FY 2026-27 Base Budget allocation for this category is approximately $4.7 million, representing a (-6.6)% decrease over the FY 2025-26 Mid-Year Revised budget.
• Risk Management Premium Increase. The FY 2026-27 general liability and worker’s compensation premiums both increased substantially. The 4% or $100k increase in General liability is due to a combination of a challenging insurance market, particularly in property coverage, and the City’s past claims history. After a few favorable years when the City experienced a reduction in the workers’ compensation premium, the coming year’s early estimate shows a significant increase of nearly $0.4 million or 25% primarily driven by a spike in claims involving extended injury-related leaves that remain open. These open claims have adversely affected the City’s claims history and renewal rates. Staff will continue to closely monitor active claims to bring them to resolution and will continue implementation of the Injury and Illness Prevention Program (IIPP) and other risk mitigation efforts citywide to help prevent future exposure. • The FY 2026-27 Base Budget includes a “status quo” continuing funding for funding of non-profit organizations as directed by Council last year for PRC ($100,000) Pacific Beach Coalition ($10,000) and removed the one-time allocations for Fog Fest and Pride.
• The Utilities expenditure assumptions for Phone/Cable, Water, and Gas & Electric services were increased by 1.5%. Although utility rates can fluctuate from year to year, gas and electric rates should see less volatile spikes in the coming years. Facilities staff continue to monitor these accounts closely and will evaluate usage trends, rate adjustments, and operational impacts throughout the fiscal year to identify any necessary budgetary adjustments.
• The Operating Transfers Out Category accounts for a transfer to the Debt Service Fund to fund Pension Obligation Bonds and other debt service obligations, as well as transfers to the Internal Service Funds for Risk Management programs, Motor Pool operations, and Fire Equipment replacements, totaling $4.3 million. This category reflected a $0.7 million increase over the prior year’s partial one-time reduction in debt service transfers. Last year, the Debt Fund was able to cover a portion of the debt obligations from the fund balance; this year shows a return to the normal debt service level supported by a transfer from the General Fund.
• The Capital Transfers Out Category includes an allocation of $50,000 for the Economic Development project, which is further described in the Capital Improvement Program section of this report. This project is consistent with the placemaking and commercial area revitalization strategies identified in the recently developed Economic Development Work Plan and is intended to support smaller-scale repair, replacement, beautification, and activation improvements that immediately enhance visitor-serving areas and support local businesses. This is the only CIP project receiving General Fund support in FY 2026-27. Although, capital transfers are not considered ongoing operating expenditures and therefore are not included in the calculation of the City’s structural deficit, as previously demonstrated in the Long-Term Financial Forecast, the General Fund does not currently have the capacity to sustain an ongoing General Fundsupported CIP program. This is the only CIP project that the General Fund contributed to this year and is consistent with the prior-year’s General Fund contribution towards CIP.
11 Packet Pg. 157
Pacifica City Council 11 May 11, 2026
Projected Fund Balance Structure - General Fund
After removing one-time expenditures, factoring in the preliminary Budget Strategies, and applying the Base Budget assumptions, the FY 2026-27 Base budget would have a projected deficit of approximately $2.3 million or about 4% of General Fund expenditures.
As noted in the Government Finance Officers Association (GFOA) best practices, “there is a major distinction between a balanced budget that is balanced on the uses of one-time resources and a structurally balanced budget.” Without addressing the City’s ongoing structural deficit, the annual shortfalls may eventually exceed the capacity of internal resource reallocations or reserves, requiring the Council to consider reductions in services and/or staffing levels.
The FY 2025-26 budget was referenced as a tipping point, a year in which Pacifica largely maintained existing service levels and avoided deeper cuts, but only through a combination of one-time or unsustainable strategies, including the use of Excess ERAF or temporary reductions in planned pension or OPEB trust contributions, among other non-structural reductions. However, the FY 2026-27 Base Budget now reflects a projected deficit even after incorporating previously identified balancing assumptions and strategies.
Departmental Service-Level Review & Budget Reduction Process As part of the FY 2026-27 budget development process, departments were asked to review their base budgets and identify potential service reduction options for City Manager review and future Council consideration during Budget Study Session #3.
The current projected General Fund deficit of approximately $2.3 million represents roughly 4% of General Fund operating expenditures. Departments have been asked to identify reduction options totaling approximately $2.8 million, or approximately 5% of General Fund operating expenditures, to provide flexibility as the budget is refined, account for ongoing fiscal uncertainty, and help establish a structural buffer against future projected imbalances identified in the Long-Term Financial Forecast.
This process will also provide the City Manager and City Council with a range of options to make informed policy decisions regarding service levels, organizational priorities, and longterm fiscal sustainability.
The General Fund Budget Target Reduction by Department is listed in the table below, the target amount to about 5% of each department’s base budget:
11 Packet Pg. 158
Pacifica City Council 12 May 11, 2026
The goal of this process is to develop a range of service-level options, both reductions and enhancements-aligned with Council’s strategic goals and service priorities, to achieve a balanced and sustainable budget. The City Manager will evaluate these inputs and present a recommended package for Council consideration. Not all identified reductions may necessarily be implemented; rather, this process is intended to provide a comprehensive set of options for evaluation.
In this context, the City’s focus on economic development initiatives that prioritize revenuegenerating development (Budget Strategy #3) to achieve additional ongoing revenue becomes even more critical. Expanding the City’s ongoing revenue base is essential to achieving long term fiscal sustainability and advancing Strategic Plan priorities without compromising core services.
Again, the numbers presented in this report only reflect the current Base Budget level of services and include funding for non-discretionary capital projects. It does not consider all budget strategies and other recommendations by the City Manager that will be brought forward at future budget meetings for a more in-depth discussion of the proposed budget and the Council's direction on how to reach a balanced and sustainable budget at the desirable level of services.
Service Categorization by Departments
As discussed throughout this report, the City is likely to continue facing structural imbalance that will require a broader evaluation of service levels to align ongoing operating expenditures with available operating revenues. This process will require a thoughtful, measured, and transparent approach, and will inevitably involve difficult choices regarding service priorities, organizational capacity, and community expectations.
To support this effort, all departments were asked to conduct a comprehensive review of the services they provide and categorize them into three broad groups:
• Category 1: Mandated & Public Health and Safety Services Federally, state, or legally required services, and those directly tied to protecting life, property, and public safety.
• Category 2: Core / Essential Services
Critical services necessary to maintain basic City operations and community functioning, but not legally mandated.
• Category 3: Discretionary Services / Community Enhancements Services that enhance quality of life, community identity, and long-term vibrancy. 11 Packet Pg. 159
Pacifica City Council 13 May 11, 2026
The initial results of this citywide exercise are summarized in Attachment 7 and are intended to serve as a foundational planning and policy discussion tool for the next study session and development of the FY 2026-27 budget options. The exercise is also intended to support future discussions regarding service levels, organizational priorities, operational sustainability, and long-term fiscal planning.
The Attachment 7 and below table summarize the initial results of this exercise. The analysis reflects approximately 358 identified departmental services supported by approximately 165.78 General Fund FTEs citywide. Based on the current departmental assessments, approximately 27% of identified services were categorized as mandated or directly related to public health and safety functions, approximately 35% were categorized as core or essential operational services, and approximately 39% were categorized as discretionary or service enhancement activities.
It is important to note, however, that the percentage breakdown of identified services by category does not directly correlate to the percentage of the City’s budget allocated to those services. Many mandated and core operational functions, particularly in public safety, infrastructure maintenance, regulatory compliance, and essential operations are significantly more resource-intensive and personnel-driven than smaller-scale discretionary programs, initiatives, or community enhancement activities. Accordingly, while discretionary or enhancement activities may represent a larger number of individual service entries in the inventory, they may account for a comparatively smaller portion of overall operating expenditures, when core and mandated services continue to comprise the substantial majority of the City’s ongoing budget and staffing commitments.
The exercise also highlights meaningful differences in service composition across departments.
Departments such as Fire, Public Works, Community Development, and Administrative Services contain a comparatively higher concentration of legally mandated or regulatory functions, while departments such as Parks, Beaches & Recreation and Economic & Housing Development contain a larger proportion of discretionary and community enhancement activities that largely contribute to the quality of life, community identity, visitor experience, and long-term sustainability efforts.
This initial effort represents a first internal evaluation intended to encourage broader organizational discussion and strategic thinking regarding how staff time, operational capacity, and financial resources are allocated across the organization. The exercise reflects a combination of ongoing operational services, regulatory responsibilities, community programs, one-time initiatives, and special projects that require ongoing staff capacity and resources on a 11 Packet Pg. 160
Pacifica City Council 14 May 11, 2026
day-to-day basis. It is not intended to represent a comprehensive, fully standardized, or exhaustive analysis of every individual service, task, or activity currently performed by City departments.
As departments continue refining services, evaluating operational nuances associated with service levels, staffing requirements, and costs, the categorizations and descriptions may continue to evolve. Accordingly, this initial effort should not be viewed as a final or exhaustive inventory of all City services, but rather as the first phase of an ongoing organizational and fiscal sustainability evaluation process. This analysis is a foundational step and planning framework to help inform the development of departmental service adjustment recommendations that will be presented for Council consideration at Budget Study Session #3 in June.
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM
As reported previously, the City does not have a designated funding source to fund the robust Capital Improvement Program at the desired level. Due to the City's financial limitations and limited staff capacity to manage major capital projects, the FY 2026-27 CIP Program recommendations are only limited to projects with available grant funding sources, legally mandated projects, or projects that pose an immediate threat to public health and safety. These projects are considered non-discretionary.
Below is a preliminary list of NEW non-discretionary projects proposed for FY 2026-27 funding included with the Base Budget:
General Capital Projects (Fund 322 funded by General Fund):
1. Economic Development Infrastructure Improvements Project ($50k) - Consistent with the recently approved Economic Development Work Plan, this project supports smaller-scale repairs, replacements, upgrades and beautification improvements to utilities, streetscapes, pedestrian access, and other improvements to enhance visitorserving areas, support local businesses and strengthen commercial vitality in key business districts citywide.
General Capital Projects (Other Funds):
2. Terra Nova Blvd and Oddstad Blvd Pedestrian Crossing Improvements (Fund 213 $50k) - install rectangular rapid flashing beacons (RRFB) and speed humps to increase visibility for pedestrians
3. FY 2026-27 Pavement Resurfacing Project ($1.6M > Fund 210 $950k, Fund 211 $100k, Fund 213 $620k) - rehabilitate the pavement along roads designated in the 5- year paving plan. This project will also include base repair as well as installation of thermoplastic traffic striping, markings and pavement markers
4. FY 2026-27 Sidewalk, Curbs, and ADA Ramps Improvement Project (Fund 211 $495k) - repair and replace damaged sidewalks, curbs, and gutters at priority locations throughout the city in compliance with ADA, federal and state standards
5. Oceana Bike Lanes ($92k > Fund 211 $9k, SCMTA Grant $83k) - new dedicated Class II bicycle lanes along Oceana Boulevard to improve safety, accessibility, and multimodal connectivity. The SCMTA Grant funds the feasibility study for the bike lanes. 11 Packet Pg. 161
Pacifica City Council 15 May 11, 2026
Wastewater Projects (funded by Enterprise Sewer Utility Fund 518):
6. Pump Station Flowmeter Project ($550k) - Flowmeters at the Linda Mar and Rockaway Sewer Pump Stations are no longer working. Flow monitoring is critical for the operation of the wastewater collection system and the Calera Creek Water Recycling Plant.
