Agenda, second session — San Bruno City Council, May 27, 2025 (part 2 of 3)

Water Tank 1 (Cunningham Tank) Replacement Project City of San Bruno Response to Comments April 2025 Response to Comment C.11:Comment noted. The City of San Bruno Public Works Department has made note that a TMP may be required as described in Comment C.11. Comment C.12: As the Lead Agency, the City is responsible for all project mitigation, including any needed improvements to the STN. The project’s fair share contribution, financing, scheduling, implementation responsibilities and lead agency monitoring should be fully discussed for all proposed mitigation measures. Response to Comment C.12: Comment noted. The City of San Bruno Public Works Department has made note of the requirement to provide mitigation for any needed improvements to the State Transportation Network, however. no impacts to the State Transportation Network were identified in the IS/MND, therefore no mitigation has been proposed. Comment C.13: If any Caltrans facilities are impacted by the project, those facilities must meet American Disabilities Act (ADA) Standards after project completion. As well, the project must maintain bicycle and pedestrian access during construction. These access considerations support Caltrans’ equity mission to provide a safe, sustainable, and equitable transportation network for all users. Response to Comment C.13: Comment noted. The City of San Bruno Public Works Department has made note of the ADA Standards requirement for Caltrans facilities if impacted by the project as described in Comment C.13. 4. TEXT EDITS TO THE INITIAL STUDY/ MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION (ERRATA) Amended text for the Water Tank 1 (Cunningham Tank) Project IS/MND are included below. Additions to the Draft IS/MND text are shown with underlining and text removed from the Draft IS/MND is shown with strikethrough. Page iv and Page 78: Mitigation Measure BIO-1: Pre-Construction Survey for Nesting Birds. Project construction (including staging) shall occur outside of the bird nesting season if possible (defined as the time between September 16th1st and January 14th31st). If construction starts during the bird nesting season between January 15thFebruary 1st and September 15th August 31st, a qualified biologist experienced with the nesting behavior of bird species of the region shall perform a pre-construction survey to identify active bird nests on or near the site, including staging areas. The pre-construction survey shall take place no more than seven days prior to the start of construction, and a second focused survey shall be conducted within 48 hours prior to construction activities that would occur during the nesting/breeding season. If ground disturbance activities are delayed following a survey, then an additional pre-construction survey shall be conducted such that no more than two weeks will have elapsed between the last survey and the commencement of ground disturbance activities. and if If more than seven days pass with no construction activities, another focused pre-construction survey shall be required before project activities can be reinitiated. The surveys shall include all trees, shrubs, and structures on the site and selected staging area, and all trees, shrubs, and structures within a 250-foot radius of the site and selected staging area for passerines, 500 feet for accipiters and 1,000 feet for

117 of 496

Page 13 ends

Water Tank 1 (Cunningham Tank) Replacement Project City of San Bruno Response to Comments April 2025 buteos. as well as trees and shrubs on and within a 250-foot radius of the selected staging area. If an active bird nest is found within survey radii, species-specific measures shall be prepared by a qualified biologist and implemented to prevent abandonment of the active nest. A protective buffer distance shall be established by a qualified biologist based on the conditions of the site, such as whether the nest is in a line of sight of the construction and the sensitivity of the birds nesting. Typical If an active, native bird nest is found during the survey, the biologist shall designate a construction-free buffer zones are as follows: 1) 250 feet for passerines, 2) 500 feet for accipiters, and 3) 1,000 feet for buteos. No Project personnel or equipment shall be allowed to enter the protective buffer until the qualified biologist determines that the young have fully fledged and will no longer be adversely affected by the Project. (typically 500 feet for raptors, and 250 feet for other birds) around the nest to remain in place until the young have fledged. The qualified biologist shall be contacted immediately if a bird nest is discovered during project construction. The results of the survey and nest monitoring (if applicable) will be documented, and any nest buffer zones shall be flagged for avoidance prior to the start of construction. The qualified biologist shall observe any identified active nests prior to the start of any construction-related activities to establish a behavioral baseline of the adults and any nestlings, and the nest site(s) shall be monitored by the biologist periodically to see if the birds are stressed by the construction activities and if the protective buffer needs to be increased. The perimeter of the nest setback zone shall be fenced or adequately demarcated with stakes and flagging at 20-foot intervals, and construction personnel and activities restricted from the area. A survey report by the qualified biologist verifying that no active nests are present, or that the young have fledged, shall be submitted to the City prior to initiation of grading or construction in the nest-setback zone. The qualified biologist shall serve as a biological monitor during those periods when construction activities occur near active nest areas to ensure that no inadvertent impacts on these nests occur. All buffers shall be shown on all sets of construction drawings. Page viii and Page 124: Mitigation Measure HAZ-1a: The City shall undertake the completion of the hazardous materials testing (including but not limited to lead based paints and soils containing lead paint contamination, PCBs, and ACMs) at the site for any site materials or features that would be disturbed by project activities, including the retaining wall near the site’s entrance that will be removed for the widened access road. and will disclose the results to contractors bidding on the construction project. Project specifications state the contractor shall undertake “due diligence inquiry” to meet the requirements of Project Specifications Section 00 72 00, General Conditions, 9.1.C Environmental and Toxics Warranty. Therefore, the contractor will be responsible for not installing any new hazardous materials and shall inform the City in the event undetected hazardous materials are uncovered during construction. Page 1: The tank receives water from the San Francisco Public Utility Commission (SFPUC) from an 8-inch pipe connection and discharges water into the distribution system through a 16-inch pipe connection. Due to seismic issues, the tank can only be safely filled to a water height of 22 feet,

118 of 496

Page 14 ends

Water Tank 1 (Cunningham Tank) Replacement Project City of San Bruno Response to Comments April 2025 which is 10 feet short of its 32-foot maximum. The City’s inability to fully utilize the existing water tank’s storage capacity because of seismic safety concerns means it can store less water during dry years. In a joint effort with the SFPUC, the City is proposing to replace the existing 2.5 MG weldedsteel tank with a larger 3.5 MG prestressed concrete tank to provide additional potable water for the area and increase storage capacity during dry years. Partial funding for the tank is provided by the SFPUC, and the remainder by the City. The replacement tank would be connected to the existing water infrastructure pipelines to receive and discharge water. The new tank would be constructed of concrete and would occupy roughly the same footprint as the existing tank. The new tank would be placed partially below grade to reduce its visible height above ground. Page 21: The City of San Bruno (City) is the CEQA Lead Agency for the project. No responsible or trustee agencies have been identified. The proposed tank will require State Water Resources Control Board, Division of Drinking Water is a Responsible Agency for this project and will need to approve the water supply permit amendment approval prior to commissioning the tank. An encroachment permit from the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) may be required if the contractor utilizes a nearby Caltrans property for staging. Page 22: Prior to construction, the contractor will establish the limits of the construction area and install the required storm water Best Management Practice (BMPs) per the Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP). As step one of construction, a new flow meter, pressure reducing station (PRS), and its associated valve vaults will be installed with all the required piping and appurtenances. After the connection to the existing water lines has been established and the new flow meter and the PRS valve vault have been tested and operational, the existing tank can be dewatered and taken out of service. Before being taken out of service, the water in the old tank would be used to supply customers; the last few feet in the tank would be drained via the drain valve into a storm drain. A dechlorination system would be installed before the drinking water enters the storm drainage system. When the existing tank is offline for construction, water would be distributed directly from the SFPUC supply line and through the new pressure reducing vault. There will be no service disruption to customers. Page 39: The City is both the proponent and the Lead Agency for the proposed project. The proposed project does not require permit approval from other regulatory agencies. The proposed tank will require State Water Resources Control Board, Division of Drinking Water approval prior to commission of the tank (bringing the tank on line). An easement encroachment permit from the California Department of Transportation will be required for the soil nail retaining wall and an encroachment permit may be required if the City chooses to utilize the Caltrans on/off ramp property adjacent to Cunningham Way for staging. Page 59:

119 of 496

Page 15 ends

Water Tank 1 (Cunningham Tank) Replacement Project City of San Bruno Response to Comments April 2025 The City is both the proponent and the Lead Agency for the proposed project. The proposed project does not require permit approval from other regulatory agencies. The proposed tank will require State Water Resources Control Board, Division of Drinking Water is a Responsible Agency for this project and will need to approve the water supply permit amendment. approval prior to commission of the tank (bringing the tank on line). An easement from the California Department of Transportation may be required if the City chooses to utilize the Caltrans on/off ramp property adjacent to Cunningham Way for staging. Page 72: Franciscan onion, (Allium peninsulare-var. franciscanum), CRPR 1B.2; bent-flowered fiddleneck (Amsinckia lunaris), CRPR 1B.2; and western leatherwood (Dirca occidentalis), CRPR 1B.2. These species have a low potential to occur because although there are nearby occurrences and/or the habitat type is potentially suitable, the project site is developed with a water tank, isolated from natural habitat areas, and often disturbed by human activity. The eucalyptus and oak woodland on the site also lacks a well-developed understory, and eucalyptus trees are known to be allelopathic (toxic to understory plants). The vegetated staging area (Alternative 2) is small, surrounded by urban development, dominated by nonnative and/or invasive vegetation, and is considered unlikely to support special-status plant species. Staging area Alternatives 1 and 3 are developed and have no potential to support special-status plants. Based on the more detailed information on these species provided below, these species are very unlikely to occur on the project site or staging areas and are not expected to be impacted by the project. Franciscan onion: The closest CNDDB record to the project site is approximately 0.2 mile to the west; however, this record is from 1950 and it is a large polygon for which the exact location is unknown, described only as “North of San Andreas Lake.” Of the other four records within five miles of the project site, three are recent (from 2008 and 2016) but are over 4.5 miles south of the project site near the Crystal Springs Reservoir, where there is open space and habitat conditions are substantially different than those of the project site. The last record within five miles is from Burlingame in 1895 and the record says, “needs fieldwork.” This species often occurs in serpentine and requires volcanic and/or clay soils, none of which is present at the project site or staging areas. Soils at the project site and staging areas are primarily Orthents, cut and fills (Types 121, 122, 124, and 133; NRCS Web Soil Survey 2025), which are frequently found in urban areas. Thus, due to the lack of suitable habitat or nearby recent occurrences in habitat similar to the project site and staging areas, this species is very unlikely to occur on the project site or staging areas. Western leatherwood: There are 11 CNDDB records of western leatherwood within five miles of the project site, all in the open space lands surrounding the San Andreas and Crystal Springs Reservoirs. The closest occurrence to the project site is about 1.3 miles to the west north of Crystal Springs Reservoir. All of these records are in areas of native forest, woodland, and scrubland habitats absent from the project site and staging areas. The site and staging areas also lack the mesic habitat required by this species. Thus, due to the lack of suitable habitat or

120 of 496

Page 16 ends

Water Tank 1 (Cunningham Tank) Replacement Project City of San Bruno Response to Comments April 2025 nearby recent occurrences in habitat similar to the project site and staging areas, this species is very unlikely to occur on the project site or staging areas. Bent-flowered Fiddleneck: The only CNDDB record of bent-flowered fiddleneck within five miles of the project site is from San Bruno Mountain in 1963, and the exact location is unknown. According to the Jepson Herbarium, this species is found on gravelly slopes, grassland, and openings in woodland, often in serpentine (Jepson Herbarium 2025). There are no gravelly slopes or serpentine on the project site or staging areas, and the grassland at staging area Alternative 2 is dominated by fast-growing nonnative annual species that would likely outcompete this species. Thus, due to the lack of suitable habitat or nearby recent occurrences and the prevalence of invasive nonnative species, this species is very unlikely to occur on the project site or staging areas. Page 132: a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade surface or ground water quality? Less Than Significant Impact. The project is required to obtain coverage under the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Construction General Permit as the project would impact more than one acre of land and construction activities could indirectly cause degradation of surface and/or ground water quality due to potential erosion and transport of fine sediments downstream from the construction area. As noted in Section 2.4, Table 2.4-1, project specifications require the contractor to prepare and implement a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP). Additionally, the contractor shall be responsible for monitoring for the presence of contaminated soil and/or groundwater during the course of the work. Before being taken out of service, the water in the old tank would be used to supply customers; the last few feet in the tank would be drained via the drain valve into a storm drain. However, a dechlorination system would be installed to remove chlorine or chloramine from the water before the drinking water enters the storm drainage system, thereby reducing the impact to water quality. Further, the contractor shall be required to comply with erosion control measures to prevent run-off of sediment and other unsuitable materials to from entering the storm drain system. For post-construction stormwater quality, the project will conform to all applicable stormwater discharge regulations and requirements contained in the San Bruno Municipal Code (Sec. 10.18), as well as all applicable provisions of the Municipal Regional Permit (MRP) regarding new development and redevelopment and construction site controls, Provisions C.3 and C.6, respectively. With implementation of these measures, project construction would not violate water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or substantially degrade surface or ground water quality. Impacts would be less than significant. Page 170: HMH. 2004. Arborist Report for the Cunningham Water Tank 1, San Bruno, CA. Prepared for Lee & Ro. January 3, 2004. Jepson Herbarium. 2025. The University and Jepson Herbaria, University of California, Berkeley. Jepson Eflora: Taxon Page, Amsinckia lunaris, bent-flowered fiddleneck. Accessed March 20, 2025 at: https://ucjeps.berkeley.edu/eflora/eflora_display.php?tid=13139

121 of 496

Page 17 ends

Water Tank 1 (Cunningham Tank) Replacement Project City of San Bruno Response to Comments April 2025 Lee & Ro. 2024a. City Of San Bruno Water Tank No. 1 (Cunningham) Replacement Project90% Design City Project No. 85100, February 2024. Page 171: Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS). 2025. Web Soil Survey. Accessed March 20, 2025 at: https://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov/app/ State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB). 2022. GeoTracker Database. Accessed July 2023 at https://geotracker.waterboards.ca.gov/map/?CMD=runreport&myaddress=313+Fairchild+Drive%2C+Mountain+view+ca.

122 of 496

This page left blank intentionally

123 of 496

Attachment 1 Public Comment Letters

124 of 496

This page left blank intentionally

125 of 496

State of California Natural Resources Agency GAVIN NEWSOM, Governor DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND WILDLIFECHARLTON H. BONHAM, Director Bay Delta Region 2825 Cordelia Road, Suite 100 Fairfield, CA 94534 (707) 428-2002www.wildlife.ca.gov Conserving Californias Wildlife Since 1870
February 27, 2025 Sandrine Ganry, Senior Engineer City of San Bruno 567 El Camino Real San Bruno, CA 94066 [email protected] Subject: Water Tank 1 (Cunningham Tank) Replacement Project, Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration, SCH No. 2025020008, City of San Bruno, San Mateo County Dear Sandrine Ganry: The California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) received a Notice of Intent to Adopt a Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) from the City of San Bruno (City) for the Water Tank 1 (Cunningham Tank) Replacement Project (Project) pursuant the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and CEQA Guidelines.1 Thank you for the opportunity to provide comments and recommendations regarding those activities involved in the Project that may affect California fish and wildlife. Likewise, we appreciate the opportunity to provide comments regarding those aspects of the Project that CDFW, by law, may be required to carry out or approve through the exercise of its own regulatory authority under the Fish and Game Code. CDFW ROLE CDFW is Californias Trustee Agency for fish and wildlife resources and holds those resources in trust by statute for all the people of the State. (Fish & G. Code, §§ 711.7, subd. (a) & 1802; Pub. Resources Code, § 21070; CEQA Guidelines § 15386, subd. (a).) CDFW, in its trustee capacity, has jurisdiction over the conservation, protection, and management of fish, wildlife, native plants, and habitat necessary for biologically sustainable populations of those species. (Id., § 1802.) Similarly, for purposes of CEQA, CDFW is charged by law to provide, as available, biological expertise during public agency environmental review efforts, focusing specifically on projects and related activities that have the potential to adversely affect fish and wildlife resources. CDFW is also submitting comments as a Responsible Agency under CEQA. (Pub. Resources Code, § 21069; CEQA Guidelines, § 15381.) CDFW expects that it may need to exercise regulatory authority as provided by the Fish and Game Code. As proposed, for example, the Project may be subject to CDFWs Lake and Streambed Alteration (LSA) regulatory authority. (Fish & G. Code, § 1600 et seq.) Likewise, to the extent implementation of the Project as proposed may result in take as defined by State law of any species protected under the California Endangered Species Act (CESA, Fish & G. Code, § 2050 et seq.), the project proponent may seek related take authorization as provided by the Fish and Game Code. California Endangered Species Act and Native Plant Protection Act8 Please be advised that a CESA Incidental Take Permit (ITP) must be obtained if the Project has the potential to result in take of plants or animals listed under CESA or Native Plant Protection Act (NPPA), either during construction or over the life of the Project. Under CESA, take is defined as to hunt, pursue, catch, capture, or kill, or attempt to hunt, pursue, catch, capture or kill. Issuance of an ITP is subject to CEQA documentation. If the Project will impact CESA or NPPA listed species, early consultation with CDFW is encouraged, as significant modification to the Project and 1 CEQA is codified in the California Public Resources Code in section 21000 et seq. The CEQA Guidelines are found in Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations, commencing with section 15000.

126 of 496

Sandrine Ganry City of San Bruno February 27, 2025 Page 2 mitigation measures may be required to obtain an ITP. Issuance of an ITP is subject to CEQA documentation; the CEQA document must specify impacts, mitigation measures, and a mitigation monitoring and reporting program. Fully protected species may not be taken or possessed at any time (Fish and Game Code, §§ 3511, 4700, 5050, and 5515. CEQA requires a Mandatory Finding of Significance if a Project is likely to substantially impact threatened or endangered species (Pub. Resources Code, §§ 21001(c), 21083, and CEQA Guidelines §§ 15380, 15064, 15065). Impacts must be avoided or mitigated to less-than-significant levels unless the CEQA Lead Agency makes and supports Findings of Overriding Consideration (FOC). The CEQA Lead Agencys FOC does not eliminate the Project proponents obligation to comply with Fish and Game Code, § 2080 et. seq. Lake and Streambed Alteration CDFW requires an LSA Notification, pursuant to Fish and Game Code section 1600 et seq., for Project activities affecting lakes or streams and associated riparian habitat. Notification is required for any activity that may substantially divert or obstruct the natural flow; change or use material from the bed, channel, or bank (including associated riparian or wetland resources); or deposit or dispose of material where it may pass into a river, lake, or stream. Work within ephemeral streams, drainage ditches, washes, watercourses with a subsurface flow, and floodplains are generally subject to notification requirements. In addition, infrastructure installed beneath such aquatic features, such as through hydraulic directional drilling, is also generally subject to notification requirements. Any impacts to the mainstems, tributaries and floodplains or associated riparian habitat would likely require an LSA Notification. CDFW, as a responsible agency under CEQA, will consider the IS/MND for the Project. CDFW may not execute a final LSA Agreement until it has complied with CEQA as the Responsible Agency. Raptors and Other Nesting Birds CDFW has authority over actions that may result in the disturbance or destruction of active nest sites or the unauthorized take of birds. Fish and Game Code sections protecting birds, their eggs, and nests include §§ 3503 (regarding unlawful take, possession or needless destruction of the nests or eggs of any bird), 3503.5 (regarding the take, possession or destruction of any birds-of-prey or their nests or eggs), and 3513 (regarding unlawful take of any migratory nongame bird). Migratory birds are also protected under the federal Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA). PROJECT DESCRIPTION SUMMARY Proponent: City of San Bruno Objective: The objective of the Project is to replace an existing 2.5-million-gallon, seismically deficient welded steel potable water tank with a new 3.5-million-gallon prestressed concrete water tank. Primary Project activities include removing the existing tank, constructing the partially buried new tank in the same footprint, revising the arrangement and depth of the waterlines and drainage at the site, as well as widening the existing access road, construction a new retaining wall and new chemical building with a retaining wall, and replacing an existing draining pipe. Location: The Project is located at the cross streets, Jenevein Avenue and the Interstate-280 (I-280) North on-ramp, San Bruno, CA 94066, in San Mateo County; Latitude 37.615868, Longitude -122.423177; APN 019-300-140. Timeframe: TBD COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS CDFW offers the comments and recommendations below to assist the City in adequately identifying and/or mitigating the Projects significant, or potentially significant, direct and

127 of 496

Sandrine Ganry City of San Bruno February 27, 2025 Page 3 indirect impacts on fish and wildlife (biological) resources. Editorial comments or other suggestions may also be included to improve the document. I. Project Description and Related Impact ShortcomingWould the Project have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special-status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by CDFW or USFWS? COMMENT 1: Nesting Birds; Page 78 Issue: Nesting birds, including a variety of common nesting and migratory bird species have the potential to nest on the ground, in trees, on structures, or in vegetation within and in the vicinity of the Project area. The IS/MND states that Project construction could disturb special-status and common nesting birds in the vicinity of the Project alignment due to construction noise and activity, and such disturbance could cause stress-related behavior changes or even nest abandonment. The IS/MND includes Mitigation Measure BIO-1 to protect nesting birds, yet this measure is not sufficient to reduce potential impact to less-than-significant levels. Specifically, the nesting bird season described in the IS/MND is not inclusive of early-season owl breeding or late-season raptor breeding. In addition, Mitigation Measure BIO-1 does not include a sufficient survey radius to ensure all potentially impacted nesting birds will be detected or ensure sufficient buffer distances will be prescribed from nesting birds. If construction commences during the nesting season without sufficiently sized nest buffers in place, or if construction activities occur without a qualified biologist having performed appropriately timed breeding bird surveys, nesting birds, as stated in the IS/MND, may be impacted directly through the removal of nest structures, or indirectly through localized disturbance sufficient to cause nest abandonment, a potentially significant impact under CEQA. Specific impact, why impact would occur, and evidence impact would be significant: The federal MBTA and California Fish and Game Code protect migratory and nesting birds, including species with potential to occur in the Project area. The nesting seasons for owls, passerines, and raptors range from January 15- September 15, February 15- August 30, and February 15- September 15, respectively. No-disturbance buffers for any bird nests identified in pre-construction surveys should be of a sufficient, species-specific size to protect young birds until they have fledged and are foraging independently. Buffers for passerines, accipiters, and buteos should be a minimum of 250 feet, 500 feet, and 1,000 feet, respectively. The no-disturbance buffers proposed in the IS/MND nesting bird measure are not adequately sized to protect buteos, which require larger no-disturbance buffers than their smaller, accipiter kin. Recommendation 1: CDFW recommends the IS/MND include sufficient avoidance and minimization measures to protect nesting birds by incorporating the following mitigation measure to reduce potential impacts to less-than-significant levels: Recommended Nesting Bird Mitigation Measure: If Project grading or construction is scheduled to take place between January 15 September 15, a pre-construction survey of the project vicinity for nesting birds shall be conducted by a qualified biologist experienced with the nesting behavior of bird species of the region. The survey shall determine if active nests are present within the planned area of disturbance or within 250 feet for passerines, 500 feet for accipiters and 1,000 feet for buteos. The survey shall be performed no more than 7 days prior to the commencement of construction activities, and a second

128 of 496

Sandrine Ganry City of San Bruno February 27, 2025 Page 4 focused survey shall be conducted within 48 hours prior to construction activities that would occur during the nesting/breeding season. If ground disturbance activities are delayed following a survey, then an additional pre-construction survey shall be conducted such that no more than two weeks will have elapsed between the last survey and the commencement of ground disturbance activities. If a lapse of Project-related activities of seven days or longer occurs, another focused survey will be conducted before Project activities can be reinitiated. If an active bird nest is found within survey radii, species-specific measures shall be prepared by a qualified biologist and implemented to prevent abandonment of the active nest. A protective buffer distance shall be established by a qualified biologist based on the conditions of the site, such as whether the nest is in a line of sight of the construction and the sensitivity of the birds nesting. Typical protective buffers are as follows: 1) 250 feet for passerines, 2) 500 feet for accipiters, and 3) 1,000 feet for buteos. No Project personnel or equipment shall be allowed to enter the protective buffer until the qualified biologist determines that the young have fully fledged and will no longer be adversely affected by the Project. The qualified biologist shall observe any identified active nests prior to the start of any construction-related activities to establish a behavioral baseline of the adults and any nestlings, and the nest site(s) shall be monitored by the biologist periodically to see if the birds are stressed by the construction activities and if the protective buffer needs to be increased. The perimeter of the nest setback zone shall be fenced or adequately demarcated with stakes and flagging at 20-foot intervals, and construction personnel and activities restricted from the area. A survey report by the qualified biologist verifying that no active nests are present, or that the young have fledged, shall be submitted prior to initiation of grading or construction in the nest-setback zone. The qualified biologist shall serve as a biological monitor during those periods when construction activities occur near active nest areas to ensure that no inadvertent impacts on these nests occur. All buffers shall be shown on all sets of construction drawings. COMMENT 2: Special-Status Plants; Page 78 Issue: The IS/MND identifies the potential for special-status plant species to occur within the Project area, including Franciscan onion (Allium peninsulare var. franciscanum), western leatherwood (Dirca occidentalis), and bent-flowered fiddleneck (Amsinckia lunaris), yet the IS/MND does not provide avoidance, minimization or mitigation measures to address potential temporary or permanent impacts to these species due to Project development. Specific impact, why impact would occur, and evidence impact would be significant: Franciscan onion, western leatherwood, and bent-flowered fiddleneck have a California Rare Plant Ranks (CRPR) of 1B.2. Plants with a CRPR of 1B are rare throughout their range, endemic to California, and are seriously or fairly threatened. Most plants that are ranked 1B have declined significantly over the last century. The additional threat rank of 0.2 indicates that 20 to 80 percent of their occurrences are threatened, respectively. Consistent with CEQA Guidelines, section 15380, the status of special-status plants as CRPR 1 or 2 species qualifies them as endangered, rare, or threatened species under CEQA (see: https://www.cnps.org/rare-plants/california-rare-plant-ranks). If special-status plants occur within or adjacent to Project sites and would be directly or indirectly impacted by Project development, the Project may result in a substantial reduction in the number or restriction in the range of endangered, rare, or threatened species, a mandatory finding of significance pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15065, subdivision (a). The conservation of special-status native plants is essential to maintaining biodiversity in the California Bay Area. Native plants are better adapted to the local environment, allowing them to grow more efficiently, require less maintenance, and

129 of 496

Sandrine Ganry City of San Bruno February 27, 2025 Page 5 provide habitat resources for other native species (Berthon et al. 2020). Industrial land development is a leading threat to endangered plant communities, causing resource depletion through direct habitat replacement and increased input of pollutants into the environment (Czech et al. 2000). Limited distribution and small population sizes of special-status plants can increase the difficulty in species detection, and robust survey efforts are imperative to determine whether plant species protected under the CESA and NPPA occur within the Project area. Robust and timely survey efforts are a necessary first step in avoiding take of listed species. Recommendation 3: CDFW recommends the IS/MND incorporate the following mitigation measure to avoid, minimize, and mitigate potential impacts on special-status plants that have the potential to occur within the Project area. Recommended Special-Status Plant Mitigation Measure: Prior to construction at all Project sites not composed of hardscape or ornamental vegetation, a qualified biologist shall conduct botanical surveys during the appropriate blooming period and conditions for all special-status plants that have the potential to occur at or adjacent to each site where plants could be indirectly impacted. Surveys shall be conducted following CDFWs Protocol for Surveying and Evaluating Impacts to Special Status Native Plant Populations and Sensitive Natural Communities (https://wildlife.ca.gov/Conservation/Survey-Protocols#377281280-plants) and include checking reference sites for target special-status plant species. Per this protocol, more than one year of surveys may be necessary if, for example, lack of rain inhibits growth of annual plants. If any special-status plant species are observed, the Project shall fully avoid direct and indirect impacts to all individuals and provide an avoidance plan to CDFW and obtain CDFW written approval of the plan. If full avoidance is not possible, Project activities may not commence until the Project has consulted with CDFW and obtained CDFWs written approval prior to the start of construction, which may include salvaging topsoil, transplanting and monitoring individuals, compensatory habitat mitigation, or other measures, based on the life history of the species and other relevant factors. ENVIRONMENTAL DATA CEQA requires that information developed in environmental impact reports and negative declarations be incorporated into a database which may be used to make subsequent or supplemental environmental determinations. (Pub. Resources Code, § 21003, subd. (e).) Accordingly, please report any special-status species and natural communities detected during Project surveys to the California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB). The CNDDB field survey form can be filled out and submitted online at the following link: https://wildlife.ca.gov/Data/CNDDB/Submitting-Data. The types of information reported to CNDDB can be found at the following link: https://www.wildlife.ca.gov/Data/CNDDB/Plants-and-Animals. ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENT FILING FEES The Project, as proposed, would have an impact on fish and/or wildlife, and assessment of environmental document filing fees is necessary. Fees are payable upon filing of the Notice of Determination by the Lead Agency and serve to help defray the cost of environmental review by CDFW. Payment of the environmental document filing fee is required in order for the underlying project approval to be operative, vested, and final. (See Cal. Code Regs, tit. 14, § 753.5; Fish & G. Code, § 711.4; Pub. Resources Code, § 21089.)CONCLUSION CDFW appreciates the opportunity to comment on the IS/MND to assist the City in identifying and mitigating Project impacts on biological resources.

130 of 496

Sandrine Ganry City of San Bruno February 27, 2025 Page 6 Questions regarding this letter or further coordination should be directed to Shannon Husband, Environmental Scientist, at (707) 337-1364 or [email protected]; or Wes Stokes, Senior Environmental Scientist (Supervisory), at [email protected]. Sincerely, Erin Chappell Regional Manager Bay Delta Region ec: Office of Planning and Research, State Clearinghouse, Sacramento REFERENCES Berthon, K., Thomas, F., and Bekessy S. 2020. The role of nativeness in urban greening to support animal biodiversity. Landscape and Urban Planning 205 (2021) 103959. Czech, Brian & Krausman, Paul & Devers, Patrick. (2000). Economic Associations Among Causes of Species Endangerment in the United States. Bioscience. 50. 10.1641/0006-3568(2000)050[0593:EAACOS]2.0.CO;2.

131 of 496

State Water Resources Control BoardMarch 5, 2025Sandrine GanryCity of San Bruno567 El Camino RealSan Bruno, CA 94066CITY OF SAN BRUNO (CITY), INITIAL STUDY/NEGATIVE DECLARATION (IS/ND), FOR THE WATER TANK 1 (CUNNINGHAM TANK) REPLACEMENT PROJECT (PROJECT); STATE CLEARINGHOUSE #2025020008Dear Sandrin Ganry: Thank you for the opportunity to review the IS/MND for the proposed Project. The State Water Resources Control Board, Division of Drinking Water (State Water Board, DDW) is responsible for issuing water supply permits pursuant to the Safe Drinking Water Act. This Project is within the jurisdiction of the State Water Board, DDW Santa Clara District. DDW Santa Clara District issues domestic water supply permit amendments to public water systems pursuant to Waterworks Standards (Title 22 California Code of Regulations [Cal Code Regs.] chapter 16 et. seq.). A public water system requires a water supply permit amendment when changes are made to a domestic water supply source, storage, or treatment and for the operation of new water system components- as specified in the Cal. Code Regs. § 64556. The City will need to apply for a water supply permit amendment for the operation of a new storage reservoir.The State Water Board, DDW, as a responsible agency under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA, has the following comments on the Citys IS/MND:The IS/MND mentions the new tank will be built over the same footprint as theexisting tank (PDF page 21). In the Project Description, please discuss if waterwill be stored on-site in temporary tanks or if there are other plans for thetransition of the tank water, how service will be maintained, and how the water inthe old tank be transferred, used, or discharged. Please then discuss impactsassociated with these plans in the checklist, as needed.Please remove the statement No responsible or trustee agencies have beenidentified (PDF page 21). The State Water Board, DDW, will need to approve awater supply permit amendment for the addition of a new distribution reservoir,100,000-gallon capacity or greater, to the distribution system (Cal. Code. Regs.§64556). As a result, the State Water Board, DDW is a responsible agency forthe Project.

132 of 496

Sandrine Ganry - 2 - March 5, 2025Please remove the statement The proposed project does not require permitapproval form other regulatory agencies (PDF page 59). As mentioned above,the State Water Resources Control Board, DDW will need to approve a watersupply permit amendment for the Project.The IS/MND states The Project would have a beneficial impact on watersupplies available during dry years (PDF page 181). Please explain how this isthe case, or remove, as needed.When the CEQA review process is completed, please forward the following items with the permit application to the State Water Board, DDW Santa Clara District Office at [email protected]:The IS/MND and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan (MMRP);All comment letters received and the lead agency responses as appropriate;The Resolution or Board Minutes adopting the IS/MND and MMRP, andapproving the Project; andThe date stamped Notice of Determination filed at the San Mateo County ClerksOffice and the State Clearinghouse.Please contact Lori Schmitz of the State Water Board at (916) 449-5285 or [email protected], for questions regarding this comment letter. Sincerely,Lori SchmitzEnvironmental ScientistDivision of Financial AssistanceSpecial Project Review Unit1001 I Street, 16thfloorSacramento, CA 95814Cc: State ClearinghouseVan TsangDistrict EngineerSanta Clara District Joshua WidjajaWater Resources Control EngineerSanta Clara District

133 of 496

“Provide a safe and reliable transportation network that serves all people and respects the environment.” DISTRICT 4 OFFICE OF REGIONAL AND COMMUNITY PLANNINGP.O. BOX 23660, MS–10D | OAKLAND, CA 94623-0660 www.dot.ca.gov March 5, 2025 SCH #: 2025020008GTS #: 35316 GTS ID: 04-SM-2025-00655 Co/Rt/Pm: SM/280/R20.113 Sandrine Ganry, Senior EngineerCity of San Bruno, Public Works Department567 El Camino RealSan Bruno, CA 94066Re: (Cunningham Tank) Replacement Project Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) Dear Sandrine Ganry:Thank you for including the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) in the environmental review process for the Water Tank 1 (Cunningham Tank) Replacement Project. The Local Development Review (LDR) Program reviews land use projects and plans to ensure consistency with our mission and state planning priorities. The following comments are based on our review of the February 2025 draft MND. Please note this correspondence does not indicate an official position by Caltrans on this project and is for informational purposes only. Project Understanding The purpose of the proposed project is to replace an outdated and seismically deficient water tank in the City of San Bruno. The project would also include widening of the access road, construction of a retaining wall along the access road, construction of a new chemical building with a retaining wall, replacement of an existing drainage pipe, and revising arrangement and depth of waterlines and site drainage among other components to accommodate the larger capacity of the new tank. The project site is directly adjacent Caltrans right-of-way at the northbound Interstate 280 (I-280) on-ramp from Cunningham Way. Geotechnical The Caltrans Office of Geotechnical Design reviewed the February 2024 Geotechnical Report for the proposed project and would like to note or clarify the following:

134 of 496

Sandrine Ganry, Senior EngineerMarch 5, 2025Page 2
“Provide a safe and reliable transportation network that serves all people and respects the environment.” Section 3.1, Surface Conditions (page 4): Please clarify the slope ratio of 0.5H:1V, which is different than the ratio of 1.75H:1V that was provided in Section 1.1 (page 1) of this report.Section 3.6, Seismic Design Parameters (page 5): This section states that the project is classified as Site Class C per Chapter 20 of American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) 7-16 standard. The classification of Site Class C is inconsistent with thereferenced ENGEO Geotechnical Data Report, dated July 13, 2023. Please confirm the correct classification. Additionally, please verify whether ASCE 7-22 should be used for this project design rather than ASCE 7-16. Section 4.1, Geotechnical Units and Properties (page 7): This section states that the onsite undisturbed soils are anticipated to be mostly composed of lightly cemented, dense to very dense, coarse-grained soils whereas the attachedENGEO boring log showed medium stiff to stiff sandy silt and dense silty sand. Please clarify the composition of the onsite undisturbed soils.Table 2, Interpreted Units and Adopted Geotechnical Properties (page 7): Please provide references for the cohesions for Fill and Collovium, Weathered Colma Formation (SM-SC), and Colma Formation (SM-SC) as they seem too high to combine with a friction angle of 30 degrees. Please clarify if cohesion should be ignored in slope stability performance for long-term conditions.Section 4.2.3.7, Temporary Slopes and Shoring (page 12): This section states an assumption of an active pressure of 25 pounds per square foot (psf) and passive equivalent pressure of 550 psf. Please clarify and/or provide references for both the active pressure and passive equivalent pressure. Please confirm whether sloping ground condition was considered for the active pressure.Section 4.3, Soil Nail Wall (page 13): This section states the wall should be designed assuming a slope stability seismic coefficient of Kh=0.43g for internal stability and Kh=0.29g for global stability. Please verify these Kh values. The section also states the wall should be designed assuming a Soil to Ground Bond Capacity of 5.65 kilopound-force per square foot (ksf). This grout bond capacity seems too high. Please clarify and/or provide references of any soil nail test performed in a similar condition. Hydrology Please ensure that any increase in storm water runoff to State Drainage Systems or Facilities be treated, contained on project site, and metered to preconstruction levels. Any floodplain impacts must be documented and mitigated.

135 of 496

Sandrine Ganry, Senior EngineerMarch 5, 2025Page 3
“Provide a safe and reliable transportation network that serves all people and respects the environment.” The proposed project may impact the existing drainage systems along the northbound I-280 on-ramp from Cunningham Way. The Office of Hydraulics would like to ensurethat no surface flow will get into the roadside ditch between the project site and theon-ramp and that no discharge or runoff from the project will flow into the roadsideditch during the construction phase. In the Encroachment Permit application, pleaseprovide plan views, profiles, cross-sections, details of all drainage facilities, andhydrologic calculations showing pre- and post-construction conditions.Encroachment Permit Please note that Section 2.5, Required Approvals (page 39) of the draft MND needs to be revised. The draft MND generally mentions that an encroachment permit will be needed from Caltrans for staging near the ramp, however this section contemplates an easement from Caltrans for the staging. Please be advised that Caltrans will not grant superior rights to the City for this work. Please revise to state that the staging will be done under an encroachment permit, consistent with how it is stated throughout other portions of the report. Please be advised that a Caltrans encroachment permit is needed for the proposed soil nail retaining wall. An Encroachment Policy Exception may be required due to the project site’s adjacency to an access-controlled freeway facility. Please provide design plans for the proposed retaining wall for encroachment permit review. Caltrans would like to ensure that the design of the soil nail wall will mitigate impacts to the I-280 on-ramp embankment. The Office of Encroachment Permit requires 100% complete design plans and supporting documents to review and circulate the permit application package. The review and approval of encroachment projects is managed through the Encroachment Permits Office Process (EPOP) or the Project Delivery Quality Management Assessment Process (QMAP), depending on project scope, complexity, and completeness of the application. Please use the following resources to determine the appropriate review process: - TR-0416 Applicant’s Checklist (link)- Flowchart, Figure 1.2 in Chapter 100 – The Permit Function, CaltransEncroachment Permit Manual (link)The permit approval may take 30 days to 6 months or more depending on the project scope, size, complexity, completeness, compliance with policies and quality of the permit package submitted. Projects requiring exceptions to design standards or external agency approvals may need more time to process.