The following continuing non-discretionary Projects that are currently underway and will require additional funding in FY 2026-27:
General Capital Projects (funded by the General Fund): None at this time General Capital Projects (Other Funds):
7. Manor Drive O/P Improvements (Fund 312 $5.5M) - widen the vehicular overcrossing over Highway 1 at Manor Drive, install traffic signals to better facilitate traffic, install pedestrian and bicycle improvements
8. Annual Pavement Striping & Marking Refresh Project - (Fund 213 $75k) - refresh centerlines, bicycle lanes, edgelines, crosswalks, stop bars and more striping on City roads
Wastewater Projects (funded by Enterprise Sewer Utility Fund 518):
9. Anza and Linda Mar Storm Water Pump Station SCADA Connection and Improvements $100k - Connecting the Anza and Linda Mar Stormwater Pump Stations to the Wastewater SCADA System.
10. Calera Creek and Wetlands Maintenance $150k - On-going maintenance and monitoring requirements for the restored Calera Creek wetlands.
11. Calera Creek Water Recycling Plant Permit Update $20k - Updating the CCWRP’s National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit.
12. Calera Creek Water Recycling Plant Piping Improvements Project $100k - Various piping systems around the Calera Creek Water Recycling Plant are nearing the end of their useful lives.
13. CCWRP Blower Replacement $100k - On-going purchases to replace aging blowers and motors for the Calera Creek Water Recycling Plant.
14. CCWRP Electrical Condition Assessment Project $300k - Continuous electrical improvements at Calera Creek Water Recycling Plant.
15. CCWRP Environmental Compliance Project $50k - On-going needs to address environmental compliance related issues.
16. CCWRP Headworks Feasibility and Improvements $2.4M - The CCWRP design was based on screenings at the major pump stations. This Project will evaluate adding bar screening facilities at the Plant, addressing headworks channel lining degradation, and installing new grit equipment.
17. CCWRP Photovoltaic System Improvement Project- $1M - Replacing aging solar panels and identifying areas for additional panel coverage.
18. CCWRP Process Optimization Projects $50k - Projects to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of wastewater treatment operations.
19. Calera Creek Water Recycling Plant (CCWRP) Pump Replacement $50k - On-going purchases to replace aging pumps and supporting equipment at the Calera Creek Water Recycling Plant.
20. CCWRP R&R Project $250k - Ongoing Operations and Maintenance Projects to ensure reliable wastewater treatment operations.
21. Collection System Projects $300k - Projects to repair and/or replace the aging sewer mainlines and pump stations around the City. Projects will be evaluated and selected 11 Packet Pg. 162
Pacifica City Council 16 May 11, 2026
annually.
22. Collection System Rehabilitation & Replacement Projects: Vallemar and Rockaway Beach Avenue $12.4M - Work includes the replacement of approximately 26,000 LF sewer main and appurtenant work in the Vallemar neighborhood. This project is intended to be funded by a USEPA WIFIA Loan.
23. Crespi to Anza Sewer Replacement Project $500k - Rehabilitation and repair of the 12 inch sewer main along Pacifica State Beach and Highway 1.
24. Digesters - ATAD Modification Phase 3 $200k - This project will continue to make necessary improvements to ensure safe and reliable operations of the autothermal thermophilic aerobic digesters.
25. Easements R&R Project $200k - Replacing sanitary sewer lines in private utilities easements will improve system reliability and reduce the cost of system maintenance.
26. Lateral Grant Assistance $200k - The City provides a voluntary private service lateral replacement program to reduce the addition of I&I from defective private service laterals.
27. Linda Mar Pump Station Rehabilitation and Repair Project $1M - Completing engine pump, electrical and controls improvements to the Linda Mar Pump Station.
28. Sewer System Master Plan Update Phase 2 (New Development Data) $50k - Updating the existing Sewer System Master Plan and incorporating new development data.
29. Sharp Park Pump Station R&R Project $1M - The Sharp Park Pump Station's odor control system is at the end of it's useful life. The pump station wetwell does not meet current design standards. This project will improve odor management around the pump station and improve reliable operations.
Staff have identified probable funding sources for these projects as listed in Attachment 4.
These include Federal and State Grants, County contributions, Gas Tax, and various other tax measures. Other projects are funded from available fund balances of various capital and special revenue funds, including Gas Tax, Measure W, Street Improvements, and Highway 1 Funds. All capital transfers and appropriations for projects referenced above and in Attachment 4 have already been included in the Base Budget. However, once the Council provides additional direction regarding this list or other CIP projects, staff will incorporate the final FY 2026-27 CIP Budget recommendations in the complete five-year CIP program.
Other Previously Approved active CIP projects that are non-discretionary ongoing projects not requesting funding, rollover projects that were not started last year due to staffing constraints, unfunded discretionary projects, and projects awaiting FEMA review are included in Attachment
4. Additionally, Attachment 5 provides information on the currently unfunded projects and estimates the funding needed to address the City’s infrastructure needs totaling over $303 million within the next five years.
OTHER FUNDS - BASE BUDGET
The Base Budget revenue and expenditure for all other funds have also been updated and are summarized in Attachment 3. This includes all the Special Revenue, Debt Service, Enterprise, and Internal Service Funds. The full budget discussion will include "All Funds," which we typically divide into the General Fund (the majority in terms of dollars and completely discretionary) and Other Funds (largely designated for specific purposes) as well as the Capital Budget (significant projects expected to begin or continue in 2026-27). The Base Budget figures include the CIP budget allocations.
Staff used the same basic assumptions for all other funds to factor in a 1.5% cost of living increase for the contract services category and for material, supplies, and maintenance.
Enterprise Funds consist of Sewer/Wastewater and Beach Parking funds. Enterprise funds 11 Packet Pg. 163
Pacifica City Council 17 May 11, 2026
are used for services that are financed and operated as a private business enterprise. The FY 2026-27 total enterprise funds base expense budget is $40.3 million, which is 34% of the City's overall Budget. Sewer funds are used to account for sewage collection, treatment, major replacements, and maintenance and protection improvements to the sewer system. Sewer charges of $20.7 million are based on a 3.5% rate increase in FY 2026-27. The sewer operating expenditures include the same inflationary base budget assumptions. The Salaries and Benefits costs of approximately $6.5 million are based on 31.5 FTE allocated to the Sewer Fund and include all current MOU provisions. The Beach Parking Fund is used to account for parking services to residents and visitors. The Beach Parking revenues have declined in recent years and no longer fully cover the staffing and operating costs allocated to the fund. Staff will be conducting additional analysis of this fund as part of this budget development process to ensure the fund remains balanced and financially sustainable in future years. The combined Enterprise Funds revenues are projected at $35.4 million.
Special Revenue and Capital Funds are used to account for specific revenue sources or financial resources for which expenditures are restricted by law or administrative action for specific purposes. This Category includes Gas Tax and Streets Funds, General Capital, Drainage, Housing Action, Housing Successor, Housing in-lieu, Parking in-Lieu, Park in-Lieu, PB&R Special Revenue and Roy Davies Trust, Disaster Accounting, and other funds. The FY 2026-27 expenditures of $10.3 million for this Category represent around 9% of the City's total Budget.
Internal Service Funds serve the City’s needs and are used to account for Citywide services on a cost-reimbursement basis. These funds accommodate the motor pool, employee selfinsured dental benefits, and risk management needs of the City and are supported by the funds that receive benefits. The FY 2026-27 budget for this Category is $6.3 million, which is 5% of the City's Budget.
Debt Service Fund is used to account for long-term debt obligations. The FY 2026-27 budget for the debt service category is based on the updated debt service. The total budget for this Category is $2.9 million, representing 2.5% of the City's Budget.
NEXT STEPS
At the June 8, 2026 Budget Study Session 3, staff will present the proposed FY 2026-27 Operating Budget, including recommended balancing strategies, and service-level recommendations informed by the service categorization and budget review process described in this report.
Departments are currently developing recommendations related to service-level adjustments and operational priorities for City Manager’s review. Over the coming weeks, the City Manager will meet with each department to evaluate requests, organizational impacts, and funding constraints in order to formulate a balanced and fiscally sustainable budget recommendation.
Due to significant ongoing fiscal challenges and structural budget pressures, the proposed FY 2026-27 Budget is expected to include a number of service reductions and operational adjustments that may significantly impact service delivery levels across the organization. The City Manager’s final recommendations will be guided by the City Council’s strategic priorities, fiscal sustainability goals, and the community impacts associated with proposed service-level changes.
FISCAL IMPACT:
11 Packet Pg. 164
Pacifica City Council 18 May 11, 2026
There is no action associated with this item; this is an informational presentation only with Council comments being sought to help guide the preparation of the Proposed Budget for future Council consideration.