136 of 496

Sandrine Ganry, Senior EngineerMarch 5, 2025Page 4
“Provide a safe and reliable transportation network that serves all people and respects the environment.” To obtainmore information and download the permit application, please visit CaltransEncroachment Permits (link). When the applicant is ready to pursue a Caltransencroachment permit, please [email protected] initiate the process.Construction-Related Impacts Project work that requires movement of oversized or excessive load vehicles on State roadways requires a transportation permit that is issued by Caltrans. To apply, please visit Caltrans Transportation Permits (link).Prior to construction, coordination may be required with Caltrans to develop a Transportation Management Plan (TMP) to reduce construction traffic impacts to the State Transportation Network (STN).Lead AgencyAs the Lead Agency, the City is responsible for all project mitigation, including any needed improvements to the STN. The project’s fair share contribution, financing, scheduling, implementation responsibilities and lead agency monitoring should be fully discussed for all proposed mitigation measures. Equitable Access If any Caltrans facilities are impacted by the project, those facilities must meet American Disabilities Act (ADA) Standards after project completion. As well, the project must maintain bicycle and pedestrian access during construction. These access considerations support Caltrans’ equity mission to provide a safe, sustainable, and equitable transportation network for all users. Thank you again for including Caltrans in the environmental review process. Should you have any questions regarding this letter, please contact Luana Chen, Transportation Planner, via [email protected]. For future early coordination opportunities or project referrals, please visit Caltrans LDR website (link) or contact [email protected]. Sincerely, YUNSHENG LUOBranch Chief, Local Development ReviewOffice of Regional and Community Planningc: State Clearinghouse

137 of 496

Attachment 2 Brierly Associates Memorandum April 18, 2025

138 of 496

This page left blank intentionally

139 of 496

140 of 496

141 of 496

142 of 496

143 of 496

February 27, 2025 Sandrine Ganry, Senior Engineer City of San Bruno 567 El Camino Real San Bruno, CA 94066 [email protected] Subject: Water Tank 1 (Cunningham Tank) Replacement Project, Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration, SCH No. 2025020008, City of San Bruno, San Mateo County Dear Sandrine Ganry: The California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) received a Notice of Intent to Adopt a Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) from the City of San Bruno (City) for the Water Tank 1 (Cunningham Tank) Replacement Project (Project) pursuant the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and CEQA Guidelines.1 Thank you for the opportunity to provide comments and recommendations regarding those activities involved in the Project that may affect California fish and wildlife. Likewise, we appreciate the opportunity to provide comments regarding those aspects of the Project that CDFW, by law, may be required to carry out or approve through the exercise of its own regulatory authority under the Fish and Game Code. CDFW ROLE Trustee Agency for fish and wildlife resources and holds those resources in trust by statute for all the people of the State. (Fish & G. Code, §§ 711.7, subd. (a) & 1802; Pub. Resources Code, § 21070; CEQA Guidelines § 15386, subd. (a).) CDFW, in its trustee capacity, has jurisdiction over the conservation, protection, and management of fish, wildlife, native plants, and habitat necessary for biologically sustainable populations of those species. (Id., § 1802.) Similarly, for purposes of CEQA, CDFW is charged by law to provide, as available, biological expertise during public agency environmental review efforts, focusing specifically on projects and related activities that have the potential to adversely affect fish and wildlife resources. CDFW is also submitting comments as a Responsible Agency under CEQA. (Pub. Resources Code, § 21069; CEQA Guidelines, § 15381.) CDFW expects that it may need to exercise regulatory authority as provided by the Fish and Game Code. As Lake and Streambed Alteration (LSA) regulatory authority. (Fish & G. Code, § 1600 et seq.) Likewise, to the State law of any species protected under the California Endangered Species Act (CESA, Fish & G. Code, § 2050 et seq.), the project proponent may seek related take authorization as provided by the Fish and Game Code. California Endangered Species Act and Native Plant Protection Act8 Please be advised that a CESA Incidental Take Permit (ITP) must be obtained if the Native Plant Protection Act (NPPA), either during construction or over the life of the documentation. If the Project will impact CESA or NPPA listed species, early consultation with CDFW is encouraged, as significant modification to the Project and 1 CEQA is codified in the California Public Resources Code in section 21000 et seq.

144 of 496

Sandrine Ganry City of San Bruno February 27, 2025 Page 2 mitigation measures may be required to obtain an ITP. Issuance of an ITP is subject to CEQA documentation; the CEQA document must specify impacts, mitigation measures, and a mitigation monitoring and reporting program. Fully protected species may not be taken or possessed at any time (Fish and Game Code, §§ 3511, 4700, 5050, and 5515. CEQA requires a Mandatory Finding of Significance if a Project is likely to substantially impact threatened or endangered species (Pub. Resources Code, §§ 21001(c), 21083, and CEQA Guidelines §§ 15380, 15064, 15065). Impacts must be avoided or mitigated to less-than-significant levels unless the CEQA Lead Agency makes and supports Findings of Lake and Streambed Alteration CDFW requires an LSA Notification, pursuant to Fish and Game Code section 1600 et seq., for Project activities affecting lakes or streams and associated riparian habitat. Notification is required for any activity that may substantially divert or obstruct the natural flow; change or use material from the bed, channel, or bank (including associated riparian or wetland resources); or deposit or dispose of material where it may pass into a river, lake, or stream. Work within ephemeral streams, drainage ditches, washes, watercourses with a subsurface flow, and floodplains are generally subject to notification requirements. In addition, infrastructure installed beneath such aquatic features, such as through hydraulic directional drilling, is also generally subject to notification requirements. Any impacts to the mainstems, tributaries and floodplains or associated riparian habitat would likely require an LSA Notification. CDFW, as a responsible agency under CEQA, will consider the IS/MND for the Project. CDFW may not execute a final LSA Agreement until it has complied with CEQA as the Responsible Agency. Raptors and Other Nesting Birds CDFW has authority over actions that may result in the disturbance or destruction of active nest sites or the unauthorized take of birds. Fish and Game Code sections protecting birds, their eggs, and nests include §§ 3503 (regarding unlawful take, possession or needless destruction of the nests or eggs of any bird), 3503.5 (regarding the take, possession or destruction of any birds-of-prey or their nests or eggs), and 3513 (regarding unlawful take of any migratory nongame bird). Migratory birds are also protected under the federal Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA). PROJECT DESCRIPTION SUMMARY Proponent: City of San Bruno Objective: The objective of the Project is to replace an existing 2.5-million-gallon, seismically deficient welded steel potable water tank with a new 3.5-million-gallon prestressed concrete water tank. Primary Project activities include removing the existing tank, constructing the partially buried new tank in the same footprint, revising the arrangement and depth of the waterlines and drainage at the site, as well as widening the existing access road, construction a new retaining wall and new chemical building with a retaining wall, and replacing an existing draining pipe. Location: The Project is located at the cross streets, Jenevein Avenue and the Interstate-280 (I-280) North on-ramp, San Bruno, CA 94066, in San Mateo County; Latitude 37.615868, Longitude -122.423177; APN 019-300-140. Timeframe: TBD COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS CDFW offers the comments and recommendations below to assist the City in adequately , or potentially significant, direct and

145 of 496

Sandrine Ganry City of San Bruno February 27, 2025 Page 3 indirect impacts on fish and wildlife (biological) resources. Editorial comments or other suggestions may also be included to improve the document. I. Project Description and Related Impact Shortcoming Would the Project have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special-status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by CDFW or USFWS? COMMENT 1: Nesting Birds; Page 78 Issue: Nesting birds, including have the potential to nest on the ground, in trees, on structures, or in vegetation within and in the vicinity of the Project area. The IS/MND states that Project construction could disturb special-status and common nesting birds in the vicinity of the Project alignment due to construction noise and activity, disturbance could cause stress-related behavior changes or even nest The IS/MND includes Mitigation Measure BIO-1 to protect nesting birds, yet this measure is not sufficient to reduce potential impact to less-than-significant levels. Specifically, the nesting bird season described in the IS/MND is not inclusive of early-season owl breeding or late-season raptor breeding. In addition, Mitigation Measure BIO-1 does not include a sufficient survey radius to ensure all potentially impacted nesting birds will be detected or ensure sufficient buffer distances will be prescribed from nesting birds. If construction commences during the nesting season without sufficiently sized nest buffers in place, or if construction activities occur without a qualified biologist having performed appropriately timed breeding bird surveys, nesting birds, as stated in the IS/may be impacted directly through the removal of nest structures, or potentially significant impact under CEQA. Specific impact, why impact would occur, and evidence impact would be significant: The federal MBTA and California Fish and Game Code protect migratory and nesting birds, including species with potential to occur in the Project area. The nesting seasons for owls, passerines, and raptors range from January 15- September 15, February 15- August 30, and February 15- September 15, respectively. No-disturbance buffers for any bird nests identified in pre-construction surveys should be of a sufficient, species-specific size to protect young birds until they have fledged and are foraging independently. Buffers for passerines, accipiters, and buteos should be a minimum of 250 feet, 500 feet, and 1,000 feet, respectively. The no-disturbance buffers proposed in the IS/MND nesting bird measure are not adequately sized to protect buteos, which require larger no-disturbance buffers than their smaller, accipiter kin. Recommendation 1: CDFW recommends the IS/MND include sufficient avoidance and minimization measures to protect nesting birds by incorporating the following mitigation measure to reduce potential impacts to less-than-significant levels: Recommended Nesting Bird Mitigation Measure: If Project grading or construction is scheduled to take place between January 15 September 15, a pre-construction survey of the project vicinity for nesting birds shall be conducted by a qualified biologist experienced with the nesting behavior of bird species of the region. The survey shall determine if active nests are present within the planned area of disturbance or within 250 feet for passerines, 500 feet for accipiters and 1,000 feet for buteos. The survey shall be performed no more than 7 days prior to the commencement of construction activities, and a second

146 of 496

147 of 496

Sandrine Ganry City of San Bruno February 27, 2025 Page 5 provide habitat resources for other native species (Berthon et al. 2020). Industrial land development is a leading threat to endangered plant communities, causing resource depletion through direct habitat replacement and increased input of pollutants into the environment (Czech et al. 2000). Limited distribution and small population sizes of special-status plants can increase the difficulty in species detection, and robust survey efforts are imperative to determine whether plant species protected under the CESA and NPPA occur within the Project area. Robust and timely survey efforts are a necessary first step in avoiding take of listed species. Recommendation 3: CDFW recommends the IS/MND incorporate the following mitigation measure to avoid, minimize, and mitigate potential impacts on special-status plants that have the potential to occur within the Project area. Recommended Special-Status Plant Mitigation Measure: Prior to construction at all Project sites not composed of hardscape or ornamental vegetation, a qualified biologist shall conduct botanical surveys during the appropriate blooming period and conditions for all special-status plants that have the potential to occur at or adjacent to each site where plants could be indirectly impacted. Surveys shall be Protocol for Surveying and Evaluating Impacts to Special Status Native Plant Populations and Sensitive Natural Communities (https://wildlife.ca.gov/Conservation/Survey-Protocols#377281280-plants) and include checking reference sites for target special-status plant species. Per this protocol, more than one year of surveys may be necessary if, for example, lack of rain inhibits growth of annual plants. If any special-status plant species are observed, the Project shall fully avoid direct and indirect impacts to all individuals and provide an avoidance plan to CDFW and obtain CDFW written approval of the plan. If full avoidance is not possible, Project activities may not commence until the Project has consulted with CDFW may include salvaging topsoil, transplanting and monitoring individuals, compensatory habitat mitigation, or other measures, based on the life history of the species and other relevant factors. ENVIRONMENTAL DATA CEQA requires that information developed in environmental impact reports and negative declarations be incorporated into a database which may be used to make subsequent or supplemental environmental determinations. (Pub. Resources Code, § 21003, subd. (e).) Accordingly, please report any special-status species and natural communities detected during Project surveys to the California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB). The CNDDB field survey form can be filled out and submitted online at the following link: https://wildlife.ca.gov/Data/CNDDB/Submitting-Data. The types of information reported to CNDDB can be found at the following link: https://www.wildlife.ca.gov/Data/CNDDB/Plants-and-Animals. ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENT FILING FEES The Project, as proposed, would have an impact on fish and/or wildlife, and assessment of environmental document filing fees is necessary. Fees are payable upon filing of the Notice of Determination by the Lead Agency and serve to help defray the cost of environmental review by CDFW. Payment of the environmental document filing fee is required in order for the underlying project approval to be operative, vested, and final. (See Cal. Code Regs, tit. 14, § 753.5; Fish & G. Code, § 711.4; Pub. Resources Code, § 21089.) CONCLUSION CDFW appreciates the opportunity to comment on the IS/MND to assist the City in identifying and mitigating Project impacts on biological resources.

148 of 496

Sandrine Ganry City of San Bruno February 27, 2025 Page 6 Questions regarding this letter or further coordination should be directed to Shannon Husband, Environmental Scientist, at (707) 337-1364 or [email protected]; or Wes Stokes, Senior Environmental Scientist (Supervisory), at [email protected]. Sincerely, Erin Chappell Regional Manager Bay Delta Region ec: Office of Planning and Research, State Clearinghouse, Sacramento REFERENCES Berthon, K., Thomas, F., and Bekessy greening to support animal biodiversity. Landscape and Urban Planning 205 (2021) 103959. Czech, Brian & Krausman, Paul & Devers, Patrick. (2000). Economic Associations Among Causes of Species Endangerment in the United States. Bioscience. 50. 10.1641/0006-3568(2000)050[0593:EAACOS]2.0.CO;2.

149 of 496

“Provide a safe and reliable transportation network that serves all people and respects the environment.” DISTRICT 4 OFFICE OF REGIONAL AND COMMUNITY PLANNINGP.O. BOX 23660, MS–10D | OAKLAND, CA 94623-0660 www.dot.ca.gov March 5, 2025 SCH #: 2025020008GTS #: 35316 GTS ID: 04-SM-2025-00655 Co/Rt/Pm: SM/280/R20.113 Sandrine Ganry, Senior EngineerCity of San Bruno, Public Works Department567 El Camino RealSan Bruno, CA 94066 Re: (Cunningham Tank) Replacement Project Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) Dear Sandrine Ganry:Thank you for including the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) in the environmental review process for the Water Tank 1 (Cunningham Tank) Replacement Project. The Local Development Review (LDR) Program reviews land use projects and plans to ensure consistency with our mission and state planning priorities. The following comments are based on our review of the February 2025 draft MND. Please note this correspondence does not indicate an official position by Caltrans on this project and is for informational purposes only. Project Understanding The purpose of the proposed project is to replace an outdated and seismically deficient water tank in the City of San Bruno. The project would also include widening of the access road, construction of a retaining wall along the access road, construction of a new chemical building with a retaining wall, replacement of an existing drainage pipe, and revising arrangement and depth of waterlines and site drainage among other components to accommodate the larger capacity of the new tank. The project site is directly adjacent Caltrans right-of-way at the northbound Interstate 280 (I-280) on-ramp from Cunningham Way. Geotechnical The Caltrans Office of Geotechnical Design reviewed the February 2024 Geotechnical Report for the proposed project and would like to note or clarify the following:

150 of 496

Sandrine Ganry, Senior EngineerMarch 5, 2025Page 2
“Provide a safe and reliable transportation network that serves all people and respects the environment.” Section 3.1, Surface Conditions (page 4): Please clarify the slope ratio of 0.5H:1V, which is different than the ratio of 1.75H:1V that was provided in Section 1.1 (page 1) of this report.Section 3.6, Seismic Design Parameters (page 5): This section states that the project is classified as Site Class C per Chapter 20 of American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) 7-16 standard. The classification of Site Class C is inconsistent with thereferenced ENGEO Geotechnical Data Report, dated July 13, 2023. Please confirm the correct classification. Additionally, please verify whether ASCE 7-22 should be used for this project design rather than ASCE 7-16. Section 4.1, Geotechnical Units and Properties (page 7): This section states that the onsite undisturbed soils are anticipated to be mostly composed of lightly cemented, dense to very dense, coarse-grained soils whereas the attached ENGEO boring log showed medium stiff to stiff sandy silt and dense silty sand. Please clarify the composition of the onsite undisturbed soils. Table 2, Interpreted Units and Adopted Geotechnical Properties (page 7): Please provide references for the cohesions for Fill and Collovium, Weathered Colma Formation (SM-SC), and Colma Formation (SM-SC) as they seem too high to combine with a friction angle of 30 degrees. Please clarify if cohesion should be ignored in slope stability performance for long-term conditions. Section 4.2.3.7, Temporary Slopes and Shoring (page 12): This section states an assumption of an active pressure of 25 pounds per square foot (psf) and passive equivalent pressure of 550 psf. Please clarify and/or provide references for both the active pressure and passive equivalent pressure. Please confirm whether sloping ground condition was considered for the active pressure. Section 4.3, Soil Nail Wall (page 13): This section states the wall should be designed assuming a slope stability seismic coefficient of Kh=0.43g for internal stability and Kh=0.29g for global stability. Please verify these Kh values. The section also states the wall should be designed assuming a Soil to Ground Bond Capacity of 5.65 kilopound-force per square foot (ksf). This grout bond capacity seems too high. Please clarify and/or provide references of any soil nail test performed in a similar condition. Hydrology Please ensure that any increase in storm water runoff to State Drainage Systems or Facilities be treated, contained on project site, and metered to preconstruction levels. Any floodplain impacts must be documented and mitigated.

151 of 496

Sandrine Ganry, Senior EngineerMarch 5, 2025Page 3
“Provide a safe and reliable transportation network that serves all people and respects the environment.” The proposed project may impact the existing drainage systems along the northbound I-280 on-ramp from Cunningham Way. The Office of Hydraulics would like to ensure that no surface flow will get into the roadside ditch between the project site and the on-ramp and that no discharge or runoff from the project will flow into the roadside ditch during the construction phase. In the Encroachment Permit application, please provide plan views, profiles, cross-sections, details of all drainage facilities, and hydrologic calculations showing pre- and post-construction conditions. Encroachment Permit Please note that Section 2.5, Required Approvals (page 39) of the draft MND needs to be revised. The draft MND generally mentions that an encroachment permit will be needed from Caltrans for staging near the ramp, however this section contemplates an easement from Caltrans for the staging. Please be advised that Caltrans will not grant superior rights to the City for this work. Please revise to state that the staging will be done under an encroachment permit, consistent with how it is stated throughout other portions of the report. Please be advised that a Caltrans encroachment permit is needed for the proposed soil nail retaining wall. An Encroachment Policy Exception may be required due to the project site’s adjacency to an access-controlled freeway facility. Please provide design plans for the proposed retaining wall for encroachment permit review. Caltrans would like to ensure that the design of the soil nail wall will mitigate impacts to the I-280 on-ramp embankment. The Office of Encroachment Permit requires 100% complete design plans and supporting documents to review and circulate the permit application package. The review and approval of encroachment projects is managed through the Encroachment Permits Office Process (EPOP) or the Project Delivery Quality Management Assessment Process (QMAP), depending on project scope, complexity, and completeness of the application. Please use the following resources to determine the appropriate review process: - TR-0416 Applicant’s Checklist (link) - Flowchart, Figure 1.2 in Chapter 100 – The Permit Function, Caltrans Encroachment Permit Manual (link) The permit approval may take 30 days to 6 months or more depending on the project scope, size, complexity, completeness, compliance with policies and quality of the permit package submitted. Projects requiring exceptions to design standards or external agency approvals may need more time to process.

152 of 496

153 of 496

State Water Resources Control BoardMarch 5, 2025Sandrine GanryCity of San Bruno567 El Camino RealSan Bruno, CA 94066CITY OF SAN BRUNO (CITY), INITIAL STUDY/NEGATIVE DECLARATION (IS/ND), FOR THE WATER TANK 1 (CUNNINGHAM TANK) REPLACEMENT PROJECT (PROJECT); STATE CLEARINGHOUSE #2025020008Dear Sandrin Ganry: Thank you for the opportunity to review the IS/MND for the proposed Project. The State Water Resources Control Board, Division of Drinking Water (State Water Board, DDW) is responsible for issuing water supply permits pursuant to the Safe Drinking Water Act. This Project is within the jurisdiction of the State Water Board, DDW Santa Clara District. DDW Santa Clara District issues domestic water supply permit amendments to public water systems pursuant to Waterworks Standards (Title 22 California Code of Regulations [Cal Code Regs.] chapter 16 et. seq.). A public water system requires a water supply permit amendment when changes are made to a domestic water supply source, storage, or treatment and for the operation of new water system components- as specified in the Cal. Code Regs. § 64556. The City will need to apply for a water supply permit amendment for the operation of a new storage reservoir.The State Water Board, DDW, as a responsible agency under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA, has the following comments on the City’s IS/MND:The IS/MND mentions the new tank will be built over the same footprint as the existing tank (PDF page 21). In the Project Description, please discuss if water will be stored on-site in temporary tanks or if there are other plans for the transition of the tank water, how service will be maintained, and how the water in the old tank be transferred, used, or discharged. Please then discuss impacts associated with these plans in the checklist, as needed.Please remove the statement “No responsible or trustee agencies have been identified” (PDF page 21). The State Water Board, DDW, will need to approve a water supply permit amendment for the addition of a new distribution reservoir, 100,000-gallon capacity or greater, to the distribution system (Cal. Code. Regs. §64556). As a result, the State Water Board, DDW is a responsible agency for the Project.

154 of 496

Sandrine Ganry - 2 - March 5, 2025Please remove the statement “The proposed project does not require permit approval form other regulatory agencies” (PDF page 59). As mentioned above, the State Water Resources Control Board, DDW will need to approve a water supply permit amendment for the Project.The IS/MND states “The Project would have a beneficial impact on water supplies available during dry years” (PDF page 181). Please explain how this is the case, or remove, as needed.When the CEQA review process is completed, please forward the following items with the permit application to the State Water Board, DDW Santa Clara District Office at [email protected]:The IS/MND and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan (MMRP);All comment letters received and the lead agency responses as appropriate; The Resolution or Board Minutes adopting the IS/MND and MMRP, and approving the Project; andThe date stamped Notice of Determination filed at the San Mateo County Clerk’s Office and the State Clearinghouse.Please contact Lori Schmitz of the State Water Board at (916) 449-5285 or [email protected], for questions regarding this comment letter. Sincerely,Lori SchmitzEnvironmental ScientistDivision of Financial AssistanceSpecial Project Review Unit1001 I Street, 16thfloorSacramento, CA 95814Cc: State ClearinghouseVan TsangDistrict EngineerSanta Clara District Joshua WidjajaWater Resources Control EngineerSanta Clara District

155 of 496

City Council Agenda Item
Staff Report

CITY OF SAN BRUNO
DATE: May 27, 2025
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Alex D. McIntyre, City Manager
PREPARED BY: Nick Pegueros, Administrative Services Director & CFO SUBJECT: Consider Adoption of Four (4) Resolutions Ratifying Side Letter Agreements with Recognized Bargaining Units as follows:

1. Resolution Ratifying a Side Letter Agreement between the City of San Bruno and the Miscellaneous Bargaining Unit Represented by Teamsters Local 856, IBT, Pertaining to the Dissolution of CityNet;

2. Resolution Ratifying a Side Letter Agreement between the City of San Bruno and the Mid-Management Bargaining Unit Represented by Teamsters Local 350, IBT, Pertaining to the Dissolution of CityNet;

3. Resolution Ratifying a Side Letter Agreement between the City of San Bruno and the San Bruno Management Employees Association, Pertaining to the Dissolution of CityNet; and

4. Resolution Ratifying a Side Letter Agreement between the City of San Bruno and the San Bruno Management Employees Association, Pertaining to the Police Chief Classification
BACKGROUND:

San Bruno CityNet Services (CityNet) has operated as an Enterprise of the City of San Bruno since 1971, originally as San Bruno Cable TV. In early 2024, the City Council reached consensus and adopted its FY25 Strategic Initiatives and Top Priorities. One of the five Top Priority Initiatives was/is “Stabilize CityNet’s Fiscal Sustainability,” which included exploration of possible new ownership of CityNet. Staff conducted financial analysis of the Enterprise with the options of operation closure or sale. A Request for Interest (RFI) was issued to gauge the private-sector’s appetite to acquire CityNet's customer base and infrastructure and received interest from one party.

As a result, on January 28, 2025, the City Council approved a Resolution authorizing an Asset Purchase Agreement with Comcast of California IX, Inc. for the sale of the San Bruno CityNet Services. The transfer CityNet to Comcast requires the elimination of multiple positions allocated to the Enterprise:
 Eleven (11) positions represented by Teamsters IBT, Local 856, Miscellaneous Bargaining Unit (856 Misc)
 One (1) position represented by Teamsters IBT, Local 350, Mid-Management Bargaining Unit (350 Mid-Mgmt)
 One (1) position represented by San Bruno Management Employee Association (SBMEA)
156 of 496 Item 6h.

Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
May 27, 2025

Page 2 of 3 ends

The three existing Memoranda of Understanding (MOU) between the City and 856 Misc, 350 Mid-Mgmt, and SBMEA include specific language for layoff and reemployment. Representatives from the City and each Unit have met and conferred in good faith over the last several months to develop tentative agreements.

Separately the City reached agreement with SBMEA to modify the salary range for the Police Chief classification. This modification allows the City to hire the most competitive candidate for the vacant Police Chief position.

DISCUSSION:

Side Letter Agreements Related to the Sale of CityNet to Comcast The City has met and conferred in good faith with leadership from Teamsters Local 856 Miscellaneous, Mid-Management (350), and SBMEA regarding workforce impacts resulting from the City’s decision to sell CityNet cable television and internet services to Comcast. These negotiations were collaborative and constructive, and resulted in Side Letter Agreements (SLAs) that meet core interests for both the City and the bargaining units. The SLAs recommended for ratification fall within the authority granted by the City Council to the City’s negotiating team and have been ratified by each respective bargaining unit. Finalization of these agreements requires formal City Council approval.

As part of the SLAs, the City and the bargaining units agreed to the City’s offer of a non- precedent-setting, one-time incentive—referred to as “stay-pay”—for employees currently assigned to CityNet positions. While the terms vary slightly by unit, the incentive is designed to retain all personnel through the completion of the sale to Comcast and to facilitate either reassignment to another represented City position or a smooth separation. Stay-pay, which is contingent upon the successful close of the sale, is critical to ensuring service continuity to San Bruno residents and preserving institutional knowledge necessary for a successful transition to Comcast. The specific terms of the incentive are outlined in each SLA and are attached to their corresponding resolutions. Notably, the full cost of implementing the SLAs is offset by proceeds from the CityNet sale.

The SLA with Teamsters Local 856 Miscellaneous provides for reassignment of all eleven affected employees without triggering layoffs through bumping rights. This provision supports the overall organizational continuity throughout and beyond the transition. In summary, the three SLAs related to CityNet achieve several key objectives vital to a successful transition:
Retention Incentives: Stay-pay is provided to all thirteen (13) CityNet employees, ensuring continuity of operations throughout the service transition. Reassignment Provisions: The SLA with 856 Miscellaneous activates applicable MOU provisions to reassign all eleven (11) impacted employees without layoffs.

Side Letter Agreement Related to the Police Chief Classification The City of San Bruno recently hired a professional executive recruiting firm to conduct a recruitment for the Police Chief position. Through this process, and while determining a competitive salary, the City reviewed the current approved salary range for the classification.

San Bruno, at its current rate, falls in the bottom four of the surveyed cities: The cities of Pacifica, Burlingame, Hillsborough, Belmont, Menlo Park, Foster City, Daly City, San Mateo, South San Francisco, and Redwood City.

157 of 496

Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
May 27, 2025

Page 3 of 3 ends

To attract and retain candidates for the Police Chief position, staff recommend ratifying an SLA with the San Bruno Management Employees’ Association to update the Police Chief’s salary range by seven percent (7%.) This increase will keep the classification range competitive, reflect the role's responsibilities, and help support recruitment and retention efforts. The City met and conferred with the bargaining unit representing the Police Chief classification, the San Bruno Management Employees Association (SBMEA), to discuss the salary range adjustment.

FISCAL IMPACT:

The cost for the three SLAs pertaining to CityNet’s dissolution is a cumulative total of $431,000, paid from proceeds from the sale of CityNet, $7.04 million. The cost for the Police Chief salary range SLA has been incorporated into the City Manager’s FY26 Recommended Budget.

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT:

The action is not a project subject to CEQA. City Council’s action is not considered a “Project” per CEQA Guidelines and therefore no further environmental analysis is required.

RECOMMENDATION:

Consider Adoption of Four (4) Resolutions:

1. Resolution Ratifying a Side Letter Agreement between the City of San Bruno and the Miscellaneous Bargaining Unit Represented by Teamsters Local 856, IBT, Pertaining to the Dissolution of CityNet; and

2. Resolution Ratifying a Side Letter Agreement between the City of San Bruno and the Mid-Management Bargaining Unit Represented by Teamsters Local 350, IBT, Pertaining to the Dissolution of CityNet; and

3. Resolution Ratifying a Side Letter Agreement between the City of San Bruno and the San Bruno Management Employees Association, Pertaining to the Dissolution of CityNet; and

4. Resolution Ratifying a Side Letter Agreement between the City of San Bruno and the San Bruno Management Employees Association, Pertaining to the Police Chief Classification.

ATTACHMENTS:

1. Resolution – City of San Bruno and Teamsters IBT 856, Miscellaneous SLA pertaining to the Dissolution of CityNet

2. Resolution – City of San Bruno and Teamsters IBT 350, Mid-Management SLA pertaining to the Dissolution of CityNet

3. Resolution – City of San Bruno and SBMEA SLA pertaining to the Dissolution of CityNet

4. Resolution – City of San Bruno and SBMEA SLA pertaining to the Police Chief Classification

158 of 496

1 RESOLUTION NO. 2025 - __

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN BRUNO RATIFYING A

SIDE LETTER AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF SAN BRUNO AND THE MISCELLANEOUS BARGAINING UNIT REPRESENTED BY TEAMSTERS LOCAL 856, IBT,

PERTAINING TO THE DISSOLUTION OF CITYNET
WHEREAS, City Council identified the priority initiative of “Stabilize CityNet’s Fiscal Sustainability,” which included exploration of possible new ownership of CityNet and authorized execution an Asset Purchase Agreement with Comcast of California IX, Inc. for the sale of the San Bruno CityNet Services; and
WHEREAS, the transfer of the Enterprise will require the elimination of multiple positions allocated to the Enterprise, including eleven (11) positions represented by Teamsters IBT, Local 856, Miscellaneous Bargaining Unit (856 Misc); and
WHEREAS, representatives from 856 Misc and representatives of the City of San Bruno have negotiated in good faith; and
WHEREAS, the side letter agreement is only valid upon successful sale of San Bruno CityNet Services to Comcast; and
WHEREAS, as a result of negotiations, a side letter agreement has been reached for a non-precedent setting incentive pay (stay-pay) for employees currently assigned to CityNet positions that remain through the sale of the enterprise and accept reassignment to a represented position within the City or separation; and NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of San Bruno that it hereby ratifies the side letter agreement reached between the City of San Bruno and 856 Misc, modifying the existing Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between the parties, and consistent with the terms and conditions outlined in the side letter agreement attached hereto and marked Exhibit A; and
Exhibit A: City of San Bruno and Teamsters IBT, Local 856, Miscellaneous Bargaining Unit Side Letter Agreement
---oOo---
I hereby certify that foregoing Resolution No. 2025 - __ was introduced and adopted by the San Bruno City Council at a regular meeting on May 27, 2025, by the following vote:

AYES: Councilmembers:

NOES: Councilmembers:

ABSENT: Councilmembers:
_________________________________
Lupita Huerta, City Clerk
159 of 496
ATTACHMENT 1
2 EXHIBIT A

CITY OF SAN BRUNO AND
TEAMSTERS IBT, LOCAL 856, MISCELLANEOUS BARGAINING UNIT

SIDE LETTER AGREEMENT
[see attached]

160 of 496

April 30, 2025
161 of 496 ATTACHMENT 1, Exhibit A

162 of 496

163 of 496

164 of 496

165 of 496

1 RESOLUTION NO. 2025 - __

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN BRUNO RATIFYING A

SIDE LETTER AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF SAN BRUNO AND THE MID- MANAGEMENT BARGAINING UNIT REPRESENTED BY TEAMSTERS LOCAL 350, IBT,

PERTAINING TO THE DISSOLUTION OF CITYNET
WHEREAS, City Council identified the priority initiative of “Stabilize CityNet’s Fiscal Sustainability,” which included exploration of possible new ownership of CityNet and authorized execution an Asset Purchase Agreement with Comcast of California IX, Inc. for the sale of the San Bruno CityNet Services; and
WHEREAS, the transfer of the Enterprise will require the elimination of multiple positions allocated to the Enterprise, including one (1) position represented by Teamsters IBT, Local 350, Mid-Management Bargaining Unit (350 Mid-Mgmt); and
WHEREAS, representatives from 350 Mid-Mgmt and representatives of the City of San Bruno have negotiated in good faith; and
WHEREAS, the side letter agreement is only valid upon successful sale of San Bruno CityNet Services to Comcast; and
WHEREAS, as a result of negotiations, a side letter agreement has been reached for a non-precedent setting incentive pay (stay-pay) for employee currently assigned to CityNet position that remain through the sale of the enterprise and termination of employment upon full closure of San Bruno CityNet Services or by December 31, 2025, whichever is sooner; and NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of San Bruno that it hereby ratifies the side letter agreement reached between the City of San Bruno and 350 Mid-Mgmt, modifying the existing Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between the parties, and consistent with the terms and conditions outlined in the side letter agreement attached hereto and marked Exhibit A;
Exhibit A: City of San Bruno and Teamsters IBT, Local 350, Mid-Management Bargaining Unit Side Letter Agreement
---oOo---
I hereby certify that foregoing Resolution No. 2025 - __ was introduced and adopted by the San Bruno City Council at a regular meeting on May 27, 2025, by the following vote:

AYES: Councilmembers:

NOES: Councilmembers:

ABSENT: Councilmembers:
_________________________________
Lupita Huerta, City Clerk
166 of 496 ATTACHMENT 2
2 EXHIBIT A

CITY OF SAN BRUNO AND
TEAMSTERS IBT, LOCAL 350, MID_MANAGEMENT BARGAINING UNIT

SIDE LETTER AGREEMENT
[see attached]

167 of 496

168 of 496
ATTACHMENT 2, Exhibit A

169 of 496

1 RESOLUTION NO. 2025 - __

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN BRUNO

RATIFYING A SIDE LETTER AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF SAN BRUNO AND THE SAN BRUNO MANAGEMENT EMPLOYEES’ ASSOCIATION,

PERTAINING TO THE DISSOLUTION OF CITYNET
WHEREAS, City Council identified the priority initiative of “Stabilize CityNet’s Fiscal Sustainability,” which included exploration of possible new ownership of CityNet and authorized execution an Asset Purchase Agreement with Comcast of California IX, Inc. for the sale of the San Bruno CityNet Services; and
WHEREAS, the transfer of the Enterprise will require the elimination of multiple positions allocated to the Enterprise, including one (1) position represented by San Bruno Management Employees’ Association (SBMEA); and
WHEREAS, representatives from SBMEA and representatives of the City of San Bruno have negotiated in good faith; and
WHEREAS, the side letter agreement is only valid upon successful sale of San Bruno CityNet Services to Comcast; and
WHEREAS, as a result of negotiations, a side letter agreement has been reached for a non-precedent setting incentive pay (stay-pay) for employee currently assigned to CityNet position that remain through the sale of the enterprise and termination of employment upon full closure of San Bruno CityNet Services; and
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of San Bruno that it hereby ratifies the side letter agreement reached between the City of San Bruno and SBMEA, modifying the existing Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between the parties, and consistent with the terms and conditions outlined in the side letter agreement attached hereto and marked Exhibit A; and
Exhibit A: City of San Bruno and San Bruno Management Employees’ Association Side Letter Agreement
---oOo---
I hereby certify that foregoing Resolution No. 2025 - __ was introduced and adopted by the San Bruno City Council at a regular meeting on May 27, 2025, by the following vote:

AYES: Councilmembers:

NOES: Councilmembers:

ABSENT: Councilmembers:
_________________________________
Lupita Huerta, City Clerk
170 of 496 ATTACHMENT 3
2 EXHIBIT A

CITY OF SAN BRUNO AND
SAN BRUNO MANAGEMENT EMPLOYEES’ ASSOCIATION

SIDE LETTER AGREEMENT
[see attached]

171 of 496

172 of 496
ATTACHMENT 3, Exhibit A

173 of 496

1 3
1 3
0 RESOLUTION NO. 2025 - __

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN BRUNO RATIFYING A SIDE LETTER AGREEMENT WITH THE SAN BRUNO MANAGEMENT EMPLOYEES’

ASSOCIATION PERTAINING TO THE POLICE CHIEF CLASSIFICATION WHEREAS, representatives from the San Bruno Management Employees’ Association (SBMEA) and representatives of the City of San Bruno have negotiated in good faith; and WHEREAS, as a result of negotiations, a side letter agreement has been reached to increase the Police Chief classification salary range by seven percent (7%); and WHEREAS, the City was notified that the members of SMBEA ratified the agreement as presented; and
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of San Bruno that it hereby ratifies the side letter agreement reached between the City of San Bruno and SBMEA, modifying the existing Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between the parties, and consistent with the terms and conditions outlined in the side letter agreement attached hereto and marked Exhibit A; and
Exhibit A: City of San Bruno and San Bruno Management Employees’ Association Side Letter Agreement
---oOo---
I hereby certify that foregoing Resolution No. 2025 - __ was introduced and adopted by the San Bruno City Council at a regular meeting on May 27, 2025, by the following vote:

AYES: Councilmembers:

NOES: Councilmembers:

ABSENT: Councilmembers:
_________________________________
Lupita Huerta, City Clerk
174 of 496 ATTACHMENT 4
2 3
1 3
0 EXHIBIT A

CITY OF SAN BRUNO AND
SAN BRUNO MANAGEMENT EMPLOYEES’ ASSOCIATION

SIDE LETTER AGREEMENT
[see attached]

175 of 496

176 of 496
ATTACHMENT 4, Exhibit A

177 of 496

City Council Agenda Item
Staff Report

CITY OF SAN BRUNO
DATE: May 27, 2025
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Alex D. McIntyre, City Manager
PREPARED BY: Hae Won Ritchie, P.E., City Engineer/Deputy Public Works Director Harry Yip, P.E., Senior Civil Engineer
SUBJECT: Consider Adoption of a Resolution Supporting Huntington Avenue Bicycle and Pedestrian Improvements Project Segment 2 and Authorizing Submittal of an Application to the San Mateo County Transportation Authority’s Cycle 1 Measure W Regional Transit Connections Program Call for Projects
BACKGROUND:

The San Mateo County Transportation Authority’s (TA) Regional Transit Connections Program (RTC) has announced a call for projects across three categories: Capital, Operations, and First/last-mile. With BART's sponsorship, the City can apply for the First/last-mile category, which offers up to $10.5 million in funding for projects proposing to provide safe active transportation connections to regional transit hubs.

The City of San Bruno's Capital Improvement Program (CIP) includes the Huntington Avenue Bicycle and Pedestrian Improvements Project (Project). This Project aims to enhance the pedestrian and bicycle network on Huntington Avenue, from San Bruno Avenue to the Centennial Way Trail entrance near the South San Francisco city limit. The planned improvements involve constructing a separated, two-way Class IV cycle track by reconstructing the northbound Huntington Avenue sidewalk and asphalt roadway. This cycle track, a protected bike lane physically separated from vehicle traffic, would require narrowing or removing the existing landscaped median and reducing the width of northbound travel lanes while maintaining two vehicular lanes and a pedestrian sidewalk. Specific improvements include roadway and median reconstruction, concrete sidewalk replacement, street lighting relocation, drainage inlet construction, pavement markings, new and modified traffic signals, and tree/landscape removal and replacement.

Due to funding limitations, the City has phased the Project into two segments. Segment 1, from San Bruno Avenue to Herman Street, is nearing completion. Segment 2 extends from Herman Street to Pacific Avenue. Segment 2 originally extended to Centennial Trail; however, the South San Francisco Southline Development Project (Southline) is constructing the portion between Pacific Avenue and Centennial Trail, thereby reducing the length of what remains to be constructed.

Following City Council direction to pursue funding opportunities aligned with the City’s vision outlined in previous council meetings, staff intends to submit a grant application for Segment 2 178 of 496
Item 6i.

Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
May 27, 2025

Page 2 of 3 ends

8 5
3 of the Project. This segment connects the infrastructure under construction by Southline and Segment 1 (nearing completion by the City). In 2024, the City successfully secured approximately $2,000,000 from the TA for Segment 2.

DISCUSSION:

The construction phase for Segment 2 is currently underfunded. Of its approximately $6,000,000 estimated cost, only $2,000,000 has been secured through the TA Pedestrian and Bicycle Program, which requires a $200,000 local match. As the City has already funded the design phase, the City can leverage funds expended for the design phase as the local match.

This leaves a $4,000,000 funding gap. While staff have actively sought external funding through programs like Regional Measure 3, the Active Transportation Program, and Congressional Appropriations, these efforts have not yet been successful.

To fully fund construction based on current estimates, staff recommends requesting the remaining $4,000,000. The RTC program has a ten percent (10%) local match requirement, meaning the City would need to contribute up to $400,000 in local funds to the requested $4,000,000 from the RTC. Similar to the Pedestrian and Bicycle Program, the City can leverage funds expended for the design phase to partially fulfil the local match requirement. The exact amount of funds needed for local match is unknown until the funds are awarded.

Application requirements include City Council approval of a resolution supporting the Project, commitment of $400,000 in matching funds, and authorization for the City Manager (or designee) to sign a funding agreement or memorandum of understanding with the TA. The City must also certify that awarded funds will supplement, not supplant, existing funds or resources, and commence the Project within one year of receiving the award.