ORIGINATED BY:
Finance Department
ATTACHMENT LIST:
Attachment 1 – FY 2026-27 General Fund Baseline Budget Revenue Summary (PDF) Attachment 2 – FY 2026-27 General Fund Baseline Budget Expenditures Summary (PDF) Attachment 3 – FY 2026-27 Fund Balance Summary (PDF)
Attachment 4 - FY 2026-27 Discretionary Projects and List of Active (PDF) Attachment 5 - List of Unfunded CIP Projects (PDF)
Attachment 6 – Unfunded Pension and OPEB Liability Funding Strategy (PDF) Attachment 7 - Service Categories Summary and List - Mandated, Core, Enhancements (PDF) 11 Packet Pg. 165
Description
FY 2024-25
Actuals
FY 2025-26
Amended Budget
FY 2026-27
Base Budget
$ Change
Base over
Amended
% Change Base
over Amended
Taxes $ 36,715,801 $ 40,997,380 $ 40,552,000 $ (445,380) -1.1% Property Tax 16,794,730 17,728,670 18,391,000 $ 662,330 3.7% Sales Tax 3,101,940 3,125,230 3,173,000 $ 47,770 1.5%
Measure Y 2,582,546 2,560,000 2,612,000 $ 52,000 2.0%
Transient Occupancy Tax 3,296,520 2,984,221 2,750,000 $ (234,221) -7.8% Franchise Tax 1,404,093 1,171,440 1,192,000 $ 20,560 1.8% Business License Tax 585,715 582,000 597,000 $ 15,000 2.6% Utility Users Tax 3,186,469 3,646,762 3,738,000 $ 91,238 2.5% Vehicle License Fees 4,832,135 4,639,057 3,499,000 $ (1,140,057) -24.6% Cannabis Tax 786,652 700,000 700,000 $ - 0.0%
Excess ERAF 145,000 3,860,000 3,900,000 $ 40,000 1.0%
Intergovernmental 4,944,471 2,725,420 2,413,000 $ (312,420) -11.5% Investment Earnings 1,191,873 998,100 1,009,000 $ 10,900 1.1% Charges for Services 7,719,039 7,449,200 8,832,000 $ 1,382,800 18.6% Sub-total 50,571,184 52,170,100 52,806,000 $ 635,900 1.2% Transfers In 1,422,000 1,478,800 450,000 $ (1,028,800) -69.6% Total $ 51,993,184 $ 53,648,900 $ 53,256,000 $ (392,900) -0.7% Attachment 1
City of Pacifica
General Fund Revenue Detail
FY 2026-27 Base Budget
11.a
Packet Pg. 166 Attachment: Attachment 1 – FY 2026-27 General Fund Baseline Budget Revenue Summary (6211 : FY2026-27 Base Budget and CIP Study Expenditures By Category
FY 2024-25
Actual
FY 2025-26
Amended Budget
FY 2026-27
Base Budget
$ Change
Base over
Amended
% Change
Base over
Amended
Salaries & Benefits $ 32,513,691 $ 36,477,464 $ 39,070,336 $ 2,592,872 7.1% Contract Services 7,964,118 9,999,608 8,948,611 $ (1,050,997) -10.5% Material/Supplies/Maintenance 5,035,576 5,082,849 4,748,587 $ (334,262) -6.6% Sub-total 45,513,386 51,559,921 52,767,534 1,207,613 -10.0% Transfers/Allocations Out 2,509,600 3,593,226 4,320,593 $ 727,367 20.2% Transfers Out - Capital 75,000 50,000 50,000 $ - 0.0%
Total $ 48,097,986 $ 55,203,147 $ 57,138,127 $ 1,934,980 3.5% Attachment 2
City of Pacifica
General Fund Expenditures
FY 2026-27 Base Budget
11.b
Packet Pg. 167 Attachment: Attachment 2 – FY 2026-27 General Fund Baseline Budget Expenditures Summary (6211 : FY2026-27 Base Budget and CIP Study Fund Name
Projected
Fund Balance
6/30/2026
Revenues &
Transfers In
Revised Budget
Expenditures &
Transfers Out
Revised Budget
Revenue Over
(Under)
Expenditures
Projected
Fund Balance
6/30/2027
101 GENERAL FUND $ 20,924,400 $ 53,256,000 $ 57,138,127 $ (3,882,127) $ 17,042,273
SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS
207 Supplemental Law Enf Serv 513,510 261,136 151,045 110,091 623,601 209 Measure A (347,479) 1,456,560 1,092,464 364,096 16,617 210 Gas Tax (701,358) 2,436,629 1,715,586 721,043 19,685 211 Measure W 419,018 704,200 687,000 17,200 436,218
213 Street Improvement 1,495,212 592,230 745,000 (152,770) 1,342,442 216 NPDES Stormwater (112,603) 193,341 79,849 113,492 889 221 Housing Action Fund 2,082,149 - 183,878 (183,878) 1,898,271 224 Housing In-Lieu 290,966 15,839 - 15,839 306,805
225 Parking In-Lieu 140,254 1,782 - 1,782 142,036
227 Davies Trust 618,609 - - - 618,609
228 PB&R 2,105,548 - 12,525 (12,525) 2,093,023
229 Tree Replacement - - - - -
238 Disaster Accounting 9,970,537 - - - 9,970,537
293 Housing Successor 372,513 - - - 372,513
312 Highway 1 Improvement 677,910 4,955,000 5,541,046 (586,046) 91,864 314 Manor Drive Improvement 266,060 - - - 266,060
315 Aircraft Noise Project 448 - - - 448
319 Planned Local Drainage 359,737 25,000 2,132 22,868 382,605 322 General Capital Improvement (23,186) 119,967 94,968 24,999 1,813 323 Frontierland Remediation 226,351 75,000 - 75,000 301,351 326 Parks and Playfield 585,794 100,000 - 100,000 685,794 331 Pacifica Library 8,437 - - - 8,437
Total Special Revenue & Capital Funds 18,271,426 10,936,684 10,305,493 631,191 19,579,617
DEBT SERVICE FUNDS
440 Debt Service Fund 74,053 2,972,787 2,972,787 - 74,053 Total Debt Service Funds 74,053 2,972,787 2,972,787 - 74,053
ENTERPRISE FUNDS
518 Sewer Utility 18,154,649 34,839,302 39,667,484 (4,828,182) 13,326,467 535 Beach Parking (94,424) 526,400 614,077 (87,677) (182,101) Total Enterprise Funds 18,060,225 35,365,702 40,281,561 (4,915,859) 13,144,366
INTERNAL SERVICE FUNDS
665 Self Insurance - Dental Plan 338,147 305,642 305,642 - 338,147 666 Self Ins - Workers Comp 613,000 1,881,962 1,881,962 - 613,000 667 Self Ins - General Liability 971,591 2,834,961 2,834,961 - 971,591 671/2 Motor Pool 2,098,884 1,487,324 1,262,324 225,000 2,323,884 674 Fire Equip Replacement 332,852 125,000 - 125,000 457,852 Total Internal Service Funds 4,354,473 6,634,889 6,284,889 350,000 4,704,473 Total Other Funds 40,760,177 55,910,062 59,844,730 (3,934,668) 37,502,509 Total All Funds $ 61,841,577 $ 109,166,062 $ 116,982,857 $ (7,816,795) $ 54,544,782 *
** Negative balances will be reviewed during the budget development process and at year-end to reduce and/or eliminate deficit in these funds Attachment 3
City of Pacifica
FY 2026-27 Base Budget
Summary of Fund Balances
Enterprise Funds and Internal Service Funds include capital investments and depreciation, the above does not represent cash balance
11.c
Packet Pg. 168 Attachment: Attachment 3 – FY 2026-27 Fund Balance Summary (6211 : FY2026-27 Base Budget and CIP Study Session 2) City of Pacifica
Attachment 4
Tyler Fund Number 101 209 210 211 213 312 518 (was 534) Project Project Number FY 2026-27 Allocation (Thousands) General Fund Measure A Gas Tax SB1/HUTA Measure W Street Improvements Highway 1 Improvement Wastewater - Revised Grants, Revenues, Loans, Bonds, and Insurance Reimbursements Terra Nova Boulevard and Oddstad Boulevard Pedestrian Crossing Improvements 27405 50 50 FY 2026-27 Pavement Resurfacing Project 26403 1,670 950 100 620 FY 2026-27 Sidewalk, Curbs, and ADA Ramps Improvement Project 26402 495 495 Oceana Bike Lanes 27408 92 9 83 Economic Development Infrastructure Improvements Project 27409 50 50 Pump Station Flow Meter 27410 550 550 Manor Drive O/P Improvements 00029 5,500 4,950 550Annual Pavement Striping & Marking Refresh Project 26378 75 75 Anza and Linda Mar Storm Water Pump Station SCADA Connection and Improvements 26388 100 100 Calera Creek and Wetlands Maintenance P011 150 150
Calera Creek Water Recycling Plant Permit Update 26392 20 20 Calera Creek Water Recycling Plant Piping Improvements Project 26389 100 100 CCWRP Blower Replacement P0024 100 100 CCWRP Electrical Condition Assessment and Improvements P0037 300 300 CCWRP Environmental Compliance Project P0038 50 50 CCWRP Headworks Feasibility and Improvements P0040 2,400 2,400 CCWRP Photovoltaic System Improvement Project 26385 1,000 1,000 CCWRP Process Optimization Projects P0036 50 50
CCWRP Pump Replacement P0004 50 50 CCWRP R&R Project P0033 250 250 Collection System Projects C0005 300 300 Collection System Rehabilitation & Replacement Projects: Vallemar and Rockaway Beach Avenue C0050 12,352 12,352 Crespi to Anza Sewer Replacement Project 26386 500 500 Digesters - ATAD Modification Phase 3 P0002 200 200 Easement R&R Projects 26390 200 200 Lateral Grant Assistance C0032 200 200 Linda Mar Stormwater Pump Station Rehabilitation Project C0047 1,000 1,000 Sewer System Master Plan Update Phase 2 (New Development Data) C0007 50 50 Sharp Park Pump Station R&R Project (Formerly Sharp Park PS Facility Improvements Project) C0008 1,000 1,000 50 28,854 - 950 604 745 550 7,570 18,385
Proposed Capital Projects FY 2026-27
Total Allocation
Non-Discretionary New/Yearly Projects requesting Funding in FY 26-27Non-Discretionary On-going Projects Requesting FY 26-27 Allocation
11.d
Packet Pg. 169
Attachment: Attachment 4 - FY 2026-27 Discretionary Projects and List of Active (6211 : FY2026-27 Base Budget and CIP Study Session 2) ATTACHMENT 4
Other Previously Approved Active CIP Projects:
Non-Discretionary On-going Projects Not Requesting FY 26-27 Funding Manor Drive O/P Improvements
Beach Boulevard Infrastructure Resiliency Project
310-330 Esplanade Infrastructure Preservation
400 Esplanade Infrastructure Preservation
Pier Rehabilitation Project (Formerly Pier Handrail Repair Project) Corp Yard Vehicle Storage Project
Police Department Radio Infrastructure Improvement
Community Center HVAC Upgrade
Civic Center Generator
City Facility Photovoltaic Infrastructure
City Facility Electric Vehicle Infrastructure
Community Center Improvements
Fire Station 72 Improvements
ADA Transition Plan Update
Annex Lighting
Wastewater
CCWRP Centrifuges
CCWRP Environmental Compliance Project
Relocation of Sewer Mainline at SF RV Park
CCWRP Admin Building Elevator Assessment
Lower Linda Mar R&R Project
Ultraviolet Disinfection System Replacement Project
CCWRP Drain Pump Station Piping Replace
Rollover Projects Not Started Last Year Due to Staffing Constraints - Not Started
Oddstad Park Building Maintenance
City Facilities Network Upgrade
IT Infrastructure
Urban Forest, Land, and Vegetation Management Plans
Needs Assessment for City Facilities
11.d
Packet Pg. 170 Attachment: Attachment 4 - FY 2026-27 Discretionary Projects and List of Active (6211 : FY2026-27 Base Budget and CIP Study Session 2) Beach Boulevard Public Plaza Project
Fairmont/Fairmont West Site Improvements
Parks, Beaches and Trail Signage Improvements
San Pedro Creek Bank Pathway and Bank Repair (Formerly San Pedro Creek Bank Stabilization Project)
Projects Waiting on FEMA Review / Funding – May move up on the priority list
San Pedro Creek Bank Stabilization and Pathway Repair
Beach Blvd. Benches and Trash Can replacements/repairs and sand clean up Landslide Repairs (Belfast, Rockaway)
Linda Mar Pump Station Repairs
EQ Basin Repair
11.d
Packet Pg. 171 Attachment: Attachment 4 - FY 2026-27 Discretionary Projects and List of Active (6211 : FY2026-27 Base Budget and CIP Study Session 2) City of Pacifica Attachment 5
Unfunded Capital Projects
Budget Numbers in 1000's
Project Unfunded
COASTAL
310-330 Esplanade Infrastructure Preservation 900
400 Esplanade Infrastructure Preservation 70
Beach Boulevard Infrastructure Resiliency Project (formerly Seawall Reconstruction Project) 82,500 Pier Rehabilitation Project (Formerly Pier Handrail Repair Project) 20,000
FACILITIES
Community Center Improvements 200
Fire Station 71 & 72 Modernization 700
Fire Station 71 and Station 72 Replacement 33,000
New Pacifica Library 60,000
Oddstad Park Parking Rehabilitation & Drainage Improvements 250 Station 72 Pavement Rehabilitation 250
Sanchez Center Improvements 300
Community Center Backup Generator 160
Rockaway Parking Area and Structure 14,545
Council Chambers A/V Replacement 250
Council Chambers Relocation and A/V Replacement 475
PARKS AND RECREATION
Ahni (Cattle Hill) Trail Improvements 2,000
Cattle Hill Trailhead Park Construction 5,000
Fairmont West Field Improvements 3,850
Frontierland Lower Park Expansion 2,700
Frontierland Upper Park Reno/Expansion 2,500
Rockaway to Pacifica State Beach Trail Rehabilitation 350 San Pedro Headlands Multi-Purpose Trail 8,250
Sanchez Field and Park Improvements 2,500
Terra Nova Tennis Court Lights 125
STORMWATER
Calera Creek Culvert Pipe Replacement 125
Clarendon Road Drainage Improvements 7,000
Crespi Canal Repair Project 100
Lower Linda Mar Storm Drain Project 5,700
Montecito Avenue Storm Drain System Improvements 200
Monterey Road Drainage Improvements 8,000
Rockaway Beach Avenue Drainage Improvement 900
STREETS AND SIDEWALKS
Adobe Bridge Reconstruction 550
Palmetto Ave. Street Amenities 1,360
Oceana Bicycle Lanes Improvements 1,300
Manor Drive Overcrossing Improvements 35,000
WASTEWATER
CCWRP Electrical Condition Assessment and Improvements 1,650 Total (Budget Numbers in 1000's) $302,760
11.e
Packet Pg. 172 Attachment: Attachment 5 - List of Unfunded CIP Projects (6211 : FY2026-27 Base Budget and CIP Study Session 2) Attachment 6
UNFUNDED PENSION AND OPEB LIABILITY
FUNDING STRATEGY
This section of the report aims to provide a refresher and an overview of the City's strategy for managing Pension and Other Post Employment Benefit liabilities. As a best practice in government finance, it is prudent to develop a funding strategy for Pension and OPEB plans. Over the last few years the City has setup such a structure. The City has pension plans with the California Public Employees Retirement System (CalPERS) and a trust fund with the Public Agency Retirement Services (PARS). The City also participates in the CalPERS medical program known as Other Post-Employment Benefits (OPEB) Plan.