FISCAL IMPACT:

If awarded, the City could receive up to $4,000,000 in grant funding from the TA. The TA requires that the City commit to providing a 10% match ($400,000). This commitment is contingent on the City receiving additional grant funding for the full project scope. If the City is unable to secure sufficient grant funding to fund the full project, the grant funding may be reallocated to another agency.

There are no appropriation requests being made at this time, staff may request funding in a future budget year or by separate action item to fund the matching portion of the grant, which could be made up of other outside funding sources.

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT:

The Project is exempt under the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) as the project falls within the Class 1 Categorical Exemption set forth in CEQA Guidelines, Section 15301(c), which exempts existing street alterations for the addition of bicycle facilities, such as bicycle lanes and other similar alterations that do not create additional automobile lanes.

RECOMMENDATION:

179 of 496

Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
May 27, 2025

Page 3 of 3 ends

8 5
3 Consider Adoption of a Resolution Supporting Huntington Avenue Bicycle and Pedestrian Improvements Project Segment 2 and Authorizing Submittal of an Application to the San Mateo County Transportation Authority’s Cycle 1 Measure W Regional Transit Connections Program Call for Projects
ALTERNATIVES:

1. Do not adopt the resolution and do not submit an application for grant funding to the TA’s Cycle 1 Measure W Regional Transit Connections Program Pedestrian and Bicycle Program.

ATTACHMENTS:

1. Resolution

180 of 496

1 3
1 0
0 RESOLUTION NO. 2025 - __

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN BRUNO SUPPORTING THE HUNTINGTON AVENUE BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN IMPROVEMENTS SEGMENT 2

PROJECT AND AUTHORIZING SUBMITTAL OF AN APPLICATION TO THE SAN MATEO COUNTY’S TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY’S 2025 CYCLE 1 MEASURE W REGIONAL

TRANSIT CONNECTIONS PROGRAM CALL FOR PROJECTS
WHEREAS, the City of San Bruno (City) has identified the need to improvement pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure on Huntington Avenue between San Bruno Avenue and Sneath Lane; and
WHEREAS, the City has developed the Huntington Avenue Bicycle and Pedestrian Improvements Project (Project) to provide a Class VI two-way bikeway, traffic improvements, lighting improvements, and landscape improvements; and
WHEREAS, the City has phased the Project and Segments 1 (San Bruno Avenue to Herman Avenue) and 3 (Pacific Avenue to Sneath Lane) are currently under construction; and WHEREAS, the Project Segment 2 (Herman Street to Pacific Avenue) is currently under design and the estimated cost to implement the construction phase of Segment 2 is $6,000,000; and
WHEREAS, the City seeks $4,000,000 for the construction phase of the Project; and WHEREAS, the TA issued a Call for Projects for the Measure W Regional Transit Connections (RTC) Program funds on April 3, 2025; and
WHEREAS, the TA requires applicants for Measure W funds to submit a resolution in support of the application, in this case for $4,000,0000 in Measure W RTC Program funds for the Project; and
WHEREAS, the TA also requires applicants to submit a resolution committing to the completion of the proposed Project scope; and
WHEREAS, the TA requires applications to certify that any funds awarded by the TA will be used to supplement existing funds for program activities, and will not replace existing funds or resources; and
WHEREAS, if the TA Board awards Measure W RTC Program funds to the Project, the TA will requires that the City commence work on the Project within one year of TA Board action; and
WHEREAS, the TA requires the Sponsor's governing board to adopt a resolution:

1. Directs staff to submit an application for TA 2025 Cycle 1 Measure W Regional Transit Connections Program funds for $4,000,000 for the Project.

2. Authorizes the City Manager or their designee to execute a funding agreement with the San Mateo County Transportation Authority for the City to receive any Measure W RTC Program funds awarded and associated amendments for an award. 181 of 496
ATTACHMENT 1
2 3
1 0
0 3. Commits $400,000 in City matching funds for the completion of Project, if awarded the requested TA Measure W RTC Program funds.

4. Certifies that any funds awarded by the TA will be used to supplement existing funds for program activities, and will not replace existing funds or resources; and

5. Directs the City to commence work on Project within one year of receiving an award of Measure W RTC Program Funds; and
WHEREAS, the Project is exempt under the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) as the project falls within the Class 1 Categorical Exemption set forth in CEQA Guidelines, Section 15301(c), which exempts existing street alterations for the addition of bicycle facilities, such as bicycle lanes and other similar alterations that do not create additional automobile lanes.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of City of San Bruno:

1. Directs staff to submit an application to the TA for Measures A and W Pedestrian and Bicycle Program funds for $4,000,000 for the Huntington Bicycle and Pedestrians Improvements Project Segment 2;

2. Authorizes the City Manager, or designee, to execute a funding agreement or MOU and any amendments with the TA encumber TA Measures A and W Pedestrian and Bicycle Program funds;

3. Commits to the completing the Project, including contributing $400,000 of matching funds needed for Project implementation, if the requested TA funds are awarded, contingent on reciving addiitonal grant funding for the full Project scope;

4. Certifies that any funds awarded by the TA will be used to supplement existing funds for program activities, and will not replace existing funds or resources;

5. Authorizes the City Manager, or designee, to take any other actions necessary to give effect to this resolution and execute applicable amendments; and

6. Finds the action exempt under CEQA Guidelines Section 15301 (c) because it is an existing street alteration for the addition of bicycle facilities and does not create additional automobile lanes.
---oOo---
I hereby certify that foregoing Resolution No. 2025 - ___ was introduced and adopted by the San Bruno City Council at a regular meeting on May 27, 2025, by the following vote:

AYES: Councilmembers:

NOES: Councilmembers:

ABSENT: Councilmembers:

Lupita Huerta, City Clerk

182 of 496

City Council Agenda Item
Staff Report

CITY OF SAN BRUNO
DATE: May 27, 2025
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Alex D. McIntyre, City Manager
PREPARED BY: Audrey Afe-Tuufuli, Management Analyst
SUBJECT: Consider Adoption of a Resolution Authorizing the City Manager to Execute a Contract with CivicRec for Recreation Management Software Services and Approving an Additional 10% Contingency Per Year to Account for Software Upgrades, New Modules
BACKGROUND:

CivicRec is a comprehensive recreation management software solution that provides the City and its residents with online registration, facility booking, program management, and communication tools. The platform streamlines administrative tasks, enhances customer service, and allows for data-driven decision-making, ensuring efficient and effective recreation program delivery.

The City has maintained a longstanding relationship with CivicRec for the past three contract cycles, each spanning three years. Over the duration of this ongoing partnership, CivicRec has become an integral platform for City residents, providing essential access to recreational services and program information. Historically, these contractual engagements were formalized utilizing the City's standard General Service Agreement template.

DISCUSSION:

Staff recommends that the City Council approve the proposed agreement with CivicRec because the software platform plays a vital role in the delivery and management of the City’s recreation services. CivicRec provides a centralized, cloud-based solution that supports key operational functions such as online program registration, facility reservations, payment processing, communication with participants, and robust reporting capabilities. These features are essential to the effective and efficient operation of the Community Services Department and directly enhance the customer experience for San Bruno residents.

The agreement consists of two components: a Master Services Agreement and a Statement of Work, which together outline the terms, services, and responsibilities of both parties. This structure differs from the City’s standard General Services Agreement format but is necessary to align with CivicRec’s proprietary service model and licensing structure.

The proposed contract includes an initial three-year term with the option for renewal, which reflects the City’s historical approach to contracting with CivicRec. Maintaining continuity with this vendor is beneficial due to the City's prior investment in training, implementation, and system integration. Transitioning to a different platform would result in service disruption, require significant staff time, and incur additional implementation costs.

183 of 496
Item 6j.

Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
May 27, 2025

Page 2 of 2 ends

9 9
5 The agreement provides for continued technical support, software updates, and access to future system enhancements, ensuring the City remains current with technological improvements and industry best practices. Approval of this agreement allows for uninterrupted service and continued progress in modernizing the City’s recreation operations.

FISCAL IMPACT:

The fiscal impact associated with this contract renewal is as follows:
Year 1 Initial Renewal Term $17,490.00
Year 2 $18,364.50
Year 3 $19,282.73
This multi-year contract totals an estimated $55,137.23 over three years. These fees encompass software licensing, ongoing technical support, system maintenance, and access to CivicRec's recreation management platform, ensuring seamless operation and continuous improvement of the system.

Funding for the Initial Term Year 1 contract is budgeted within the Community Services Department’s Recreation and Aquatic’s Division, as allocated in the approved Fiscal Year 2024- 25 budget. The annual fees for Years 2 and 3 are projected to be included in subsequent fiscal year budget requests, contingent upon budgetary approval and alignment with the City's financial planning process. It should be noted that further delays in approving the proposed CivicRec contract may result in an increase in the quoted price, as pricing is subject to change and could impact future budgetary allocations.

It is recommended that the City Council approves an additional 10% contingency per year to account for software upgrades, new modules, and system improvements.

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT:

The action is not a project subject to CEQA. City Council’s action is not considered a “Project” per CEQA Guidelines and therefore no further environmental analysis is required.

RECOMMENDATION:

Adopt a resolution authorizing the City Manager to execute a contract with CivicRec for Recreation Management Software Services and approve an additional 10% contingency per year to account for software upgrades, new modules.

ALTERNATIVES:

None
ATTACHMENTS:

1. Resolution

2. CivicRec Master Services Agreement

3. Scope of Work

4. Statement of Work/Cost Fee Schedule

184 of 496

1 RESOLUTION NO. 2025 - __

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN BRUNO AUTHORIZING

THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE A CONTRACT WITH CIVICREC FOR RECREATION MANAGEMENT SOFTWARE SERVICES AND APPROVING AN ADDITIONAL 10%

CONTINGENCY PER YEAR TO ACCOUNT FOR SOFTWARE UPGRADES, NEW MODULES WHEREAS, the City of San Bruno desires to enhance its recreation management capabilities by providing efficient and accessible online services to its residents; and WHEREAS, CivicRec offers a comprehensive recreation management software solution providing the City and its residents with online registration, facility booking, program management, and communication tools, thereby ensuring effective recreation program delivery; and WHEREAS, the City has maintained a longstanding and beneficial partnership with CivicRec for the past three contract cycles, providing essential access to recreational services and program information to City residents; and
WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the services provided by CivicRec are essential to the City’s recreation programs, optimizing resource allocation, streamlining administrative processes, and providing data-driven insights, and that entering into the proposed contract is in the best interests of the City and its residents.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the San Bruno City Council hereby:

1. The City Council authorizes the City Manager to execute a contract with CivicRec for a 3 year period for Recreation Management Software Services in the amount not to exceed $55,138, acknowledging execution on a Non-Standard General Service Agreement.

2. The City Council approves a software Contingency of $5,500 with approval for such contingency usage by the City Manager.
---oOo---
I hereby certify that foregoing Resolution No. 2025 - __ was introduced and adopted by the San Bruno City Council at a regular meeting on May 27, 2025, by the following vote:

AYES: Councilmembers:

NOES: Councilmembers:

ABSENT: Councilmembers:
_________________________________
Lupita Huerta, City Clerk
185 of 496 ATTACHMENT 1
civicplus.com | 302 South 4th Street, Suite 500 | Manhattan, KS 66502 | 888-228-2233 CivicPlus Master Services Agreement
This Master Services Agreement (this “Agreement”) governs all Statements of Work (“SOW”) entered into by and between CivicPlus, LLC (“CivicPlus”) and the customer entity identified on the SOW (“Customer”). This Agreement governs the use and provision of any Services purchased by Customer, as described in any signed SOW, and the effective date of this Agreement shall commence on the date of signature of the SOW (“Effective Date”). If a SOW has not been executed, then the Effective Date shall be determined as the start date of implementation of any software solution by CivicPlus for Customer. CivicPlus and Customer referred to herein individually as “Party” and jointly as “Parties”.

Recitals
I. WHEREAS, CivicPlus is engaged in the business of developing and providing access to proprietary community engagement and government content, workflow, and general management software solutions, platforms and associated services (the “Services”); and
II. WHEREAS, Customer wishes to engage CivicPlus for the procurement of the Services and/or receive a license subscription for the ongoing use of the Services, as set forth in the SOW; NOW, THEREFORE, Customer and CivicPlus agree as follows:

Agreement
Term & Termination

1. This Agreement shall commence on the Effective Date and shall remain in full force and effect for as long as any SOW is in effect between CivicPlus and Customer, or Services are being provided by CivicPlus to Customer, unless terminated in accordance with this §1 or as otherwise provided in this Agreement (the “Term”). Either Party may terminate this Agreement or any SOW as set forth in such SOW, or at its discretion, effective immediately upon written notice to the other Party, if the other Party materially breaches any provision of this Agreement and does not substantially cure the breach within thirty (30) days after receiving notice of such breach. Customer may terminate this Agreement, or any SOW. for convenience upon providing no less than sixty (60) days’ prior written notice to CivicPlus, effective at the end of the then-current term. A delinquent Customer account remaining past due for longer than 90 days is a material breach by Customer and is grounds for CivicPlus termination. CivicPlus reserves the right to withhold, remove and/or discard Customer Data without notice upon effective date of termination, including, without limitation, Customer’s non-payment Upon effective date of termination for Customer’s breach, Customer’s right to access or use Customer Data immediately ceases, and CivicPlus shall have no obligation to maintain or forward any Customer Data.

2. Upon termination of this Agreement or any SOW for any reason, (a) the licenses granted for such relevant SOW by §11 below will terminate and Customer shall cease all use of the CivicPlus Property and Services associated with the terminated SOW and (b) any amounts owed to CivicPlus for work performed prior to termination shall immediately become due in full and payable. If Customer has paid in advance for the Services, and this Agreement terminates due to 186 of 496
ATTACHMENT 2
civicplus.com | 302 South 4thStreet, Suite 500 | Manhattan, KS 66502 | 888-228-2233 material breach of this Agreement by CivicPlus, CivicPlus shall refund Customer a prorated amount of any amount already paid. Upon termination by Customer for convenience or due to material breach by Customer, in addition to any remedy provided in this Agreement or provided in law or equity, CivicPlus shall be entitled to retain any amounts already paid. Sections 7, 8, 10, 14, 15, 18, 32 -34, 40, and 42 will survive any expiration or termination of this Agreement. 3.At any time during the Term, CivicPlus may, immediately upon notice to Customer, suspend Customer and any of its Users access to any Service due to a threat to the technical security or technical integrity of the Services. Invoicing & Payment Terms 4.Customer will pay the amounts owed to CivicPlus for the development and implementation of the Customer’s Services, as defined in the SOW (“Project Development”), subscription and licensing, and annual hosting, support and maintenance services (“Annual Recurring Services”) in accordance with the payment schedule set forth on the applicable SOW. Invoices shall be sent electronically to the individual/entity designated in the SOW’s contact sheet that is required to be filled out and submitted by Customer (the “Contact Sheet”). Customer shall provide accurate, current and complete information of Customer’s legal business name, address, email address, and phone number in the Contact Sheet upon submission of a signed SOW. Customer will maintain and promptly update the Contact Sheet information if it should change. Upon Customer’s request, CivicPlus will mail hard-copy invoices for a $5.00 convenience fee to be added to the mailed invoice. 5.Invoices shall be due and payable thirty (30) business days after the date of an invoice.. Unless otherwise limited by law, a finance charge of 1.5 percent (%) per month or the maximum rate permitted by applicable law, whichever is less, will be added to past due accounts from due date until paid. Payments received will be applied first to finance charges, then to the oldest outstanding invoice(s). If the Customer's account exceeds 60 days past due, support will be discontinued until the Customer's account is made current. If the Customer's account exceeds 90 days past due, CivicPlus may suspend in progress Project Development and Annual Recurring Services will be discontinued, and the Customer will no longer have access to the Services until the Customer's account is made current. Customer will be given 15 days’ notice prior to discontinuation of Services for non-payment. 6.During the performance of Project Development, if Customer requests a change that requires repeated efforts to previously approved work product and such change causes CivicPlus to incur additional expenses (i.e. airline change fees, resource hours, consultant fees, Customer does not show up for scheduled meetings or trainings), Customer agrees to reimburse CivicPlus for such additional expenses. CivicPlus shall notify Customer prior to incurring such expenses and shall only incur those expenses which are approved by Customer. Ownership & Content Responsibility 7.Upon full and complete payment of undisputed amounts owed for Project Development under the applicable SOW, Customer will own any website graphic designs, Services content, module content, importable/exportable data, and archived information (“Customer Content”) created by CivicPlus on behalf of Customer pursuant to this Agreement. “Customer Content” also includes, without limitation, any elements of text, graphics, images, photos, audio, video, designs, artworks, logos, trademarks, services marks, and other materials or content which Customer provides to CivicPlus for processing, transmission, storage, or inputs into any website, software or module in connection with any Services. Customer Content excludes any content in the public domain and any content owned or licensed by CivicPlus, whether in connection with providing Services or otherwise. 8.Upon completion of the Project Development, Customer will take over the management and control of the Services

187 of 496

civicplus.com | 302 South 4thStreet, Suite 500 | Manhattan, KS 66502 | 888-228-2233 and Customer will assume full responsibility for Customer Content maintenance and administration. Customer, not CivicPlus, shall have sole responsibility for the accuracy, quality, integrity, legality, reliability, appropriateness, and intellectual property ownership or right to use of all Customer Content. Customer hereby grants CivicPlus a worldwide, non-exclusive right and license to reproduce, distribute and display the Customer Content as necessary to provide the Services. Customer represents and warrants that Customer owns all Customer Content or that Customer has permission from the rightful owner to use each of the elements of Customer Content and that Customer has all rights necessary for CivicPlus to use the Customer Content in connection with providing the Services. Customer agrees that CivicPlus shall not be responsible or liable for the content of messages created by Customer or by Customer’s Users or end-users who access Service. Notwithstanding the foregoing, CivicPlus retains the right, but not the obligation, to remove any Customer Content that is libelous, harassing, abusive, fraudulent, defamatory, excessively profane, obscene, abusive, hate related, violent, harmful to minors, that advocates racial or ethnic intolerance, intended to advocate or advance computer hacking or cracking, or other material, products or services that violate or encourage conduct that would violate any laws or third-party rights. 9.At any time during the term of the applicable SOW, Customer will have the ability to download the Customer Content and export the data that is processed through the Services (“Customer Data”). Customer may request CivicPlus to perform the export of Customer Data and provide the Customer Data to Customer in a commonly used format, at any time, for a fee to be quoted at time of request and approved by Customer. Upon termination of the applicable SOW for any reason, whether or not Customer has retrieved or requested the Customer Data, CivicPlus reserves the right to permanently and definitively delete the Customer Content and Customer Data held in the Services thirty (30) days following termination of the applicable SOW. During the thirty (30) day period following termination of the SOW, regardless of the reason for its termination, Customer will not have access to the Services. 10.Intellectual Property in the software or other original works created by or licensed to CivicPlus, including all software source code, documents, and materials used in performing the Services (“CivicPlus Property”) will remain the property of CivicPlus. CivicPlus Property specifically excludes Customer Content. Customer shall not (i) license, sublicense, sell, resell, reproduce, transfer, assign, distribute or otherwise commercially exploit or make available to any third party any CivicPlus Property in any way, except as specifically provided in the applicable SOW; (ii) adapt, alter, modify or make derivative works based upon any CivicPlus Property; (iii) create internet “links” to the CivicPlus Property software or “frame” or “mirror” any CivicPlus Property administrative access on any other server or wireless or internet-based device that may allow third party entities, other than Customer, to use the Services; (iv) reverse engineer, decompile, disassemble or otherwise attempt to obtain the software source code to all or any portion of the Services; (v) make any attempt to gain unauthorized access to the Services and/or any of CivicPlus’ systems or networks; or (vi) access any CivicPlus Property in order to: (a) build a competitive product or service, (b) build a product using similar ideas, features, functions or graphics of any CivicPlus Property, or (c) copy any ideas, features, functions or graphics of any CivicPlus Property. The CivicPlus name, the CivicPlus logo, and the product and module names associated with any CivicPlus Property are trademarks of CivicPlus, and no right or license is granted to use them outside of the licenses set forth in this Agreement. 11.Provided Customer complies with the terms and conditions herein, the relevant SOW, and license restrictions set forth in §10, CivicPlus hereby grants Customer a limited, nontransferable, nonexclusive, non-assignable license to access and use the CivicPlus Property associated with any valid and effective SOW, for the term of the respective SOW. The license set forth herein, shall only apply to the extent that Customer is using the Services for legitimate business use as intended by the purpose of the Services and not for the purpose of comparing the Services to a competitor or similar product of CivicPlus. Customer hereby warrants and affirms its purpose in accessing or otherwise using the Services is for their intended purpose only and understands and agrees that any other use shall be considered fraud. 12.All CivicPlus helpful information and user’s guides for the Services (“Documentation”) are maintained and updated electronically by CivicPlus and can be accessed through the CivicPlus “Help Center”. CivicPlus does not provide paper copies of its Documentation. Customer and its Users are granted a limited license to access Documentation as needed.

188 of 496

civicplus.com | 302 South 4thStreet, Suite 500 | Manhattan, KS 66502 | 888-228-2233 Customer shall not copy, download, distribute, or make derivatives of the Documentation. 13.Customer acknowledges that CivicPlus may continually develop, alter, deliver, and provide to the Customer ongoing innovation to the Services, in the form of new features and functionalities. CivicPlus reserves the right to modify the Services from time to time, so long as no functionality is reduced. Any modifications or improvements to the Services listed on the SOW will be provided to the Customer at no additional charge. In the event that CivicPlus creates new products or significant enhancements to the Services (“New Services”), and Customer desires these New Services, then Customer will have to pay CivicPlus the appropriate fee for the access to and use of the New Services. CivicPlus shall use its reasonable best efforts to provide workarounds in the event any modification to the Services causes Customer to lose substantial functionality of the Services. 14.CivicPlus in its sole discretion, may utilize all comments and suggestions, whether written or oral, furnished by Customer to CivicPlus in connection with its access to and use of the Services (all reports, comments and suggestions provided by Customer hereunder constitute, collectively, the “Feedback”). Customer hereby grants to CivicPlus a worldwide, non-exclusive, irrevocable, perpetual, royalty-free right and license to incorporate the Feedback in the CivicPlus products and services. Indemnification 15.CivicPlus will indemnify, defend and hold harmless Customer, its elected officials, officers, directors, agents, attorneys and employees (each, an “Indemnitee“) from and against any and all third party claims, liabilities, damages, losses, expenses, demands, suits, fines, or judgments (each, a “Claim,” and collectively, the “Claims“), including reasonable attorneys’ fees, costs, and expenses incidental thereto, to the extent such Claims are directly caused by the malicious acts, error or omission, negligence, or misconduct of CivicPlus, its officers, directors, agents, employees, and subcontractors, during the performance of this Agreement, including allegations that the Services provided under this Agreement infringe intellectual property rights. CivicPlus will pay infringement claim defense costs, CivicPlus–negotiated settlement amounts, and damages finally awarded by a court. CivicPlus has no obligation for any claim of infringement arising from Customer's use of the Services for purposes not contemplated by this Agreement. CivicPlus’s indemnification obligations under this Section 15 are conditioned upon the Customer (i) promptly notifying the CivicPlus of any claim in writing; (ii) cooperating with CivicPlus in the defense of the claim; and (iii) granting CivicPlus sole control of the defense or settlement of the claim. The indemnification obligations of CivicPlus herein shall not apply to any claims of intellectual property infringement related to Customer Content. This section shall survive the termination or expiration of this Agreement. Responsibilities of the Parties 16.CivicPlus will not be liable for any act, omission of act, negligence or defect in the quality of service of any underlying carrier, licensor or other third-party service provider whose facilities or services are used in furnishing any portion of the Service received by the Customer. 17.CivicPlus will not be liable for any failure of performance that is caused by or the result of any act or omission by Customer or any entity employed/contracted on the Customer’s behalf. During Project Development, Customer will be responsive and cooperative with CivicPlus to ensure the Project Development is completed in a timely manner. 18.Customer agrees that it is solely responsible for the end-user’s personal data that Customer decides to solicit, collect, store, or otherwise use in connection with any Service provided by CivicPlus, except to the extent of CivicPlus’ obligations herein. Customer understands and agrees that CivicPlus provides certain solutions with increased security measures for the solicitation and storage of any sensitive data, and it is Customer’s responsibility to determine whether the data it solicits

189 of 496

civicplus.com | 302 South 4thStreet, Suite 500 | Manhattan, KS 66502 | 888-228-2233 and collects should be stored in such solutions. Customer understands and agrees that CivicPlus does not have knowledge or control over what type of data Customer solicits therefore CivicPlus has no responsibility for the use or storage of end-users’ personal data in connection with the Services or the consequences of the solicitation, collection, storage, or other use by Customer or by any third party of any personal data. Customer has the sole control and responsibility over the determination of which data and information shall be included in the content that is to be transmitted and stored by CivicPlus. Customer shall not provide to CivicPlus or allow to be provided to CivicPlus any content that (a) infringes or violates any 3rd party’s intellectual property rights, rights of publicity or rights of privacy, (b) contains any defamatory material, or (c) violates any federal, state, local, or foreign laws, regulations, or statutes. 19.Customer is responsible for all activity that occurs under Customer's accounts by or on behalf of Customer. Customer agrees to (a) be solely responsible for all designated and authorized individuals chosen by Customer (“User”) activity, which must be in accordance with this Agreement and the CivicPlus Terms of Use; (b) be solely responsible for content of Customer Data; (c) obtain and maintain during the term all necessary consents, agreements and approvals from end-users, individuals or any other third parties for all actual or intended uses of information, data or other content Customer will use in connection with the Services; (d) use commercially reasonable efforts to prevent unauthorized access to, or use of, any User’s log-in information and the Services, and notify CivicPlus promptly of any known unauthorized access or use of the foregoing; (e) use commercially reasonable efforts to prevent unauthorized access to or use of the Services and CivicPlus Property and shall promptly notify CivicPlus of any unauthorized access or use of the Services and/or CivicPlus Property and any loss or theft or unauthorized use of any User's password or username and/or personal information; and (f) use the Services only in accordance with applicable laws and regulations. 20.The Parties shall comply with all applicable local, state, and federal laws, treaties, regulations, and conventions in connection with its use and provision of any of the Services or CivicPlus Property. 21.CivicPlus shall not be responsible for any act or omission of any third-party vendor or service provider that Customer has selected to integrate any of its Services with. 22.Customer understands that CivicPlus must fastidiously allocate resources across all of its customers and specifically reserves necessary resources for Customer’s Project Development. If any professional services, such as consulting or training, purchased by Customer are not used during the Project Development phase solely due to the inaction or unresponsiveness of Customer, then these services shall expire 30 days after completion of Project Development. The Customer may re-schedule any unused professional services during this 30-day period as mutually agreed upon by the Parties. Any professional services that have not been used or rescheduled shall be marked as complete and closed upon the expiration of the 30-day period. Data Security 23.CivicPlus shall, at all times, comply with the terms and conditions of its Privacy Policy. CivicPlus will maintain commercially reasonable administrative, physical, and technical safeguards designed to protect the security and confidentiality of Customer Data. CivicPlus will not modify Customer Data or disclose Customer Data, except (a) in order to provide the Services; (b) to prevent or address service or technical problems in connection with support matters; (c) as specifically directed or expressly permitted in writing by Customer, (d) in compliance with our Privacy Policy; or (f) if compelled by law. Notwithstanding the foregoing, CivicPlus reserves the right to delete, suspend, or block known malicious accounts without Customer authorization. Customer understands that CivicPlus has no obligation to provide the Services or maintain the Customer Data, information or other material if Customer’s accounts are past due and unpaid as set forth in this Agreement. 24.Customer acknowledges and agrees that CivicPlus utilizes third-party service providers to host and provide the Services and store Customer Data and the protection of such data will be in accordance with such third party’s safeguards

190 of 496

civicplus.com | 302 South 4thStreet, Suite 500 | Manhattan, KS 66502 | 888-228-2233 for the protection and the security and confidentiality of Customer’s Data. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary, CivicPlus shall have the right to collect and analyze data and other information relating to the provision, use and performance of various aspects of the Services and related systems and technologies (including, without limitation, information concerning Customer Data and data derived therefrom), and CivicPlus will be free (during and after the term hereof) to use such information and data to improve and enhance the Services and for other development, diagnostic and corrective purposes in connection with the Services and other CivicPlus offerings. 25.CivicPlus may offer Customer the ability to use third-party applications in combination with the Services. Any such third-party application will be subject to acceptance by Customer. In connection with any such third-party application agreed to by Customer, Customer acknowledges and agrees that CivicPlus may allow the third-party providers access to Customer Data as required for the interoperation of such third-party application with the Services. The use of a third-party application with the Services may also require Customer to agree to a separate agreement or terms and conditions with the provider of the third-party application, which will govern Customer's use of such third-party application. 26.In the event of a security breach, due to the negligence, malicious actions, omissions, or misconduct of CivicPlus, CivicPlus, as the data custodian, will comply will all remediation efforts as required by applicable federal and state law. Notwithstanding the foregoing, in the event of a security breach due to the negligence of both Parties, cost for the remediation efforts shall be allocated based on the degree of fault of the Parties CivicPlus Support 27.CivicPlus will use commercially reasonable efforts to perform the Services in a manner consistent with applicable industry standards, including maintaining Services availability 24 hours a day, 7 days a week with 99.9% uptime. Customer will have 24/7 access to the online CivicPlus Help Center (civicplus.help) to review use articles, software best practices, receive maintenance release notes, as well as submit and monitor omni-channel support tickets and access solution specific support contact methods (https://www.civicplus.help/hc/en-us/requests/new). 28.CivicPlus provides live support engineers based in the domestic United States to respond to basic questions concerning use and configuration, to diagnose software code-related errors, and proactively identify potential systems issues. CivicPlus support engineers serve a preliminary function in the agile development process and escalate defects to software developers or architects for remediation. For security purposes, CivicPlus support engineers are not permitted to modify user accounts, and permissions nor distribute access outside of accounts established by means of a support interaction for testing. Customer delegated Users may receive tutorials and guidance on account modifications but will perform the action themselves. 29.CivicPlus support hours span between the hours of 7 am to 7 pm CST, but may vary by product. Customer may access the CivicPlus Help Center (civicplus.help) to obtain each product’s support hours. After hours support is available by toll- free phone call only. Non-emergency support requested outside of support hours will be subject to additional fees, such fees will be quoted to Customer at the time of the request and will be subject to Customer acceptance and invoiced the next business day following the non-emergency support. CivicPlus shall have the sole discretion to determine in good faith whether support requests qualify as an emergency, exceed reasonable use or are outside the scope of services outlined in any SOW. 30.If a reported problem cannot be solved during the first support interaction, Customer will be provided a ticket number that will be used as communication method throughout ticket escalation until a solution is provided. Support service does not include support for errors caused by third party products or applications for which CivicPlus is not responsible.

191 of 496

civicplus.com | 302 South 4thStreet, Suite 500 | Manhattan, KS 66502 | 888-228-2233 Marketing31.Customer hereby authorizes CivicPlus to include CivicPlus’s name and logo inconspicuously within the Customer’s instance of the Services. Customer may publicly refer to itself as a customer of the CivicPlus Services, including on Customer's website and in sales presentations. Notwithstanding the foregoing, each Party hereby grants the other a limited, worldwide, license to use the other’s logo in conformance with such Party’s trademark usage guidelines and solely for the purposes of providing the Services. In no event will either Party issue a press release publicly announcing this relationship without the approval of the other Party, such approval not to be unreasonably withheld; however, CivicPlus understands and agrees that Customer is a public entity subject to open meeting and records laws and may have public discussion and display of this Agreement and related materials.

192 of 496

civicplus.com | 302 South 4thStreet, Suite 500 | Manhattan, KS 66502 | 888-228-2233 Limitation of Liability32.CivicPlus’ liability arising out of or related to this Agreement, or any associated SOW, excluding liability under Sections 15 and 26 of this Agreement, will not exceed three times the amounts paid by Customer for the Annual Recurring Services in the year prior to such claim of liability. Notwithstanding the foregoing, CivicPlus’ total aggregate liability under Sections 15 and 26 of this Agreement shall not exceed the limits of insurance coverage available to CivicPlus under its applicable policies in effect at the time such claim is made. 33.In no event will either Party be liable to the other for any consequential, indirect, special, incidental, or punitivedamages arising out of or related to this Agreement. 34.The liabilities limited by Section 32 and 33 apply: (a) to liability for negligence; (b) regardless of the form of action, whether in contract, tort, strict product liability, or otherwise; (c) even if a party is advised in advance of the possibility of the damages in question and even if such damages were foreseeable; and (d) even if a Party’s remedies fail of their essential purposes. If applicable law limits the application of the provisions of this Limitation of Liability section, a Party’s liability will be limited to the maximum extent permissible. Warranties and Disclaimer 35.Each person signing the SOW, or otherwise agreeing to the terms of this Agreement, represents and warrants that he or she is duly authorized and has legal capacity to execute and bind the respective Party to the terms and conditions of the SOW and this Agreement. Each Party represents and warrants to the other that the execution and delivery of the SOW and the performance of such Party’s obligations thereunder have been duly authorized and that this Agreement is a valid and legal agreement binding on such Party and enforceable in accordance with its terms. Customer represents and warrants that Customer has not provided any false information to gain access to the Service and that Customer’s billing information provided on the Contact Sheet is correct; and it has all necessary rights in the Customer Content to permit Customer’s use of the Service and to grant the licenses contained in this Agreement without infringing the intellectual property or other rights of any third parties, violating any applicable laws, or violating the terms of any license or agreement to which it is bound. CivicPlus warrants that it has all necessary right to provide the Services without infringing the intellectual property or other rights of any third parties, violating any applicable laws, or violating the terms of any license or agreement to which it is bound. 36.CivicPlus warrants that the Services will perform substantially in accordance with documentation and marketingproposals, and free of any material defect. CivicPlus warrants to the Customer that, upon notice given to CivicPlus of any defect in design or fault or improper workmanship, CivicPlus will remedy any such defect. CivicPlus makes no warranty regarding, and will have no responsibility for, any claim arising out of: (i) a modification of the Services made by anyone other than CivicPlus, even in a situation where CivicPlus approves of such modification in writing; or (ii) use of the Services in combination with a third-party service, web hosting service, or server not authorized by CivicPlus. 37.The Services may be temporarily unavailable for scheduled maintenance or for unscheduled emergency maintenance, either by CivicPlus or by third-party providers, or because of other causes beyond CivicPlus's reasonable control, but CivicPlus shall use reasonable efforts to provide advance notice in writing or by e-mail of any scheduled service disruption. HOWEVER, SERVICE PROVIDER DOES NOT WARRANT THAT THE SERVICES WILL BE UNINTERRUPTED OR ERROR FREE; NOR DOES IT MAKE ANY WARRANTY AS TO THE RESULTS THAT MAY BE OBTAINED FROM USE OF THE SERVICES.EXCEPT FOR THE EXPRESS WARRANTIES IN THIS AGREEMENT, THE SERVICES ARE PROVIDED “AS IS AND CIVICPLUS HEREBY DISCLAIMS ALL WARRANTIES, WHETHER EXPRESS, IMPLIED, STATUTORY OR OTHERWISE, INCLUDING ANY IMPLIED WARRANTY OF MERCHANTABILITY, FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, OR ARISING FROM A

193 of 496

civicplus.com | 302 South 4thStreet, Suite 500 | Manhattan, KS 66502 | 888-228-2233 PRIOR COURSE OF DEALING. 38.EACH PROVISION OF THIS AGREEMENT THAT PROVIDES FOR A LIMITATION OF LIABILITY,DISCLAIMER OF WARRANTIES, OR EXCLUSION OF DAMAGES IS TO ALLOCATE THE RISKS OF THIS AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE PARTIES. THIS ALLOCATION IS REFLECTED IN THE PRICING OFFERED BY CIVICPLUS TO CUSTOMER AND IS AN ESSENTIAL ELEMENT OF THE BASIS OF THE BARGAIN BETWEEN THE PARTIES. EACH OF THESE PROVISIONS IS SEVERABLE AND INDEPENDENT OF ALL OTHER PROVISIONS OF THIS AGREEMENT. Force Majeure 39.No party shall have any liability to the other hereunder by reason of any delay or failure to perform any obligation or covenant if the delay or failure to perform is occasioned by force majeure, meaning any act of God, storm, pandemic, fire, casualty, unanticipated work stoppage, strike, lockout, labor dispute, civil disturbance, riot, war, national emergency, act of public enemy, internet service provider failure or delay, third party application failure, denial of service attack, or other cause of similar or dissimilar nature beyond its control. Taxes 40.The amounts owed for the Services exclude, and Customer will be responsible for, all sales, use, excise, withholding and any other similar taxes, duties and charges of any kind imposed by any federal, state or local governmental entity in connection with the Services (excluding taxes based solely on CivicPlus’s income). If the Customer is tax-exempt, the Customer must provide CivicPlus proof of their tax-exempt status, within fifteen (15) days of contract signing, and the fees owed by Customer under this Agreement will not be taxed. If such exemption certificate is challenged or held invalid by a taxing authority then Customer agrees to pay for all resulting fines, penalties and expenses. Other Documents 41.This Agreement, including all exhibits, amendments, and addenda hereto and all SOWs, constitutes the entire agreement between the Parties and supersedes all prior and contemporaneous agreements, proposals or representations, written or oral, concerning its subject matter. No modification, amendment, or waiver of any provision of this Agreement or any SOW will be effective unless in writing and signed by each Party. However, to the extent of any conflict or inconsistency between the provision in the body of this Agreement and any exhibit, amendment, or addenda hereto or any SOW, the terms of such exhibit, amendment, addenda or SOW will prevail. Notwithstanding any language to the contrary therein, no terms or conditions stated in a Customer purchase order or other order documentation (excluding SOWs) will be incorporated into or form any part of this Agreement, all such terms or conditions will be null and void, unless such term is to refer and agree to this Agreement. Interlocal Purchasing Consent/ Cooperative Purchasing 42.With the prior approval of CivicPlus, which may be withheld for any or no reason within CivicPlus’s sole discretion, this Agreement and any SOW may be extended to any public entity in Customer’s home-state to purchase at the SOW prices and specifications in accordance with the terms stated herein. 43.To the extent permitted by law, the terms of this Agreement and set forth in one or more SOW(s) may be extended

194 of 496

civicplus.com | 302 South 4thStreet, Suite 500 | Manhattan, KS 66502 | 888-228-2233 for use by other local government entities upon execution of a separate agreement, SOW, or other duly signed writing by and between CivicPlus and such entity, setting forth all of the terms and conditions for such use, including applicable fees and billing terms. Miscellaneous Provisions 44.The invalidity or unenforceability, in whole or in part, of any provision of this Agreement shall not void, affect the validity or enforceability of any other provision of this Agreement. 45.The Parties negotiated this Agreement with the opportunity to receive the aid of counsel and, accordingly, intend this Agreement to be construed fairly, according to its terms, in plain English, without constructive presumptions against the drafting Party. The headings of Sections of this Agreement are for convenience and are not to be used in interpreting this Agreement. As used in this Agreement, the word “including” means “including but not limited to.” 46.The Parties will use reasonable, good faith efforts to resolve any dispute between them in good faith prior to initiating legal action. 47.This Agreement and any SOW, to the extent signed and delivered by means of a facsimile machine or electronic mail, shall be treated in all manner and respects as an original agreement or instrument and shall be considered to have the same binding legal effect as if it were the original signed version thereof delivered in person. The Parties agree that an electronic signature is the legal equivalent of its manual signature on this Agreement and any SOW. The Parties agree that no certification authority or other third party verification is necessary to validate its electronic signature and that the lack of such certification of third party verification will not in any way affect the enforceability of the Parties’ electronic signature or any resulting agreement between CivicPlus and Customer. 48.Reserved. 49.CivicPlus shall maintain accurate records of all fees billable to, and payments made by, Customer in a format that will permit audit by Customer for a period of no less than three (3) years from when a fee was incurred or a payment was made. 50.Where a user is required to “click through” or otherwise accept or made subject to any online terms and conditions in accessing or using the Services, such terms and conditions are not binding and shall have no force or effect as to the Services or this Agreement. However, the CivicPlus Privacy Policy, Terms of Use, and other Product or Solution terms referenced on any SOW shall remain applicable and binding as they govern the use of the Services. 51. CivicPlus is retained as an independent contractor and is not an employee of Customer. No employee or agent of CivicPlus is or shall become an employee of Customer. The work to be performed shall be in accordance with the Scope of Services described in this Agreement, subject to such directions and amendments from Customer as herein provided. 52.This Agreement shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of California and the federal laws of the United States of America. CivicPlus hereby consents and submits to the jurisdiction and forum of San Mateo County Superior Court, Redwood City and for federal court in San Francisco, in all questions and controversies arising out of this Agreement. 53.This Agreement and the obligations of CivicPlus hereunder are personal to CivicPlus. Neither CivicPlus nor any successor, receiver, or assignee of CivicPlus shall directly or indirectly assign this Agreement or the rights or duties created by this Agreement. 54.CivicPlus shall, at its own expense, procure and maintain in full force and effect during the term of this Agreement, policies of insurance, of the types and in the minimum amounts as follows, with responsible insurance carriers duly admitted and qualified in California covering the operations of CivicPlus, pursuant to this Agreement: commercial general liability

195 of 496

civicplus.com | 302 South 4thStreet, Suite 500 | Manhattan, KS 66502 | 888-228-2233 ($1,000,000 per occurrence, $2,000,000 aggregate); excess liability ($2,000,000 per occurrence, $2,000,000 aggregate); workers’ compensation (statutory limits); cyber liability ($5,000,000 per occurrence) providing protection against claims and liabilities arising from: (i) errors and omissions in connection with maintaining security of Customer Data; (ii) data breach including theft, destruction, and/or unauthorized use of Customer Data; (iii) identity theft; and (iv) violation of privacy rights due to a breach of Customer Data; and professional liability ($1,000,000 per occurrence, $1,000,000 aggregate). 55.The Indemnitees shall be named as additional insureds in the commercial general, cyber, and excess liability policies which shall contain standard cross liability clauses. CivicPlus shall cause the liability it assumed under this Agreement to be specifically insured under the contractual liability section of the liability insurance policies. The liability policies shall be primary without right of contribution from any Indemnitee, and CivicPlus waives all rights of subrogation with respect to said policies. Such policies shall require that Customer be given no less than thirty (30) calendar days prior written notice of any cancellation thereof or material change therein. Customer shall have the right to request an adjustment of the limits of liability for commercial general, cyber, and excess liability, and/or professional liability insurance as CivicPlus’ exposure to Customer increases. CivicPlus shall provide Customer with certificates of insurance and original endorsements, evidencing all of the above coverage, including all special requirements specifically noted above, and shall provide Customer with certificates of insurance evidencing renewal or substitution of such insurance thirty (30) calendar days prior to the effective date of such renewal or substitution.