CalPERS Pension Plans:
Miscellaneous
CLASSIC Safety Police
PEPRA Safety Police
CLASIC Safety Fire
PEPRA Safety Fire
CalPERS OBEB
CalPERS OPEB medical program is an agent multiple employer defined benefit retiree healthcare plan.
PARS Pension Plan
The City has an Agent Multiple-Employer PARS Retirement Enhancement Plan (REP) that was implemented July 1, 2003, and is now closed to new participants hired after January 1, 2012.
There are 20 inactive employees or beneficiaries receiving benefits and zero active employees in the plan. The REP is administered by PARS.
All these plans accumulate assets that will be used to pay future benefits. An actuary prepares a report for each of these plans. They determine the market value of the assets and the accrued liability (present value of the amount needed to pay future benefits). The difference between the plan assets and the plan liability is the Unfunded Accrued Liability (UAL; also known as the Unfunded Actuarily Accrued Liability (UAAL). They determine the amount the City needs to pay each year, which has two components: 1) Normal Cost and 2) UAL. The Normal Cost rate is a rate to cover current member's future benefits. The UAL will fluctuate based on assumptions and market conditions each year. The following is a table of the CalPERS plans Assets, Liability, UAL, and other information taken from the most current actuarial reports.
Both Employee and employer contributions to this plan are required under state law. As mentioned, the required employer contributions are comprised of two components. The "normal
11.f
Packet Pg. 173 Attachment: Attachment 6 – Unfunded Pension and OPEB Liability Funding Strategy (6211 : FY2026-27 Base Budget and CIP Study Session 2) Attachment 6
cost" represents the cost attributable to services earned during the current fiscal period and are expressed as a percentage of pensionable payroll. The second component is a flat dollar amount representing the "UAL Contribution" which is an amortization of outstanding individual UAL bases (layers). The method and maximum term of the UAL amortization is dictated by the CalPERS policy, but the repayment of the UAL can be accelerated and/or restructured at the employer's discretion. Together, the two employer components represent the total required employer contribution. The sum of the required employer and employee contributions is called the Actuarial Determined Contribution (ADC).
Due to the frequent volatility in the total required employer contribution rate, the City has opted to utilize an Internal Revenue Code (IRC) §115 trust as a buffer against future expected volatility investing in a manner consistent with the long-term nature of pension liabilities and the City's tolerance for investment risk.
How Can a 115 Trust Be Structured?
For FY 2026-27, an annual contribution of $236,000 to the City’s IRC §115 Pension Trust was calculated in accordance with the City’s Pension Funding Policy adopted in FY 2024–25. The goal of this policy is to accumulate an amount equal to 1.5% of the City's accrued pension liability over the next 20 years (1.5% x $282,463,392 = $4.2 million). This trust fund account will serve as a "rainy day fund" or buffer against future pension cost volatility. Given the frequent volatility in CalPERS employer contribution rates, the City can utilize the §115 Trust to help stabilize future costs. Trust assets are invested in a manner consistent with the long-term nature of pension liabilities and the City’s tolerance for investment risk.
Similarly, for FY 2026-27, a continuing contribution to the PARS trust is budgeted at $283,750 to fund OPEB unfunded liability, consistent with the City’s funding strategy approved in April 2022.
This allocation will provide additional contributions toward the Actuarial Determined Contribution (ADC) in addition to the pay-as-you-go payment strategy, which was historically the only budget mechanism of the unfunded liability prior to 2022. Because the City closed the OPEB pool to all new members, unlike pensions, the actuarial liability will gradually go away. By prefunding this liability through the §115 Trust, the City will be able to significantly reduce the Net OPEB liability reported annually in the Annual Comprehensive Financial Report (ACFR). The most current actuarial report shows the Net OPEB unfunded liability balance of $2,827,664 as of the June 30, 2025 report date.
11.f
Packet Pg. 174 Attachment: Attachment 6 – Unfunded Pension and OPEB Liability Funding Strategy (6211 : FY2026-27 Base Budget and CIP Study Session 2) Department (General Fund) Mandated # Mandated % Core # Core % Enhancement # Enhancement % Total Services FTE's C ol
City Council 3 20% 10 67% 2 13% 15 -
City Manager's Office 3 9% 18 55% 12 36% 33 3.50
City Clerk 10 32% 14 45% 7 23% 31 2.00
Economic & Housing Development 1 6% 4 25% 11 69% 16 3.00 Community Development 18 40% 16 36% 11 24% 45 10.75
Administrative Services (HR, Finance, IT) 14 39% 15 42% 7 19% 36 15.00 Fire 8 53% 2 13% 5 33% 15 26.00
Police 12 23% 17 32% 24 45% 53 43.50
Public Works* 24 44% 20 36% 11 20% 55 28.53
Parks, Beaches & Recreation 2 3% 9 15% 48 81% 59 33.50
CITYWIDE TOTAL 95 27% 125 35% 138 39% 358 165.78
*Public Works totals reflect the General Fund supported activities only, and excludes enterprise operations for Wastewater and Beach Parking services and FTEs. **City Attorney's Department services are not listed here, however the department is also subject to 5% department target reductions.
Service Categorization Summary by Department
Attachment 7
***As departments continue to refine service inventories, evaluate operational dependencies, and further assess service levels and associated costs, the categorizations and descriptions may continue to evolve. Accordingly, this initial exercise should be viewed as a foundational planning tool intended to support ongoing budget discussions and long term service level evaluation, rather than a final or exhaustive listing of all City services.
11.g
Packet Pg. 175 Attachment: Attachment 7 - Service Categories Summary and List - Mandated, Core, Enhancements (6211 : FY2026-27 Base Attachment 7
What is Legally Mandated? Determination Considerations:
Is this service required by Federal, State, or local law, statute or regulation? Does this service directly prevent immediate harm to life, health, or property? Would failure to provide this service result in:
Legal penalties or loss of compliance
Immediate legal exposure or safety risk to public life/safety/property Inability to respond to emergencies
Is there a minimum standard we must meet regardless of budget constraints? Department Service Description of Service
City Council Regular Meeting Attendance and Governance
Councilmembers deliberate on all matters brought to Council during City Council meetings in their legislative and policymaking authority to adopt and enact local laws, set policies and priorities for the City, meet the fiduciary obligations of the city, and approve services and contracts within Council authority to meet the goals of the adopted Strategic Plan.
Submission of mandated filing requirements to comply with Political Reform Act, Fair Political Practices Commission requirements, etc. E.g. filing of FPPC Form 700's, FPPC Campaign reporting forms, etc Comply with Legally Mandated Trainings
Comply with Legally Mandated Training such as AB 1234 Ethics & Brown Act Training, Anti-Harrassment Training, etc
General Liability & Property Claims Management Management & reporting of claims filed against the City or on behalf of City property Brown Act Compliance Agenda, noticing, communication
Public Records Requests Responding to requests within legal timelines City Council Agenda Packet Preparation & Posting
City Council Agenda Packet Preparation & Posting, including implementation and administration of Agenda Management Software in the process of Agenda Packet preparation Records Retention Policy Administration, Training, Compliance, Updates Preparation of City Council Minutes at basic level in Action Style format Administation of City Records Administation of Records of City Council Resolutions and Ordinances Publishing Public Notices Public Noticing related to City Council Public Hearings, Ordinances, etc.
California Public Records Act compliance, processing & response to PRA Requests California Public Records Act compliance, processing & response to PRA Requests Administration of Municipal Elections for the City
Administration of Municipal Elections for the City (City Councilmember elections, local initiatives, referendums, ballot measures, etc)
Political Reform Act Filing Officer responsibilities
Administration of requirements for filing of FPPC Form 700's (Statement of Economic Interest), FPPC Campaign Filings
Political Reform Act requirements compliance
Political Reform Act requirements compliance re: mandated training - AB 1234 Ethics & Brown Act Training, Fiscal Training
Conflict of Interest Code Updates (Bi-annually)
Legal Process Administration - Subpoenas and Summons Receive and respond to Subpoenas to the City and receive Summons Public Records Requests Responding to requests within legal timelines City Manager's Office
Legally Mandated
These are non-discretionary services required by law, regulation, or binding agreements, or those that directly protect public health, life and safety.