196 of 496

COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT
1 | P a g e
RECREATIOIN SOFTWARE | Scope of
Work

RECREATION MANAGEMENT SOFTWARE

SCOPE OF WORK

1. Project Title: Recreation Management Software Solution

2. Purpose: This Scope of Work (SOW) outlines the requirements for a web-based recreation management software solution to be provided by CivicRec to the City of San Bruno. This system will support the City's recreation registration, facilities reservation program, and related administrative tasks.

3. Services to be Provided by CivicRec:
 Web-Based System: A fully online-capable system accessible via the internet.  Hosting and Technical Support:
o Hosting the system off-site.
o Providing technical support with a response time of one calendar day.  Account Management: Assignment of a dedicated representative/account manager.  Help Center: Access to a comprehensive help center with information related to modules for reference.
 Pricing Model: Flat fee rate structure.
 Facility Reservation Capabilities: Functionality to manage facility reservations.  Activity Registration Capabilities:
o Online activity registration.
o Handling refunds, transfers, and credits.
 Brochure Production Capabilities: Ability to produce program brochures.  Membership Management:
o Annual pass production.
o Membership card swipe functionality.
 Payment Processing:
o Automatic monthly payment capabilities for residents.  Reporting: Comprehensive reporting capabilities.
 Instructor Management:
o Instructor payment capabilities.
o Instructor remote login capability.
 Data Management:
o Downloadable data in various formats (Excel, Publisher, Word, In-Design, etc.).
 Integrations: Integration capabilities with software in city Finance Departments.  Residency Verification: Ability to verify residency.
 Marketing: eMarketing capability.
 Social Media Integration: Direct compatibility with various social media outlets.  Donations: Ability to accept donations for a scholarship program.  Resident Customization: Ability for residents to customize camp weeks during registration.
 Demographics: Ability to create demographic and interest groups.  Credit Card Compliance: Ensuring credit card data security and compliance.  Customer Surveys: Customer survey capability.
 Email Communications: Automatic email to residents following registration. 197 of 496 ATTACHMENT 3

COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT
2 | P a g e
RECREATIOIN SOFTWARE | Scope of
Work
Calendar: Calendar available for viewing without requiring booking. Remote Registration: Ability for registrants to register remotely without service charges.

4. Responsibilities of the City of San Bruno
Providing Requirements: Clearly communicate specific business requirements and processes.
Data Migration: Assist in the migration of existing data to the new system. Testing: Perform thorough testing of the system to ensure it meets requirements. Training: Ensure staff receive adequate training on the use of the system.

5. Project Schedule
Start Date: As per the General Services Agreement.
Completion Date: As per the General Services Agreement. (Specific milestones and timelines will be detailed in a separate project plan.)

6. Acceptance Criteria
The system will be considered acceptable when it meets the following criteria:
All required functionalities are implemented and working according to specifications. The system integrates successfully with city Finance Department software. All data is migrated accurately.
The system performs reliably and efficiently under normal operating conditions. City staff are trained and able to use the system effectively.

7. Pricing and Payment Terms
Pricing: As per the Master Services Agreement.
Payment Terms: As per the Master Services Agreement.

8. Assumptions
The City of San Bruno will provide timely feedback and approvals. The city Finance Department software has documented APIs for integration. There are no unforeseen technical obstacles that would prevent the implementation of the system.

9. Dependencies
The project's success is dependent on the City's timely access to their software. The project's timeline depends on the availability of key personnel from both CivicRec and the City of San Bruno.

198 of 496

Page 1 of 3 ends

CivicPlus
302 South 4th St. Suite 500
Manhattan, KS 66502 US
Client: San Bruno, CA
Bill To: San Bruno, CA
CA San Bruno - CivicRec - Statement of Work
QTY Product Description PRODUCT TYPE
1 CivicRec Annual Fee Renewal Renewable
Annual Recurring Services Initial Term USD 17,490.00
Annual Recurring Services Year 2 USD 18,364.50
Annual Recurring Services Year 3 USD 19,282.73

1. This renewal Statement of Work ("SOW") is between San Bruno, CA shall and Products terms found at: www.civicplus.help/hc/p/legal-stuff By signing this SOW, Customer expressly agrees to the Terms and Conditions throughout the Term of this SOW.

The Terms and Conditions form the entire agreement between Customer and CivicPlus (collectively, referred to The Parties agree the Agreement shall supersede and replace all prior agreements between

2. This SOW shall remain in effect for an initial term from November 1, 2023 through October 31, 2024 (the Initial subsequent Renewal Term, this SOW may be renewed for an additional twelve month

3. Annual Recurring Services shall be invoiced on the first day of the Initial Term and the first day of any of each Renewal Term and be subject to a 5% uplift each Renewal Term. Client will pay all invoices within 30 days of the date of such invoice.

Signature Page to Follow.
199 of 496
ATTACHMENT 4

Page 2 of 3 ends

Acceptance By signing below, the parties are agreeing to be bound by Terms and Conditions found at: www.civicplus.help/hc/p/legal-stuff. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have caused this SOW to be executed by their duly authorized representatives as of the dates below. Client CivicPlus By: By: Name: Name: Title: Title: Date: Date:

200 of 496

Page 3 of 3 ends

Contact Information *all documents must be returned: Master Service Agreement, Statement of Work, and Contact Information Sheet. Organization URL Street Address Address 2 City State Postal Code CivicPlus provides telephone support for all trained clients from 7am 7pm Central Time, Monday-Friday (excluding holidays). Emergency Support is provided on a 24/7/365 basis for representatives named by the Client. Client is responsible for ensuring CivicPlus has current updates. Emergency Contact & Mobile Phone Emergency Contact & Mobile Phone Emergency Contact & Mobile Phone Billing Contact E-Mail Phone Ext. Fax Billing Address Address 2 City State Postal Code Tax ID # Sales Tax Exempt # Billing Terms Account Rep Info Required on Invoice (PO or Job #) Contract Contact Email Phone Ext. Fax Project Contact Email Phone Ext. Fax

201 of 496

City Council Agenda Item
Staff Report

CITY OF SAN BRUNO
DATE: May 27, 2025
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Alex D. McIntyre, City Manager
PREPARED BY: Nick Pegueros, Administrative Services Director & CFO SUBJECT: Consider Adoption of a Resolution Approving an Updated Publicly Available Pay Schedule Effective January 13, 2025 Pursuant to the Public Employees’ Retirement Law (PERL), Public Employees’ Pension Reform Act of 2013 (PEPRA), and Title 2 of the California Code of Regulations (CCR)
BACKGROUND:

On January 14, 2025, and March 25, 2025, staff presented the 2025 Pay Schedule to the City Council for adoption, which incorporated compensation adjustments effective January 13, 2025, and applied to the City’s represented and unrepresented employees. Pursuant to the Public Employees’ Retirement Law (PERL), Public Employees’ Pension Reform Act of 2013 (PEPRA), and Title 2 of the California Code of Regulations (CCR), the City Council is required to adopt a publicly available salary schedule that lists the pay rates for all classifications in the City.

DISCUSSION:

The recommended action updates the salary schedule to ensure that the City’s salary schedule complies with the PERL. Specifically, the following modifications are required at this time:

1. Inclusion of City Councilmember classification to the salary schedule as required by PERL. The updated Pay Schedule includes the addition of the City’s elected positions. The purpose of the addition is to comprehensively reflect compensation on the Pay Schedule. City Council compensation is authorized in San Bruno Municipal Code section §2.04.140 (Salaries of City Council members.), which identifies salary based on an estimated population of the city and in the amount of $486 per month. There is no proposed change to the Municipal Code or compensation amount.

2. Salary range updates for unrepresented classifications, effective July 14, 2025 , as
previously authorized under Resolution No. 2025-28. The salary increase is 2.7 percent to salary ranges. Of special note is this action has no automatic impact on salaries paid to management and executive classifications in the Unrepresented Compensation Plan (Plan.) One feature of the Plan is to provide cost of living adjustments (COLA) to salary ranges for salaried employees, with advancements in their ranges dependent on individual performance. Employees paid on an hourly basis automatically receive the COLA.
202 of 496 Item 6k.

Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
May 27, 2025

Page 2 of 2 ends

3.Incorporation of the side letter agreement between the City and the San Bruno Management Employees Association (SBMEA), scheduled for separate adoption by Resolution on May 27, 2025, and updates the salary range for Police Chief classification.

4.Updated salary schedule format. The Pay Schedule was reformatted for ease of use and clarifying that some positions are paid on schedules other than 40 hours per week or 2,080 per year. The new format consolidates all full-time positions previously separated by represented and unrepresented full-time classifications. The new format also includes each classification’s standard base compensation rate hourly, monthly, and annually.

The Pay Schedule, as presented in Exhibit A to Attachment 1, meets California Public Employees’ Retirement System’s (CalPERS) eight (8) requirements for a publicly available Pay Schedule to be used to determine pay rates. By adopting the proposed updated Pay Schedule dated May 27, 2025, the action rescinds and nullifies all previously approved schedules.

FISCAL IMPACT:

The full cost of the salary range updates have been incorporated in the City Manager’s Recommended Fiscal Year 2025-26 budget. There is no additional cost for the addition of the City Council to the Pay Schedule.

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT:

There is no environmental impact. The action is not a project subject to CEQA. City Council’s action is not considered a “Project” per CEQA Guidelines and therefore no further environmental analysis is required.

RECOMMENDATION:

1. Adopt a resolution approving an updated publicly available Pay Schedule effective January 13, 2025 pursuant to the Public Employees’ Retirement Law (PERL), Public Employees’ Pension Reform Act of 2013 (PEPRA), and Title 2 of the California Code of Regulations (CCR)
ALTERNATIVES:

1. Do not adopt a publicly available Pay Schedule pursuant to the Public Employees’ Retirement Law and risk potential penalties.

2. Amend the Pay Schedule different from staff recommendations.

ATTACHMENTS:

1. Resolution with Exhibit A (Updated Pay Schedule)

203 of 496

1 RESOLUTION NO. 2025 - __

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN BRUNO APPROVING AN UPDATED PUBLICLY AVAILABLE PAY SCHEDULE EFFECTIVE JANUARY 13, 2025 PURSUANT TO THE PUBLIC EMPLOYEES’ RETIREMENT LAW (PERL), PUBLIC EMPLOYEES’ PENSION REFORM ACT OF 2013 (PEPRA), AND TITLE 2 OF THE

CALIFORNIA CODE OF REGULATIONS (CCR)
WHEREAS, the City of San Bruno City Council adopted the 2025 Pay Schedule on January 14, 2025 and March 25, 2025 to reflect salary range modification and equity adjustments for the six represented bargaining units and unrepresented staff, effective the first pay period in January of 2025; and
WHEREAS, the Pay Schedule was adopted in compliance with Public Employees’ Retirement Law (PERL), Public Employees’ Pension Reform Act of 2013 (PEPRA), and Title 2 of the California Code of Regulations (CCR) requiring employee pay rates to be paid pursuant to a publicly available pay schedule that meets the requirements of CCR Section 570.5(a) to qualify as both compensation earnable and pensionable compensation that is reportable to CalPERS; and
WHEREAS, the updated Pay Schedule also includes the addition of the elected official positions (City Council) as authorized in San Bruno Municipal Code section §2.04.140 (Salaries of City Council members.); and
WHEREAS, City Council adopted Resolution No. 2025-28 on March 25, 2025, to provide a 2.7 percent increase in salary ranges, effective July 14, 2025, for classifications covered by the Unrepresented Compensation Plan; and
WHEREAS, City Council adopted a Resolution on May 27, 2025, to ratify a side letter agreement between the City and the San Bruno Management Employees’ Association on the salary range for the Police Chief classification; and
WHEREAS, City staff has reformatted the salary schedule presentation to provide greater ease of use and understanding of the City’s compensation structure; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council hereby rescinds and nullifies all previously adopted salary schedule resolutions and approves and adopts the pay schedule, attached hereto as Exhibit A, effective May 27, 2025.

Exhibit A: Updated 2025 Pay Schedule
---oOo---
I hereby certify that foregoing Resolution No. 2025 - __ was introduced and adopted by the San Bruno City Council at a regular meeting on May 27, 2025, by the following vote:

AYES: Councilmembers:

NOES: Councilmembers:

ABSENT: Councilmembers:
_________________________________
Lupita Huerta, City Clerk
204 of 496 ATTACHMENT 1
2 EXHIBIT A
CITY OF SAN BRUNO EMPLOYEE HOURLY PAY SCHEDULE 2025 – REV 3 [see attached]

205 of 496

EXHIBIT A
City of San Bruno Employee Pay Schedule 2025
Proposed - July 14, 2025
Classification Bargaining Unit Effective
Date
Annual Time
Basis (hours)
Step Hourly
Rate
Monthly Rate Annual Rate
Accountant Mid-Management 1/13/2025 2,080 1 (Min) 44.70$ 7,748$ 92,972$ 2 47.04 8,154 97,853
3 49.51 8,583 102,990
4 52.11 9,033 108,397
5 (Max) 54.85 9,507 114,088 Accounting & Customer Service Rep I Miscellaneous 1/13/2025 2,080 1 (Min) 30.68 5,318 63,816 2 32.29 5,597 67,166
3 33.99 5,891 70,693
4 35.77 6,200 74,404
5 (Max) 37.65 6,526 78,310 Accounting & Customer Service Rep II Miscellaneous 1/13/2025 2,080 1 (Min) 35.28 6,115 73,384 2 37.13 6,436 77,237
3 39.08 6,774 81,292
4 41.13 7,130 85,559
5 (Max) 43.29 7,504 90,051 Accounting & Customer Service Rep III Miscellaneous 1/13/2025 2,080 1 (Min) 40.58 7,034 84,407 2 42.71 7,403 88,838
3 44.95 7,792 93,502
4 47.31 8,201 98,411
5 (Max) 49.80 8,631 103,578 Accounting Manager Mid-Management 1/13/2025 2,080 1 (Min) 62.20 10,782 129,384 2 65.47 11,348 136,177
3 68.91 11,944 143,326
4 72.52 12,571 150,851
5 (Max) 76.33 13,231 158,771
Accounting Supervisor Mid-Management 1/13/2025 2,080 1 (Min) 51.25 8,884 106,605 2 53.94 9,350 112,202
3 56.78 9,841 118,092
4 59.76 10,358 124,292
5 (Max) 62.89 10,901 130,818
Administrative Analyst I Unrepresented 7/14/2025 1,872 1 (Min) 49.72 7,756 93,069 2 52.32 8,163 97,951
3 55.07 8,591 103,087
4 57.96 9,042 108,502
5 (Max) 61.00 9,516 114,196 Administrative Analyst II Unrepresented 7/14/2025 1,872 1 (Min) 57.16 8,917 107,006 Open range
5 (Max) 70.15 10,943 131,316
Administrative Services Director/CFO Unrepresented 7/14/2025 1,872 1 (Min) 108.94 16,995 203,942 Open range
5 (Max) 136.22 21,250 254,998
Administrative Technician I Unrepresented 7/14/2025 1,872 1 (Min) 41.58 6,486 77,837 2 43.76 6,827 81,922
3 46.06 7,185 86,223
4 48.48 7,562 90,750
5 (Max) 51.02 7,960 95,514 Administrative Technician II Unrepresented 7/14/2025 1,872 1 (Min) 48.92 7,631 91,572 2 51.48 8,032 96,379
3 54.19 8,453 101,438
4 57.03 8,897 106,765
5 (Max) 60.03 9,364 112,370 Assistant Administrative Services Director Unrepresented 7/14/2025 1,872 1 (Min) 92.17 14,379 172,543 Open range
5 (Max) 113.10 17,644 211,729
Assistant City Manager Unrepresented 7/14/2025 1,872 1 (Min) 117.49 18,329 219,946 Open range
5 (Max) 144.18 22,493 269,911
Assistant Community Development Director Mid-Management 1/13/2025 2,080 1 (Min) 76.98 13,344 160,126 2 81.03 14,044 168,533
3 85.28 14,782 177,381
4 89.76 15,558 186,693
5 (Max) 94.47 16,375 196,495
Assistant Engineer Mid-Management 1/13/2025 2,080 1 (Min) 51.34 8,899 106,790 2 54.04 9,366 112,397
3 56.87 9,858 118,298
4 59.86 10,376 124,508
5 (Max) 63.00 10,920 131,045
206 of 496
ATTACHMENT 1, Exhibit A
City of San Bruno Employee Pay Schedule 2025
Proposed - July 14, 2025
Classification Bargaining Unit Effective
Date
Annual Time
Basis (hours)
Step Hourly
Rate
Monthly Rate Annual Rate
Assistant Planner Mid-Management 1/13/2025 2,080 1 (Min) 42.15 7,306 87,669 2 44.36 7,689 92,272
3 46.69 8,093 97,116
4 49.14 8,518 102,215
5 (Max) 51.72 8,965 107,581 Assistant To City Manager Unrepresented 7/14/2025 1,872 1 (Min) 70.91 11,062 132,749 Open range
5 (Max) 87.02 13,575 162,905
Associate Civil Engineer Mid-Management 1/13/2025 2,080 1 (Min) 59.04 10,234 122,809 2 62.14 10,771 129,256
3 65.40 11,337 136,042
4 68.84 11,932 143,185
5 (Max) 72.45 12,558 150,702
Associate Planner Mid-Management 1/13/2025 2,080 1 (Min) 48.47 8,402 100,821 2 51.02 8,843 106,114
3 53.69 9,307 111,685
4 56.51 9,796 117,548
5 (Max) 59.48 10,310 123,719
Building Division Supervisor Mid-Management 1/13/2025 2,080 1 (Min) 43.19 7,487 89,845 2 45.46 7,880 94,562
3 47.85 8,294 99,526
4 50.36 8,729 104,751
5 (Max) 53.01 9,188 110,251 Building Inspector I Mid-Management 1/13/2025 2,080 1 (Min) 43.19 7,487 89,845 2 45.46 7,880 94,562
3 47.85 8,294 99,526
4 50.36 8,729 104,751
5 (Max) 53.01 9,188 110,251 Building Inspector II Mid-Management 1/13/2025 2,080 1 (Min) 48.47 8,402 100,821 2 51.02 8,843 106,114
3 53.69 9,307 111,685
4 56.51 9,796 117,548
5 (Max) 59.48 10,310 123,719
CATV Business Manager Mid-Management 1/13/2025 2,080 1 (Min) 62.20 10,782 129,384 2 65.47 11,348 136,177
3 68.91 11,944 143,326
4 72.52 12,571 150,851
5 (Max) 76.33 13,231 158,771
CATV Director (CityNet Services Director) Management 1/13/2025 2,080 1 (Min) 98.13 17,009 204,113 2 103.28 17,902 214,829
3 108.71 18,842 226,107
4 114.41 19,832 237,978
5 (Max) 120.42 20,873 250,472
CATV Headend Technician Miscellaneous 1/13/2025 2,080 1 (Min) 46.89 8,128 97,536 2 49.35 8,555 102,657
3 51.95 9,004 108,046
4 54.67 9,477 113,719
5 (Max) 57.54 9,974 119,689 CATV Programming Technology Manager Mid-Management 1/13/2025 2,080 1 (Min) 52.88 9,166 109,986 2 55.65 9,647 115,761
3 58.58 10,153 121,838
4 61.65 10,686 128,234
5 (Max) 64.89 11,247 134,967
CATV System Engineer Mid-Management 1/13/2025 2,080 1 (Min) 62.20 10,782 129,384 2 65.47 11,348 136,177
3 68.91 11,944 143,326
4 72.52 12,571 150,851
5 (Max) 76.33 13,231 158,771
CATV Technician I Miscellaneous 1/13/2025 2,080 1 (Min) 40.17 6,963 83,554 2 42.28 7,328 87,941
3 44.50 7,713 92,557
4 46.83 8,118 97,417
5 (Max) 49.29 8,544 102,531 CATV Technician II Miscellaneous 1/13/2025 2,080 1 (Min) 41.39 7,175 86,100 2 43.57 7,552 90,620
3 45.85 7,948 95,377
4 48.26 8,365 100,385
5 (Max) 50.80 8,805 105,655

207 of 496

City of San Bruno Employee Pay Schedule 2025
Proposed - July 14, 2025
Classification Bargaining Unit Effective
Date
Annual Time
Basis (hours)
Step Hourly
Rate
Monthly Rate Annual Rate
CATV Technician III Miscellaneous 1/13/2025 2,080 1 (Min) 42.63 7,389 88,670 2 44.87 7,777 93,326
3 47.22 8,185 98,225
4 49.70 8,615 103,382
5 (Max) 52.31 9,067 108,809 Chief Building Official Mid-Management 1/13/2025 2,080 1 (Min) 71.03 12,312 147,738 2 74.76 12,958 155,494
3 78.68 13,638 163,658
4 82.81 14,354 172,250
5 (Max) 87.16 15,108 181,293
City Clerk Unrepresented 1/13/2025 1,872 1 (Min) 67.04 10,458 125,493 Open range
5 (Max) 82.27 12,834 154,004
City Councilmember* N/A - Elected Official 1/13/2025 N/A 5 (Max) n/a 486$ 5,832$ City Manager N/A - agreement 1/13/2025 2,080 5 (Max) 159.62$ 27,667$ 332,000$ Citynet Services Technical Manager Mid-Management 1/13/2025 2,080 1 (Min) 63.32 10,976 131,716 2 66.65 11,553 138,631
3 70.15 12,159 145,909
4 73.83 12,797 153,569
5 (Max) 77.71 13,469 161,631
Code Enforcement Officer I Police 1/13/2025 2,080 1 (Min) 40.35 6,995 83,937 2 42.47 7,362 88,343
3 44.70 7,748 92,981
4 47.05 8,155 97,863
5 (Max) 49.52 8,583 103,001 Code Enforcement Officer II Police 1/13/2025 2,080 1 (Min) 44.39 7,694 92,329 2 46.72 8,098 97,176
3 49.17 8,523 102,278
4 51.75 8,971 107,648
5 (Max) 54.47 9,442 113,299 Community Development Director Management 1/13/2025 2,080 1 (Min) 95.69 16,587 199,045 2 100.72 17,458 209,495
3 106.01 18,374 220,494
4 111.57 19,339 232,070
5 (Max) 117.43 20,354 244,253
Community Development Technician I Miscellaneous 1/13/2025 2,080 1 (Min) 35.99 6,238 74,851 2 37.88 6,565 78,781
3 39.86 6,910 82,917
4 41.96 7,273 87,270
5 (Max) 44.16 7,654 91,852 Community Development Technician II Miscellaneous 1/13/2025 2,080 1 (Min) 41.39 7,175 86,100 2 43.57 7,552 90,620
3 45.85 7,948 95,377
4 48.26 8,365 100,385
5 (Max) 50.80 8,805 105,655 Community Services Director Management 1/13/2025 2,080 1 (Min) 96.23 16,680 200,158 2 101.28 17,556 210,666
3 106.60 18,477 221,726
4 112.20 19,447 233,367
5 (Max) 118.09 20,468 245,618
Community Services Officer II Police 1/13/2025 2,080 1 (Min) 30.15 5,225 62,702 2 31.73 5,500 65,994
3 33.39 5,788 69,459
4 35.15 6,092 73,105
5 (Max) 36.99 6,412 76,943 Community Services Superintendent Mid-Management 1/13/2025 2,080 1 (Min) 61.44 10,650 127,802 2 64.67 11,209 134,512
3 68.06 11,798 141,574
4 71.64 12,417 149,007
5 (Max) 75.40 13,069 156,829
Community Services Technician I Miscellaneous 1/13/2025 2,080 1 (Min) 35.99 6,238 74,851 2 37.88 6,565 78,781
3 39.86 6,910 82,917
4 41.96 7,273 87,270
5 (Max) 44.16 7,654 91,852

208 of 496

City of San Bruno Employee Pay Schedule 2025
Proposed - July 14, 2025
Classification Bargaining Unit Effective
Date
Annual Time
Basis (hours)
Step Hourly
Rate
Monthly Rate Annual Rate
Community Services Technician II Miscellaneous 1/13/2025 2,080 1 (Min) 41.39 7,175 86,100 2 43.57 7,552 90,620
3 45.85 7,948 95,377
4 48.26 8,365 100,385
5 (Max) 50.80 8,805 105,655 Computer Support Technician Miscellaneous 1/13/2025 2,080 1 (Min) 41.21 7,143 85,711 2 43.37 7,518 90,211
3 45.65 7,912 94,947
4 48.04 8,328 99,931
5 (Max) 50.57 8,765 105,178 Custodial Services Leader Miscellaneous 1/13/2025 2,080 1 (Min) 37.72 6,538 78,450 2 39.70 6,881 82,569
3 41.78 7,242 86,904
4 43.97 7,622 91,466
5 (Max) 46.28 8,022 96,268 Custodian Miscellaneous 1/13/2025 2,080 1 (Min) 32.80 5,685 68,218 2 34.52 5,983 71,799
3 36.33 6,297 75,568
4 38.24 6,628 79,536
5 (Max) 40.25 6,976 83,711 Deputy Building Official Mid-Management 1/13/2025 2,080 1 (Min) 64.01 11,095 133,142 2 67.37 11,677 140,125
3 70.90 12,290 147,481
4 74.63 12,935 155,222
5 (Max) 78.55 13,615 163,378
Deputy City Clerk Unrepresented 7/14/2025 1,872 1 (Min) 44.43 6,930 83,165 2 46.76 7,294 87,527
3 49.21 7,676 92,118
4 51.79 8,079 96,949
5 (Max) 54.51 8,503 102,035 Deputy Director - Comm Service Mid-Management 1/13/2025 2,080 1 (Min) 70.81 12,275 147,294 2 74.53 12,919 155,027
3 78.45 13,597 163,166
4 82.56 14,311 171,732
5 (Max) 86.90 15,062 180,748
Deputy Public Works Dir - PW Admin & Engineering Mid-Management 1/13/2025 2,080 1 (Min) 80.85 14,014 168,170 2 85.10 14,750 176,999
3 89.56 15,524 186,292
4 94.27 16,339 196,072
5 (Max) 99.21 17,197 206,366
Deputy Public Works Dir - PW Utilities & Operations Mid-Management 1/13/2025 2,080 1 (Min) 76.45 13,252 159,020 2 80.47 13,947 167,369
3 84.69 14,680 176,156
4 89.14 15,450 185,404
5 (Max) 93.82 16,261 195,137
Deputy Public Works Dir - PW Utilities & Operations with PE Mid-Management 1/13/2025 2,080 1 (Min) 80.85 14,014 168,170 2 85.10 14,750 176,999
3 89.56 15,524 186,292
4 94.27 16,339 196,072
5 (Max) 99.21 17,197 206,366
Engineer Tech/PW Inspector Miscellaneous 1/13/2025 2,080 1 (Min) 47.21 8,183 98,201 2 49.69 8,613 103,356
3 52.30 9,065 108,782
4 55.04 9,541 114,494
5 (Max) 57.93 10,042 120,504
Executive Assistant Miscellaneous 1/13/2025 2,080 1 (Min) 38.76 6,718 80,620 2 40.79 7,071 84,852
3 42.94 7,442 89,307
4 45.19 7,833 93,996
5 (Max) 47.56 8,244 98,930 Executive Assistant to the City Manager Unrepresented 7/14/2025 1,872 1 (Min) 48.92 7,631 91,572 2 51.48 8,032 96,379
3 54.19 8,453 101,438
4 57.03 8,897 106,765
5 (Max) 60.03 9,364 112,370

209 of 496

City of San Bruno Employee Pay Schedule 2025
Proposed - July 14, 2025
Classification Bargaining Unit Effective
Date
Annual Time
Basis (hours)
Step Hourly
Rate
Monthly Rate Annual Rate
Facilities Tech I Miscellaneous 1/13/2025 2,080 1 (Min) 35.99 6,238 74,851 2 37.88 6,565 78,781
3 39.86 6,910 82,917
4 41.96 7,273 87,270
5 (Max) 44.16 7,654 91,852 Facilities Tech II Miscellaneous 1/13/2025 2,080 1 (Min) 41.39 7,175 86,100 2 43.57 7,552 90,620
3 45.85 7,948 95,377
4 48.26 8,365 100,385
5 (Max) 50.80 8,805 105,655 Field Supervisor Mid-Management 1/13/2025 2,080 1 (Min) 49.60 8,597 103,169 2 52.20 9,049 108,586
3 54.95 9,524 114,287
4 57.83 10,024 120,287
5 (Max) 60.87 10,550 126,602
Field Supervisor - CATV Mid-Management 1/13/2025 2,080 1 (Min) 49.60 8,597 103,169 2 52.20 9,049 108,586
3 54.95 9,524 114,287
4 57.83 10,024 120,287
5 (Max) 60.87 10,550 126,602
Field Supervisor - Parks Mid-Management 1/13/2025 2,080 1 (Min) 49.60 8,597 103,169 2 52.20 9,049 108,586
3 54.95 9,524 114,287
4 57.83 10,024 120,287
5 (Max) 60.87 10,550 126,602
Finance Manager Mid-Management 1/13/2025 2,080 1 (Min) 62.20 10,782 129,384 2 65.47 11,348 136,177
3 68.91 11,944 143,326
4 72.52 12,571 150,851
5 (Max) 76.33 13,231 158,771
Financial Services Supervisor Mid-Management 1/13/2025 2,080 1 (Min) 51.25 8,884 106,605 2 53.94 9,350 112,202
3 56.78 9,841 118,092
4 59.76 10,358 124,292
5 (Max) 62.89 10,901 130,818
Fire Battalion Chief (40-hour) Public Safety Mid-Management 1/13/2025 2,080 1 (Min) 86.97 15,075 180,898 2 91.54 15,866 190,395
3 96.34 16,699 200,390
4 101.40 17,576 210,911
5 (Max) 106.72 18,499 221,984
Fire Battalion Chief (56-hour) Public Safety Mid-Management 1/13/2025 2,912 1 (Min) 62.12 15,075 180,898 2 65.38 15,866 190,395
3 68.82 16,699 200,390
4 72.43 17,576 210,911
5 (Max) 76.23 18,499 221,984
Fire Captain (40-hour) Fire 1/13/2025 2,080 1 (Min) 66.80 11,578 138,940 2 70.30 12,186 146,234
3 74.00 12,826 153,911
4 77.88 13,499 161,992
5 (Max) 81.97 14,208 170,496
Fire Captain (56-hour) Fire 1/13/2025 2,912 1 (Min) 47.71 11,578 138,940 2 50.22 12,186 146,234
3 52.85 12,826 153,911
4 55.63 13,499 161,992
5 (Max) 58.55 14,208 170,496
Fire Chief Management 1/13/2025 2,080 1 (Min) 109.94 19,057 228,685 2 115.72 20,058 240,691
3 121.79 21,111 253,327
4 128.19 22,219 266,627
5 (Max) 134.92 23,385 280,624
Fire Inspector Fire 1/13/2025 2,080 1 (Min) 51.07 8,852 106,230 2 53.75 9,317 111,807
3 56.58 9,806 117,677
4 59.55 10,321 123,855
5 (Max) 62.67 10,863 130,357

210 of 496

City of San Bruno Employee Pay Schedule 2025
Proposed - July 14, 2025
Classification Bargaining Unit Effective
Date
Annual Time
Basis (hours)
Step Hourly
Rate
Monthly Rate Annual Rate
Firefighter (40-hour) Fire 1/13/2025 2,080 1 (Min) 55.22 9,571 114,853 2 58.12 10,074 120,883
3 61.17 10,602 127,230
4 64.38 11,159 133,909
5 (Max) 67.76 11,745 140,939
Firefighter (56-hour) Fire 1/13/2025 2,912 1 (Min) 39.44 9,571 114,853 2 41.51 10,074 120,883
3 43.69 10,602 127,230
4 45.99 11,159 133,909
5 (Max) 48.40 11,745 140,939
Firefighter Recruit Fire 1/13/2025 2,080 1 (Min) 49.70 8,614 103,372 Food Services Coordinator Miscellaneous 1/13/2025 2,080 1 (Min) 37.98 6,584 79,002 2 39.98 6,929 83,150
3 42.07 7,293 87,515
4 44.28 7,676 92,109
5 (Max) 46.61 8,079 96,945 Human Resources Manager Unrepresented 7/14/2025 1,872 1 (Min) 70.91 11,062 132,749 Open range
5 (Max) 87.02 13,575 162,905
Information Technology Associate Mid-Management 1/13/2025 2,080 1 (Min) 48.54 8,414 100,964 2 51.09 8,855 106,264
3 53.77 9,320 111,843
4 56.59 9,810 117,715
5 (Max) 59.56 10,325 123,895
Information Technology Manager Mid-Management 1/13/2025 2,080 1 (Min) 65.89 11,422 137,060 2 69.35 12,021 144,256
3 72.99 12,652 151,829
4 76.83 13,317 159,800
5 (Max) 80.86 14,016 168,190
Lead Customer Service & Tech Support Rep Miscellaneous 1/13/2025 2,080 1 (Min) 45.45 7,877 94,527 2 47.83 8,291 99,489
3 50.34 8,726 104,712
4 52.99 9,184 110,210
5 (Max) 55.77 9,666 115,996 Lead Maintenance Worker Miscellaneous 1/13/2025 2,080 1 (Min) 41.39 7,175 86,100 2 43.57 7,552 90,620
3 45.85 7,948 95,377
4 48.26 8,365 100,385
5 (Max) 50.80 8,805 105,655 Lead Water System Operator - Pumps Miscellaneous 1/13/2025 2,080 1 (Min) 48.27 8,367 100,408 2 50.81 8,807 105,679
3 53.47 9,269 111,227
4 56.28 9,756 117,067
5 (Max) 59.24 10,268 123,213
Lead Water Systems Operator - Field Miscellaneous 1/13/2025 2,080 1 (Min) 48.27 8,367 100,408 2 50.81 8,807 105,679
3 53.47 9,269 111,227
4 56.28 9,756 117,067
5 (Max) 59.24 10,268 123,213
Lead Water Systems Operator - Wells Miscellaneous 1/13/2025 2,080 1 (Min) 48.27 8,367 100,408 2 50.81 8,807 105,679
3 53.47 9,269 111,227
4 56.28 9,756 117,067
5 (Max) 59.24 10,268 123,213
Librarian I Miscellaneous 1/13/2025 2,080 1 (Min) 37.74 6,542 78,500 2 39.72 6,885 82,622
3 41.81 7,247 86,959
4 44.00 7,627 91,525
5 (Max) 46.31 8,027 96,330 Librarian II Miscellaneous 1/13/2025 2,080 1 (Min) 43.40 7,522 90,263 2 45.67 7,917 95,002
3 48.07 8,332 99,989
4 50.60 8,770 105,239
5 (Max) 53.25 9,230 110,764 Library Assistant I Miscellaneous 1/13/2025 2,080 1 (Min) 28.72 4,978 59,741 2 30.23 5,240 62,877
3 31.82 5,515 66,178
4 33.49 5,804 69,652
5 (Max) 35.24 6,109 73,309

211 of 496

City of San Bruno Employee Pay Schedule 2025
Proposed - July 14, 2025
Classification Bargaining Unit Effective
Date
Annual Time
Basis (hours)
Step Hourly
Rate
Monthly Rate Annual Rate
Library Assistant II Miscellaneous 1/13/2025 2,080 1 (Min) 33.04 5,727 68,719 2 34.77 6,027 72,327
3 36.60 6,344 76,124
4 38.52 6,677 80,121
5 (Max) 40.54 7,027 84,327 Library Services Coordinator Miscellaneous 1/13/2025 2,080 1 (Min) 37.98 6,584 79,002 2 39.98 6,929 83,150
3 42.07 7,293 87,515
4 44.28 7,676 92,109
5 (Max) 46.61 8,079 96,945 Library Services Manager Mid-Management 1/13/2025 2,080 1 (Min) 56.94 9,869 118,434 2 59.93 10,388 124,651
3 63.07 10,933 131,195
4 66.39 11,507 138,083
5 (Max) 69.87 12,111 145,333
Maintenance Services Manager Series Mid-Management 1/13/2025 2,080 1 (Min) 63.32 10,976 131,716 2 66.65 11,553 138,631
3 70.15 12,159 145,909
4 73.83 12,797 153,569
5 (Max) 77.71 13,469 161,631
Maintenance Worker I Miscellaneous 1/13/2025 2,080 1 (Min) 31.28 5,421 65,058 2 32.92 5,706 68,473
3 34.65 6,006 72,068
4 36.47 6,321 75,851
5 (Max) 38.38 6,653 79,834 Maintenance Worker II Miscellaneous 1/13/2025 2,080 1 (Min) 35.99 6,238 74,851 2 37.88 6,565 78,781
3 39.86 6,910 82,917
4 41.96 7,273 87,270
5 (Max) 44.16 7,654 91,852 Management Analyst I Mid-Management 1/13/2025 2,080 1 (Min) 43.61 7,559 90,710 2 45.90 7,956 95,472
3 48.31 8,374 100,485
4 50.85 8,813 105,760
5 (Max) 53.52 9,276 111,312 Management Analyst II Mid-Management 1/13/2025 2,080 1 (Min) 50.14 8,691 104,294 2 52.77 9,147 109,769
3 55.54 9,628 115,532
4 58.46 10,133 121,597
5 (Max) 61.53 10,665 127,981
Mechanic I Miscellaneous 1/13/2025 2,080 1 (Min) 35.99 6,238 74,851 2 37.88 6,565 78,781
3 39.86 6,910 82,917
4 41.96 7,273 87,270
5 (Max) 44.16 7,654 91,852 Mechanic II Miscellaneous 1/13/2025 2,080 1 (Min) 41.39 7,175 86,100 2 43.57 7,552 90,620
3 45.85 7,948 95,377
4 48.26 8,365 100,385
5 (Max) 50.80 8,805 105,655 Nutrition Program Manager Mid-Management 1/13/2025 2,080 1 (Min) 48.21 8,356 100,272 2 50.74 8,795 105,536
3 53.40 9,256 111,077
4 56.21 9,742 116,908
5 (Max) 59.16 10,254 123,046
Parks And Facilities Manager Mid-Management 1/13/2025 2,080 1 (Min) 58.85 10,200 122,401 2 61.94 10,736 128,827
3 65.19 11,299 135,591
4 68.61 11,892 142,709
5 (Max) 72.21 12,517 150,201
Parks Maintenance Technician I {Utility I - Tree I} Miscellaneous 1/13/2025 2,080 1 (Min) 35.99 6,238 74,851 2 37.88 6,565 78,781
3 39.86 6,910 82,917
4 41.96 7,273 87,270
5 (Max) 44.16 7,654 91,852

212 of 496

City of San Bruno Employee Pay Schedule 2025
Proposed - July 14, 2025
Classification Bargaining Unit Effective
Date
Annual Time
Basis (hours)
Step Hourly
Rate
Monthly Rate Annual Rate
Parks Maintenance Technician II {Utility II - Tree II} Miscellaneous 1/13/2025 2,080 1 (Min) 41.39 7,175 86,100 2 43.57 7,552 90,620
3 45.85 7,948 95,377
4 48.26 8,365 100,385
5 (Max) 50.80 8,805 105,655 Planning And Housing Manager Mid-Management 1/13/2025 2,080 1 (Min) 71.03 12,312 147,738 2 74.76 12,958 155,494
3 78.68 13,638 163,658
4 82.81 14,354 172,250
5 (Max) 87.16 15,108 181,293
Police Captain Public Safety Mid-Management 1/13/2025 2,080 1 (Min) 101.15 17,533 210,396 2 106.46 18,453 221,442
3 112.05 19,422 233,067
4 117.93 20,442 245,304
5 (Max) 124.13 21,515 258,182
Police Chief Management 5/27/2025 2,080 1 (Min) 117.64 20,391 244,693 Open range
5 (Max) 144.36 25,022 300,268
Police Clerk I Police 1/13/2025 2,080 1 (Min) 32.37 5,610 67,325 2 34.07 5,905 70,859
3 35.86 6,215 74,580
4 37.74 6,541 78,495
5 (Max) 39.72 6,885 82,616 Police Clerk II Police 1/13/2025 2,080 1 (Min) 35.60 6,171 74,049 2 37.47 6,495 77,936
3 39.44 6,836 82,028
4 41.51 7,195 86,334
5 (Max) 43.69 7,572 90,867 Police Communications & Records Supervisor Mid-Management 1/13/2025 2,080 1 (Min) 63.55 11,016 132,190 2 66.89 11,594 139,130
3 70.40 12,203 146,435
4 74.10 12,844 154,122
5 (Max) 77.99 13,518 162,214
Police Corporal Police 1/13/2025 2,080 1 (Min) 58.01 10,056 120,671 2 61.06 10,584 127,006
3 64.27 11,139 133,674
4 67.64 11,724 140,692
5 (Max) 71.19 12,340 148,078
Police Lieutenant Public Safety Mid-Management 1/13/2025 2,080 1 (Min) 82.43 14,288 171,458 2 86.76 15,038 180,459
3 91.31 15,828 189,934
4 96.11 16,659 199,905
5 (Max) 101.15 17,533 210,400
Police Officer Police 1/13/2025 2,080 1 (Min) 53.97 9,354 112,254 2 56.80 9,846 118,147
3 59.78 10,362 124,350
4 62.92 10,906 130,878
5 (Max) 66.23 11,479 137,749
Police Recruit Police 1/13/2025 2,080 1 (Min) 48.57 8,419 101,031 Police Sergeant Public Safety Mid-Management 1/13/2025 2,080 1 (Min) 66.46 11,521 138,247 2 69.95 12,125 145,505
3 73.63 12,762 153,144
4 77.49 13,432 161,184
5 (Max) 81.56 14,137 169,646
Principal Civil Engineer Mid-Management 1/13/2025 2,080 1 (Min) 71.06 12,318 147,813 2 74.79 12,964 155,573
3 78.72 13,645 163,741
4 82.85 14,361 172,337
5 (Max) 87.20 15,115 181,385
Principal Planner Mid-Management 1/13/2025 2,080 1 (Min) 64.01 11,095 133,142 2 67.37 11,677 140,125
3 70.90 12,290 147,481
4 74.63 12,935 155,222
5 (Max) 78.55 13,615 163,378
Principal Special Projects Manager Unrepresented 7/14/2025 1,872 1 (Min) 92.17 14,379 172,543 Open range
5 (Max) 158.42 24,713 296,559

213 of 496

City of San Bruno Employee Pay Schedule 2025
Proposed - July 14, 2025
Classification Bargaining Unit Effective
Date
Annual Time
Basis (hours)
Step Hourly
Rate
Monthly Rate Annual Rate
Property And Evidence Technician Police 1/13/2025 2,080 1 (Min) 35.53 6,158 73,894 2 37.39 6,481 77,774
3 39.35 6,821 81,857
4 41.42 7,180 86,154
5 (Max) 43.59 7,556 90,677 Public Safety Dispatcher I Police 1/13/2025 2,080 1 (Min) 42.21 7,316 87,793 2 44.42 7,700 92,402
3 46.76 8,104 97,253
4 49.21 8,530 102,359
5 (Max) 51.79 8,978 107,733 Public Safety Dispatcher II Police 1/13/2025 2,080 1 (Min) 46.42 8,046 96,556 2 48.86 8,469 101,626
3 51.42 8,913 106,961
4 54.12 9,381 112,576
5 (Max) 56.96 9,874 118,487 Public Works Director Management 1/13/2025 2,080 1 (Min) 98.13 17,009 204,113 2 103.28 17,902 214,829
3 108.71 18,842 226,107
4 114.41 19,832 237,978
5 (Max) 120.42 20,873 250,472
Pump Mechanic I Miscellaneous 1/13/2025 2,080 1 (Min) 35.99 6,238 74,851 2 37.88 6,565 78,781
3 39.86 6,910 82,917
4 41.96 7,273 87,270
5 (Max) 44.16 7,654 91,852 Pump Mechanic II Miscellaneous 1/13/2025 2,080 1 (Min) 41.39 7,175 86,100 2 43.57 7,552 90,620
3 45.85 7,948 95,377
4 48.26 8,365 100,385
5 (Max) 50.80 8,805 105,655 Recreation Services Coordinator Miscellaneous 1/13/2025 2,080 1 (Min) 37.98 6,584 79,002 2 39.98 6,929 83,150
3 42.07 7,293 87,515
4 44.28 7,676 92,109
5 (Max) 46.61 8,079 96,945 Recreation Services Manager Mid-Management 1/13/2025 2,080 1 (Min) 52.19 9,046 108,558 2 54.93 9,521 114,257
3 57.82 10,021 120,256
4 60.85 10,547 126,569
5 (Max) 64.05 11,101 133,214
Recreation Services Supervisor Mid-Management 1/13/2025 2,080 1 (Min) 49.60 8,597 103,169 2 52.20 9,049 108,586
3 54.95 9,524 114,287
4 57.83 10,024 120,287
5 (Max) 60.87 10,550 126,602
Secretary Miscellaneous 1/13/2025 2,080 1 (Min) 35.23 6,107 73,284 2 37.08 6,428 77,131
3 39.03 6,765 81,181
4 41.08 7,120 85,443
5 (Max) 43.23 7,494 89,928 Senior Administrative Analyst Unrepresented 7/14/2025 1,872 1 (Min) 65.74 10,255 123,056 Open range
5 (Max) 80.67 12,584 151,013
Senior Administrative Technician Unrepresented 7/14/2025 1,872 1 (Min) 56.25 8,776 105,308 2 59.21 9,236 110,835
3 62.32 9,721 116,654
4 65.59 10,232 122,779
5 (Max) 69.03 10,769 129,225
Senior Civil Engineer Mid-Management 1/13/2025 2,080 1 (Min) 65.06 11,276 135,317 2 68.47 11,868 142,421
3 72.07 12,492 149,899
4 75.85 13,147 157,768
5 (Max) 79.83 13,838 166,051
Senior Code Enforcement Officer Police 1/13/2025 2,080 1 (Min) 49.96 8,659 103,911 2 52.58 9,114 109,366
3 55.34 9,592 115,108
4 58.25 10,096 121,151
5 (Max) 61.30 10,626 127,511

214 of 496

City of San Bruno Employee Pay Schedule 2025
Proposed - July 14, 2025
Classification Bargaining Unit Effective
Date
Annual Time
Basis (hours)
Step Hourly
Rate
Monthly Rate Annual Rate
Senior Planner Mid-Management 1/13/2025 2,080 1 (Min) 57.33 9,937 119,249 2 60.34 10,459 125,510
3 63.51 11,008 132,099
4 66.84 11,586 139,034
5 (Max) 70.35 12,194 146,334
Systems Administrator Mid-Management 1/13/2025 2,080 1 (Min) 53.91 9,344 112,133 2 56.74 9,835 118,020
3 59.72 10,351 124,216
4 62.85 10,895 130,737
5 (Max) 66.15 11,467 137,601
Warehouse Clerk Miscellaneous 1/13/2025 2,080 1 (Min) 31.28 5,421 65,058 2 32.92 5,706 68,473
3 34.65 6,006 72,068
4 36.47 6,321 75,851
5 (Max) 38.38 6,653 79,834 Water Field Service Supervisor Mid-Management 1/13/2025 2,080 1 (Min) 53.67 9,303 111,636 2 56.49 9,791 117,496
3 59.45 10,305 123,665
4 62.58 10,846 130,157
5 (Max) 65.86 11,416 136,991
Water Quality & Prod Sup Mid-Management 1/13/2025 2,080 1 (Min) 53.67 9,303 111,636 2 56.49 9,791 117,496
3 59.45 10,305 123,665
4 62.58 10,846 130,157
5 (Max) 65.86 11,416 136,991
Water Quality Technician I Miscellaneous 1/13/2025 2,080 1 (Min) 35.99 6,238 74,851 2 37.88 6,565 78,781
3 39.86 6,910 82,917
4 41.96 7,273 87,270
5 (Max) 44.16 7,654 91,852 Water Quality Technician II Miscellaneous 1/13/2025 2,080 1 (Min) 41.39 7,175 86,100 2 43.57 7,552 90,620
3 45.85 7,948 95,377
4 48.26 8,365 100,385
5 (Max) 50.80 8,805 105,655 Water System & Conservation Manager Mid-Management 1/13/2025 2,080 1 (Min) 56.47 9,788 117,457 2 59.43 10,302 123,624
3 62.55 10,843 130,114
4 65.84 11,412 136,945
5 (Max) 69.30 12,011 144,134
Water Systems Manager Mid-Management 1/13/2025 2,080 1 (Min) 61.72 10,698 128,371 2 64.96 11,259 135,110
3 68.37 11,850 142,204
4 71.96 12,472 149,669
5 (Max) 75.73 13,127 157,527
Water Systems Operator I Miscellaneous 1/13/2025 2,080 1 (Min) 36.70 6,361 76,331 2 38.62 6,695 80,338
3 40.65 7,046 84,556
4 42.79 7,416 88,995
5 (Max) 45.03 7,806 93,668 Water Systems Operator II Miscellaneous 1/13/2025 2,080 1 (Min) 41.97 7,275 87,304 2 44.18 7,657 91,887
3 46.50 8,059 96,711
4 48.94 8,482 101,788
5 (Max) 51.51$ 8,928$ 107,132$

215 of 496

City of San Bruno Employee Pay Schedule 2025
Proposed - July 14, 2025
Classification Bargaining Unit Effective
Date
Annual Time
Basis (hours)
Step Hourly
Rate
Monthly Rate Annual Rate
Classification Bargaining Unit** Effective
Date
Step 1
(Min)
Step 2 Step 3 Step 4 Step 5
(Max)
Special Assistant Part-time/Temporary/Seasonal 1/13/2025 16.50$ Open range 77.34$ CityNet Services Production Assistant Part-time/Temporary/Seasonal 1/13/2025 20.63 Open range 26.81 CityNet Services Special Assistant Part-time/Temporary/Seasonal 1/13/2025 27.84 Open range 34.03 Library Page Part-time/Temporary/Seasonal 1/13/2025 16.50 17.33 18.19 19.10 20.06 Library Aide Part-time/Temporary/Seasonal 1/13/2025 19.59 20.57 21.60 22.68 23.82 Library Assistant I (PT Temp) Part-time/Temporary/Seasonal 1/13/2025 23.72 24.90 26.15 27.46 28.83 Library Assistant II (PT Temp) Part-time/Temporary/Seasonal 1/13/2025 28.88 30.32 31.83 33.43 35.10 Librarian (On-Call Per-Diem) Part-time/Temporary/Seasonal 1/13/2025 - - - - 38.16 Recreation Leader I Part-time/Temporary/Seasonal 1/13/2025 16.50 17.33 18.19 19.10 20.06 Recreation Leader II Part-time/Temporary/Seasonal 1/13/2025 19.59 20.57 21.60 22.68 23.82 Recreation Specialist Part-time/Temporary/Seasonal 1/13/2025 23.72 24.90 26.15 27.46 28.83 Maintenance Assistant Part-time/Temporary/Seasonal 1/13/2025 28.88 30.32 31.83 33.43 35.10 Bus Driver Part-time/Temporary/Seasonal 1/13/2025 20.63 21.87 22.97 24.11 25.32 Lifeguard / Swim Instructor I Part-time/Temporary/Seasonal 1/13/2025 16.50 17.33 18.19 19.10 20.06 Lifeguard / Swim Instructor II Part-time/Temporary/Seasonal 1/13/2025 17.49 18.37 19.28 20.25 21.26 Water Safety Instructor I Part-time/Temporary/Seasonal 1/13/2025 17.82 18.71 19.65 20.63 21.66 Water Safety Instructor II Part-time/Temporary/Seasonal 1/13/2025 19.14 20.10 21.10 22.16 23.27 Community Services (PT Temp) Part-time/Temporary/Seasonal 1/13/2025 30.94 32.48 34.11 35.81 37.60 Dispatcher (Per-Diem) Part-time/Temporary/Seasonal 1/13/2025 53.63 Police Clerk (Per-Diem) Part-time/Temporary/Seasonal 1/13/2025 36.09$ * Councilmember salary is monthly as set by San Bruno Municipal Code Section 2.04.144 ** Part-time/Temporary/Seasonal classifications participate in Social Security, not the California Public Employees' Retirement System (CalPERS) Adopted: January 14, 2025 (Resolution No. 2025-01); March 25, 2025 (Resolution No. 2025-28); May 27, 2025 (Resolution No. 2025-##)

216 of 496

City Council Agenda Item
Staff Report

CITY OF SAN BRUNO
DATE: May 27, 2025
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Alex D. McIntyre, City Manager
PREPARED BY: Nick Pegueros, Administrative Services Director & CFO Jennifer Dianos, Assistant Administrative Services Director SUBJECT: Consider Adoption of a Resolution Authorizing the City Manager to Execute the NASPO ValuePoint FMV Lease Agreement with Pitney Bowes to Provide Equipment and Software for Mailing Services Through June 30, 2030
BACKGROUND:

On June 25, 2024, the City Council adopted Resolution number 2024-54 approving the Award of Contract Policy which authorizes the City Manager to execute standard form agreements for budgeted expenditures and public projects under $250,000. City Council appropriates the City’s operating expenditures in the annual budget or subsequent budget amendments. If an operating expenditure is not budgeted and the agreement for services is not procured through the standard form agreement, staff is required to obtain City Council authority.

The City currently has an agreement with Pitney Bowes to provide mail center services, including equipment lease and software related to mailing paper pieces through the United State Postal Service (USPS). This service is included in the Technology Fund operating budget and is used by City Departments.

DISCUSSION:

The City’s current lease for services with Pitney Bowes expires on July 29, 2025. City staff has worked with Pitney Bowes to review the current services needs to ensure the leased equipment is currently serving the City’s needs. Staff determined that there is one piece of equipment that continues to provide value and worked with Pitney Bowes to provide an updated lease agreement to continue the lease and services. This postage machine provides sealing and stamping of USPS mail pieces.

Pitney Bowes has provided an updated lease agreement for a five-year term (60 months) in an amount of $492.53 per month or $1,477.59 per quarter. The agreement is outside of the City’s standard form agreement, requiring the City Council to review agreement and authorize the City Manager to execute the agreement.

Staff has worked with the City Attorney’s Office to review the terms of the agreement and recommends the City Council to authorize the execution of the non-standard form agreement 217 of 496
Item 6l.

Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
May 27, 2025

Page 2 of 2 ends

8 2
6 prior to June 30 in order to prevent an interruption of services, potentially limiting the ability to mail out correspondence on behalf of the City.

FISCAL IMPACT:

The total cost of the agreement is $29,552 over a period of 60 months, effective July 1, 2025 through June 30, 2030. That is $492.53 per month or $1,477.59 per quarter. The expenditures associated with this agreement will be incorporated in the Technology Fund’s annual operating budgets over the next five years.

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT:

The action is not a project subject to CEQA. City Council’s action is not considered a “Project” per CEQA Guidelines and therefore no further environmental analysis is required.

RECOMMENDATION:

Consider Adoption of a Resolution Authorizing the City Manager to Execute the NASPO ValuePoint FMV Lease Agreement with Pitney Bowes to Provide Equipment and Software for Mailing Services through June 30, 2030
ALTERNATIVES:

1. Do not adopt the agreement and direct staff to return with modifications to the agreement.

ATTACHMENTS:

1. Resolution

218 of 496

1 RESOLUTION NO. 2025 - __

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN BRUNO AUTHORIZING

THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE THE NASPO VALUEPOINT FMV LEASE AGREEMENT

WITH PITNEY BOWES TO PROVIDE EQUIPMENT AND SOFTWARE FOR MAILING SERVICES THROUGH JUNE 30, 2030
WHEREAS, the City Council adopted Resolution number 2024-54 on June 25, 2024 approving the Award of Contract Policy, which requires staff to obtain City Council authority if an operating expenditure is not procured through the standard form agreement; and WHEREAS, the City currently has an agreement through June 30, 2025 with Pitney Bowes to provide mail center services, including equipment lease and software related to mailing paper pieces through the United State Postal Service (USPS); and WHEREAS, the expense is standard budgeted expense; and
WHEREAS, City staff have worked with the City Attorney’s Office to review the terms of the agreement and recommends authority to execute the non-standard form agreement; and NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of San Bruno that it hereby approves the NASPO ValuePoint FMV Lease Agreement with Pitney Bowes to provide equipment and software for mailing services through June 30, 2030 attached hereto and marked Exhibit A; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Manager is hereby authorized to execute on behalf of the City of San Bruno the attached agreement.

Exhibit A: Pitney Bowes NASPO ValuePoint FMV Lease Agreement ---oOo---
I hereby certify that foregoing Resolution No. 2025 - __ was introduced and adopted by the San Bruno City Council at a regular meeting on May 27, 2025, by the following vote:

AYES: Councilmembers:

NOES: Councilmembers:

ABSENT: Councilmembers:
_________________________________
Lupita Huerta, City Clerk219 of 496 ATTACHMENT 1
2 EXHIBIT A
Pitney Bowes NASPO ValuePoint FMV Lease Agreement
[see attached]

220 of 496

221 of 496
ATTACHMENT 1, Exhibit A

222 of 496

223 of 496

224 of 496
ATTACHMENT 1, Exhibit A

225 of 496

226 of 496

227 of 496

228 of 496

229 of 496

230 of 496

231 of 496

232 of 496

233 of 496

234 of 496

235 of 496

236 of 496

City Council Agenda Item
Staff Report

CITY OF SAN BRUNO
DAT
E: May 27, 2025
TO
: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
F
ROM: Alex D. McIntyre, City Manager
PR
EPARED BY: Brian Adam, Assistant to the City Manager
S
UBJECT: Consider Adoption of a Resolution Authorizing the Display of the LGBTQ+ Progress Pride Flag on a Designated City Facility Flagpole to Commemorate LGBTQ+ Pride Month During the Month of June 2025 BA
CKGROUND:

The C
ity of San Bruno has historically received requests on behalf of the San Mateo County Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, and Queer/Questioning, Intersex, Asexual, and more (LGBTQ+) Commission requesting that the City of San Bruno support the LGBTQ+ community during Pride Month, which is June 2025.

A
lthough the City has not received a request from the Commission this year, precedent and the pressing need to show support for San Bruno residents of various backgrounds remains paramount. In prior years, the City has demonstrated this support through symbolic gestures like the raising of the LGBTQ+ Progress Pride Flag for the month of June.

O
n June 9, 2020, the San Bruno City Council approved a policy regarding the display of commemorative and ceremonial flags and banners at City facilities. Following is a summary of the policy:

1. The United States Flag and the State of California flag shall be displayed in accordance with Federal and State laws and regulations.

2. The City Manager is authorized to order that the United States Flag, California State Fl ag
and any
commemorative and ceremonial flags or banners on display be lowered to half-staff by the order of the President of the United States, or by the Governor of the State of California.

3. Commemorative or Ceremonial Flags and Banners: may only be displayed on a designated City Flag flagpole located at a San Bruno city facility; commemorative flags shall be di
splayed for a period of time authorized by resolution of the City Council; the City will not display a commemorative or ceremonial flag or banner based on a request from a third party, unless approved by a City Council resolution.

DI
SCUSSION:

Ra
ising the LGBTQ+ Progress Pride Flag on a City flagpole in San Bruno is a symbolic gesture that can demonstrate support for the San Bruno LGBTQ+ residents and community, and it is intended to bring visibility and inclusion to the forefront in San Bruno.

Item 6m.
237 of 496
Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
May 27, 2025

Page 2 of 2 ends

Should the City Council authorize the LGBTQ+ Progress Pride Flag to be on display in accordance with the City’s Flag Policy, the Flag will be raised at San Bruno City Hall and will be on display for the month of June, starting no earlier than May 31, 2025 and ending no later than July 1, 2025 to celebrate and honor LGBTQ+ Pride Month.

FISCAL IMPACT:

There is no fiscal impact.

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT:

RECOMMENDATION:

Adopt a Resolution Authorizing the Display of the LGBTQ+ Progress Pride Flag on a Designated City Facility Flagpole to Commemorate LGBTQ+ Pride Month During the Month of June 2025.

ALTERNATIVES:

1. Recognize LGBTQ+ Pride month using another method other than displaying the LGBTQ+ Progress Flag for the month of June 2025.

2. Authorize display of the LGBTQ+ Progress Flag for a different duration or location.

ATTACHMENTS:

1. Resolution
238 of 496
1 RESOLUTION NO. 2025 - ___

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN BRUNO AUTHORIZING

THE DISPLAY OF THE LGBTQ PROGRESS PRIDE FLAG ON A DESIGNATED CITY FACILITY FLAGPOLE TO COMMEMORATE LGBTQ+ PRIDE MONTH FOR THE MONTH OF JUNE 2025, STARTING NO EARLIER THAN MAY 31, 2025 AND ENDING NO LATER THAN JULY 1, 2025
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of San Bruno wishes to express their support for Pride Month and the Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, and Queer/Questioning (LGBTQ+) community in the United States and LGBTQ+ residents in San Bruno; and WHEREAS, the display of the LGBTQ+ Progress Pride Flag, serves to express the City’s official commitment to celebrating diversity, visibility and inclusion in the San Bruno community; and
WHEREAS, the City’s flagpoles are not intended to be a forum for free expression by the public; and
WHEREAS, the LGBTQ+ Progress Pride Flag will be flown on a designated City facility flagpole at San Bruno City Hall for the full month of June 2025.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of San Bruno hereby authorizes the display of the LGBTQ+ Progress Pride Flag on a designated City facility flagpole for the month of June, starting no earlier than May 31, 2025 and ending no later than July 1, 2025 to celebrate and honor LGBTQ+ Pride Month.
---oOo---
I hereby certify that foregoing Resolution No. 2025 - __ was introduced and adopted by the San Bruno City Council at a regular meeting on May 27, 2025, by the following vote:

AYES: Councilmembers:

NOES: Councilmembers:

ABSENT: Councilmembers:
_________________________________
Lupita Huerta, City Clerk
239 of 496
ATTACHMENT 1
City Council Agenda Item
Staff Report

CITY OF SAN BRUNO
DATE: May 27, 2025
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Alex D. McIntyre, City Manager
PREPARED BY: Ari Delay, Fire Chief
SUBJECT: Respond to the request from the San Bruno Community Foundation that the City Council consider and agree to the Foundation serving as a funding partner on a new Fire Station No. 52
BACKGROUND:

On March 5, 2025, the San Bruno Community Foundation (SBCF) transmitted a letter to the City Council communicating its interest in partnering on a final legacy investment to benefit the community. In response, the City Council created an ad-hoc subcommittee, comprised of Mayor Rico Medina and Councilmember Michael Salazar, to engage in exploratory discussions with SBCF’s Strategic Planning Ad Hoc Committee.

On May 7, 2025, SBCF transmitted a letter to the City Council formally expressing its desire to invest the bulk of its remaining net assets, estimated to be in the range of $15 million to $19 million, into the construction of a new Fire Station No. 52. SBCF is asking the City to agree to a partnership for this legacy capital investment, citing alignment with community needs and feasibility for completion within the next five years. The SBCF noted that the value of its assets, while fluctuating due to market conditions, is expected to be finalized at the close of the 2024– 2025 fiscal year (June 30, 2025).

The SBCF identified Fire Station No. 52 as a fitting “full circle” legacy project, both for its essential public safety function and for its symbolic connection to the Crestmoor neighborhood.

The site of the 2010 gas pipeline explosion that led to the creation of the SBCF itself. Fire Station No. 52 played a pivotal role in the emergency response to that disaster and continues to serve the entire City with fire suppression, emergency medical services, and other critical operations.

DISCUSSION:

The SBCF has proposed a strategic partnership with the City to fund the construction of a new Fire Station No. 52, offering an estimated $15 million to $19 million from its remaining net assets. This proposal aligns directly with long-identified needs in City planning documents and the 2022 third-party Community Risk Assessment / Standards of Cover of the San Bruno Fire Department.
240 of 496
Item 7a.

Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
May 27, 2025

Page 2 of 3 ends

8 4
9 This 2022 Community Risk Assessment and Standards of Cover (CRA-SOC) Study provided a comprehensive analysis of the San Bruno Fire Department’s facilities, deployment, and service demands. That Study determined that both Fire Stations 51 and 52 are in “poor” condition and do not meet modern operational, health, or safety standards.

During the inspection, it was noted that Station 52 has also exceeded its life expectancy because of its age, present location, and numerous infrastructure problems. The facility is 65 years old and well beyond the typical life expectancy of a fire station.

Furthermore, the study identified increasing call volumes and service demands in the City’s northern and central areas served directly by Station 52 as indicators of future operational strain (CRA-SOC, pp. 90–91). The Fire Department’s current deployment model, while effective, is constrained by the physical limitations of the stations, including suboptimal apparatus bays, limited staff accommodation, and outdated infrastructure.

The CRA-SOC report recommended that replacement or substantial renovation of both stations be considered a high priority, specifically stating:

In light of this objective assessment, SBCF’s offer to fund a majority of the cost to replace Fire Station No. 52 is both timely and strategic. The partnership would allow the City to maximize Measure Q revenue currently earmarked in part for fire station upgrades toward other urgent infrastructure needs, for which estimated costs exceed the $102 million Measure Q will generate.

The proposed funding approach mirrors the successful model used in the Recreation and Aquatic Center project: initial Council endorsement, followed by phased grant agreements as the project progresses. This method provides fiscal transparency and ensures milestone-based accountability, while allowing flexibility in project management and oversight by the City.

Given the substantial documented deficiencies of Fire Station No. 52, the opportunity for major external funding, and the potential to preserve other Measure Q funds for broader use, staff concludes that a formal partnership with SBCF represents the most responsible and beneficial course of action.

If the City agrees to accept the SBCF funding proposal at the May 27, 2025, meeting, it is anticipated that SBCF would follow a process similar to what took place with the Recreation and Aquatic Center. This process would include requesting City Council approval of a resolution formally supporting the concept of dedicating strategic grant funding to the City for the design and construction of a new Fire Station No. 52 at a future meeting, and then subsequent approval of a series of grants covering specific portions of the project costs as the project progresses.

FISCAL IMPACT:

The proposed SBCF grant fills a gap in the City’s construction financing strategy for the reconstruction of Fire Station No. 52, which previously relied on issuing smaller Measure Q tranches to meet the cashflow needs of the new facility. Originally, the Measure Q spending plan anticipated splitting the first tranche into two smaller tranches to manage uncertainties in project readiness. The grant enables the City to leverage Measure Q bond financing more

241 of 496

Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
May 27, 2025

Page 3 of 3 ends

8 4
9 effectively by maximizing bonding capacity in the first tranche, 2025/2026, for other Measure Q restricted uses. The infusion of SBCF grant funds, however, allows the City the ability to initiate construction within the next five years using the grant, deferring the need for Measure Q funding until the second tranche is issued in 2030/2031. This timing allows the City to comply with deadlines for use of tax-exempt bond proceeds.

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT:

The action is not a project subject to CEQA. City Council’s action is not considered a “Project” per CEQA Guidelines and therefore, no further environmental analysis is required.

RECOMMENDATION:

Acknowledge the receipt of the SBCF letter dated May 7th, 2025, and agree to the SBCF proposal to accept grant funding for the design and construction of a new Fire Station No. 52 ATTACHMENTS:

1. Letter from the San Bruno Community SBCF

2. Standards of Cover / Community Risk Assessment

242 of 496

901 Sneath Lane, Suite 209, San Bruno, CA 94066 • (650) 763-0775 • www.sbcf.org May 7, 2025
Honorable Rico Medina, Mayor
Honorable Marty Medina, Vice Mayor
Honorable Sandy Alvarez, City Councilmember
Honorable Tom Hamilton, City Councilmember
Honorable Michael Salazar, City Councilmember
City of San Bruno
567 El Camino Real
San Bruno, CA 94066
Dear Mayor Medina and Councilmembers:

We are writing to follow up on our letter to you dated March 5, 2025, which expressed our interest in engaging with the City of San Bruno to identify a final legacy project in which to invest the bulk of the Foundation’s remaining assets. We thank the City Council for creating an ad-hoc sub-committee, consisting of Mayor Rico Medina and Councilmember Michael Salazar, to engage in discussions with the Foundation about a legacy project. The Foundation Board’s Ad Hoc Committee on Strategic Planning recently had a productive meeting with the City Council’s ad-hoc sub-committee to explore the Foundation’s and the City’s mutual interests in partnering on a final, meaningful legacy project to benefit the San Bruno community.

Now, on behalf of the Board of Directors of the San Bruno Community Foundation, we write to express the Foundation’s desire to invest the bulk of the Foundation’s total net assets available at the end of the 2024-2025 fiscal year to construction of a new Fire Station No. 52 and to ask the City to agree to the Foundation becoming a funding partner on this project.

The Board is targeting a new Fire Station No. 52 as the main legacy project to which to commit the bulk of the Foundation’s remaining net assets as the capital project that the City can most realistically accomplish in the next half decade. The City has identified Fire Station No. 52 as outdated and in need of seismic improvements and has been preliminarily exploring, in the development and post-voter approval of Measure Q, the construction of a replacement fire station. Grant funding in the range of $15 million to $19 million from the Foundation would make a substantial contribution to the overall project cost, with Measure Q funds available to cover the remaining balance. A Foundation investment in the fire station replacement project would allow the City to redirect Measure Q funds currently penciled in for that use to much-needed community-supported street and stormwater infrastructure improvements, estimates of which exceed the $102 million that Measure Q will raise.
243 of 496
ATTACHMENT 1

Page 2 ends

The Board views investment in a new Fire Station No. 52 as a fitting final project for the Foundation – a “full-circle” project – given the Foundation’s origins. Fire Station No. 52 is located in the Crestmoor neighborhood where the 2010 gas pipeline explosion took place, played a crucial role in the City’s response to the disaster, and supports the entire City of San Bruno and the broader region in protecting life and property by responding to and suppressing fires and providing emergency medical and other safety-related services.The amount of grant funding that the Foundation will be able and willing to dedicate to the fire station replacement project will depend on the Foundation’s total net assets at the end of the current fiscal year (June 30, 2025). As of March 31, 2025, total net assets were just over $23.8 million, down from $24.5 million just two months earlier. The June 30 total net assets figure will depend on additional program and operating expenses incurred through the end of the fiscal year as well as the performance of the Foundation’s investment portfolio. With the new administration in Washington, D.C., changes in federal tariff and other economic policies have led to significant market volatility, particularly in the past month, making it difficult to predict at this time what the Foundation’s total net assets will be at the end of June. In addition, while the Board plans to earmark the vast majority of the Foundation’s remaining total net assets for the fire station, it intends to reserve funds to cover ongoing operating expenses and leaves open the possibility of also considering one or two additional, smaller strategic grant initiatives with the remaining funds, such as the funding of permanent lighting as part of the Crestmoor Fields Project or making a smaller final contribution to support San Bruno’s public schools. Although the exact amount is yet to be determined, the Foundation currently anticipates available grant funding for the fire station project to be in the range of $15 million-$19 million. The Foundation is beginning the process of updating the Foundation’s program and investment strategies to reflect the Board’s decision to spend down the Foundation’s remaining total net assets at the end of the current fiscal year in the near-to-mid-term on at least one large legacy project (ideally, a new Fire Station No. 52) and winding down all other programs in order to maximize preservation of the Foundation’s net assets for the legacy project(s). If the City Council agrees to accept Foundation grant funding for the fire station replacement project, we anticipate that the Foundation would follow a process similar to what took place with the Recreation and Aquatic Center, including approval of a resolution supporting the concept of dedicating strategic grant funding to the City for the design and construction of a new Fire Station No. 52 and then subsequent approval of a series of grants covering specific portions of the project costs as the project progresses. On behalf of the Foundation Board, we thank you for the opportunity to share the Foundation’s desire to target a new Fire Station No. 52 as the main legacy project to receive the bulk of the Foundation’s remaining net assets. We ask that the City Council consider this

244 of 496

245 of 496

San Bruno
Fire Department
San Bruno, CA

COMMUNITY RISK

ASSESSMENT
Standards of Cover &
Deployment Analysis
October 2022
246 of 496
ATTACHMENT 2
Community Risk Assessment/Standards of Cover San Bruno Fire Department 1 Contents Acknowledgments ........................................................................................................................... 3SECTION I: THE FIRE DEPARTMENT & EMERGENCY SERVICES SYSTEM ............................................ 4Overview of the San Bruno Fire Department .................................................................................. 5SBFD Organizational Structure ..................................................................................................... 5Services Provided by SBFD ........................................................................................................... 5Emergency Services in San Mateo County ................................................................................ 7Staffing & Personnel .......................................................................................................................... 9Administrative & Support Staffing ................................................................................................ 9Operational Staffing ................................................................................................................... 10Comparison of Regional & National Operational Staffing ..................................................... 13Financial Overview ......................................................................................................................... 14Revenue ....................................................................................................................................... 14Expenditures ................................................................................................................................ 15Capital Facilities & Apparatus ....................................................................................................... 18San Bruno Fire Stations ................................................................................................................ 20Apparatus & Vehicles Inventory ................................................................................................ 24Capital Medical Equipment Inventory ..................................................................................... 28SECTION II: COMMUNITY RISK ASSESSMENT .................................................................................. 29Description of the Community Served ......................................................................................... 30The City of San Bruno .................................................................................................................. 30San Mateo County ...................................................................................................................... 31Population .................................................................................................................................... 32Demographics ............................................................................................................................. 35Risk Classification ........................................................................................................................... 42Risk Assessment Methodology ................................................................................................... 42Physical Hazards ............................................................................................................................. 51Technological (Human-Caused) Hazards ................................................................................... 65Land Use .......................................................................................................................................... 66Physical Assets Protected .............................................................................................................. 69Structural Risks .............................................................................................................................. 69Target Hazards ............................................................................................................................. 76Critical Infrastructure ...................................................................................................................... 81

247 of 496

Community Risk Assessment/Standards of Cover San Bruno Fire Department 2 Comparison of Fire Risk in Other Communities ........................................................................... 86Fire Loss ......................................................................................................................................... 86Intentionally Set Fires ................................................................................................................... 86Insurance Services Office ........................................................................................................... 87SECTION III: STANDARDS OF COVER .............................................................................................. 89Historical Response Workload ....................................................................................................... 90Service Demand ......................................................................................................................... 90Resource Distribution ................................................................................................................ 100Impact of Automatic Aid & Mutual Aid ................................................................................. 105Resource Reliability ................................................................................................................... 109Historical System Performance ................................................................................................... 111Operational Performance Standards ..................................................................................... 111Population & Incident Workload Projections ............................................................................. 122Performance Objectives & Measures ......................................................................................... 124SECTION IV: FINDINGS & RECOMMENDATIONS .......................................................................... 139Findings & Observations ............................................................................................................... 140Proposed Strategies & Recommendations ................................................................................ 143Response Performance ............................................................................................................ 143Fire Stations & Facilities & Organizational Structure .............................................................. 143Operations & Deployment ....................................................................................................... 147Miscellaneous Recommendations .......................................................................................... 148SECTION V: APPENDICES .............................................................................................................. 152Appendix A: Risk Classifications ................................................................................................. 153Appendix B: Summary of the Stakeholder Interviews .............................................................. 157Appendix C: Table of Figures ...................................................................................................... 166Appendix D: References .............................................................................................................. 170

248 of 496

Community Risk Assessment/Standards of Cover San Bruno Fire Department 3 Acknowledgments AP Triton Consulting wishes to extend its sincere appreciation to each individual whose contributions and assistance made this project possible. San Bruno Fire Department Ari Delay Fire Chief Gage Schlice Fire Marshal Bill Forester Battalion Chief Scott Waldvogel Battalion Chief Michael Ku Battalion Chief Patrick Kelleher Lynx Technologies Our sincere appreciation is extended to each of you

and each of the firefighters, officers, and support staff who daily serve the citizens and visitors of the San Bruno Fire Department service area and surrounding communities.

249 of 496

Community Risk Assessment/Standards of Cover San Bruno Fire Department 4 Section I: THE FIRE DEPARTMENT & EMERGENCY SERVICES SYSTEM

250 of 496

Community Risk Assessment/Standards of Cover San Bruno Fire Department 5 Overview of the San Bruno Fire Department The City of San Bruno Fire Department (SBFD) is an all-hazards department originally established in the early 1900s as a volunteer organization. In 1937, the department acquired its first career firefighters. SBFD continued to utilize volunteers until 2004. The department provides service to an area of nearly six square miles in addition to a boundary drop for San Mateo County. SBFD serves a resident population exceeding 44,000 persons.1 In 2017, the San Bruno Fire Department was given a Public Protection Classification (PPC®) score of 2 by the Insurance Services Office (ISO). SBFD Organizational Structure The City of San Bruno is governed by the City Council and operates under a Council-Manager form of government. The City Manager oversees the Fire Chief. The following figure illustrates the current organizational structure of the San Bruno Fire Department. As shown, the Fire Chief oversees an Executive Assistant, a Battalion Chief (BC) serving as the Fire Marshal, and three shift BCs who are each assigned to manage a single platoon. Services Provided by SBFD The San Bruno Fire Department deploys its apparatus and personnel from two staffed fire stations. As an all-hazard fire department, SBFD provides traditional fire protection, wildland fire response, and medical first response (MFR) at the Advanced Life Support (ALS) level utilizing Firefighter/Paramedics on each of its apparatus, low-angle rope rescue at the operational level (LARO), confined space rescue, and hazardous materials response at the operational level.

Figure 1: San Bruno VFD (1934)
Figure 2: SBFD Organizational Structure (2021)

251 of 496

Community Risk Assessment/Standards of Cover San Bruno Fire Department 6 In addition, SBFD provides fire inspections, code enforcement, plan reviews, fire and arson investigations, and public education and prevention programs. The following figure illustrates the service area of the San Bruno Fire Department.