City Clerk
City Council
Economic and Housing Development
11.g
Packet Pg. 176 Attachment: Attachment 7 - Service Categories Summary and List - Mandated, Core, Enhancements (6211 Attachment 7
What is Legally Mandated? Determination Considerations:
Is this service required by Federal, State, or local law, statute or regulation? Does this service directly prevent immediate harm to life, health, or property? Would failure to provide this service result in:
Legal penalties or loss of compliance
Immediate legal exposure or safety risk to public life/safety/property Inability to respond to emergencies
Is there a minimum standard we must meet regardless of budget constraints? Department Service Description of Service
Legally Mandated
These are non-discretionary services required by law, regulation, or binding agreements, or those that directly protect public health, life and safety.
Building Permits Processing Process all building permits from intake through issuance; schedule inspections Building Permit Review Bldg. code plan check review, CASP review Building Official Bldg. code authority, bldg. code enforcement, customer service, legal compliance Building Inspections Inspect construction for compliance with approved plans Solar App+ Permits Mandatory permit streamlining
Planning Commission admin support creating/posting agendas & minutes, website, materials; leagl notices Public Records Requests Responding to requests within legal timelines Planning Commission Staff Liaison Planning Commission administration/facilitation; project QC Local Hazard Mitigation Plan Multi-jurisdictional/inter-departmental (PPD, CDD, PW) Building Permit - Zoning Review
Zoning plan check for compliance with zoning ordinance, approved entitlements, conditions of approval, CEQA mitigations
Planning Commission Hearings Support Requires two staff members for clerking and dial-in; editing full minutes Planning Entitlements Legislative, discretionary, and ministerial approval of planning applications for development Business License review Zoning review of Business License applications Zoning Ordinance updates for state law compliance (multiple) Three priority ordinances that need to be updated for compliance with state law HE/GP Annual Reports Mandated annual reporting
Local Coastal Program Amendments Certification of amendments to GP, Zoning Ord, etc.
General Plan Implementation - General / Updates
Certain GP elements need to be analyzed and possibly updated for compliance with state law (Open Space and Safety); plus general maintenance
Zoning Modernization (HE-I-2) Overall code update/restructuring, amendments General Ledger Accounting
General ledger maintenance, bank reconciliations, grant accounting, transparency and safeguarding of the City's assets
Vendor Compliance Form-1099, Quarterly Taxes, Property Taxes Payroll Administration Employee compensation & tax filing Treasury Management Cash position and liquidity monitoring, investment portfolio management Debt Compliance Arbitrage, continuing disclosures, rating agency coordination, debt covenant compliance GASB and GAAP Compliance
Compliance with these standards is legally required under California law and is necessary to support audits, maintain transparency, and meet bond, grant, and regulatory reporting obligations.
Annual Audits and Required Reporting Annual audit preparation and other related compliance reports Critical IT Services for PD, FD & Wastewater
Technology, network, cybersecurity, and customer support services necessary to support legally mandated and public health and safety functions systems and infrastructure (PD, FD, WW) .
Labor Relations & MOU Compliance Administration of collective bargaining agreements, grievance handling, meet and confer obligations Workers’ Compensation Administration Administration of claims, coordination with TPA, compliance with CA law Leave Administration (FMLA/CFRA/ADA) Compliance with protected leave laws and accommodation processes CalPERS Reporting & Compliance Reporting pensionable compensation and regulatory compliance Required Training Compliance Mandated harassment prevention and compliance trainings Public Records Requests Responding to requests within legal timelines Administrative Services
Community Development
11.g
Packet Pg. 177 Attachment: Attachment 7 - Service Categories Summary and List - Mandated, Core, Enhancements (6211 Attachment 7
What is Legally Mandated? Determination Considerations:
Is this service required by Federal, State, or local law, statute or regulation? Does this service directly prevent immediate harm to life, health, or property? Would failure to provide this service result in:
Legal penalties or loss of compliance
Immediate legal exposure or safety risk to public life/safety/property Inability to respond to emergencies
Is there a minimum standard we must meet regardless of budget constraints? Department Service Description of Service
Legally Mandated
These are non-discretionary services required by law, regulation, or binding agreements, or those that directly protect public health, life and safety.
Emergency Response Response to calls for service
Mandated Fire Safety Inspections Fire safety inspections mandated by state law Pre-Fire Engineering Development and Review Plan review Plan Review and Inspection
Plan check analysis and Inspections for new construction, tenant improvements and fire detection alarm and detection systems
Fire Investigation Fire investigation and cause and origin determination Mandated Training for Fire Companies Training required by Federal, State or Local Agencies Small Business Fire Safety Inspections Annual fire inspections of businesses Public Records Requests Responding to requests within legal timelines Investigative Services
Investigations legally mandated to investigate- 290PC, Fraud, DV, Sexual abuse, Sexual Assault, Homicide, Elder Abuse
Property and Evidence Legally mandated by DOJ, audits, inventory, DA's office, chain of custody, (digital/physical evidence) Professional Standards POST required training and hiring standards, Audits, financial oversight of training budget.
Emergency Management Fed/State mandates- Disaster recovery-FEMA-EOC, EPSC Commission (PMC) Dispatch (SSFPD Contract) Daily communication, 911 emergency calls, etc.
Custodian of Records Implementation of legal mandates, policy comliance, DOJ Audits Destruction of Property Allows citizens to turn in property to be detroyed, (guns, amunition, drugs, etc) Cannabis Business Oversight Compliance Inspections, Approvals of all employees Emergency response Respond to in-progress services calls involving violence or threat of life Respond to medical service calls Provide medical aid and life saving services Respond to traffic collisions involving major injury/death or major property damage Investigate and document collisions
Public Records Requests Responding to requests within legal timelines Police
Fire
11.g
Packet Pg. 178 Attachment: Attachment 7 - Service Categories Summary and List - Mandated, Core, Enhancements (6211 Attachment 7
What is Legally Mandated? Determination Considerations:
Is this service required by Federal, State, or local law, statute or regulation? Does this service directly prevent immediate harm to life, health, or property? Would failure to provide this service result in:
Legal penalties or loss of compliance
Immediate legal exposure or safety risk to public life/safety/property Inability to respond to emergencies
Is there a minimum standard we must meet regardless of budget constraints? Department Service Description of Service
Legally Mandated
These are non-discretionary services required by law, regulation, or binding agreements, or those that directly protect public health, life and safety.
Pollution Prevention Program and Annual Stormwater Report Preparation, review and submission of Annual Stormwater Report to the Water Control Board Countywide Local Hazard Mitigation Plan (LHMP) Countywide hazard mitigation planning support ADA Transition Plan ADA Compliance
SB1383 Composting SB1383 Grant submittal to Calrecyle
Stormwater Business Inspections Commercial and Industrial Stormwater Inspections San Pedro Creek and Pacifica State Beach TMDL Required by the Water Board Annual S/W, Curb, and ADA Improvements ADA Compliance
AB1600 Reporting Annual report on development impact fees Building Permit Review Review of construction on strucutres on private property Engineering Encroachment Permits Processing and Inspection of Engineering Permits Private Development Review Review of current private development applications Tree maintenance & removal Maintain city owned trees per Chapter 14 of Title 4 of the Pacifica Municipal Code Vegetation Management & Weed Abatement Medians, public spaces, planters in ROW Hazmat - Emergency Repair Efforts
The majority of the facilities maintained by staff were constructed prior to 1978. Renovations and emergency repair efforts necessitate thorough testing of the building before any work can commence.
Traffic Signal Lights
Maintenance, repair, and replacement of services for four signal intersections, including the associated electrical cabinets.
Traffic Devices Maintenance of speed radar systems and pedestrian crosswalk infrastructure.
Street Lights
An extensive streetlight network requiring ongoing maintenance and replacement of photocells, light fixtures of varying wattages, as well as associated arm, poles, and pull boxes.
Street Signs and Markings Regulatory, warning, informational, street name signs Street Sweeping NPDES compliance to keep storm drains clear of debris Potholes and Street Repairs Keeping public roads in a reasonably safe condition for travel Storm Drain Maintenance Clear and maintain storm drainage facilities - CWA, NPDES Assistance for Police, Fire, and Disaster Responses Public Safety - Traffic control, barricades, signage, safety diversions Generator Permits & Maintenance BAAQMD Permits, testing, maintenance Public Records Requests Responding to requests within legal timelines After School and Preschool Nutrition & Snack Program Provide nutritious snacks adhering to State requirement menu components Public Records Requests Responding to requests within legal timelines PBR
Public Works
11.g
Packet Pg. 179 Attachment: Attachment 7 - Service Categories Summary and List - Mandated, Core, Enhancements (6211 Attachment 7
What are Core Services? Determination Considerations:
If this service were reduced to a minimal level:
Would the City operations become unreliable or significantly degraded? Would we lose the ability to deliver other services?
Does this service:
Support ongoing daily operations?
Maintain public-facing service continuity?
Protect revenue streams or cost recovery?
Department Service Description of Service
City Council Meetings City Council Special Meetings, Study Sessions, Closed Session Attendance Appeal Public Hearings as conducted during City Council Meetings Appeal Body for appeals of Planning Commission decisions, certain decisions of other subsidiary bodies / staff decisions Strategic Planning Establish and Annually Evaluate and Adopt the City's Mission, Vision, Values, Goals, Strategies and Priority Projects Adopt Balanced Budget Annually
Fiscal and financial stewardship for the City to allocate financial resources as necessary to meet mandates, priorities and goals to provide community services
Constituent and Resident Representation and Communications Engage with constituents and residents as their elected representative, local business community, etc, addressing concerns and questions, directing to City resources / services / assistance or to another agency, as appropriate Act as Representative of the City on Various Local, Regional, Statewide Policy Committees / Commissions or Boards
Act as City representative on bodies as required and/or voluntarily designated, such as C/CAG, ABAG Delegate, SFO Airport Roundtable, Peninsula Clean Energy JPA, LAFCo, liaison to Pacific Beach Coalition, etc City Advocacy and Engagement City Advocacy and Engagement with County, Regional, State and Federal Elected Officials, Agencies and Representatives Meet with City Manager, City Attorney and City Staff to receive information / briefings Information / background and preparation for substantive agenda topics that will be brought for deliberation and decisions at public City Council Meetings and/or guidance in the execution and administration of policies set by City Council Adhoc Subcommittee Participate in Ad Hoc Subcommitees of the City Council, as established, for focused purposes of limited duration Mayor / Vice Mayor Agenda Planning Meetings with City Manager Mayor / Vice Mayor Agenda Planning Meetings with City Manager for preparation for administration of efficient and productive City Council meetings
Short-Term Rental (STR) Administration Short-Term Rental (STR) Administration Agenda Planning Meetings Agenda Planning Meetings with Mayor & Vice Mayor Administrative Support Services for the City Manager and Assistant City Manager Includes scheduling/calendar management, mail, business cards, and Purchasing of office supplies and subscription services for CMO/City Council
Daily City Hall Office Adminitrative Operations Various daily tasks of office functions such as the purchase of business cards for City Council & Staff and distributing mail City-wide Leadership & Coordination CMO leadership organization-wide for Council policy implementation Strategic Planning & Performance Carry out Strategic Plan development & tracking. Department workplan alignment and performance measurements City Organization and Service Delivery Direct and Organize City departments, programs and services Adoption and Implementation of Policies and ordinances Recommend, develop and implement policies Budget Oversight City-wide budget coordination and fiscal oversight Intergovernmental Relations Regional, State and Federal coordination and legislative tracking and response Communication City-wide communications coordination and messaging Policy Development Council agenda development, policy analysis and recommendations Agreements and Permits Implement and enforce contracts and permits authorized by Council Risk Management Program Administration
Cit-ywide coordination of risk management activities, including oversight of liability, property, workers’ compensation (coordination with Human Resources), and insurance programs.