Figure 3: SBFD Service Area

252 of 496

Community Risk Assessment/Standards of Cover San Bruno Fire Department 7 Emergency Services in San Mateo County The following section is a brief overview of other emergency services and automatic aid organizations in San Mateo County. EMS Transport Since 1998, American Medical Response (AMR) has served as the primary provider of 911 ground emergency medical transport (GEMT) at the ALS level in San Mateo County. AMR is under contract with the County, which in 2019 renewed its contract with AMR for an additional 10 years. The company employs approximately 250 Paramedics, Emergency Medical Technicians, and support staff. Throughout San Mateo County, AMR transports about 40,000 patients annually.2 In addition, the South San Francisco Fire Department can deploy ALS transport units from its Stations 61 and 63. Air Medical Transport Three organizations are available to SBFD for rotary-wing scene response: Stanford Lifeflight, CALSTAR Air Medical Services, and REACH Air Medical Services. Lifeflight is based in Stanford at the hospital, CALSTAR has multiple bases throughout California, and REACH is affiliated with CALSTAR. Stanford Lifeflight is staffed with specially trained Flight Nurses, and the agency is accredited by the Commission on Accreditation of Medical Transport Systems (CAMTS). In addition, CALSTAR utilizes Flight Nurses and Paramedics with advanced training and is also an accredited organization by CAMTS. Hospitals & Tertiary Care Facilities in San Mateo County The primary hospitals in San Mateo County include: Seton Medical Center (Daly City & Moss Beach)maintains an emergency department & has a catheterization lab equipped to treat strokes and STEMI cases. San Mateo Medical Centermaintains an emergency department and has interventional radiology capabilities for strokes and STEMI cases. Kaiser Permanente (Redwood City & South San Francisco). Mills-Peninsula Heath Services (Burlingame & San Mateo). Zuckerberg San Francisco General Hospital & Trauma Center maintains a fully equipped and staffed emergency department and is a Level 1 Trauma Center with interventional radiology capabilities. Stanford University Medical Center (located in Santa Clara County).

253 of 496

Community Risk Assessment/Standards of Cover San Bruno Fire Department 8 Mutual & Automatic Aid Providers San Mateo County has at least 13 fire departments available for mutual and automatic aid responses. The next figure shows the locations of many (but not all) departments.

Figure 4: Mutual & Automatic Aid Fire Station Locations in San Mateo County

254 of 496

Community Risk Assessment/Standards of Cover San Bruno Fire Department 9 Staffing & Personnel The greatest asset for any organization is its personnel. Therefore, managing an organizations human capital is essential in ensuring that maximum production is achieved while employees also enjoy a high level of job satisfaction. Job satisfaction is typically a combined result of several factors, including consistent management practices, a safe working environment, recognition of positive workforce practices, inclusion and equitable treatment, and the encouragement of workforce input. The size and structure of an organizations staffing depend on the organizations specific needs. Organizational priorities should correlate to the community in which they serve. Several national organizations provide staffing guidance and recommendations, including the Occupational Health and Safety Administration (OSHA), the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA), and the Center for Public Safety Excellence (CPSE). This section provides an overview of the San Bruno Fire Departments staffing configuration. Two distinct groups of staff are common in most fire service organizations. The first group is the administrative and support staff that directly services the internal customers by providing the management and support needed to deliver effective and efficient emergency services. The second group is the operational staff, or internal customers, who provide emergency services to external customers and are typically the most recognized group among the citizens. Ensuring a balance between these two groups is essential in providing effective and efficient emergency services and high-quality customer service. Administrative & Support Staffing Providing the operational staff with the means and ability to respond to and mitigate emergencies safely, effectively, and efficiently is one of the primary responsibilities of administrative and support staff. Additional responsibilities of this group include planning, organizing, directing, coordinating, and evaluating the various programs utilized within SBFD. In many cases, the administrative and support staff handle various responsibilities, some of which do not fall under the previously mentioned responsibilities. Some of these ongoing responsibilities include records management, payroll, purchasing, travel/per diem, and training documentation requirements.

255 of 496

Community Risk Assessment/Standards of Cover San Bruno Fire Department 10 The following figure illustrates the administrative and support staffing structure for SBFD. Figure 5: SBFD Administrative & Support Staffing Position Title No. of FTEs Hours per Week Fire Chief 1 40 Deputy Fire Chiefs 0 N/A Division Fire Chiefs 0 N/A Administrative Battalion Chiefs 0 N/A Fire Marshal Battalion Chief 1 40 Fire Inspectors 2 40 Executive Assistant 1 40 Information Technology Tech 0.5 20 Training Captain (new in 2022) 1 40 Total: 6.5 As with many fire service organizations, administrative and support staff typically serve multiple roles with varying job responsibilities. For SBFD, the Fire and Life Safety Division is an example. The division includes three full-time equivalents (FTE): a Battalion Chief/Fire Marshal and two Fire Inspectors. All three positions serve as fire inspectors, handle plan reviews, and coordinate public education and community engagement. Administrative and support staffing represents 14% of the total SBFD employees. Operational Staffing As previously discussed, the operational staff is typically the face of any fire service organization due to increased interaction with the citizens they serve. This group is involved with nearly every facet of the organizations operations. For SBFD, this includes fire suppression, emergency medical response, technical rescue, fire investigations, public education, pre-incident planning, and a regional hazardous materials team. Several national organizations recommend standards to address staffing issues. The Occupational Health & Safety Administration (OSHA) CFR 1910.134, Section (g)(4) Respiratory Protection Standard, National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) 1710: Standard for the Organization and Deployment of Fire Suppression Operations, Emergency Medical Operations, and Special Operations to the Public by Career Fire Departments and the Center for Public Safety Excellence (CPSE) publishes benchmarks on the number of personnel recommended on the emergency scene for various risk levels.

256 of 496

Community Risk Assessment/Standards of Cover San Bruno Fire Department 11 The following figure illustrates the operational staffing structure for SBFD. Figure 6: SBFD Operational Staffing Position Title Number of FTEs Hours Worked per Week Work Schedule Battalion Chiefs 3 56 48/96 Captains 9 56 48/96 Firefighter/Paramedics 15 56 48/96 Firefighter/EMTs 5 56 48/96 Total: 32 A three-platoon system working 48-hour shift rotations that yield an average 56-hour workweek accomplishes shift operations. The minimum staffing goal for SBFD is 10 personnel responding from two fire stations on four apparatus every 24 hours. The on-duty Battalion Chief manages flexibility for a limited timeframe. The following figure illustrates the current minimum staffing model for SBFD. Figure 7: SBFD Current Staffing Model Apparatus Minimum Staffing Engine 51 3 personnel Truck 51 3 personnel Battalion Chief 1 person Engine 52 3 personnel Total: 10 personnel Responding on the appropriate units with sufficient responders is critical for all emergency incidents but is especially true for fire suppression operations. Staffing methodologies for fire suppression operations are typically derived from numerous national organizations that have been previously mentioned. For example, OSHA safety regulations (CFR 1910.120) require that personnel entering a building involved in a fire must do so in groups of two. Further, before personnel can enter a building, at least two additional firefighters must be on-scene and assigned to conduct search and rescue if the initial crew becomes trapped. This is referred to as the two-in, two-out rule.

257 of 496

Community Risk Assessment/Standards of Cover San Bruno Fire Department 12 As previously discussed, SBFD has a minimum staffing requirement of 10 personnel on duty each period. Several fire suppression apparatus types are housed at the two SBFD fire stations, and cross-staffing is used to respond to emergencies such as wildland fires. The SBFDs actual response to incidents and performance will be analyzed in a separate section of this report. Industry standards offer guidance for determining the staffing level that will meet service demand. NFPA 1710 Standard for the Organization and Deployment of Fire Suppression Operations, Emergency Medical Operations, and Special Operations to the Public by Career Fire Departments (2020 Edition) provides specific definitions and operational standards for SBFD: A career fire department is an organization that utilizes full-time or equivalent station-based personnel immediately available to compromise at least 50 percent of an initial full alarm assignment. Four Firefighters must be on the scene to proceed with an interior fire attack. This portion of the standard mirrors the OSHA Regulation two-in, two-out policy (29 CFR 1910.134 (g)(4)) that states that for an atmosphere immediately dangerous to life and health (IDLH) such as a structure fire, two personnel can fight the fire, but at least two standby persons must be present before entry should be made into the structure. Company staffing (crew size) should be Engine = minimum 4 on duty, and Truck = minimum 4 on duty. Initial Alarm Deployment (number of Firefighters including officers) is Low Hazard = 15 firefighters, Medium Hazard = 28 firefighters, and High Hazard = 43 firefighters. A fire department should identify minimum staffing requirements to ensure the number of members available to operate based on the community's needs. SBFD currently does not meet the NFPA 1710 minimum staffing standards for its three full-time apparatus. Four-person minimum staffing on apparatus is a department and community needs-driven local decision. It can be based on several factors, including budgetary constraints, overall population, and the ability to attain an effective response force of firefighters and apparatus, to name a few. Many communities strive to attain the NFPA 1710 standard but operate at a level below the NFPA staffing standard.

258 of 496

Community Risk Assessment/Standards of Cover San Bruno Fire Department 13 In many urban areas, fire departments will prioritize the goal of attaining the four-person NFPA 1710 staffing standard to apply to aerial apparatus first, followed by the staffing of fire engines. This is seen at San Brunos regional partners, including San Mateo Consolidated Fire, Redwood City Fire, and North County Fire, where those agencies regularly staff their aerial trucks with four-person minimum staffing. Comparison of Regional & National Operational Staffing The following figure illustrates the current comparison of the number of firefighters for SBFD on staff per 1,000 population of the service region compared to national averages from the United States Fire Department Profile issued by the NFPA. SBFD staffing percentage at 0.72 is below both the National Median and the West Coast Regional Median for firefighters on staff per 1,000 population. In comparison, SBFD is slightly below its regional partners, including Central County Fire Department at 1.03 and San Mateo Consolidated Fire Department at 0.74.

11.280.7200.20.40.60.811.21.4Regional Median National Median SBFDFigure 8: SBFD Firefighters per 1,000 Population (2022)

259 of 496

Community Risk Assessment/Standards of Cover San Bruno Fire Department 14 Financial Overview The SBFD is an operating department within the City of San Bruno. Determining financial policies and adopting budgets falls to the San Bruno City Council. The City operates on an annual budget from July 1st through June 30th. The City Managers FY 2021/22 Budget Transmittal Letter speaks to the financial challenges the City has faced since FY 2020/21. As a result, significant reductions were made citywide, both at adoption and mid-year, to balance the budget. Reductions included eliminating positions, delaying recruitment for various positions, reducing expenses, transferring revenue, and utilizing General Fund reserves. While the City included $10.2 million in American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) funding for the current fiscal year, that is insufficient to restore City services that were reduced due to the prior shortfall. In addition, the FY 2021/22 budget also projects the General Fund Reserve balance remaining at $12.28 million, which is slightly less than the adopted Reserve Policy Target of 25% of annual budget expenditures. The City predicts a return to full economic recovery will be challenging, as additional revenue shortfalls may be experienced in upcoming years. Revenue As with most municipalities, the Citys General Fund is the primary fund for overall City operations, including the fire department. The General Fund is principally comprised of tax-generated revenues such as property taxes, sales tax, business license tax, and transient occupancy tax. The June 2020 Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR) discusses a new funding source, Measure G, a local half-cent transaction and use tax approved by voters in November 2019, and the tax became effective on April 1, 2020. Two of the many described uses of this funding are fire prevention services and urban wildlife protection. This funding is included in the revenue sources directed into the General Fund and therefore utilized as a part of the Citys General Fund contribution toward the fire department operations

260 of 496

Community Risk Assessment/Standards of Cover San Bruno Fire Department 15 The fire department also receives several direct revenue sources. The following figure summarizes the fire departments allocated revenue. Figure 9: San Bruno Fire Department Revenues Description FY 17/18 Actual FY 18/19 Actual FY 19/20 Actual FY 20/21 Amended FY 21/22 Budget General Fund $9,570,406 $10,426,140 $11,100,039 $11,698,391 $11,515,028 Recurring Department Revenues: Fire Inspection Fees $51,548 $72,969 $78,897 $82,000 $381,500 Fire Permit Fees $48,627 $13,601 $2,775 $50,000 $25,000 Fire Plan Check Fees ($1,849) $15,511 $25,806 $50,000 $250,000 Fire Code Fees $80,335 $120,873 $93,080 $95,000 $0 Fire Reimbursements $47,208 $45,072 $42,823 $47,208 $47,208 Other Revenue1 $420,713 $315,350 $62,160 $63,930 $64,969 Total Revenue: $646,582 $583,376 $305,541 $388,138 $768,677 State Grants $75,661 ARPA Fund Support2 $763,201 Total Revenue: $10,216,988 $11,009,516 $11,481,241 $12,086,529 $13,046,906 1Primarily consists of reimbursement for services to SF Jail 2Excluded from the total revenue in FY 21/22 budget, page 129 Expenditures SBFD mirrors most service providers, with employee salaries and benefits accounting for most of the departments expenses. According to the current budget, 82.3% of the fire Departments General Fund allocation is directed to these costs. The fire department operation represents 24.2% of the citywide General Fund budget for FY 2021/22. A summary of total General Fund expenditures for the most recent five fiscal years is provided in the next figure.

261 of 496

Community Risk Assessment/Standards of Cover San Bruno Fire Department 16 Figure 10: San Bruno Fire Department General Fund Expenditures Description FY 18/19 Actual FY 19/20 Actual FY 20/21 Amended FY 21/22 Amended FY 22/23 Adopted Salaries & Benefits $8,861,808 $9,305,761 $9,708,772 $9,482,971 $10,669,216 Supplies & Materials $400,681 $410,919 $420,341 $498,102 $617,470 Other Charges $1,616,840 $1,764,562 $1,957,416 $1,608,424 $1,633,114 Transfers $130,187 $0 $0 $0 $0 Total Expenditures: $11,009,516 $11,481,242 $12,086,529 $11,589,497 $12,919,800 The American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) passed in 2021, also called the COVID-19 Stimulus package, provided funding resulting in expenditures for SBFD in fiscal 21/22 and 22/23. In addition to the previous SBFD general fund expenditures, there were $763,201 in Salaries & Benefits expenditures in the fiscal 21/22 amended budget and $665,068 in Salaries & Benefits expenditures in the fiscal 22/23 adopted budget that were paid out of the ARPA fund. Because the fire department operates as a function of the City, the revenues and expenditures are balanced, so there is no surplus or deficit to review. $0$2,000,000$4,000,000$6,000,000$8,000,000$10,000,000$12,000,000FY 17/18 FY 18/19 FY 19/20 FY 20/21 FY 21/22Salaries & BenefitsSupplies & MaterialsOther ChargesTransfers Figure 11: San Bruno Fire Department Expenditures by Category

262 of 496

Community Risk Assessment/Standards of Cover San Bruno Fire Department 17 No fire department-specific data regarding the Citys Other Post-Employment Benefit (OPEB) obligation is available. However, according to the June 2020 CAFR, it was determined during the fiscal year 2016 the Citys participation in a multi-employer health trust should disclose annual trust contributions rather than the Other Post-Employment Benefit (OPEB) liability. According to the Memorandum of Understanding between the City and Teamsters Local 856, IBT, San Bruno Professional Firefighters Association, employees are eligible to participate in the Teamsters Local 856 Health and Welfare Trust, which includes the provision of retiree health benefits. Long-range financial forecasting is a best practice that San Bruno utilizes. Therefore, according to the adopted FY 2021/22 budget, the City is projecting the following for the General Fund. Figure 12: San Bruno Citywide General Fund Projections Description FY 21/22 Adopted FY 22/23 Forecast FY 23/24 Forecast FY 24/25 Forecast FY 25/26 Forecast Revenues $49,767,229 $51,814,890 $53,883,003 $58,586,820 $63,202,652 Expenditures $50,851,490 $53,040,282 $54,631,490 $56,270,435 $58,576,548 Surplus/(Deficit): ($1,084,261) ($1,225,392) ($748,487) $2,316,385 $4,626,104

263 of 496

Community Risk Assessment/Standards of Cover San Bruno Fire Department 18 Capital Facilities & Apparatus Trained personnel, apparatus and vehicles, firefighting and emergency medical equipment, and fire stations are the essential capital resources necessary for a fire department to carry out its mission. No matter how competent or numerous the firefighters are, if appropriate capital equipment is not available for operations personnel, it would be impossible for the San Bruno Fire Department to perform its responsibilities effectively. The essential capital assets for emergency operations are facilities, apparatus, and other emergency response vehicles. This section of the report assessed SBFDs fire stations, vehicles, and apparatus. Fire Station Features Fire stations play an integral role in the delivery of emergency services for several reasons. To a large degree, a stations location will dictate response times to emergencies. Conversely, a poorly located station can mean the difference between confining a fire to a single room and losing the structure or survival from sudden cardiac arrest. Fire stations also need to be designed to adequately house equipment and apparatus and meet the organization's and its personnel's needs. Fire station activities should be closely examined to ensure the structure is adequate in both size and function. Examples of these functions can include the following: Kitchen facilities, appliances, and storage Residential living space and sleeping quarters for on-duty personnel (all genders) Bathrooms and showers (all genders) Training, classroom, and library areas Firefighter fitness area The housing and cleaning of apparatus and equipment, including decontamination and disposal of biohazards Administrative and management offices, computer stations, and office facilities Public meeting space In gathering information from the San Bruno Fire Department, Triton asked the department to rate its fire stations' condition using the next figure's criteria. The results will be seen in the figures after that.

264 of 496

Community Risk Assessment/Standards of Cover San Bruno Fire Department 19 Figure 13: Criteria Utilized to Determine Fire Station Condition Excellent Like new condition. No visible structural defects. The facility is clean and well-maintained. Interior layout is conducive to function with no unnecessary impediments to the apparatus bays or offices. No significant defect history. Building design and construction match the buildings purposes. Age is typically less than ten years. Good The exterior has a good appearance with minor or no defects. Clean lines, good workflow design, and only minor wear on the building interior. Roof and apparatus apron are in good working order, absent any significant full-thickness cracks or crumbling of the apron surface or visible roof patches or leaks. Building design and construction match the buildings purposes. Age is typically less than 20 years. Fair The building appears to be structurally sound, with a weathered appearance and minor to moderate non-structural defects. The interior condition shows normal wear and tear but flows effectively to the apparatus bay or offices. Mechanical systems are in working order. Building design and construction may not match the buildings purposes well. Showing increasing age-related maintenance but with no critical defects. Age is typically 30 years or more. Poor The building appears to be cosmetically weathered and worn with potential structural defects, although not imminently dangerous or unsafe. Large, multiple full-thickness cracks and crumbling concrete on the apron may exist. The roof has evidence of leaking and multiple repairs. The interior is poorly maintained or shows signs of advanced deterioration with moderate to significant non-structural defects. Problematic age-related maintenance and major defects are evident. It may not be well-suited to its intended purpose. Age is typically greater than 40 years.

265 of 496

Community Risk Assessment/Standards of Cover San Bruno Fire Department 20 San Bruno Fire Stations The following figures list the features of the two SBFD fire stations. Figure 14: SBFD Station 51 Address/Physical Location: 555 El Camino Real, San Bruno, CA 94066 General Description: This station co-locates with Fire Administration and Prevention staff. It houses one staffed engine company and one staffed truck company and contains a hose/training tower and fleet maintenance bay. The station has numerous deficiencies and is in poor condition.Structure Date of Original Construction 1958 Seismic Protection No Auxiliary Power Yes General Condition Poor Number of Apparatus Bays Drive-through Bays 2 Back-in Bays 2 ADA Compliant No Total Square Footage 6,796 Facilities Available Sleeping Quarters 9 Bedrooms 10 Beds 0 Dorm Beds Maximum Staffing Capability 10 Exercise/Workout Facilities In apparatus bay Kitchen Facilities Yes Individual Lockers Assigned Yes Bathroom/Shower Facilities Yes Training/Meeting Rooms No Washer/Dryer Yes Safety & Security Station Sprinklered No Smoke Detection Yes Decontamination/Bio. Disposal Yes Security System No Apparatus Exhaust System Plymovent

266 of 496

Community Risk Assessment/Standards of Cover San Bruno Fire Department 21 Figure 15: SBFD Station 52 Address/Physical Location: 1999 Earl Drive San Bruno, CA 94066 General Description: This station houses one staffed engine company and is in a residential neighborhood. It is located directly above the San Andreas fault, has numerous deficiencies, and is rated in poor condition. Structure Date of Original Construction 1957 Seismic Protection No Auxiliary Power Yes General Condition Poor Number of Apparatus Bays Drive-through Bays 0 Back-in Bays 2 ADA Compliant No Total Square Footage 3,604 Facilities Available Sleeping Quarters 3 Bedrooms 4 Beds 0 Dorm Beds Maximum Staffing Capability 3 Exercise/Workout Facilities In apparatus bay Kitchen Facilities Yes Individual Lockers Assigned Yes Bathroom/Shower Facilities Yes Training/Meeting Rooms No Washer/Dryer Yes Safety & Security Station Sprinklered No Smoke Detection Yes Decontamination/Bio. Disposal Yes Security System No Apparatus Exhaust System Plymovent

267 of 496

Community Risk Assessment/Standards of Cover San Bruno Fire Department 22 Summary of the San Bruno Fire Stations The next figure summarizes the two San Bruno fire stations and their basic features. In addition, the department owns a third fire station which is unstaffed, non-functional, and closed. Figure 16: Summary of the San Bruno Fire Station Features (2022) Station Square Footage Apparatus Bays Maximum Staffing General Condition Station Age Station #51 6,796 4 10 Poor 63 years Station #52 3,604 2 3 Poor 64 years Totals: 10,400 6 13 As shown in the preceding figure, SBFD can staff a maximum of 13 personnel across two fire stations and house a total of six apparatusalthough one bay at each station is occupied with exercise equipment. Fire Stations Discussion Both stations are considered to be in Poor condition and are well beyond the typical lifespan of 50 years for most fire stations. Therefore, the City of San Bruno needs to consider options for fire station replacements and possible relocation. Fire Station 51 During Tritons inspection, it was evident that Station 51 has exceeded its life expectancy because of its age and numerous infrastructure problems. The facility is 64 years old and well beyond repair. Structural deficiencies included: Does not meet seismic upgrade protections. It is not ADA-compliant. Does not have a sprinkler system. Does not have a security system. Lacks a separate turnout storage room. No adequate space for a reserve truck. Inadequate space for the Fleet Maintenance program to operate if continuing to maintain the on-duty mechanic program. There are dry-rotted plywood siding areas on the station's exterior and hose tower.

268 of 496

Community Risk Assessment/Standards of Cover San Bruno Fire Department 23 Living, safety, and usability deficiencies included: Lack of a workout or exercise room. Exercise equipment is currently kept in the apparatus bay. No adequate training or meeting room. There is no dedicated office space for crews (offices in sleeping quarters). Inadequate office space for Fire Chief, administrative staff, Fire Prevention, and support personnel. Fire Prevention is housed in a separate building. Inadequate public reception/greeting area for a City Hall-based Main fire station. Numerous other general issues create dysfunction and insufficient use of the fire station. Fire Station 52 During Tritons inspection, it was noted that Station 52 has also exceeded its life expectancy because of its age, present location, and numerous infrastructure problems. The facility is 65 years old and well beyond the typical life expectancy of a fire station. Structural deficiencies included: Does not meet seismic upgrade protections. It is not ADA-compliant. Does not have a sprinkler system. Does not have a security system. Lacks a separate turnout storage room. The station is located directly above the San Andres fault line. Personnel must walk through the apparatus bay to travel from dormitories/restrooms to daytime living quarters. Living, safety, and usability deficiencies included: Lack of a workout or exercise room. Exercise equipment is currently kept in the apparatus bay. No turnout washing extractor. Lack of a dedicated EMS supply/decontamination room and sink. There is no dedicated office space for crews (offices in sleeping quarters). Numerous other general issues create dysfunction and insufficient use of the fire station.

269 of 496

Community Risk Assessment/Standards of Cover San Bruno Fire Department 24 Apparatus & Vehicles Inventory Fire apparatus, command vehicles, and other emergency response units must be sufficiently reliable to transport firefighters and equipment rapidly and safely to an incident scene. In addition, such vehicles must be properly equipped and function appropriately to ensure that the delivery of emergency services is not compromised. As a part of this study, Triton requested that the San Bruno Fire Department provide a complete inventory of its fleet (suppression apparatus, command and support vehicles, specialty units, etc.). For each vehicle listed, SBFD was asked to rate its condition utilizing the criteria described in the next figure, which will be shown in the apparatus inventory figures. Figure 17: Criteria Used to Determine Apparatus & Vehicle Condition Components Points Assignment Criteria Age: One point for every year of chronological age, based on the date the unit was originally placed into service. Miles/Hours: One point for every 10,000 miles or 1,000 hours Service: 1, 3, or 5 points are assigned based on the service type received (e.g., a pumper would be given a 5 since it is classified as severe duty). Condition: This category considers body condition, rust, interior condition, accident history, anticipated repairs, etc. The better the condition, the lower the assignment of points. Reliability: Points are assigned as 1, 3, or 5, depending on the frequency a vehicle is in for repair (e.g., a 5 would be assigned to a vehicle in the shop 2 or more times per month on average; while a 1 would be assigned if in the shop on average once every 3 months or less. Point Ranges Condition Rating Condition Description Under 18 points Condition I Excellent 1822 points Condition II Good 2327 points Condition III Fair (consider replacement) 28 points or higher Condition IV Poor (immediate replacement) The San Bruno Fire Department maintains two frontline Type 1 structural engines and a single 100-foot ladder truck with a tiller. The next figure shows SBFDs frontline apparatus inventory.

270 of 496

Community Risk Assessment/Standards of Cover San Bruno Fire Department 25 Figure 18: SBFD Frontline & Reserve Apparatus Inventory (2022) Unit Type Manufacturer Year Condition Features Engine 51 Type 1 Pierce 2022 Excellent 1500 gpm/500 gal. Engine 52 Type 1 Pierce 2022 Excellent 1500 gpm/500 gal. Truck 51 Aerial E-One 2017 Excellent 100-foot tiller Truck 151 Aerial E-One 2001 Poor 100-foot truck Engine 151 Type 1 E-One 2017 Excellent 1500 gpm/500 gal. Engine 152 Type 1 Seagrave 2011 Fair 1500 gpm/500 gal. Engine 2607 Type 6 HME 2020 Excellent 500 gpm/300 gal. In 2022, SBFD received two 2022 Pierce Enforcer Fire Engines that replaced Engine 51 and Engine 52 and a 2022 Chevy Tahoe that replaced Chief 16. The addition of these new units into the capital fleet significantly improved the apparatus inventory and condition of the SBFD front line & reserve fleet. The city leadership is to be commended for their significant investment in improving the SBFD fleet. Additionally, with the addition of the new engines, the current two reserve engines (both 2001 E-Ones rated in Poor condition) will be placed in surplus. SBFD was also assigned a Type 6 Wildland Fire Engine in 2020 via an agreement in cooperation with the California Office of Emergency Services (OES) housed at station 52. The next figure lists SBFDs frontline command and staff vehicles. Figure 19: SBFD Frontline Command & Other Vehicles Unit Assigned To Manufacturer Year Condition Battalion 16 Battalion Chief Chevy Tahoe 2016 Excellent Prevention 16 Fire Marshal Ford F-150 2019 Excellent Prevention 16A Fire Inspector Ford Explorer XLT 2019 Excellent Prevention 16B Fire Inspector Ford Escape 2019 Excellent C16 Staff Chevy Tahoe 2022 Excellent As shown in the preceding figure, most of the SBFD command and staff vehicles are relatively new and considered to be in Excellent condition.

271 of 496

Community Risk Assessment/Standards of Cover San Bruno Fire Department 26 Apparatus Maintenance & Replacement Planning No piece of mechanical equipment or vehicle can be expected to last indefinitely. As apparatus and vehicles age, repairs tend to become more frequent and increasingly complex. Parts may become more difficult to obtain, and downtime for repair and maintenance increases. Since fire protection, EMS, and other emergencies prove critical to a community, downtime is one of the most frequently identified reasons for apparatus replacement. Because of the expense of fire apparatus and ambulances, most communities develop replacement plans. To enable such planning, fire departments often turn to the accepted practice of establishing a life-cycle for apparatus that results in an anticipated replacement date for each vehicle. However, the reality is that it may be best to establish a life-cycle for planning purposes, such as the development of replacement funding for various types of apparatus, yet apply a different method (such as a maintenance and performance review) for determining the actual replacement date, thereby achieving greater cost-effectiveness when possible.Economic Theory of Apparatus Replacement A conceptual model utilized by some fire departments is the Economic Theory of Vehicle Replacement. As a vehicle ages, the theory states that the cost of capital diminishes, and its operating costs increase. The combination of these two costs produces a total cost curve. The model suggests that the optimal time to replace any apparatus is when the operating costs begin to exceed the capital costs. This optimal time may not be a fixed point but a time range. Shortening the replacement cycle to this window allows an apparatus to be replaced at optimal savings to the fire department. However, if an agency does not routinely replace equipment promptly, the overall reduction in replacement spending can quickly increase maintenance and repair expenditures. Therefore, fire officials, who assume that deferring replacement purchases is a good tactic for balancing the budget, need to understand two possible outcomes that may occur because of that decision: Costs are transferred from the capital budget to the operating budget. Such deferral may increase overall fleet costs. The next figure is a representation of the Economic Theory of Vehicle Replacement.

272 of 496

Community Risk Assessment/Standards of Cover San Bruno Fire Department 27 Regardless of its net effect on current apparatus and vehicle costs, the deferral of replacement purchases unquestionably increases future replacement spending needs. The deferral may also impact operational capabilities, including the safe and efficient use of apparatus. Future Apparatus Serviceability An important consideration for fire departments is the cost associated with the future replacement of major equipment. Apparatus service life can readily be predicted based on factors that include vehicle type, call volume, age, and maintenance considerations. NFPA 1901: Standard for Automotive Fire Apparatus recommends that fire apparatus 15 years of age or older be placed into reserve status and that apparatus 25 years or older be replaced. This is a general guideline, and the standard recommends using the following objective criteria in evaluating fire apparatus lifespan: Vehicle road mileage. Engine operating hours. The quality of the preventative maintenance program. The quality of the driver-training program. Whether the fire apparatus was used within its design parameters. Whether the fire apparatus was manufactured on a custom or commercial chassis. The quality of workmanship by the original manufacturer. The quality of the components used in the manufacturing process. The availability of replacement parts.

Figure 20: Economic Theory of Vehicle Replacement

273 of 496

Community Risk Assessment/Standards of Cover San Bruno Fire Department 28 It is important to note that age is not the only factor for evaluating serviceability and replacement. Vehicle mileage and pump hours on engines must also be considered. For example, a two-year-old engine with 250,000 miles may need replacement sooner than a 10-year-old vehicle with 2,500 miles. Triton uses a calculation tool to determine the replacement costs of apparatus. Utilizing the original costs of the vehicles, the following figure applies a 15-year life expectancy for each engine, 20 years for the quint, and 10 years for the ambulances. Capital Medical Equipment Inventory As an ALS provider, the San Bruno Fire Department must maintain and utilize advanced-level capital medical equipment. Likely the most expensive items are the cardiac monitor/defibrillators that must be assigned to each frontline apparatus. These devices are a critical part of delivering ALS-level care. Aside from the basic features of cardiac monitoring and defibrillation, the devices have other capabilities, including 12-lead ECG, blood pressure monitoring, pulse oximetry, end-tidal CO2 monitoring, and other features. SBFD owns and maintains three Physio-Control Lifepak® 15 monitor/defibrillators manufactured during 20162020, and AMR owns and maintains two on SBFD apparatus. SBFD also owns one Lifepak® 12 monitor/defibrillator manufactured in 2014. In addition to the cardiac monitor/defibrillators, SBFD maintains two Physio-Control Lifepak® 1000 and five HeartSine® Automated External Defibrillators (AED).

274 of 496

Community Risk Assessment/Standards of Cover San Bruno Fire Department 29 Section II: COMMUNITY RISK ASSESSMENT

275 of 496

Community Risk Assessment/Standards of Cover San Bruno Fire Department 30 Description of the Community Served The City of San Bruno The City of San Bruno was known as a rural town until the 1940s when two events dramatically changed the City. First, the Tanforan horse racing track was used during WWII for the internment of American citizens of Japanese descent before sending them off to detention camps. The Army oversaw this operation and decided to use the area west of the racetrack for the Army's Western Region Advance Personnel Depot. Second, thousands of military personnel went through San Bruno on their way to and from military outposts in the Pacific. This changed San Bruno forever. Many military personnel settled in the area upon returning to the United States. The second event of the '40s that changed San Bruno was George Williams' purchase of much of the Mills land. Williams built houses on this land for the vast number of support personnel and veterans returning from the war. Soon after Williams developed the Mills Park Addition, the land in the western hills of San Bruno was also developed into housing. The housing boom that took place between the 1940s and 1960s transformed San Bruno from a town of about 6,500 in 1940 to a population of over 35,000 by the mid-1960s. Since then, the population has stabilized due to a lack of available land. Currently, there are over 44,000 residents in San Bruno. In the past, the City of San Bruno was known as an airport city. Mills Field was dedicated in 1927 near the site now occupied by San Francisco International Airport, but it took many years for the airport to become the success it is today. The many other established airports in the area, along with the short and often swampy runways, made Mills Field unpopular with aviators and businesses alike until 1945, when voters approved a $1 million bond for the improvement and expansion of the airport. Since then, the airport has become one of the busiest in the world, and San Bruno has grown into an international city. Today, San Bruno is often referred to as the City with a Heart as a result of a heart-shaped housing tract in a neighborhood on the Eastern flats near Bayshore Freeway, where you can find Cupid Row, an arrow of a street that pierces the heart-shaped housing tract. The City is between South San Francisco and Millbrae, adjacent to San Francisco and the Golden Gate National Cemetery, and is approximately 12 miles (19 km) south of downtown San Francisco.

276 of 496

Community Risk Assessment/Standards of Cover San Bruno Fire Department 31 According to the U.S. Census Data, the City has a total area of 5.5 square miles (14 km2).3The City spreads from the mostly flat lowlands near San Francisco Bay into the foothills of the Santa Cruz Mountains, which rise to more than 600 feet (180 m) above sea level in Crestmoor and more than 700 feet (210 m) above sea level in Portola Highlands. San Bruno City Hall sits at an official elevation of 41 feet (12.5 m) above sea level. Portions of Mills Park, Crestmoor, and Rollingwood are very hilly, featuring canyons and ravines. Many of them are now in culverts, and creeks flow from springs in the hills toward San Francisco Bay. Just west of Skyline Boulevard and outside city limits is San Andreas Lake, which got its name from the San Andreas Fault. The lake is one of several reservoirs used by the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission (SFPUC), providing water to San Francisco and several communities in San Mateo County, including San Bruno. In addition, the City of San Bruno maintains its own wells, which are critical to the emergency water supply in case of disruption from the SFPUC water system. San Mateo County San Mateo County is located in the San Francisco Bay area. It is in the San Francisco-Oakland-Berkeley, CA, Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA), and Redwood City is the county seat. The estimated population of the MSA in 2019 was 4,731,803, representing an increase of 9.1% since 2010. San Mateo Countys population, according to the 2020 Census, is 764,442 and has increased by 6.4% since 2010.4 It is the home of the San Francisco International Airport, which is in the northeastern section of the County. The County is considered suburban, with interspersed pockets of urban areas. The southern end of the County borders Silicon Valley. It is the home of many innovative companies such as bioscience, computer software, green technology, hospitality, financial management, health care, education, and transportation. The County is 455 square miles of land and bordered by the Pacific Ocean to the west and San Francisco Bay to the east.5 According to the U.S. Census 2019 American Community Survey, the median age in San Mateo County is 39.9, at-risk populations under five years old is 5.7%, and those older than 65 is 15.8%. In addition, the median household income is $122,641, while the percentage of those in poverty is 6.1%.

277 of 496

Community Risk Assessment/Standards of Cover San Bruno Fire Department 32 Population Risk factors influence the types of services a community provides. Identification of hazards is the process of recognizing the natural or human-caused events that threaten a community. Every community must prepare for and respond to events, including natural disasters like an earthquake, pandemics, or wildfires. In addition, the degree to which a community exhibits certain social conditions, including poverty levels, vehicle access, or the number of individuals in a household, may affect the community's ability to prevent suffering and financial loss in the event of a disaster. These factors describe the risks found in a community. A community's risk is assessed based on numerous factors, including socioeconomic status, household composition, minority status and language, population and density and housing types, local land use and development, and the geography and natural hazards present throughout the community. These factors affect the number and type of resourcesboth personnel and apparatusnecessary to control or mitigate an emergency. The community's risk assessment provides relevant information to help public officials and agencies better prepare their communities to respond to emergency events and help them recover faster. Population density is a risk factor, and demographics present another unique risk. For example, over 15% of the population is 65 years of age, and over 50% of the population speaks languages other than English at home. The physical characteristics of the area and the resultant natural hazards are risk factors. For example, SBFD is located near the San Francisco Airport and Crestmoor Canyon area and is at risk of entirely different hazards like wildland fires and earthquakes. Land use and zoning risk can be characterized as low (e.g., agricultural (or low-density housing); moderate (e.g., small commercial and office); or high (e.g., large commercial, industrial, wildland exposures, and high-density residential). The City of San Bruno has seen an increase in population based on the U.S. Census data from the America Community Survey, except for 2017 and 2019.6 The following figure illustrates the population trends of the community from 2010 through 2020 for San Bruno.

278 of 496

Community Risk Assessment/Standards of Cover San Bruno Fire Department 33 41,42041,11441,64542,16542,44343,00943,18542,95743,29943,04744,10039,50040,00040,50041,00041,50042,00042,50043,00043,50044,00044,5002010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Figure 21: San Bruno Population (20102020)

279 of 496

Community Risk Assessment/Standards of Cover San Bruno Fire Department 34 Figure 22: San Bruno Population Density

280 of 496

Community Risk Assessment/Standards of Cover San Bruno Fire Department 35 Demographics At-Risk Population Specific populations are at higher risk of fires and other unintentional injuries, and these incidents directly affect service delivery. Several factors place groups of people in higher-risk categories in urban and suburban areas. For example, NFPA reports identified groups with a higher risk of injury or death in a fire as follows:7 Children under 5 years of age Older adults over 65 years of age People with disabilities Language barrier People in low-income communities Information from the U.S. Census data estimates identified several groups that fall into these categories.8 These groups are more likely to need additional emergency services, specifically EMS, than other population groups. It should be noted that San Bruno's data was limited and unavailable for each risk. Age The age of a community may directly relate to the need for higher service demand from SBFD. In San Bruno, the percentage of children under five years of age is 5.1% compared to 6.1% in California. The number of older adults over 65 is 14.9%, compared to California at 14.8%. San Bruno is similar to the state averages for the risk age factor based on the information.

281 of 496

Community Risk Assessment/Standards of Cover San Bruno Fire Department 36 Disabilities Residents with disabilities comprise 7.9% of the population in San Bruno, which is lower than California at 10.6%. This group may have more difficulty or be unable to evacuate during an emergency. These people place an additional demand for emergency medical services as they age, thus increasing response from SBFD. It should be noted that the median resident age of San Bruno is 39.5 years, and California's median age is 37 years. 5%15%6%15%0%2%4%6%8%10%12%14%16%< 5 years > 65 yearsSan BrunoCalifornia Figure 23: San Bruno Percentage of Population by Age Risk 8%11%0%2%4%6%8%10%12%San Bruno California
Figure 24: San Bruno Percentage of Population with Disabilities

282 of 496

Community Risk Assessment/Standards of Cover San Bruno Fire Department 37 Persons without Health Insurance SBFD already has a high-risk population of 15% 65 and over. This age group is even at higher risk when looking at those 65 and over without health insurance. This group is more likely to have chronic illnesses requiring more intensive health care services because they did not seek treatment. The good news is that this group is lower than the state average as the population in San Bruno is at 4.1% without insurance compared to California, which is higher at 8.9%. Low-Income Persons The effect of low incomes in the community corresponds with a higher risk of fires and medical responses. 5% of San Bruno residents had an income below the poverty level in 2019, which was 7% less than the poverty level of 12% across California. Considering residents not living in families, 7.7% of high school graduates and 8.8% of non-high school graduates live in poverty. The highest age group in poverty is between 15 to 25 years of age, representing 32% of those in poverty, and the renting rate among poor residents was 59.6%. The median household income in San Bruno is $123,532 compared to the median household income in California of $80,440. 4%9%0%1%2%3%4%5%6%7%8%9%10%San Bruno California Figure 25: San Bruno Percentage of Population Without Health Insurance

283 of 496

Community Risk Assessment/Standards of Cover San Bruno Fire Department 38 Language Barriers SBFD is highly likely to regularly encounter someone who needs another type of communication or language translation during an emergency or when providing fire safety public education. According to the U.S. Census data, the most numerous races in San Bruno are Hispanic (11,329 residents), White (13,806 residents), and Asian (13,926 residents), where 50.1% of San Bruno residents speak English only at home. 5%12%0%2%4%6%8%10%12%14%San Bruno California Figure 26: Percentage of Population with Income Below the Poverty L l

284 of 496

Community Risk Assessment/Standards of Cover San Bruno Fire Department 39 Other Demographics Educational Levels Educational attainment is not considered one of the NFPA at-risk populations but should be considered when developing fire and life safety educational programs. In San Bruno, 7.7% of the population under age 25 does not have a high school diploma, compared to 7.3% in California. In San Bruno, approximately 24% of the population only has a high school diploma, and approximately 49.9% have an associate degree or higher, which is much higher than in California, which is at 43%. The following figure provides data on the levels of education in San Bruno 50%45%41%42%43%44%45%46%47%48%49%50%51%San Bruno Calfornia Figure 27: Percentage of Population Speaking English "Only" and "Very Well"

285 of 496

Community Risk Assessment/Standards of Cover San Bruno Fire Department 40 Housing The housing types vary in a community and can provide insight into ownership, the age of the home, and the number of units in the building. Housing risks can include the location, such as homes in the wildland interface area, selected housing types, such as older multifamily apartments built before fire sprinkler requirements, and vacant homes. In San Bruno, there are approximately 15,787 total housing units, of which 15,153 are occupied, 8,940 are owner-occupied, and 6,213 are renter-occupied. Vacant structures can pose a risk for the fire department and community if the building is not secured to prevent entry. If the building is not maintained, the structural integrity can degrade and present problems during a fire. Vandalism may create additional problems for the fire department and law enforcement. In San Bruno, the median year a house or apartment was built is 1968. The percentage of owner-occupied housing is 59%, compared to California at 54.8%. Rentals in San Bruno are 41% of the properties compared to California at 45.2%. 8%24%50%7%21%43%0%10%20%30%40%50%60%9th to 12th Grade, nodiplomaHigh School Graduate Associate Degree orHigherSan BrunoCalifornia Figure 28: San Bruno Educational Levels 25 Years & Older

286 of 496

Community Risk Assessment/Standards of Cover San Bruno Fire Department 41 59%55%41%45%0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%San Bruno CaliforniaOwner OccupiedRenter Occupied Figure 29: San Bruno Housing TypesOwner-Occupied or Renter-Occupied

287 of 496

Community Risk Assessment/Standards of Cover San Bruno Fire Department 42 Risk Classification Risk Assessment Methodology Developing a risk score to determine risks in a community is necessary to provide an organization with a method for creating response protocols for an incident. The Three-Axis Heron model establishes a score by reviewing probability, consequence, and impact factors and assigning a score between 28 in each category.9 A description of the incident types for each risk is located in an appendix of this report. Use of the Three-Axis Heron Formula includes the following equation: The risk is graphically illustrated through a three-axis model as follows: P = Probability (Y-Axis) C = Consequences (X-Axis) I = Impact (Z-Axis) (PC)2 + (CI)2 + (IP)2 2 2 2 Risk = Figure 30: Three-Axis Risk Classification Process

288 of 496

Community Risk Assessment/Standards of Cover San Bruno Fire Department 43 When developing the score, it should be recognized that each of the three scoring components is based on incident data from SBFD. Although a low risk may have a higher consequence or impact than a moderate or high risk, the probability is a significant factor in the score. In many instances, the number of low-risk incidents is high, while the consequence and impact on the department are low. For example, a BLS medical call response can be used. The likelihood (probability) of this occurring would be high (it occurs multiple times every day) by a factor of 10. The consequence would be minor (affects one person) by a factor of 2. The impact on the Departments ability to respond would be minor (one crew) by a factor of 2. Using the calculator, here is what it looks like: Herons formula value is 20.2. This equates to a Low Risk incident, as shown in the following figure. The result of the formulas calculation (risk area) is depicted by the triangular shape created by the risk scores ascribed to points on each three-axis.

Probability Probability is the likelihood of an incident occurring in the community over time. This axis reflects the probability of a particular type of incident occurring (which contributes to the level of risk). Many factors are considered, such as time of day, location, hazard present, season of the year, building construction and maintenance, demographic factors, and more. It can range from a rare event to one that occurs often.

Probability = 10 Consequence = 2 Impact on Department = 2 Figure 31: Heron's Formula Example

289 of 496

Community Risk Assessment/Standards of Cover San Bruno Fire Department 44 Figure 32: Probability or Likelihood of Occurrence Score Category Probability or Likelihood 2 Minor Unlikely: < 0.02% of total call volume. Expected to occur very rarely. 4 Low Possible: 0.02%0.07% of total call volume. Expected to occur rarely. 6 Moderate Probable: 0.07&0.3% of total call volume. Expected to occur monthly. 8 High Likely: 0.3%2% of total call volume. Expected to occur multiple times per week. 10 Extreme Frequent: >2% of total call volume. Expected to occur one or more times per day. Consequence The consequence of an incident can vary from minor casualties to severe impacts that may destroy historical or major facilities in the community and create a large loss of employment or life. Figure 33: Consequence to the Community Score Category Consequence to the Community 2 Minor 12 people affected (injuries/deaths). < $10,000 loss. 4 Low < 5 people affected (injuries/deaths). < $500,000 loss 6 Moderate 550 people affected (injuries/deaths). $500,000$1,000,000 loss 8 High 51100 people affected (injuries/deaths). $1,000,000$5,000,000 loss 10 Extreme > 100 people affected (injuries/deaths). > $5,000,000 loss Impact The third factor in determining the risk is the fire departments impact and the critical tasking needed to control or mitigate an incident. This includes the number of emergency responders and apparatus available internally or from external agencies. It measures the departments ability to respond to a given risk or incident while providing service to the remaining parts of the service area.

290 of 496

Community Risk Assessment/Standards of Cover San Bruno Fire Department 45 Figure 34: Impact on Operational ForcesScore Category Impact on Operational Forces 2 Minor 90% Remaining Apparatus/Crews 4 Low 75% Remaining Apparatus/Crews 6 Moderate 50% Remaining Apparatus/Crews 8 High 25% Remaining Apparatus/Crews 10 Extreme < 25% Remaining Apparatus/Crews Fire Response SBFD is the primary provider of prevention or mitigation of fire-related incidents. These range from low-risk incidents such as a vehicle fire to a maximum risk for a fire involving a school. Fire risks for a vehicle fire are considered low compared to a maximum risk for a school that houses students. This scoring is applied to four different categories of fire incidents in SBFDs service area to provide staffing needs to meet critical tasks on the fire ground. The following figures provide the risk score and classifications assigned to each type of fire risk in SBFD.

291 of 496

Community Risk Assessment/Standards of Cover San Bruno Fire Department 46 Figure 35: SBFD Fire Response Risk Assessment Description Low Moderate High Maximum Risk Score P C I P C I P C I P C I 10 2 2 6 4 2 2 4 6 2 6 8 Score Assigned 20.2 32.12 26.53 36.8 Figure 36: Fire 3-Axis Risk Classifications 0246810LowRiskImpactConsequenceProbability0246810ModerateRiskImpactConsequenceProbability0246810HighRiskImpactConsequenceProbability0246810MaximumRiskImpactConsequenceProbability

292 of 496

Community Risk Assessment/Standards of Cover San Bruno Fire Department 47 Emergency Medical Services SBFD provides advanced life support emergency medical care in their service area but does not offer transport services. Low-risk incidents range from a medical assist to a maximum for an active shooter. The following figures provide the risk score and classifications assigned to each type of EMS risk in SBFD. Figure 37: SBFD EMS Response Risk AssessmentDescription Low Moderate High Maximum Risk Score P C I P C I P C I P C I 10 2 2 10 4 2 2 8 8 2 6 8 Score Assigned 20.2 19.8 19.8 38.77 Figure 38: EMS 3-Axis Risk Classifications 0246810LowRiskImpactConsequenceProbability0246810ModerateRiskImpactConsequenceProbability0246810HighRiskImpactConsequenceProbability0246810MaximumRiskImpactConsequenceProbability

293 of 496

Community Risk Assessment/Standards of Cover San Bruno Fire Department 48 Technical Rescue Rescue services can vary from a low-risk incident, such as accessing a locked vehicle with a child inside, to a confined space incident (maximum) that potentially requires many personnel to mitigate the incident. The following figures provide the risk score and classifications assigned to each type of technical rescue risk in SBFD. Figure 39: SBFD Technical Rescue Response Risk Assessment Description Low Moderate High Maximum Risk Score P C I P C I P C I P C I 6 2 2 2 4 2 2 4 6 2 6 8 Score Assigned 12.33 8.49 19.8 36.77 Figure 40: Technical Rescue 3-Axis Risk Classification 0246810LowRiskImpactConsequenceProbability0246810ModerateRiskImpactConsequenceProbability0246810HighRiskImpactConsequenceProbability0246810MaximumRiskImpactConsequenceProbability

294 of 496

Community Risk Assessment/Standards of Cover San Bruno Fire Department 49 Hazardous Materials Hazardous materials responses can vary from low-risk odor investigations to the maximum risk for a fuel tanker fire in higher populations. Most of these incidents can be managed by SBFD, but higher risks may need assistance from outside resources. The following figures provide the risk score and classifications assigned to each type of hazardous materials risk in SBFD. Figure 41: SBFD Hazardous Materials Response Risk Assessment Description Low Moderate High Maximum Risk Score P C I P C I P C I P C I 8 2 2 4 2 2 2 6 6 2 8 8 Score Assigned 16.25 8.49 28.1 48 Figure 42: Hazardous Materials 3-Axis Risk Classification 0246810LowRiskImpactConsequenceProbability0246810ModerateRiskImpactConsequenceProbability0246810HighRiskImpactConsequenceProbability0246810MaximumRiskImpactConsequenceProbability

295 of 496

Community Risk Assessment/Standards of Cover San Bruno Fire Department 50 Wildland Fires The types of wildland fire risk vary from small grass fires to large forest fires requiring many internal and external resources. The following figures provide the risk score and classifications assigned to each type of wildland fire risk in SBFD. Figure 43: SBFD Wildland Fires Response Risk Assessment Description Low Moderate Maximum Risk Score P C I P C I P C I 4 2 2 2 4 6 2 8 10 Score Assigned 8.49 19.8 59.4 Figure 44: Wildland 3-Axis Risk Classification 0246810LowRiskImpactConsequenceProbability0246810ModerateRiskImpactConsequenceProbability0246810MaximumRiskImpactConsequenceProbability

296 of 496

Community Risk Assessment/Standards of Cover San Bruno Fire Department 51 Physical HazardsWeather Conditions A physical hazard is a natural or man-made event that has the potential to cause impacts on people, buildings, infrastructure, agriculture, environmental assets, and communities. Every community faces the risk of being struck by a physical hazard of one type, including natural disasters such as floods, hurricanes, ice-storms, wildfires, and earthquakes, or technological disasters such as a chemical spill or explosion. When disaster strikes, it can wreak havoc on a communitydestroying homes and businesses and leaving people homeless and out of work. Nationwide, property damage from disasters has been increasing steadily, partly because of larger disasters and because more and more people live in hazard-prone areas. Hurricane damages alone have cost the nation billions of dollars. Without knowledge of the past, we cannot predict what might happen in the future. Historical catalogs are used to understand the frequency of hazard events. They help us develop synthetic event sets that represent, for example, up to 10 000 years of events. This allows us to understand what might be possible in the future and to prepare for events that we have not seen in our lifetime. For rarer hazards such as earthquakes, seismological investigations play a critical role in identifying and characterizing individual pre-historic events that make up the active tectonics record. Reducing risk can only be achieved by decreasing the contribution from one or more of these three components. Examples of risk reduction or managing the risk in these components are: Hazard: building a flood levee to alter the course of flood events. Exposure: land-use planning decisions to ensure that new development is not exposed to hazardous events or influences the development type. Vulnerability: retrofitting older buildings built to lower building standards or before building codes were enforced. Temperature The weather conditions in an area can impact not only the fire department but the entire community. When temperatures are high, they affect firefighters during extended incident operations and require rehabilitation to prevent heat exhaustion. For example, although the average temperature in San Bruno is 59 F, the temperature can increase during August and September when the average maximum temperature reaches the high 60s.

297 of 496

Community Risk Assessment/Standards of Cover San Bruno Fire Department 52 Winds The direction and speed of winds directly influence how SBFD plans for daily operations, specifically during wildland fire danger. Based on San Francisco International Airport data, the average wind speed indicates that May through July is the highest and predominately from the north or northwest. 5254565860636465666457522025303540455055606570Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Figure 45: San Bruno Average Daily High Temperatures

298 of 496

Community Risk Assessment/Standards of Cover San Bruno Fire Department 53 Drought The effects of a drought directly impact the growth of crops and the ability to provide water to replace surface water supplies. In addition, droughts may last for an extended period and create secondary problems during peak wildfire conditions as the vegetation becomes dry and highly combustible. This creates conditions in the community that can cause local resources to become strained during an event. More than 95% of the West remains in drought, with over half the region in the extreme to exceptional drought. According to the US Drought Monitor, this represents the most expansive and intense drought for the West this century and continues to intensify across portions of northern California. San Mateo County is in a severe drought condition. 79111214 14131211988246810121416Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Figure 46: San Bruno Average Wind Speeds

299 of 496

Community Risk Assessment/Standards of Cover San Bruno Fire Department 54 3.23.03.11.50.30.20 0 0.10.62.13.70.00.51.01.52.02.53.03.54.0Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Figure 47: San Bruno Average Monthly Precipitation
Figure 48: San Bruno Drought Conditions (July 2022)

300 of 496

Community Risk Assessment/Standards of Cover San Bruno Fire Department 55 Environmental Hazards San Mateo County (18) natural disasters are near the U.S. average (15). Major Disasters (Presidential) Declared: 11. In the history of the City of San Bruno, Emergencies Declared: 2 Causes of natural disasters: Floods: 11, Storms: 6, Mudslides: 5, Winter Storms: 5, Landslides: 4, Fires: 2, Drought: 1, Earthquake: 1, Freeze: 1. Earthquakes The San Bruno Fire Department is in a high seismic area, and the United States Geological Society has identified several faults. There are a couple of faults in the San Bruno and San Mateo County area, but none are considered active. However, San Andreas and Serra faults are considered potentially active. As a result, San Bruno has a very high earthquake risk, totaling 3,741 earthquakes since 1931. Data suggests a 97.2% chance of a major earthquake within 50km of San Bruno within the next 50 years. The largest earthquake within 30 miles of San Bruno was a 4.8 magnitude in 1977. Since the early 1900s, 13 earthquakes at 4.8 or greater have occurred within 50 miles of San Bruno.10 An area of concern is the possibility of soil liquefaction. There are locations along the coast where high-severity groundwater and liquefaction may present problems during a major earthquake.

301 of 496

Community Risk Assessment/Standards of Cover San Bruno Fire Department 56 Figure 49: SBFD Earthquake Risk

302 of 496

Community Risk Assessment/Standards of Cover San Bruno Fire Department 57 Landslides The City's risk of a landslide in San Bruno is considered very low. However, areas within the City of San Bruno in the Crestmoor Canyon have potential landslides, especially along hills or canyons. Landslides commonly occur because of slope failure due to erosion from surface water runoff, mudflows when the water has saturated the ground, or debris flows after a wildland fire. These locations are along the western portion of the City near Crestmoor Drive and Piedmont Avenue, the Glenview Park area, and the area just below the park.

Figure 50: San Bruno Earthquake Probability

303 of 496

Community Risk Assessment/Standards of Cover San Bruno Fire Department 58 Wildland Fires Wildland fire risks in SBFDs jurisdiction range from moderate to high; however, much of the City is in a high fire severity area. Much like many areas in San Mateo County, the threat of wildland fire in SBFDs jurisdiction is a significant risk. The greatest wildfire threat to the City comes from fires spreading out of the Crestmoor canyon, or undeveloped San Mateo County lands west of San Bruno and the coast range to the west.

Figure 51: San Bruno Landslide Hazard Map

304 of 496

Community Risk Assessment/Standards of Cover San Bruno Fire Department 59 Crestmoor Canyon is a large open space area totaling 76.6 acres owned by the City of San Bruno. The Canyon is wooded, containing some native species but primarily non-native eucalyptus trees. The Canyon is near the City's westerly border and close to several regional and arterial roadways, including Sneath Lane to the north, State Route 35 (Skyline Blvd.) to the west, San Bruno Avenue to the south, and US 280 to the east. It is surrounded by the Crestmoor and Rollingwood residential subdivisions, containing approximately 321 homes; 137 homes, a school, and City facilities directly border the Canyon. Within a quarter-mile to the west of the Canyon are 1,200 acres of open space (Sweeney Ridge), identified as a State Response Area with a high fire risk. Besides the Canyon area, populated areas in San Bruno have, on average, a greater risk than 21% of communities in California. Populated areas in San Bruno are predominantly exposed to wildfire from indirect sources, such as embers or home-to-home ignition. The neighborhoods west of the Junipero Serra Freeway and the Crestmoor Canyon community are substantially at risk of damage or loss from wildfires due to their proximity to the wildland vegetation and direct and indirect exposure to the San Bruno Mountain range. Data indicates the area is listed as 39% indirectly exposed and 12% directly exposed to wildfire. These areas produce unique risks because of limited egress and access due to reduced fire road widths and difficulties for vehicles attempting to pass during an emergency. In addition, a delayed response may occur when emergency vehicles need access during an incident because other vehicles use the same roads. Because of the risk to San Mateo County, the City of San Bruno has partnered with county agencies to develop a Community Wildfire Protection Plan (CWPP) and was part of a county-wide planning effort to evaluate and identify the wildfire threat. As a result, the CWPP developed strategies that enhanced wildfire protection to help protect human life and the City's assets. The development of this CWPP includes data, planning documents, and a science-based assessment of the potential wildfire threat. As a result of this CWPP, SBFD was able to identify areas with wildfire threats and developed mitigation actions needed to enhance the protection of the City from wildfire. SBFD has implemented programs to mitigate hazardous WUI issues to reduce damages during an event. SBFD presented to the City council in January 2019, providing an overview of the fire migration plan and the Crestmoor community projects. The Fire Hazard Mitigation Program is overseen by the San Bruno Fire Department with input from the Community Services Department.

305 of 496

Community Risk Assessment/Standards of Cover San Bruno Fire Department 60 The program prioritizes major rights of way and easements in San Bruno. Staff recognizes the need for a thorough assessment of potential hazards. SBFD received a grant from the California Fire Foundation to create fuel breaks surrounding the fire roads and completed them in December 2018. In addition, SBFD submitted a grant application to California Climate Investment Fire Prevention Program to create defensible space in the neighborhoods surrounding the Canyon. SBFD is participating in the FEMA Hazard Mitigation Grant for DR-4382. Staff continues to work on a plan to conduct fire mitigation in the Crestmoor Canyon to create defensible space surrounding the neighborhood. Because of the 2019 city presentation, in 2020, the City of San Bruno contracted with the California Conservation Corps (CCC) to help with fuel reduction. This project is critical to meeting the City's fire safety goals. The California Conservation Corps, or the CCC, is a department of the government of California, falling under the state cabinet-level California Resources Agency. The CCC is a voluntary work development program specifically for men and women between 18 to 25 (up to 29 for veterans), offering work in environmental conservation, fire protection, land maintenance, and emergency response to natural disasters. The project consists of vegetation clearing along pathways, creating new pathways for improved access, designing and installing a fire hydrant network, underbrush clearing, and removing fallen and unhealthy trees/vegetation within the Canyon proper.

306 of 496

Community Risk Assessment/Standards of Cover San Bruno Fire Department 61 Figure 52: San Bruno Wildfire Hazards

307 of 496

Community Risk Assessment/Standards of Cover San Bruno Fire Department 62 Tsunami The probability of a tsunami occurring in San Bruno is low. Still, the City has areas adjacent to the San Francisco Bay that could receive flooding during an event. Inundation maps from California Geological Survey display the most significant area east of Highway 101 to the San Francisco Bay, and this area includes residential and commercial properties.

Figure 53: San Bruno Tsunami Hazard Map

308 of 496

Community Risk Assessment/Standards of Cover San Bruno Fire Department 63 Floods SBFDs jurisdiction, according to FEMA, is at low risk of flooding, specifically along the creeks flowing into the San Francisco Bay. Although flooding typically occurs during the highest rainfall, the seasonable variations can cause localized flooding along the creek channels during high-intensity rainfall events. However, the events are usually brief since there is a short distance from San Francisco Bay to the Pacific Ocean. Additional problems could occur with flash flooding in the City's urban areas, but they are usually short-lived.

Figure 54: San Bruno FEMA Flood Zones

309 of 496

Community Risk Assessment/Standards of Cover San Bruno Fire Department 64 Although FEMAs previous studies did not show any special flood hazard areas in San Bruno, the new analysis identified numerous residential properties within the Belle Air neighborhood as potentially subject to coastal flooding. The next figure illustrates the flood zones determined by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA).

Figure 55: FEMA Belle Air Flood Map

310 of 496

Community Risk Assessment/Standards of Cover San Bruno Fire Department 65 Technological (Human-Caused) Hazards Events that occur without warning or that are unknown and suddenly appear are considered technological hazards. Examples include industrial accidents or hazardous chemical releases. Each community should create contingency plans for the specific risks in their jurisdiction. This may consist of permitting, fire and life safety inspections periodically, and pre-incident planning. These activities are designed to reduce risks and provide on-site visits for fire department personnel. If a building or facility has been identified that stores or produces hazardous materials, it may require special personal protective clothing and equipment to control or mitigate the event. Locations with hazardous materials on-site during the year exceeding the limits established by the Environmental Protection Agency are required to file Tier II reports. These reports are provided to local jurisdictions, local emergency planning committees, and the state's Emergency Response Commission as required by the Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act of 1986, also known as SARA Title III. These thresholds require submission: Ten-thousand pounds for hazardous chemicals. Lesser of 500 pounds or the threshold planning quantity for extremely hazardous chemicals. California requires additional reporting quantities through a five-tier system that authorizes the treatment and storage of hazardous waste. Hazardous Materials (Haz-Mat) There are numerous facilities in SBFDs jurisdiction that store hazardous materials, but there are no locations that produce or store any extremely hazardous substances. U.S. Hwy 10, CA Hwy 82 and 35, Interstate 380 and 280 are the primary transportation corridors passing through the service area. This presents the possibility of a hazardous materials incident involving motor vehicles and trucks. SBFD provides the initial basic Haz-Mat response at the HazMat Operations level. However, if there is a need for an in-depth hazardous materials response, this is accomplished through the regional Haz-Mat response team from the San Mateo Consolidated Fire Department. This response includes an initial Haz-Mat unit with a Battalion Chief and the OES Emergency Services.

311 of 496

Community Risk Assessment/Standards of Cover San Bruno Fire Department 66 Land Use Land use for a community is designed to classify properties within a geographical area normally under governmental control. The concept of land use regulation is to provide attractive social and environmental outcomes to assist in efficiently managing development. Zoning areas may vary within one portion of the service area with a mixture of low-, moderate-, and high-risk properties. Low Risk: Areas zoned for agricultural purposes, open spaces, low-density residential, and other low-intensity use. Moderate Risk: Areas zoned for medium-density single-family properties, small commercial and office uses, low-intensity retail sales, and similarly sized business activities. High Risk: High-intensity business districts, mixed-use areas, high-density residential, industrial, storage facilities, and large mercantile centers. The vision of the City of San Bruno's land use goal is as follows: "This General Plan promotes balanced development, outlines strategies for conserving established neighborhoods, revitalizing Downtown and other aging commercial and industrial areas. Policies for expanding the City's affordable housing stock and promoting mixed-use development are included. The General Plan also outlines strategies for improved bicycle and pedestrian connections between residences, activity centers, and transit stations. The General Plan seeks to conserve existing natural resources, and policies are designated to minimize hazards."11 Most of San Bruno's land area comprises residential use, and neighborhoods are its most prominent feature. The City's older eastern half contains the greatest diversity of land uses and residential types. In this relatively flat area, streets are organized in a grid pattern reflecting their early 20th-century roots. San Bruno's newer western half comprises single-family subdivisions and several large multi-family complexes.

312 of 496

Community Risk Assessment/Standards of Cover San Bruno Fire Department 67 Commercial uses include neighborhood and regional retail, office, finance/insurance, hotels and motels, and other services. The Shops at Tanforan and Towne Center, approximately 72 acres, are San Bruno's two regional shopping centers. The San Bruno BART Station is located on the east side of The Shops at Tanforan. Other retail establishments are located along El Camino Real, San Mateo Avenue (south of I-380), and San Bruno Avenue (east of Cherry Avenue). The City is currently in development discussions for a potential significant multi-use facility replacing the Shops at Tanforan. This development will add to the demand on the North East end of the City. The portion of San Mateo Avenue between Huntington Avenue and El Camino Real is downtown. Industrial, warehousing, distribution, and auto-related uses are located in the area bordered by the Caltrain tracks, I-380, and San Mateo Avenue, along San Mateo Avenue south to its intersection with Huntington Avenue; and along San Bruno Avenue between San Bruno Avenue and Interstate 380. Other light industrial uses are located at the Airport Trade Center on Sneath Lane and Cherry Avenue. Several auto dealerships and repair shops are also located along El Camino Real.

313 of 496

Community Risk Assessment/Standards of Cover San Bruno Fire Department 68 Figure 56: San Bruno Zoning Map

314 of 496

Community Risk Assessment/Standards of Cover San Bruno Fire Department 69 Physical Assets ProtectedStructural Risks The next figure illustrates the various self-identified target hazards in the San Bruno Fire Department. These hazards include public assemblies, large shopping centers, healthcare facilities, transportation centers, and large square footage buildings.

Figure 57: San Bruno Target Hazards

315 of 496

Community Risk Assessment/Standards of Cover San Bruno Fire Department 70 Schools The San Bruno Park School District serves approximately 2,500 students in five elementary schools and one intermediate school, in addition to the California Montessori School, Saint Robert Catholic Elementary School, and Parkside Middle School. These locations should be considered target hazards because of the many students and teachers in a single place.

Figure 58: San Bruno School Locations

316 of 496

Community Risk Assessment/Standards of Cover San Bruno Fire Department 71 Assembly Assembly occupancies create unique risks because of the large number of people in a single location. These occupancies include restaurants, theaters, nightclubs, sporting events, or large outside festivals, all locations where people gather. These occupancies may require many emergency response personnel during an event such as a fire or active shooter. These locations should have pre-incident plans completed for use by personnel during a response. SBFD has identified their assemblies on the following figure using the criteria of A1, A2, & A3 occupancies having a greater occupancy of 50 persons or more at one time.

317 of 496

Community Risk Assessment/Standards of Cover San Bruno Fire Department 72 Figure 59: San Bruno Assembly Occupancies

318 of 496

Community Risk Assessment/Standards of Cover San Bruno Fire Department 73 Institutional These types of buildings are where occupants may be unable to leave without assistance from the employees. Examples include assisted living, nursing homes, medical facilities, jails, and detention centers. Childcare Facilities Childcare facilities pose a special concern because of the children's young age and, in some cases, the inability to evacuate during an emergency. These facilities require childcare workers to assist small children or physically carry infants when an evacuation is necessary. SBFD used the threshold for institutional and childcare facilities that had state licenses, including boarding care facilities and senior daycare centers, on the following figure.

319 of 496

Community Risk Assessment/Standards of Cover San Bruno Fire Department 74 Figure 60: San Bruno Institutional & Childcare Facilities

320 of 496

Community Risk Assessment/Standards of Cover San Bruno Fire Department 75 Residential Multifamily Occupancies Residential properties create a higher risk for occupants than most commercial buildings. Most fire fatalities occur in these locations and represent numerous risks, such as occupants with accessibility issues or buildings built without fire sprinkler protection. The common areas of these occupancies are required to be inspected annually to ensure fire code compliance. SBFD used the threshold of multifamily occupancies containing three units or more identified in the following figure.

Figure 61: San Bruno Multifamily Occupancies

321 of 496

Community Risk Assessment/Standards of Cover San Bruno Fire Department 76 Target Hazards Buildings Three or More Stories in Height Structures three or more stories in height typically require an aerial apparatus with an elevated master stream. The Insurance Service Office reviews the coverage area for a ladder truck for all buildings within 2.5 miles. A ladder truck may be necessary to access these higher buildings' upper floors or roofs since most ground ladders cannot reach these heights. The following figure provides the locations of all buildings three or more stories in height.

322 of 496

Community Risk Assessment/Standards of Cover San Bruno Fire Department 77 Figure 62: San Bruno Tall Buildings Map

323 of 496

Community Risk Assessment/Standards of Cover San Bruno Fire Department 78 Large Square Footage Buildings Large buildings, such as warehouses, strip malls, and large "box" stores, need more significant volumes of water for firefighting and require more firefighters to advance hose lines long distances into the building. Although the number of large square footage buildings is low, the fire flow may be more significant for smaller buildings because of construction type, distance to exposures, and lack of built-in fire protection systems such as fire sprinklers. The following figure is based on data from ISO and shows the locations for buildings 100,000 square feet and larger.

324 of 496

Community Risk Assessment/Standards of Cover San Bruno Fire Department 79 Figure 63: San Bruno Large Buildings

325 of 496

Community Risk Assessment/Standards of Cover San Bruno Fire Department 80 Large Fire-Flow Occupancies Occupancies can be classified according to their risk level. Risk factors that classify occupancies as low, medium, or high include the size of the building(s), construction type, the presence or absence of fire suppression features such as sprinklers and standpipes, the needed fire flow, the risk to life, the presence of chemicals or hazardous processes, and the amount of water available relating to the required fire flow. The Insurance Services Office developed the Batch Report that lists the needed fire flow (NFF) for most commercial occupancies in SBFD. The NFF formula was developed based on a review of large-loss fires by ISO that included the construction and occupancy type, area of the building, and exposures.

326 of 496

Community Risk Assessment/Standards of Cover San Bruno Fire Department 81 Critical InfrastructureEnergy & Pipelines The use of electrical power is required for many day-to-day activities. The need for electricity requires lines throughout the service area and can be broken down into a distribution network. The highest voltage lines in SBFD are 66 kV, 230 kV, and 130 kV, all owned and operated by Pacific Gas & Electric. The two major natural gas transmission lines travel along Interstate 280 and Highway 35, and the other line travels along Highway 101. There was an additional note of a hazardous liquids pipeline located from the train tracks down Walnut Street to the corner of 7th Avenue and San Bruno Avenue East. PG&E may implement Public Safety Power Shutoffs when wildfire dangers exist to prevent a fire from igniting from power lines. These shutoffs are normally temporary. PG&E provides alerts for customers before the power is shut off, but the customer must sign up for text, phone messages, or email notifications.12 If these shutoffs occur, SBFD must be prepared if its stations are impacted or understand how the community may be affected. The City of San Bruno was the site of a pipeline explosion that occurred on September 9, 2010, when a 30-inch diameter steel natural gas pipeline owned by PG&E exploded into flames in the Crestmoor residential neighborhood near Station 52. The following figure includes the significant natural gas pipeline, liquid pipeline, and electrical power transmission lines in San Bruno. It identifies transmission lines only and not smaller distribution lines.

327 of 496

Community Risk Assessment/Standards of Cover San Bruno Fire Department 82 Transportation Network Most of the transportation network consists of collector streets fed by residential roads throughout SBFD. These roads provide interconnectivity for emergency responders, but some no-outlet roads could impact response if the roads are impassable.

Figure 64: San Bruno Energy Systems

328 of 496

Community Risk Assessment/Standards of Cover San Bruno Fire Department 83 Traffic signal preemption allows responding units to modify the signal plan and change the light to green to allow safe and quick passage through a controlled intersection. These systems can reduce the number of vehicle crashes with apparatus or between private vehicles. All San Bruno fire apparatus contain signal preemption Opticom devices. However, not all intersections in San Bruno contain signal preemption control equipment. The main highways transverse SBFDs jurisdiction are US Hwy 35, US Hwy 101, and Route 82. There are also two interstates in San BrunoInterstate 280 and Interstate 380. According to Caltrans, the 2018 peak monthly average volume for passenger vehicles at the Interstate 280 junction with Route 35 North was approximately 120,800, and more than 532 were trucks.13 It is unknown how many of these trucks transport hazardous materials. Based on accident data, the SBFD experiences more auto accidents in March, May, September, and December on Wednesday afternoons than any other day. This data also indicates that almost all fatal auto accidents have occurred on Interstate 380 and Sneath Lane in San Bruno. Figure 65: San Bruno Average Daily Traffic Counts Location Average Annual Daily TrafficVehicles Average Annual Daily TrafficTrucks RTE. 280 JCT. RTE 35 North 120,800 532 JCT. RTE 280 and Crystal Springs Road 3,400 44 San Bruno Avenue and Juniper Serra Fwy. 116,000 2,749 RTE. 380 JCT. RTE 82 50,900 743 Taylor and San Mateo Ave. 35,500 554 Rail Lines/Caltrain/BART The City of San Bruno has high-speed rail lines, including Caltrain and Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART), which pose a significant risk to the community. The San Francisco & San Jose Railroad was completed on January 16, 1864, and the railroad known today as Caltrain is the oldest in the West, with continuous passenger service passing through SBFDs jurisdiction. Rail crossing overpasses include Angus Avenue, San Mateo Avenue, and San Bruno Avenue West. Scott Street has a Caltrain rail crossing in which numerous fatal accidents have been documented. There is a San Bruno station for passengers located at 833 San Mateo Avenue.

329 of 496

Community Risk Assessment/Standards of Cover San Bruno Fire Department 84 Caltrain has a passenger train that runs every hour through San Bruno. On March 10, 2022, Caltrain had an incident that involved an investigation by the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB). At about 10:33 AM, a southbound Caltrain struck three stationary on-track maintenance vehicles at milepost 11.6 on main track 2 near San Bruno. The locomotive derailed, and all three maintenance vehicles were destroyed. Fuel from the hi-rail maintenance vehicles released and fueled a fire that spread to one of the passenger rail cars. Fourteen people reported injuries: 12 passengers, 1 train crew member, and 1 maintenance contractor. Seven were transported to local hospitals, and seven were treated and released at the scene. Caltrain and its contractors estimated property damages to be almost $1.4 million. Water SupplyA reliable public water system that provides adequate volume, pressure, and flow duration close to all buildings is critical in mitigating a communitys fire risk. The City of San Bruno owns, operates, and maintains the potable water distribution system that serves drinking water to residential, commercial, institutional, and industrial establishments within its service area. Water supplied through the Citys distribution system is a combination of purchased water and groundwater pumped from the Citys groundwater supply wells. The Citys water supply comes from three different sources surface water purchased from San Francisco Public Utilities Commission (SFPUC), surface water purchased from North Coast County Water District (NCCWD), and groundwater extracted from the Westside Groundwater Basin through the Citys four local well. The City of San Bruno Water Distribution system consists of four active groundwater wells, eight booster pump stations, 13 pressure zones, 31 pressure regulating stations, 985 fire hydrants, approximately 116 miles of water main ranging from 2 to 18 inches, and eight storage tanks with a total storage capacity of approximately 8.3 MG. The 2021 City of San Bruno Water System Master Plan identifies a significant need for new pipelines and regulating stations to address fire flow needs. The Citys existing distribution system has adequate capacity and reliability for everyday operational needs. However, most of the system was built when less stringent fire flow standards were in effect. While the system is generally well reinforced and many areas meet current standards, there is a need for new distribution system infrastructure to improve capacity and fire flow.

330 of 496

Community Risk Assessment/Standards of Cover San Bruno Fire Department 85 Communications The ability to receive and transmit incident information requires an emergency communication center. All 911 calls are received by the County of San Mateo Public Safety Center (SMPSC). The county telecommunicators provide Emergency Dispatch services for both Fire and EMS responses. SMPSC provides dispatching services utilizing shift personnel specifically assigned as Telecommunicators. The 911/Communications Center currently works 12-hour shifts and staffs more than 60 employees. SMPSC uses a Versaterm Public Safety computer-aided dispatch system to receive incident data and dispatch the appropriate unit. The Public Safety Communications (PSC) is the ninth Emergency Communications Center in the State of California, the 97th in the world, to become an Accredited Dispatch Center of Excellence for providing medical priority dispatch services to those who call for emergency medical services. The Centers performance is closely monitored, and reports performance measures to the County Board of Supervisors bi-annually. Standards include processing high-priority service calls within established timeframes and customer satisfaction. The Center continually meets the call processing standards and rates over 99% in customer satisfaction. In addition to these standards, PSC dispatch staff have job-related performance standards used during the performance evaluation process and compliance standards (95% or above) for Emergency Medical Dispatch. PSC continually exceeds the National Academy standards and Center of Excellence averages for EMD compliance (98%). PSC is the only Communications Center in the County to manage multi-discipline incidents (police, fire, and medical), resulting in overall efficiency, accuracy, and expedited service. Staff are allowed to cross-train on all radios (police, fire, and medical) or remain specialists in either Law or Fire/EMS dispatching. Government & Public Safety Facilities Buildings that provide services for the public from local or other governmental units are considered essential facilities and should receive special attention. These facilities are for the public to receive community services, and fire department personnel should be familiar with the properties during an emergency. Pre-incident plans should be completed and updated annually, including their facilities.

331 of 496

Community Risk Assessment/Standards of Cover San Bruno Fire Department 86 Comparison of Fire Risk in Other Communities Fire Loss In 2020, fire departments responded to more than 1.4 million incidents in the United States that caused 3,500 civilian fire fatalities and over 15,200 civilian fire injuries. The property damage was estimated at more than $21.9 billion. The NFPA reported that 64% of the fire deaths occurred in one-or two-family dwellings. In addition, the report stated that $4.2 billion of property fire losses from wildland-urban interface incidents occurred in California. A review of fire loss data from SBFD revealed an increase from the two previous years by more than 50%. This is an example of how fire loss can vary yearly based on the number of fires occurring annually. In 2018, the fire loss per capita was $46.25, and $45.79 in 2019. The following figure compares the number of fires per 1,000 population and property loss per capita. Figure 66: SBFD 2020 Fires and Fire Loss and Property Damage Community Size 25,00049,999 Fires per 1,000 Population Property Loss per Capita San Bruno Fire Department 3.5 $87.32 United States 2.9 $66.62* *This amount is for the entire U.S. NFPA no longer provides loss by community size. Intentionally Set Fires Intentionally set fires, in many cases, are considered arson and defined as any willful or malicious burning or attempt to burn, with or without intent to defraud, a dwelling house, public building, motor vehicle or aircraft, personal property of another.14 SBFD provides fire investigative services to determine the cause of a fire. These investigators receive bi-annual training and have established a juvenile firesetter intervention program. All evidence collected during an investigation is stored in the San Bruno Police Departments Evidence Room. In addition, the departments records management system tracks all fire investigations. The following figure lists the number of intentionally set fires between 20182020.