Risk Mitigation & Loss Prevention
Evaluation of operational risks; development and implementation of mitigation strategies to reduce liability exposure and protect City assets.
Risk Management Policies, Procedures and Best Practices Development and maintenance of risk-related policies, standard operating procedures, and best practices to ensure consistent compliance and reduce exposure across departments.
Risk Management Committee Coordination
Facilitation of cross-departmental risk management committee meetings to review incidents, trends, and mitigation strategies; promote accountability and continuous improvement.
Insurance & Coverage Administration
Management of insurance programs, including coverage evaluation, renewals, claims coordination, and liaison with risk pools/providers.
Core Services
Core services are necessary to maintain basic operations of the City. These services are not legally mandated, but are foundational to delivering services the community reasonably expects. This category does not always represent the current service levels, service enhancements, or preferred staffing levels. When evaluated, the minimum service level required to keep a function operational were considered, not the current or ideal service levels.
City Council
City Manager's Office
11.g
Packet Pg. 180 Attachment: Attachment 7 - Service Categories Summary and List - Mandated, Core, Enhancements (6211 Attachment 7
What are Core Services? Determination Considerations:
If this service were reduced to a minimal level:
Would the City operations become unreliable or significantly degraded? Would we lose the ability to deliver other services?
Does this service:
Support ongoing daily operations?
Maintain public-facing service continuity?
Protect revenue streams or cost recovery?
Department Service Description of Service
Core Services
Core services are necessary to maintain basic operations of the City. These services are not legally mandated, but are foundational to delivering services the community reasonably expects. This category does not always represent the current service levels, service enhancements, or preferred staffing levels. When evaluated, the minimum service level required to keep a function operational were considered, not the current or ideal service levels.
Preparation and Publication Agendas Support for Preparation and Publication of City Committee / Commissions Agendas and Compliance with the Brown Act City Council Support Scheduling of Special City Council meetings and study sessions City Council Support - Attendance at City Council meetings Attendance at Meetings and room set up, technology support (Zoom), preparing presentations for display during meeting, office supplies and dinners / refreshments for meetings City Council Support - Meeting Administration and Preparation and Support Meeting Administration and Preparation and Support including compiling written Public Comments received for City Council meetings and sending to Councilmembers / staff and printing for public reference Council Liaision Assignments
Preparation for annual Council Liaison Assignments process & communications with outside agencies for updates related to Council Liaison Assignments
City Committee / Commissions Recruitment Administration City Committee / Commissions Recruitment Administration, interviews and selection support, scheduling, orientation Support of City Council Updates to Policies / Procedures Support process of updates and/or creation of policies and procedures as directed by City Council under the direction of City Manager and/or Council Ad Hoc Subcommittee
Administrative Policies Administrative Policies recordkeeping, updates, support and administration Records Retention Policy Records Retention Policy Administration, Training, Compliance and Updates Daily customer engagement / interface with residents, visitors, and the general public Assistance to guide residents to City services and resources, providing services such as foreign pension certifications, etc.
Administrative & Management Functions Related to Executive Team and In Support of City Manager Administrative & Management Functions Related to Executive Team and In Support of the City Manager including preparation and updates to the Council Agenda Planner
General Administration Related to City Council / City Manager Support Scheduling, Council Events Calendar updates, Assistance with City Council conference / training / meeting registrations, draft / send correspondence on behalf of City Manager / Mayor, etc Conduct Bid Openings
Generally in coordination with Public Works / Engineering and occasionally with other City Departments, to conduct public Bid Opening as part of RFP / Public Bid Process
Implementation and Compliance with New Legislation (e.g. SB 707, SB 827, SB 852, etc) Includes City Clerks' Conferences & Training in new laws, efforts and costs in implementing new mandates such as new required meeting format for City Council to include Zoom component for two-way remote public participation, translation of agendas into other language(s) as required, website updates, agenda posting requirements, public outreach, new fiscal training requirements, etc.
Implementation of the Business Visitation Program
Fully implement Business Visitation Program to transition from policy adoption to measurable performance tracking and outcomes reporting
Explore formation of a Property-Based Business Improvement District (PBID) Explore formation of a Property-Based Business Improvement District (PBID) to evaluate whether this self-assessment district tool could provide sustainable funding for commercial improvements and marketing in Rockaway and Sharp Park Technical assistance partnerships
Continue technical assistance partnerships (Small Business Development Center, Renaissance Center, Workforce Development Board) to enhance business resilience and workforce capacity Expand connectivity and pedestrian improvements
Expand connectivity and pedestrian improvements supporting commercial areas to increase foot traffic, ensure safety and support long-term commercial performance
Emails and phone customer service Respond to customer inquiries Building and Planning Counter Services
In-person payments for building permits and planning entitlements that must be paid in person; general information, assistance and over-the-counter permits; issuance
City-wide Code Enforcement Investigation, facilitate compliance, NOVs STR Permit Review/Processing and inspections Annual review and approval of Short-Term Rental renewals; new permits Tobacco Inspections Inspections; grant-funding
Annual Budget Budget preparation
Departmental/Division Leadership Daily supervision of staff, programmatic management, etc.; general meetings; council attendance Financial and Contract Management
Oversight on all financial tasks - invoices, Purchase Orders, licensing, contracts, budget preparation/support; journal entries; end of Fiscal-Year close; writing and amending contracts; RFPs; Approvals; Staff Reports Invoice processing - planning and building; development review Acounts Receivable and Accounts Payable; invoices, etc.
Housing Element Implementation - General Affordable Housing Study / Disparate Impact Analysis; Smaller projects, monitoring, public information Housing Opportunities on Public Sites (HE-I-3) Master Planning for Public Sites - focus on city-owned site Special Permits Special events, pumpkin/tree lots
Public Information website, project information and status Special Shoreline Resiliency Areas (SSRA), Coastal CARP, Initiate Shoreline Adaptation Program Initiation of the SAP, filing Coastal CARP, and sunrising SSRAs; deadline May 2028 Applications and Forms Maintain up-to-date applications and forms pursuant to state laws Permit Tracking Software RFP + implementation of permit tracking software for CDD City Clerk
Community Development
Economic and Housing Development
11.g
Packet Pg. 181 Attachment: Attachment 7 - Service Categories Summary and List - Mandated, Core, Enhancements (6211 Attachment 7
What are Core Services? Determination Considerations:
If this service were reduced to a minimal level:
Would the City operations become unreliable or significantly degraded? Would we lose the ability to deliver other services?
Does this service:
Support ongoing daily operations?
Maintain public-facing service continuity?
Protect revenue streams or cost recovery?
Department Service Description of Service
Core Services
Core services are necessary to maintain basic operations of the City. These services are not legally mandated, but are foundational to delivering services the community reasonably expects. This category does not always represent the current service levels, service enhancements, or preferred staffing levels. When evaluated, the minimum service level required to keep a function operational were considered, not the current or ideal service levels.
Financial Reporting Annual Comprehensive Financial Report and other non-legally mandated reports Accounts Payable Contracts and Purchase Orders and Vendor Payments Budget and Budget Analysis Budget creation,Budgetary control and Quarterly deptartment performance reviews Accounts Receivable, Revenue Management and Compliance Equitable application of fees and charges, proactive collection strategies and monitoring the revenue stream Administrative Services to Wastewater Enterprise
Running Payroll, Acounts Payable, Accounts Receivable, Purchasing and Accounting. Revenue Analysis for Property Tax Roll.
Set up and Maintain: Technology Infrastructure
Technology Infrastructure provided by the IT team are: covering all city employees as well as non-employees such as commissioners, committee members, and others.
Set up and Maintain: Network Infrastructure
Network infrastructure provided by the IT team includes: covering all city employees as well as non-employees such as commissioners, committee members, and others.
Set up and Maintain: Cybersecurity
Cybersecurity provided by the IT team includes: covering all city employees as well as non-employees such as commissioners, committee members, and others.
Set up and Maintain: Service Delivery
Customer Support provided by the IT team includes: covering all city employees as well as non-employees such as commissioners, committee members, and others.
Recruitment & Hiring Full-cycle recruitment including job postings, exams and on-boarding Employee Relations Day-to-day Human Resources support, including conflict resolution and discipline guidance Benefits Administration Administration of health, retirement, and ancillary benefits Classification & Compensation Maintenance of classification plan and compensation structure HRIS/Payroll Coordination Support for Human Resources systems and payroll accuracy Policy Development & Administration Maintenance and interpretation of personnel policies Non-Mandated Fire Company Training Routine training
Professional Development External training
Records DOJ/PRA/Records requests, RIPA,
Fleet Services Compliance w/VC mandates for emergency vehicles response Citizen non-criminal reports Quality of life complaints from citizens (phone/lobby calls) Investigative Services not legally mandated Currently detectives investigate most major cases not required by law Public Safety Technology Crime tracer, Callyo, Closure Cellebrite, Axon, Flock, BWC, In Car Cameras, etc Lost/Found Property Staff collects lost and found property which requires storage and notification for destruction Public Information Officer Community Outreach and Education/ Transparency Administrative Services Entire Police Budget/ Department contracts Beach Revenue Reports Oversee parking violations for paid parking lots Gang/ Vehicle Theft Task Force MOU agreement among SMCPCSA to fund county-wide task force Non-emergency response Respond to non-emergency service calls involving violations of vehicle and penal code Compliance with OTS and CHP (Cannabis) Grant Award DUI checkpoints and impaired driving enforcement Compliance with ABC Grant Award Business license compliance checks and enforcement operations Respond to quality of life service calls (Officers & CSOs) Respond and document non-criminal service calls (Ii.e found/lost property, property damage, animal complaints and advice calls)
Respond to non-injury/property damage only collisions (Officers & CSO's) Investigate and document incidents Patrol traffic enforcement Issue citations for vehicle code violations and municipal code violations Parking enforcement (Officers) Respond to parking complaints and issue citations Administrative Services
Fire
Police
11.g
Packet Pg. 182 Attachment: Attachment 7 - Service Categories Summary and List - Mandated, Core, Enhancements (6211 Attachment 7
What are Core Services? Determination Considerations:
If this service were reduced to a minimal level:
Would the City operations become unreliable or significantly degraded? Would we lose the ability to deliver other services?
Does this service:
Support ongoing daily operations?
Maintain public-facing service continuity?
Protect revenue streams or cost recovery?
Department Service Description of Service
Core Services
Core services are necessary to maintain basic operations of the City. These services are not legally mandated, but are foundational to delivering services the community reasonably expects. This category does not always represent the current service levels, service enhancements, or preferred staffing levels. When evaluated, the minimum service level required to keep a function operational were considered, not the current or ideal service levels.
5-Year Capital Improvement Plan Preparation of 5-Year CIP for council adoption Recology Rates Recology rate change increases yearly per franchise agreement Traffic & Transportation Engineering Review of traffic/transportation related requested in the ROW.
Federal /State Disaster Management Apply and manage reimbursement for disaster projects City and County Association of Government (CCAG) Attend the TAC and Stormwater Committee Meetings in San Carlos Annual Pavement Resurfacing Annual roadway maintenance and resurfacing program Engineering Support to other Departments Public Records Request, Mapping, Etc.
Parks Facilities Services provided for these facilities include plumbing, electrical work, and structural repairs.
Pacifica Pier
Services include the upkeep of 23 trash receptacles and four wash stations, in addition to quarterly power washing of the deck and handrails
Pacifica Pier Restroom Janitorial services and general plumbing support are provided for six public restroom fixtures, including toilets, and four sinks.
Trails and Walkways
Comprehensive upkeep of all memorial benches, pathways, and storm drainage systems, including mitigation of vandalism, repair of storm-related damages, and vegetation and sand management.
Buildings
Maintenance including the repair and upkeep of facilities and infrastructure, including electrical, plumbing, and structural systems.
Beach Facilities There are four public beach facilities, with a total of nine restrooms, three of which are equipped with outdoor showers.
Parks
Maintenance services are provided across 23 public parks, including mowing, irrigation, playground inspections, and general repairs.
Parks Restrooms
Janitorial and maintenance services are provided at the two facilities at Frontierland, which offer a total of seven stalls for public use. These facilities are open seven days a week.
Custodial
Janitorial services are provided for citywide facilities, including offices, daycare centers, libraries, senior centers, council chambers, and public restrooms.
Creek maintenance Annual creek walk to remove debris obstructing flow of creeks and submit report - CWA, NPDES Storm preparation Clear and maintain storm drainage facilities - CWA, NPDES Fleet Repair and Maintenance
Maintenance and repair of equipment performed within the maintenance facility. Prepare applications for and payment of all permits necessary to operate the facility. Maintains inventory, as well as monitor and dispose of all hazardous waste generated at the facility.
Fleet Procurement
Get pricing to order and replace vehicles and equipment that has reached its useful life for the city utilizing fleet/government pricing for purchases
Tree Appeals Assist with PB&R Commission Tree Appeals
Community Center Public Access Public Access to Community Center 5+ days per week Field Allocations Schedule field space for field users throughout the City Community Full-Cost Child Care
Fee based Child Care services and following all Community Care Licensing regulations, and public heath and safety requirements, for Toddler, Preschool, and School-Aged children.
California State Preschool Program Grant Funded - Early childhood education and school readiness services SMCOE Preschool Program Grant Funded - Subcontracted preschool services with San Mateo County Office of Education Licensed After School Program
Before and after-school Child Care services for TK-8th grade students, including school safe transitions, for over 400 children (Partially Grant Funded)
CDE (California Dept. of Education) CDSS (California Dept. of Social Services) contracted child care services
Grant Funded: Title 5 state preschool and school-age contracted services, including Eligibility & Registration, Annual reports, Annual Audits, Environmental reviews, student portfolios and Profiles, Teacher and administrator qualifications.
Alternative Payment School-Age & Preschool Program Provide voucher based Child Care services with partner agency 4 C's- Child Care Coordinating Council Public Works
PBR
11.g
Packet Pg. 183 Attachment: Attachment 7 - Service Categories Summary and List - Mandated, Core, Enhancements (6211 Attachment 7
What are Service Level Enhancements? Determination Considerations:
Does this service enhance (v. sustain) core operations? Could this service be reduced, deferred or suspended without causing immediate legal or operational disruption?
Does this service:
Expand service levels beyond baseline?
Improve experience, access or quality, but is not required to maintain operations? Department Service Description of Service
Attend and/or participate in Conferences and Training for Elected Officials Attendance and participation in conferences, training and events within budgeted allotments Liaison to City Committees and Commissions
Act as Council Liaison to City Committees / Commission as determined annually be City Council Liaison Appointments
Summer Internship Management and oversight of summer intern Community Engagement Strategic outreach initiatives and planning City-wide Risk Training Expand training programs related to risk awareness, liability reduction and Risk Management best practices Rose AI Automated phone tree
Employee Engagement Committee Employee Engagement Committee Innovation and Transformation AI Initiatives, process redesign Special Projects Council Priority Initiatives, cross-departmental project coordination Economic Strategic Initiatives Opportunity site work
Risk Analysis and Trends Indentify trends, high-risk areas and emerging issues to inform policy and operational changes RM Systems Implementation of systems and tools for claims tracking, reporting and risk analytics Loss Prevention Programs Safety and Risk Management initiatives like sewer, sidewalks, fleet safety, facilities, workplace safety, etc.
Risk Management Grants Manage annual grant submissions to the insurance carrier City Council Agenda Packet Publication in Advance of 72 hrs City Council Agenda Packet Publication in advance of the required 72 hrs - i.e. posting on Wednesday prior to City Council regular meeting instead of Friday
City Council Support Preparation of Annotated Version of Agenda for Mayor and/or Councilmembers City Council Minutes Preparation City Council Minutes preparation in Detailed Summary Format Printing and Delivery of City Council Agenda Packets Printing and Delivery of City Council Agenda Packets to Councilmembers, as requested Adminstration of Requests for Proclamations and Commendations Fulfiling requests for Proclamations, City Council recognitions / commendations initiatied by both internal and external requestors, as well as annual recurring recognitions that the City recognizes by Proclamation Special Events Coordination and Support Special Events Coordination / Support for events such as the Council of Cities Meeting / Dinner hosting Staff Liaison Staff Liaison / Support of Library Advisory Committee City Council
City Clerk
City Manager's Office
Programs or services that go beyond baseline operations and enhance community experience, advance strategic priorities, or provide additional service levels. These services may be adjusted, reduced, or eliminated with more manageable operational impact. This may include services aligned with Council goals or strategic initiatives, but that are not strictly required to maintain basic operations. These could also include non-recurring expenditures, like capital projects and equipment purchases.
Service Level Enhancements
11.g
Packet Pg. 184 Attachment: Attachment 7 - Service Categories Summary and List - Mandated, Core, Enhancements (6211 Attachment 7
What are Service Level Enhancements? Determination Considerations:
Does this service enhance (v. sustain) core operations? Could this service be reduced, deferred or suspended without causing immediate legal or operational disruption?
Does this service:
Expand service levels beyond baseline?
Improve experience, access or quality, but is not required to maintain operations? Department Service Description of Service
Programs or services that go beyond baseline operations and enhance community experience, advance strategic priorities, or provide additional service levels. These services may be adjusted, reduced, or eliminated with more manageable operational impact. This may include services aligned with Council goals or strategic initiatives, but that are not strictly required to maintain basic operations. These could also include non-recurring expenditures, like capital projects and equipment purchases.
Service Level Enhancements
Catalyst Projects & Opportunity Sites: 2212 Beach Boulevard Negotiate transaction terms and development agreements; initiate environmental review Catalyst Projects & Opportunity Sites: Pacifica Manor Shopping Center Continue engagement with property owners; explore investor interest aligned with Housing Element and General Plan
Catalyst Projects & Opportunity Sites: Downtown and Sharp Park Continue beautification and activation of economic vibrancy efforts. Engage investors/developers consistent with Housing Element designations. Continue discussions regarding Sharp Park Golf Course economic opportunities Catalyst Projects & Opportunity Sites: Other Commmercial Areas Strengthen Broker Relationships. Track vacancies and building conditions. Conduct a feasibility study of potential financing tools: Property and Business Improvement Districts (PBID), Enhanced Infrastructure Financing Districts (EIFD), and Community Facilities Districts (CFD) to support infrastructure improvements and catalyze private investment in priority areas
Business Attraction: Continue coordinated marketing and media outreach efforts to sustain visibility in regional tourism and retail markets
Continue coordinated marketing and media outreach efforts to sustain visibility in regional tourism and retail markets
Business Attraction: Strengthen relationships with retailers and brokers to maintain active engagement to ensure Pacifica remains competitive in site selection discussions and filling commercial vacancies
Strengthen relationships with retailers and brokers to maintain active engagement to ensure Pacifica remains competitive in site selection discussions and filling commercial vacancies Business Attraction: Coordinate tourism events regionally and cross-jurisdictionally (e.g., Half Moon Bay collaboration) to expand visitor draw and shared marketing impact Coordinate tourism events regionally and cross-jurisdictionally (e.g., Half Moon Bay collaboration) to expand visitor draw and shared marketing impact
Business Attraction: Support signature community events, including Fogfest, Tree Lighting, and seasonal programming to reinforce the community identity and impact on small businesses Support signature community events, including Fogfest, Tree Lighting, and seasonal programming to reinforce the community identity and impact on small businesses
Planning, Analysis & Policy Development: Continue coordination with Planning/Community Development on Housing Element priority sites to align entitlement processing and infrastructure planning to facilitate planned housing development
Continue coordination with Planning/Community Development on Housing Element priority sites to align entitlement processing and infrastructure planning to facilitate planned housing development Planning, Analysis & Policy Development: Evaluate financing mechanisms such as Enhanced Infrastructure Financing Districts (EIFDs), Community Facilities Districts (CFDs), and related financing tools to assess the City’s capacity to establish financing districts that align land use policy with infrastructure funding strategies and long-term fiscal sustainability goals (coordinates with Goal 1 above)
Evaluate financing mechanisms such as Enhanced Infrastructure Financing Districts (EIFDs), Community Facilities Districts (CFDs), and related financing tools to assess the City’s capacity to establish financing districts that align land use policy with infrastructure funding strategies and long-term fiscal sustainability goals (coordinates with Goal 1 above)
Planning, Analysis & Policy Development: Pursue grant opportunities for infrastructure and commercial corridor improvements to reduce General Fund exposure while advancing capital investments.
Pursue grant opportunities for infrastructure and commercial corridor improvements to reduce General Fund exposure while advancing capital investments.
Summer Internship Management and oversight of summer intern Organizational Assessment (on-going) Organization assessment for staffing, process mapping, prep for permit tracking software RFP Geographic Information Systems Community Development GIS for internal and public use with accurate parcel date OSPAC Staff Liaison OSPAC administration/facilitation
2212 Beach Blvd Support Support 2212 Beach Blvd RFQ/RFP process CivicSpark Fellows Oversee two CivicSparks fellows, one focused on LCLUP and one on CARP/CARC Climate Action & Resilience Plan
Inter-deptartmental coordination and liaison between CARC and dept heads, newsletter, advancing CARP policies
Climate Action & Resilience Committee CARC Staff Liaison CARC administration and facilitation; tasks beyond typical committee support Objective Design Standards
(HE-I-2) Development and implementation of Objective Design Standards PBF Fellow (HE-I-2) Managing PBF fellow, participating in Site Team, quarterly convenings Preliminary Community Engagement - Shoreline Adaptation Council direction for Preliminary Community Engagement - Shoreline Adaptation Community Development
Economic and Housing Development
11.g
Packet Pg. 185 Attachment: Attachment 7 - Service Categories Summary and List - Mandated, Core, Enhancements (6211 Attachment 7
What are Service Level Enhancements? Determination Considerations:
Does this service enhance (v. sustain) core operations? Could this service be reduced, deferred or suspended without causing immediate legal or operational disruption?
Does this service:
Expand service levels beyond baseline?
Improve experience, access or quality, but is not required to maintain operations? Department Service Description of Service
Programs or services that go beyond baseline operations and enhance community experience, advance strategic priorities, or provide additional service levels. These services may be adjusted, reduced, or eliminated with more manageable operational impact. This may include services aligned with Council goals or strategic initiatives, but that are not strictly required to maintain basic operations. These could also include non-recurring expenditures, like capital projects and equipment purchases.
Service Level Enhancements
Training & Development Programs
IT provided training for sytems efficiency; Human Resources provides expanded supervisor and leadership training programs
Set up and Maintain: Service Delivery
Customer Support provided by the IT team for non-employees such as commissioners, committee members, and others.
Employee Engagement Initiatives Survey administration, committees, and engagement strategies Process Improvement & SOP Development Development of standardized procedures for HR functions Internal Investigations Capacity Building internal ability to conduct investigations Technology & Automation Improvements HRIS enhancements and workflow automation Employee Wellness Program
Development and coordination of wellness initiatives including mental health resources, EAP promotion, wellness challenges, and workplace well-being strategies Community Outreach Staffing of events, brochures, social media content, website,etc. related to non-safety content such as job fairs Augmented Staffing for Weather Events Additional units or staffing for storm related activites or high fire danger weather patterns 4th of July Additional Staffing Staffing of additional units/personnel due to increased fire danger related to fireworks Special Event Staffing Fogfest EMS staffing
Public Education Staffing of events, brochures, social media content, website,etc. related to safety related concerns Citizen Rims Crime-mapping technology
Department Website Community Outreach and Education
Social Media platforms Public Education and Communication Tool Telephone calls- Live person In-person calls versus an automated phone tree Community Outreach Programs Community Education to prevent crime and build trust/promote transparency Medical Drop Box Allows community to drop off medications CERT Community Disaster Preparedness Classes
Records Volunteers Helps staff with clerical roles- due to work load and low staffing Crime Prevention Community Outreach and Engagement Events Parking enforcement (CSOs) Respond to parking complaints and issue citations (Weekdays and Weekends) Temporary Safe Parking Program Liaison Serve as liaison with the Pacifica Resource Center to manage clients and support program objectives Co-response Officer/Clinician Provide mental health services and case management Parking enforcement for OSV's and PMC violations (CSOs) Issue citations and impound vehicles (Weekdays and Weekends) Vehicle Abatement - Abandoned Vehicles (CSOs) Issue citations and impound vehicles (Weekdays and Weekends) Firework Abatement Investigate and document incidents
County-wide Enforcements (Gang Task Force & STEP) Targeted enforcement and investigations throughout San Mateo County Coastal Beach/Pier Enforcement Respond to service calls, investigate and document incidents City Department Liaison Collaborate with various departments to address City-wide needs School District Liaison Serve as liaison and support measures to improve local school's safety Respond to Short Term Rental complaints Investigate and document Short Term Rental complaints and incidents Liaison to various community groups (HOA, Red Ribbon, National Night Out, Coffee with a Cop) Participate, support and organize community events Special Event Liaison (Fog Fest, 4th of July, Dog Surfing Contest and Pride Parade) Support event organizers by coordinating police services and city resources Homeless Outreach Resource referrals and partner with Public Works for encampment abatement Beach parking lot count (Officer or CSO) Respond to beach parking lots and document amount of vehicles Police
Administrative Services
Fire
11.g
Packet Pg. 186 Attachment: Attachment 7 - Service Categories Summary and List - Mandated, Core, Enhancements (6211 Attachment 7
What are Service Level Enhancements? Determination Considerations:
Does this service enhance (v. sustain) core operations? Could this service be reduced, deferred or suspended without causing immediate legal or operational disruption?
Does this service:
Expand service levels beyond baseline?
Improve experience, access or quality, but is not required to maintain operations? Department Service Description of Service
Programs or services that go beyond baseline operations and enhance community experience, advance strategic priorities, or provide additional service levels. These services may be adjusted, reduced, or eliminated with more manageable operational impact. This may include services aligned with Council goals or strategic initiatives, but that are not strictly required to maintain basic operations. These could also include non-recurring expenditures, like capital projects and equipment purchases.
Service Level Enhancements
Administrative services to Beautification Advisory Committee Provide administrative services and staff liaison Urban Forest Land, and Vegetation Management Plan Comprehensive management plans for the City’s urban forest Grant Applications Apply and submit grant applications
Engineering Special and Block Party Permits Processing and Inspection of special and party permits Fog Fest Assist Pacifica Police Department to organize and provide traffic control devices Public Works Open House Community Event
Arbor Day PARKS - Support and Facilitate planting of Arbor Day event trees Dog Park Debris clean-up, Solid waste disposal, Dog waste bags refill, Field maintenance, and repairs Sand bags Provide sandbags and sand for public use
Un-Housed Clean-up Occasionally Clean-up Un-Housed encampments Fourth of July Fireworks Clean-up Manage the Clean-up of Fireworks Debris at the Pacifica State Beach after Fourth of July Community Outreach Production of seasonal activity guide, Multiple Social Media Accounts Park Rentals Oversight of park picnic rentals for private events Permits Permits for large scale beach events, surf camps and parking PB&R Commission Minutes, agenda packets & communication for PB&R Commission Bike & Pedestrian Advisory Committee Meet twice annually to review Bike and Pedestrian related projects grants Poet Laureate Program Support the Poet Laureate, coordinate public poetry opportunities and events City Leases Oversight of city leases at 8 properties throughout the City Film/Photo Permits Provide permits for approved film/photo productions Beach/Trail/Park Event Permits Provide permits for approved contests/weddings/ ceremonies/races (private, non-City) Youth & Teen Enrichment Classes Special Interest Contract Classes for Youth & Teens(Year-Round) Adult Enrichment Classes Special Interest Contract Classes for Adults (Year-Round) Adventure Camp Full Day Summer Camps for Youth, Ages 5-13 Wet & Wild Summer Camp Full Day & Half Summer Camp focused on aquatics and water play for Youth Ages 8+ Specialty Camps Contracted special interest summer camps for youth Leaders In Training Education Program (L.I.T.E.'s) Summer camp leadership training for teens in grade 9-12 Community Events
Community Wide Special Events including the 4th of July, Fun Fest, Boo Bash, Polar Palooza, Epic EggVenture, Junior Olympics, & Arbor Day Partnership Community Events Community Event support in partnership with other organizations & agencies "Learn to Swim" Program / Beginner Swim Lessons Swim lessons for 4 months-6 years with focus on water safety and basic swimming skills Intermediate and Advanced Youth Swim Lesson Swim lessons for 6-15 year olds to build on swimming skills Adult Swim lessons Adults, Learn to swim class for 18+, with focus on water safety and basic swimming skills Pool & Aquatics Facility rentals Oversee rental of pool, including swim meets, private parties, etc. Also contracts for long-term users Facility Rentals Oversight of Community Center and Civic Center private rentals Lifeguard Trainings
Provide opportunity for individuals ages 15+ to assess and certify through American Red Cross lifeguard certification program. Also, provide city-wide training for employees/ volunteers on CPR, First Aid and AED Rec Swim / Lap Swim Open swim times with lifeguards for community to access Jean E. Brink pool Water Aerobics Water aerobics class with lifeguards present Youth Advisory Board Oversight of Youth Advisory Board
J-Teen Dances Quarterly Teen Dances at the Community Center J-Teen After School program Drop-In Afterschool Program for middle school-age students Community Drop-in Water Polo Program Weekly Drop-in Water Polo Public Works
PBR
11.g
Packet Pg. 187 Attachment: Attachment 7 - Service Categories Summary and List - Mandated, Core, Enhancements (6211 Attachment 7
What are Service Level Enhancements? Determination Considerations:
Does this service enhance (v. sustain) core operations? Could this service be reduced, deferred or suspended without causing immediate legal or operational disruption?
Does this service:
Expand service levels beyond baseline?
Improve experience, access or quality, but is not required to maintain operations? Department Service Description of Service
Programs or services that go beyond baseline operations and enhance community experience, advance strategic priorities, or provide additional service levels. These services may be adjusted, reduced, or eliminated with more manageable operational impact. This may include services aligned with Council goals or strategic initiatives, but that are not strictly required to maintain basic operations. These could also include non-recurring expenditures, like capital projects and equipment purchases.
Service Level Enhancements
PBR cont'd Meals on Wheel Program
Home-Delivered Meal program for homebound Seniors & older adults, 5 days per week with meals that are prepared at the Community Center
Congregate Nutrition Program Meals & socialization for Seniors, 5 days per week Transportation Program
Use of City Shuttle for transportation to and from the Community Center, shopping trips and field trips for Seniors.
CARs Program
Collaboration with Serra Cab Company, low-cost transportation to medical appointments, etc. from home for Seniors
SASH Program Shopping assistance for Seniors, connecting volunteers and homebound Seniors Information & Referral Service Connects individuals with the resources, services, and support they need within the community.
Tax Aide AARP Tax-Aide services for Seniors
Rummage Sale Monthly Senior Services rummage sale, that supports "Recycle, Reuse, Reduce" Senior Computer Lab & Technology Services
Technology based programs for Seniors, Anti-scam education, isolation reduction, connection to family and community
Senior Enrichment Classes Special Interest Contract Classes for Seniors (Year-Round) Seniors In Action (S.I.A) Membership Program Yearly S.I.A. Council and membership program which provides discount to variety of Senior classes Senior Volunteer Program Opportunities for individuals or groups to volunteer in a variety of Senior programs and services.
BINGO Program Permitted BINGO program
Senior Newsletter Quarterly information newsletter specific for Seniors promoting Senior programs and services Medical Loan Program Provide resources for medical loan programs. Limited stock of medical equipment onsite.
Rockaway Ricky - Healthy Pet Program Veterinarian Bill reimbursement program for Seniors through Pacificans Care Grant Child Care Enrichment Programs
Partner agency with San Mateo County Libraries, SMCOE, Pacifica School District and the Magic Tooth Bus, STEM Curriculum: Science, technology, engineering, arts and math curriculum. Throught out the school-year and Summer.
Child Care Swimming Lessons & Learn to Swim Scholarships Structured swim instruction for safety and skill-building with a focus on populations at risk for not receiving basic water safety and swim training
Family Outreach, Engagement, & Events Workshops, meetings, parenting education, and events for families & PAC (Parent Advisory Committee)
11.g
Packet Pg. 188 Attachment: Attachment 7 - Service Categories Summary and List - Mandated, Core, Enhancements (6211