332 of 496

Community Risk Assessment/Standards of Cover San Bruno Fire Department 87 Figure 67: Intentionally Set FiresYear Intentionally Set Fires 2018 0 2019 3 2020 2 Insurance Services Office The Insurance Services Office, Inc. (ISO©) is an independent organization that collects and analyzes data from fire departments in communities throughout the United States to determine rates for fire insurance. According to their report, the ISOs Public Protection Classification program, or PPC, is a proven and reliable predictor of future fire losses. Commercial property insurance rates are expected to be less in areas with a lower (better) ISO PPC Class rating. The ISO Fire Suppression Rating Schedule (FSRS) measures four primary elements of a communitys fire protection system: Emergency Communications (max 10 points); Fire Department (max 50 points); Water Supply (max 40 points); and Community Risk Reduction (max 5.5 points), for a maximum possible total of 105.5 points. ISO then assigns a grade using a scale of 1 to 10. Class 1 represents the highest degree of fire protection, and Class 10 designates a fire suppression program that does not meet the ISO minimum criteria. In 2017, the SBFD was assigned an ISO classification of 2. SBFD is one of 158 communities out of 890 surveyed nationwide to achieve the rating, as shown in the following figure. SBFD received 87.74 points which translate to its assigned classification. The following figure provides a review of the Public Protection Classification Summary Report revealed: Figure 68: ISO Earned & Available Credits ISO Feature Earned Credit Available Credit Emergency Communications 9.20 10 Fire Department 39.83 50 Water Supply 36.43 40 Divergence -2.28 0 Community Risk Reduction 4.56 5.5 Totals: 87.74 105.5

333 of 496

Community Risk Assessment/Standards of Cover San Bruno Fire Department 88 The following figure provides an overview of ISO classification in California and highlights Class 2, where SBFD is grouped. 421582171741465813144298050100150200250Class1Class2Class3Class4Class5Class6Class7Class8Class8BClass9Class10 Figure 69: Comparison of ISO Class Rating (California)

334 of 496

Community Risk Assessment/Standards of Cover San Bruno Fire Department 89 Section III: STANDARDS OF COVER

335 of 496

Community Risk Assessment/Standards of Cover San Bruno Fire Department 90 Historical Response Workload In analyzing the service delivery and performance of SBFD, the study team requested incident and unit response data for the calendar years of 2018 through June 30, 2021. The department provided data from its records management system (RMS) and dispatch center. Service Demand The following figure shows the response workload by general type for the last four full calendar years. The total response workload has increased by 28.7% over the four full-year periods. Interestingly, mainly due to other category call types that rose over the period. Other call types include false alarms, lockouts, public assists, service calls, hazardous conditions, and out-of-district responses. EMS still shared the vast majority of the total volume and has increased by 5.6% overall and was increasing before the pandemic effects of less traffic and less personal interaction affected a decrease in 2020. All other types of calls had increased overall. Figure 70: SBFD Service Demand (20182021) SBFD responded to over 13,000 incidents over four years. The following figure shows incidents by type. Emergency medical responses and motor vehicle collisions were the most common incident types, comprising 62% of the total responses. 2,7822,8832,6012,9381191671331378209687821,71705001,0001,5002,0002,5003,0003,5002018 2019 2020 2021EMSFireOther

336 of 496

Community Risk Assessment/Standards of Cover San Bruno Fire Department 91 Figure 71: Responses by Incident Type Incident Type Percent of Total* EMS 62% Good Intent 12% Service Call 9% Hazard 7% Alarm 7% Other Fire 1% Trash Fire 1% Structure Fire < 1% Wildfire < 1% Vehicle Fire < 1% Rescue < 1% Special < 1% Weather < 1% Vehicle Fire < 1% *Percentages rounded to the nearest integer. Temporal Analysis This analysis shows how responses change in volume over various measures of time. For example, the following figure shows the change in volume over the months during the study period, indicating seasonality in the response pattern. The busiest months for SBFD have been November through January, after which total monthly volume generally declines until June, then rises.

337 of 496

Community Risk Assessment/Standards of Cover San Bruno Fire Department 92 Figure 72: Monthly Response Workload (20182021) Next, the response workload is shown by the day of the week. Mondays and Fridays tend to have slightly more responses. Figure 73: Daily Response Workload (20182021) 02004006008001,0001,200JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC 02004006008001,0001,2001,4001,6001,8002,000SUN MON TUE WED THU FRI SAT

338 of 496

Community Risk Assessment/Standards of Cover San Bruno Fire Department 93 Response workload by the hour typically shows fire department activity higher during daytime hours, as in the case of SBFD. Response workload correlates with the time of day in which people are most active. In San Bruno, the departments activity begins to increase from 4:00 to 5:00 a.m. until it reaches its first peak at midnight. This level gradually decreases until the 6:00 p.m. hour, when it begins to decrease more rapidly. For some reason, there is a tendency for an increase in workload during the hour of 1900. The following figure represents the SBFD hourly workload for incidents during the four-year period of 20182021. Figure 74: SBFD Hourly Workload Response Unit Workload The response workload for each SBFD apparatus is shown in the following figure. Many incidents, like structure fires and severe motor vehicle collisions, require more than one unit to respond. Engine 51 is the busiest unit. The following figure represents the SBFD unit workload for all apparatus for incidents during the period of 20182021. 0204060801001201401601802000 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23No. of CallsHour-of-Day

339 of 496

Community Risk Assessment/Standards of Cover San Bruno Fire Department 94 Due to low volumes, the workload for Engines 151, 152, 2607, and Unit 51 were excluded from the preceding figure. As a result, these apparatus had a combined service demand of 48 incidents for the same period. The amount of time spent on the scene can affect firefighters workload and the availability of resources for the next or concurrent incident. The following figure details the average time each unit was committed to a scene type. Understandably for fire incidents, the amount of time committed to the scene by a unit is longer than for the other call types. 0 2,000 4,000 6,000 8,000 10,000Battalion Chief 16Engine 51Engine 52Truck 51 Figure 75: SBFD Unit Workload (Incidents) by Apparatus

340 of 496

Community Risk Assessment/Standards of Cover San Bruno Fire Department 95 As shown, the Battalion Chief spent the most amount of time on scene. The remaining frontline units spend a similar amount of time on the scene. Spatial Analysis Triton also examined the response workload geographically. As a result, the distribution of heavier service demand can be evaluated against the location of the fire station. The following figure shows the density of response workload during the study period. 00:00 10:00 20:00 30:00 40:00Battalion Chief 16Engine 151Engine 152Engine 51Engine 52Truck 51Unit 51Figure 76: Average Time on Scene by SBFD Apparatus

341 of 496

Community Risk Assessment/Standards of Cover San Bruno Fire Department 96 The previous figure reflected the predominance of emergency medical incidents within the dataset. Note that most demand is located near station 51 and to its North. During the day, the pattern closely mimics the overall demand. As noted previously, the workload during the evening is higher as it increases throughout the day. Based on the SBFD, all incident demand density, both Stations 51 and 52 are in adequate locations but could be re-located to nearby locations to further optimize overall better coverage for San Bruno and potentially utilize more appropriate building sites.

Figure 77: SBFD All Incident Demand Density

342 of 496

Community Risk Assessment/Standards of Cover San Bruno Fire Department 97 Figure 78: SBFD All Incident DensityNight Hours

343 of 496

Community Risk Assessment/Standards of Cover San Bruno Fire Department 98 Because of the predominance of EMS-type incidents in the workload data, this figure mimics the map of overall demand density.

Figure 79: SBFD EMS Incident Demand

344 of 496

Community Risk Assessment/Standards of Cover San Bruno Fire Department 99 The next figure shows the level of structural fire events within the city.

The preceding figure reveals that most structure fires occur during the afternoon and early evening hours, as shown in the next figure.

Figure 80: SBFD Structure Fire Locations

345 of 496

Community Risk Assessment/Standards of Cover San Bruno Fire Department 100
Figure 81: SBFD Structure Fires by Hour of Day The following figure details the addresses to which SBFD responded most frequently. Figure 82: Frequent Response Addresses Location Facility No. of Calls 1150 EL CAMINO REAL, SNB The Shops at Tanforan 359 1101 NATIONAL AVE, SNB Village at the Crossing 309 1151 HUNTINGTON AVE, SNB BART Station 203 1177 HUNTINGTON AVE, SNB San Bruno Police Dept 144 3300 COLLEGE DR, SNB 79 701 SHELTER CREEK LA, SNB Shelter Creek Condos 68 659 HUNTINGTON AVE, SNB Artichoke Joe's Casino 65 SB 101 NO MILLBRAE, SFO 63 Resource Distribution SBFD operates out of two fire stations. The following figure illustrates the street sections that can be reached from each station within 4 minutes or less of travel time. The data are based on posted road speeds modified to account for turning, stops, and acceleration. They do not consider congestion, construction, weather, darkness, and other non-controllable factors. 024681012141618200 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23

346 of 496

Community Risk Assessment/Standards of Cover San Bruno Fire Department 101
The overall coverage of fire incident demand is 99%, presuming engines are available and responding from their assigned stations. The coverage of EMS incidents was 99%.

Figure 83: SBFD Travel Time Overlap (04 Minutes)

347 of 496

Community Risk Assessment/Standards of Cover San Bruno Fire Department 102
The Insurance Services Office (ISO) is a major rating bureau that assists insurers in setting insurance prices. Their evaluation of the fire department includes the station location and the distance from which a property is located. For engines, better rates are achieved when located within 1.5 miles of a fire station. The following image shows the ISO 1.5-mile engine distance for SBFD.

Figure 84: ISO1.5-Mile Engine Distance from SBFD Stations

348 of 496

Community Risk Assessment/Standards of Cover San Bruno Fire Department 103
The ISO requirement for ladder truck apparatus is less severe since they should be positioned near multistory or large square footage buildings within a 2.5-mile distance. The figure that follows shows the 2.5-mile distances for SBFD Truck 51.

Figure 85: ISO5-Mile Truck Distance from SBFD Stations

349 of 496

Community Risk Assessment/Standards of Cover San Bruno Fire Department 104
ISOs worst rates are reserved for properties beyond 5 miles from a fire station which is not an issue for the SBFD area, as shown in the following figure.

Figure 86: ISO Distance Limit (05 miles)

350 of 496

Community Risk Assessment/Standards of Cover San Bruno Fire Department 105
Effective Response Force Capability Analysis Effective Response Force (ERF) is the number of personnel and apparatus required to be present on the scene of an emergency incident to perform the critical tasks in such a manner to effectively mitigate the incident without unnecessary loss of life or property. The ERF is specific to each type of incident and is based on the critical tasks to be performed. The response time goal for delivering the initial full ERF to a building fire is within 8 minutes, 90% of the time for Low and Medium Risk Hazard structures, and 10 minutes, 10 seconds, 90% of the time for High-Risk Hazard and High-Rise structures. SBFD has defined the minimum full effective response force for Low and Medium Risk Hazard building fires as five fire engines, one Ladder Truck, and two Battalion Chiefs for a total of 20 firefighters, including resources from neighboring fire agencies. For high-rise and commercial building fires, the defined minimum full ERF is increased to add additional engines, ladders, and Battalion Chiefs to 33 firefighters due to the identified need for more firefighters. While several units are dispatched when a fire is reported, once the first unit arrives and the scene is assessed, responding units may be canceled en route. Impact of Automatic Aid & Mutual Aid SBFD relies on automatic and mutual aid from adjacent agencies during a structure fire and other incidents when needed. These are very important relationships that enable the department to ensure it has sufficient staff and apparatus to fight the fire. The following list catalogs the adjacent mutual aid agencies. Menlo Park Fire Protection District Woodside Fire Protection District Redwood City Fire Department San Carlos Fire Department San Mateo Consolidated Fire Department Central County Fire Department Coastside Fire Protection District Kings Mountain Fire Brigade South San Francisco Fire Department North County Fire Authority

351 of 496

Community Risk Assessment/Standards of Cover San Bruno Fire Department 106
Colma Fire Protection District La Honda Fire Brigade California Department of Forestry & Fire Protection SBFD reciprocates by providing aid to its adjacent agencies when requested. According to SBFD data, 11% of the incidents were recorded as providing mutual aid. The most mutual aid was given to a Millbrae postal address, with South San Francisco the second most. When a structure fire is reported, the reality may be something else, perhaps less threatening. As a result, an engine often arrives and handles the fire threat, canceling the other units dispatched. According to the RMS data, no structure fire response achieved the effective apparatus and staffing firefighting force compared to the departments alarm assignment protocol. The concentration analysis reviews the physical capability of SBFDs resources to achieve its target ERF travel time to its service area. The following figures depict the physical capability of SBFD to assemble apparatus and firefighters by area within an 8-minute travel time. The modeled analysis below assumes that all response units are available. The first figure represents the collective apparatus needed to achieve the ERF.

352 of 496

Community Risk Assessment/Standards of Cover San Bruno Fire Department 107

Figure 87: Effective Firefighting ForceApparatus

353 of 496

Community Risk Assessment/Standards of Cover San Bruno Fire Department 108
The next figure shows where the number of firefighters from SBFD and automatic aid agencies can reach within an 8-minute travel time.

Figure 88: Effective Response ForceFirefighters

354 of 496

Community Risk Assessment/Standards of Cover San Bruno Fire Department 109
Resource Reliability This section analyzes the workload at the unit level rather than at the department level, as previously shown. However, unit-level workload analysis can reveal further insights into the stress level firefighters, and apparatus are experiencing. For instance, units are only effective if available within their station. Therefore, if they are already handling an incident when another incident is reported, a unit from further away must respond, increasing the response times. Unit Hour Utilization (UHU) calculates the percentage of time a unit is not available for a response because it is committed to an incident during a calendar year. This is important because the higher the percentage, the more time the unit is not available to respond to another incident. This is especially important for agencies like SBFD that measure their performance at the 90th percentile. For example, a unit with greater than 10% utilization cannot provide on-time performance to a 90% target within its response area. This analysis only measures response incidents and does not include other unmeasured activities in the dataset, such as training time and station duties. Figure 89: Unit Hour Utilization Unit 2018 2019 2020 2021 Battalion Chief 16 2% 2% 2% 1% Engine 51 10% 11% 9% 8% Engine 52 7% 7% 6% 6% Truck 51 3% 4% 3% 3% Concurrency One way to look at resource workload is to examine the number of times multiple incidents occur within the same time frame. Therefore, incidents during the study period were examined to determine the frequency of concurrent incidents. This is important because concurrent incidents can stretch available resources and delay response to other emergencies. Therefore, this factor significantly impacts the jurisdiction's response times to emergencies.

355 of 496

Community Risk Assessment/Standards of Cover San Bruno Fire Department 110
The following figure shows the number of times that one or more incidents occurred concurrently during the study period. Figure 90: Concurrent Incident Percentage Calls Concurrent Percent Single Incident 80.26% Two Incidents 16.27% Three Incidents 2.70% Four Incidents 0.48% Five or More Incidents 0.29% It is also useful to review the number of times that one or more response units are committed to incidents simultaneously. The following figure shows the number of times one or more SBFD response units were committed to incidents. It is more common for multiple response units to be simultaneously committed to incidents, with two to four concurrent responses occurring in significant numbers. Figure 91: Unit Concurrency Units/Incident Percent Single Unit 87.77% Two Units 5.57% Three Units 4.67% Four Units 1.93% Five or More Units 0.04% How a station crew responds reliably within its assigned area is important to its ability to handle the incident and its response time performance. Other stations must handle incidents outside their response zones when busier units are on assignment. This is especially true during fire events that require multiple units from several stations. The fire department instituted Automatic Vehicle Locators (AVL) so that the dispatch center can send the closest available unit even if it is not in its response area, which can occur if the zone station is busy on another assignment (concurrency) or a mutual aid assignment outside of the city. For the data period studied, the station unit was dispatched first 87% of the time in Station 51s area and 84% of the time in Station 52s area.

356 of 496

Community Risk Assessment/Standards of Cover San Bruno Fire Department 111
Historical System Performance Operational Performance Standards Incident data for the period between January 1, 2018, and June 30, 2021, were evaluated in detail to determine SBFDs current performance. Only priority incidents occurring within the SBFD service area are included in the analysis. Non-emergency public assistance requests were excluded. Performance is reported based on the type of incident as reported. Three categories are used to report performance: FireResponses to a report of a fire Emergency medicalAll emergency medical incidents OtherAny other incident to which the department responded Each phase of the incident response sequence was evaluated to determine current performance. This allows an analysis of each phase to determine where opportunities might exist for improvement. The total incident response time continuum consists of several steps, beginning with the initiation of the incident and concluding with its appropriate mitigation. Therefore, the time required for each of the components varies. In addition, the policies and practices of the department directly influence some of the steps. SBFDs response performance was compared to the national consensus standard for response performance found in the NFPA 1710 standard for career departments. In addition, the dispatch centers performance was compared to standards found in the National Fire Protection Associations Standard 1221, Standard for the Installation, Maintenance, and Use of Emergency Services Communications Systems, 2019 Edition. The following figure summarizes the performance standards used in this section to evaluate performance compared to NFPA 1710s standards.

357 of 496

Community Risk Assessment/Standards of Cover San Bruno Fire Department 112
Figure 92: Summary of Performance Goals Incident Interval Performance Goal 911 call answer time (time from the first ring to answer). Within 15 seconds, 90% of the time Call process time (time from acceptance at the dispatch center until notification of response units). Within 60 seconds, 90% of the time Turnout time (time from notification of response personnel until the initiation of movement towards the incident). Within 60 sec., 90% of the time (EMS) Within 80 sec., 90% of the time (Fire) First unit travel time (time from initiation of response until the arrival of the first unit at the incident). Within 4 minutes, 90% of the time First unit response time (time from dispatch until the arrival of the first unit at the incident). Within 5 minutes, 90% of the time (EMS) Within 5 minutes, 20 seconds, 90% of the time (Fire) Full effective response force travel time (time from dispatch until all units initially dispatched arrive at the incident. Response resources needed for a medium-risk building fire are used for the evaluation). Within 8 minutes, 90% of the time In keeping with NFPA Standards 1710 and 1221 and SBFDs performance goals, all response time elements are reported at a given percentile. Percentile reporting is a methodology by which response times are sorted from least to greatest, and a line is drawn at a certain percentage of the calls to determine the percentile. The point at which the line crosses the 90th percentile, for example, is the percentile time performance. Thus, 90% of the time was at or less than the result. Only 10% were longer. Percentile measurements differ greatly from averages. Averaging calculates response times by adding all response times together and dividing the total number of minutes by the total number of responses (mean average). Measuring and reporting average response times is not recommended because it does not identify the number and extent of events with times beyond the stated performance goal. A detailed description and review of each phase of the response time continuum follows. Finally, all phases will be compared to SBFDs performance goals.

358 of 496

Community Risk Assessment/Standards of Cover San Bruno Fire Department 113
Detection Detecting a fire (or medical incident) may occur immediately if someone is present or an automatic system is functioning. Otherwise, detection may be delayed, sometimes for a considerable period. This phase begins with the inception of the emergency and ends when the emergency is detected. It is largely outside the fire department's control and not a part of the event sequence that is reliably measurable. Call Processing Phase The call processing phase has two parts, the call answer time and the call processing time. Most emergency incidents are reported by telephone to the 911 center. Call takers must quickly elicit accurate information about the incident's nature and location from persons apt to be excited. Lay people well-trained in reporting emergencies can reduce the time required for the call processing phase. The dispatcher must identify the correct units based on incident type and location, dispatch them to the emergency, and continue to update information about the emergency while the units respond. The San Bruno Police Department is the primary 9-1-1 call answer point for the SBFD. It answers the 9-1-1 call, queries the caller to determine nature and location, and then transfers the information to the secondary Public Safety Answering Point (PSAP) at San Mateo County Public Safety Communications Center, which dispatches SBFD units. The call transfer time from PSAP to PSAP adds a time element to the sequence. Triton determined that the actual call answer and call transfer times for the SBFD dispatch performance goal data are non-existent as the San Bruno Police Dispatch Center does not track these times, and there is no CAD-to-CAD transfer from San Bruno Police dispatch to San Mateo County dispatch. Therefore, the call answer and call transfer data were unavailable in this analysis. The second part of the call processing phase, called call processing time, begins when the call is entered into the system at the dispatch center and ends when response units are notified of the incident. NFPA 1221 standards recommend that this phase occurs within 60 seconds, 90% of the time. SBFD has a call process time goal of 60 seconds as well. The following figure illustrates the San Mateo County dispatch centers call processing time performance from the time it receives the call until it notifies response units. Overall performance during the study period was within the NFPA guideline.

359 of 496

Community Risk Assessment/Standards of Cover San Bruno Fire Department 114
Figure 93: Call Processing by Incident Type The workload at the dispatch center can influence call processing performance. The following figure illustrates call processing performance at different times of the day compared to SBFDs response workload for all incidents during the period 20182021. Call processing time is below NFPA recommendations despite the variation of being faster in the evening and slightly longer during the day. Figure 94: Call Processing by Hour of Day 00:3501:0500:5900:00 00:30 01:00 01:301OtherFireEMS
010020030040050060070080000:0000:3001:000 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 No. of Calls
MinutesCall ProcessingWorkload

360 of 496

Community Risk Assessment/Standards of Cover San Bruno Fire Department 115
Turnout Time The turnout time response phase is controllable by SBFD. This phase begins with the dispatch center's notification of an emergency in progress and ends when personnel and apparatus begin to move toward the incident location. Personnel must don appropriate equipment, assemble on the response vehicle, and begin traveling to the incident. Good training and proper fire station design can minimize the time required for this phase. The performance goal for turnout time is within 60 seconds, 90% of the time for priority emergency incidents. The following figure lists turnout time by incident type. Turnout times for all incident types did not meet standards. During the study period, turnout time for priority incidents was within 2 minutes, 32 seconds, 90% of the time. Figure 95: Turnout Time Performance by Incident Type Turnout time can vary by the hour of the day. In this case, turnout time varied by 72 seconds between the early morning hours and daytime hours, as shown in the following figure. SBFD has identified the turnout time deficiency issue and has already developed a plan for turnout time performance education and improvement during this study. 02:3202:0502:3300:00 00:30 01:00 01:30 02:00 02:30 03:001OtherFireEMS

361 of 496

Community Risk Assessment/Standards of Cover San Bruno Fire Department 116
Figure 96: Turnout time Performance by Hour of Day The following figure shows turnout time by unit at the 90th percentile performance measure. Figure 97: Turnout Time by Unit at the 90th Percentile 010020030040050060070080000:0000:3001:0001:3002:0002:3003:0003:300 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 No. of Calls
MinutesTurnoutWorkload
02:3402:4902:5302:5800:00 01:00 02:00 03:00 04:00BC16E51E52T51

362 of 496

Community Risk Assessment/Standards of Cover San Bruno Fire Department 117
Distribution & Initial Arriving Unit Travel Time Travel time is potentially the longest of the response phases. The distance between the fire station and the location of the emergency influences response time the most. The quality and connectivity of streets, traffic, driver training, geography, and environmental conditions also are factors. This phase begins with the initial apparatus movement toward the incident location and ends when response personnel and apparatus arrive at the emergencys location. According to NFPA 1710, the performance goal should be 4 minutes for the first response unit to arrive at an incident. The following figure lists travel times for all priority incidents and incident types. SBFDs travel times exceeded its goal in all incident types. Travel time for all incident types was within 5 minutes, 31 seconds, 90% of the time. Figure 98: Travel Time Performance by Call Type Travel time can vary considerably by the time of day. Heavy morning and evening traffic can slow the departments response. Concurrent incidents also can increase travel time since units from more distant stations would need to respond. Morning commuter traffic appears to affect travel time more than evening commuter traffic. The following figure shows the travel time performance and the hourly workload. 05:1905:0106:1200:00 01:00 02:00 03:00 04:00 05:00 06:00 07:001OtherFireEMS

363 of 496

Community Risk Assessment/Standards of Cover San Bruno Fire Department 118
Figure 99: Travel Time Performance by Hour of Day A response unit must be available within four travel minutes of the incident to provide an on-time response. During the study period, 99% occurred within four travel minutes of a fire station. First Arriving Unit Response Times First Unit Response time is defined as that period between the notifications of response personnel by the dispatch center that an emergency is in progress until the arrival of the first fire department response unit at the emergency. When turnout time and travel time are combined, the performance goal for response time is within 5 minutes, 90% of the time for EMS incidents, and within 5 minutes, 20 seconds, 90% of the time for fire incidents. The following figure illustrates the response time for priority incident types. Overall, average first-unit response times for all priority incidents were within 7 minutes, 9 seconds, at 90% of the time. This is longer than SBFD response time objectives for urban/suburban areas of 5 minutes. 010020030040050060070080000:0001:0002:0003:0004:0005:0006:0007:000 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 No. of Calls
MinutesTravel TimeWorkload

364 of 496

Community Risk Assessment/Standards of Cover San Bruno Fire Department 119
Figure 100: First Unit Response Time Performance The next figure shows response times and the number of incidents by the hour of the day for all incidents. Response time is slowest during the nighttime hours and fastest during the day. Generally, SBFDs best response times occur during the day when response activity is at its highest. Figure 101: First Unit Arrival Performance by Hour of Day 06:5606:2107:5700:00 01:00 02:00 03:00 04:00 05:00 06:00 07:00 08:00 09:001OtherFireEMS 010020030040050060070080000:0001:0002:0003:0004:0005:0006:0007:0008:0009:000 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 No. of Calls
MinutesDispatch to ArriveWorkload

365 of 496

Community Risk Assessment/Standards of Cover San Bruno Fire Department 120
Call Received to First Unit Arrival Time From the customers standpoint, response time begins when an emergency occurs. Their first contact with emergency services is when they call for help, usually by dialing 911. The call received-to-first unit arrival time phase combines the answer/transfer, call processing, turnout, and travel time phases. When the performance goals are combined, call received-to-first unit arrival time should be within 6 minutes, 30 seconds, 90% of the time for all priority incidents. The following figure shows call received-to-first unit arrival performance for priority incidents within the SBFD service area. Overall, call received-to-first unit arrival time was within 7 minutes, 36 seconds, 90% of the time. Figure 102: Call Received to First Unit Arrival by Call Type The next figure shows received-to-arrival performance by time of the day compared to incident activity by time of day. From the customers standpoint, received-to-arrival is quickest during the middle of the day and evening hours and is the slowest at night when it spikes after midnight. . 07:2106:5808:2800:00 01:00 02:00 03:00 04:00 05:00 06:00 07:00 08:00 09:001OtherFireEMS

366 of 496

Community Risk Assessment/Standards of Cover San Bruno Fire Department 121
Figure 103: Call Received to Arrival by Hour of Day 010020030040050060070080000:0001:0002:0003:0004:0005:0006:0007:0008:0009:0010:000 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 No. of Calls
MinutesCall Create to ArriveWorkload

367 of 496

Community Risk Assessment/Standards of Cover San Bruno Fire Department 122
Population & Incident Workload Projections Over the last four years, the utilization rate of the fire department per 1,000 population generally both increased and decreased, as shown in the following figure. The rate during 2019 increased, but in 2020, the rate was lower at 93.3 incidents per 1,000 population. This was likely due to pandemic concerns, traffic reduction, and fears of healthcare settings. It is projected that utilization will stabilize at 86.8 per 1,000 population through 2040. Figure 104: Utilization Rate Using the lasted growth rate and census population data, a forecast for a future population can be calculated. This forecast was very close to the population projections provided for San Bruno by the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) report.15Census-based forecast calculated a population of 54,827 in 2040, while the ABAG projected 51,920 residents. 01020304050607080901002018 2019 2020

368 of 496

Community Risk Assessment/Standards of Cover San Bruno Fire Department 123
Figure 105: Population Projections The following figure shows that using the census-based forecasted population growth will potentially increase SBFDs workload. However, response workload is expected to remain stable, and requests for emergency medical services are expected to increase. Figure 106: Workload Projections 010,00020,00030,00040,00050,00060,0002020 2025 2030 2035 2040Census-based ForecastABAG Forecast 05001,0001,5002,0002,5003,0003,5004,0002025 2030 2035 2040EMSFireOther

369 of 496

Community Risk Assessment/Standards of Cover San Bruno Fire Department 124
Performance Objectives & Measures San Bruno Fire Departments service area combines urban and suburban areas with unique risks and response requirements. This can be seen by providing fire protection and EMS coverage to over 5 square miles that stretch from Hwy 101 adjacent to San Francisco International Airport to the high wildfire risk areas of the Crestmoor Canyon. Specific critical tasks must be accomplished with each type of incident and corresponding risk, and certain numbers and types of apparatus should be dispatched. Tasks that must be performed at a fire can be broken down into two key components: life safety and fire flow. Life safety tasks are based on the number of building occupants, and their location, status, and ability to take self-preservation action. Life safety-related tasks involve the search, rescue, and evacuation of victims. The fire-flow component involves delivering sufficient water to extinguish the fire and create an environment within the building that allows entry by firefighters. The number and types of tasks needing simultaneous action will dictate the minimum number of firefighters required to combat different types of fires. In the absence of adequate personnel to perform concurrent action, the commanding officer must prioritize the tasks and complete some in chronological order rather than concurrently. These tasks include the following: Command Scene safety Search and rescue Fire attack Water supply Pump operation Ventilation Backup/rapid intervention Critical task analyses also apply to non-fire-type emergencies, including medical, technical rescue, and hazardous materials emergencies. Numerous simultaneous tasks must be completed to control an emergency effectively. Therefore, the departments ability to quickly muster the needed numbers of trained personnel to make a difference is critical to successful incident outcomes.

370 of 496

Community Risk Assessment/Standards of Cover San Bruno Fire Department 125
The following figure illustrates the minimum emergency incident staffing recommendations of the Commission on Fire Accreditation International (CFAI). The following definitions apply to the figure: Low Risk: Minor incidents involving small fires (fire flow less than 250 gallons per minute), single patient non-life-threatening medical incidents, minor rescues, small fuel spills, and small wildland fires without unusual weather or fire behavior. Moderate Risk: Moderate-risk incidents involving fires in single-family dwellings and equivalently sized commercial office properties (fire flow between 250 gallons per minute to 1,000 gallons per minute), life-threatening medical emergencies, hazardous materials emergencies requiring specialized skills and equipment, rescues involving specialized skills and equipment, and larger wildland fires. High Risk: High-risk incidents involving fires in more significant commercial properties with a sustained attack (fire flows more than 1,000 gallons per minute), multiple patient medical incidents, significant releases of hazardous materials, high-risk rescues, and wildland fires with extreme weather or fire behavior. Figure 107: CFAI Staffing Recommendation Based on Risk Incident Type High Risk Moderate Risk Low Risk Structure Fire 29 15 6 Emergency Medical Service 12 4 2 Rescue 15 8 3 Hazardous Materials 39 20 3 SBFD has developed the following Critical Task Analysis using risk matrices for various incident types. AP Tritons review of the Critical Task Analysis concludes that all are generally in keeping with industry standards and provide the minimum number of personnel needed for effective incident operations. Establishing resource levels needed for various emergencies is a uniquely local decision. Factors influencing local decisions for incident staffing include the type of equipment operated, training levels of responders, operating procedures, geography, traffic, and the nature of buildings and other risks protected.

371 of 496

Community Risk Assessment/Standards of Cover San Bruno Fire Department 126
Critical Tasking Critical tasks are those activities that must be conducted early on and promptly by firefighters at emergency incidents to control the situation, stop loss, and perform necessary tasks required for a medical emergency. SBFD is responsible for ensuring those responding companies can perform all described tasks promptly, efficiently, and safely. These are the minimum number of personnel needed by incident type. More personnel will be required for incidents of increased complexity or size. Figure 108: Structure Fire w/Hydrants Task Number of Personnel Command & Safety 2 Pump Operations 1 Attack Line 2 Search and Rescue 3 Ventilation 3 Back-up Line 3 RIT 3 Ambulance/EMS 0 Other (Utilities, support) 3 Total: 20 Figure 109: Structure Fire without Hydrants Task Number of Personnel Command & Safety 2 Pump Operations 1 Attack Line 2 from 1st Co and additional company 5 Back-up Line 3 Search and Rescue 3 Ventilation 3 RIT 3 Ambulance/EMS 0 Water Tender Operator 1 Total: 21

372 of 496

Community Risk Assessment/Standards of Cover San Bruno Fire Department 127
Figure 110: Commercial Structure Fire Task Number of Personnel Command & Safety 2 Pump Operations 1 Attack Line 5 Search and Rescue Team 6 Back-Up Line 3 Ventilation/Ground Ladders 3 Aerial Operator (if ladder used) 1 RIT 3 Medical Care 0 Total: 24 Figure 111: High-Rise Structure Fire Task Number of Personnel Command & Safety 2 Pump Operations 1 Attack Line 6 Back-Up Line 3 Vertical Ventilation Crew 3 Victim Search & Rescue Team 6 Interior Staging Manager 1 Evacuation 2 Lobby Control 2 Equipment Transport 3 RIT 3 Ambulance/EMS 3 Total: 35

373 of 496

Community Risk Assessment/Standards of Cover San Bruno Fire Department 128
Figure 112: Wildland FireLow Risk Task Number of Personnel Command/Safety 1 Pump Operations/Lookout 1 Attack Line 5 Exposure Lines 3 Structure Protection Water Supply Other (mop-up, overhaul, line) Total: 10 Figure 113: Wildland FireHigh Risk Task Number of Personnel Command & Safety 2 Pump Operations/Lookout 1 Attack Line 8 Exposure Lines 6 Structure Protection 6 Water Supply 3 Other (mop-up, overhaul, line) Total: 26 Figure 114: Aircraft Emergency Task Number of Personnel Command & Safety 2 Aircraft Fire Suppression 1 Pump Operations 1 Attack Line 2 Back-Up Line 3 Rescue 3 Emergency Medical Care 3 Water Supply Total: 15

374 of 496

Community Risk Assessment/Standards of Cover San Bruno Fire Department 129
Figure 115: Hazardous MaterialsLow-Risk (Investigation) Task Number of Personnel Command/Safety 1 Investigation 2 Total: 3 Figure 116: Hazardous MaterialsHigh-Risk (Response) Task Number of Personnel Command 1 Haz Mat Group Supervisor 1 Haz Mat Safety Officer 1 Entry Supervisor 1 Entry Team 2 Back-Up Team 2 Decontamination 4 Pump Operations 1 Chemist 1 Total: 14 Figure 117: Emergency Medical Aid Task Number of Personnel Patient Management 1 Patient Care 2 Total: 3 Figure 118: Motor Vehicle Accident Task Number of Personnel Command/Safety 1 Patient Care 3 Extrication 3 Pump Operator/Suppression Line 1 Vehicle Stabilization 2 Total: 10

375 of 496

Community Risk Assessment/Standards of Cover San Bruno Fire Department 130
Figure 119: Major Medical Response Task Number of Personnel Command & Safety 2 Medical Group Supervisor 1 Triage 3 Treatment Manger 1 Patient Care 3 Transportation Manager 1 Documentation 1 Total: 12 Figure 120: Technical Rescue (Water Bay/Near Shore) Task Number of Personnel Command/Safety 1 Rescue Boat 3 Back-Up Boat 3 Patient Care 3 Total: 10 Figure 121: Technical Rescue (Rope Rescue) Task Number of Personnel Command/Safety 1 Technical Safety Officer 1 Rigging Team 3 Rescue Team Edge Supervisor 3 Back-Up Team 3 Patient Care 3 Total: 14

376 of 496

Community Risk Assessment/Standards of Cover San Bruno Fire Department 131
Figure 122: Technical Rescue (Confined Space Rescue) Task Number of Personnel Command/Safety 1 Technical Safety Officer 1 Support Team (air monitor, air supply, communications) 3 Rigging Team 3 Rescue Team 3 Back-Up Team 3 Patient Care 3 Total: 17 Figure 123: Technical Rescue (Trench Rescue) Task Number of Personnel Command & Safety 2 Support Team (air monitor, air supply, communications) 3 Shoring Team 6 Rescue Team 3 Back-Up Team 3 Patient Care 3 Total: 20 Alarm Assignments To ensure sufficient personnel and apparatus are dispatched to an emergency event, the following first alarm response assignments have been established by SBFD to ensure sufficient personnel and apparatus are dispatched to an emergency event. Total Staffing Needed is the number identified in the previous Critical Tasking Analysis. The number of personnel and apparatus required to mitigate an active and complex working incident may require additional resources above and beyond the numbers listed next. With currently available resources, SBFD is able to staff all incident types in accordance with its Critical Tasking Analysis by relying on auto-aid with other neighboring departments while using Automatic Vehicle Location (AVL) technology.

377 of 496

Community Risk Assessment/Standards of Cover San Bruno Fire Department 132
Figure 124: SBFD Structure Fire w/Hydrants Unit Type Number of Units Total Personnel Engine 5 15 Ladder 1 3 Battalion Chief 2 2 Total Units/Staffing Provided by SBFD: 4 10 Total Staffing Needed: 20 Auto-Aid Units/Staffing: 4 10 Total Staffing Provided: 20 Gap/Deficit: 0 Figure 125: SBFD Expanded Structure Fire Unit Type Number of Units Total Personnel Engine 5 15 Ladder 1 3 Battalion Chief 2 2 Total Units/Staffing Provided by SBFD: 4 10 Total Staffing Needed: 20 Auto-Aid Units/Staffing: 4 10 Total Staffing Provided: 20 Gap/Deficit: 0 Figure 126: SBFD High-Rise Structure Fire Unit Type Number of Units Total Personnel Engine 6 18 Ladder 3 9 Air Supply 1 3 Battalion Chief 3 3 Total Units/Staffing Provided by SBFD: 4 10 Total Staffing Needed: 35 Auto-Aid Units/Staffing: 9 23 Total Staffing Provided: 33 Gap/Deficit: -2

378 of 496

Community Risk Assessment/Standards of Cover San Bruno Fire Department 133
Figure 127: SBFD Wildland FireLow Risk Unit Type Number of Units Total PersonnelEngine 3 9 Brush Engine 3 9 Battalion Chief 1 1 Bulldozer 1 1 Total Units/Staffing Provided by SBFD: 4 10 Total Staffing Needed: 10 Auto-Aid Units/Staffing: 4 10 Total Staffing Provided: 20 Gap/Deficit: +10 Figure 128: SBFD Wildland FireHigh Risk Unit Type Number of Units Total Personnel Engine 6 18 Brush Engine 1 3 Battalion Chief 3 3 Water Tender 1 1 Division Chief 1 1 Type 3 Engines 6 18 Air Attack + 2 Air Tankers 3 4 Helicopter 1 8 Bulldozer 2 2 Fire Crews 2 28 Total Units/Staffing Provided by SBFD: 4 10 Total Staffing Needed: 26 Auto-Aid Units/Staffing: 22 76 Total Staffing Provided: 86 Gap/Deficit: +60

379 of 496

Community Risk Assessment/Standards of Cover San Bruno Fire Department 134
Figure 129: SBFD Hazardous MaterialsLow Risk (Investigation) Unit Type Number of Units Total Personnel Engine 1 3 Ladder 0 0 Battalion Chief 0 0 Total Units/Staffing Provided by SBFD: 1 3 Total Staffing Needed: 3 Auto-Aid Units/Staffing: 0 0 Total Staffing Provided: 3 Gap/Deficit: 0 Figure 130: SBFD Hazardous MaterialsHigh Risk (Response) Unit Type Number of Units Total Personnel Engine 4 12 Ladder 1 3 Battalion Chief 1 1 Hazardous Material Unit 1 6 SMCO Environmental Health Chemist 1 1 Total Units/Staffing Provided by SBFD: 4 10 Total Staffing Needed: 14 Auto-Aid Units/Staffing: 4 13 Total Staffing Provided: 23 Gap/Deficit: +9 Figure 131: SBFD Emergency Medical Aid Unit Type Number of Units Total Personnel Engine or Ladder 1 3 Battalion Chief Total Units/Staffing Provided by SBFD 1 3 Total Staffing Needed: 3 Auto-Aid Units/Staffing: 0 Total Staffing Provided: 3 Gap/Deficit: 0

380 of 496

Community Risk Assessment/Standards of Cover San Bruno Fire Department 135
Figure 132: SBFD Motor Vehicle Accident Unit Type Number of Units Total Personnel Engine 1 3 Ladder 1 3 Chief Officer 1 1 Total Units/Staffing Provided by SBFD: 3 7 Total Staffing Needed: 10 Auto-Aid Units/Staffing: 0 Total Staffing Provided: 7 Gap/Deficit: -3 Figure 133: SBFD Major Medical Response Unit Type Number of Units Total Personnel Engine 3 9 Ladder 1 3 MCI Trailer Battalion Chief 1 1 Total Units/Staffing Provided by SBFD: 4 10 Total Staffing Needed: 12 Auto-Aid Units/Staffing: 1 3 Total Staffing Provided: 13 Gap/Deficit: +1 Figure 134: SBFD Technical Rescue Water (Bay/Near Shore) Unit Type Number of Units Total Personnel Engine 2 6 Boat (Varies on mutual aid) 2 6 Ladder 1 3 Battalion Chief 1 1 Total Units/Staffing Provided by SBFD: 4 10 Total Staffing Needed: 10 Auto-Aid Units/Staffing: 2 6 Total Staffing Provided: 16 Gap/Deficit: +6

381 of 496

Community Risk Assessment/Standards of Cover San Bruno Fire Department 136
Figure 135: SBFD Technical RescueTrench Rescue Unit Type Number of Units Total Personnel Engine 3 9 Ladder 1 3 USAR Type 1 1 3 Battalion Chief 1 1 Total Units/Staffing Provided by SBFD: 4 10 Total Staffing Needed: 20 Auto-Aid Units/Staffing: 2 6 Total Staffing Provided: 16 Gap/Deficit: -4 Response Time Performance Objectives Once SBFD has established response time objectives and identified the critical tasks and number of personnel necessary to achieve those critical tasks (in the preceding section), the department can begin defining emergency response time performance objectives. The process of setting response time performance objectives will include two primary questions: What are the expectations of the community and elected officials regarding the initial response times of SBFD to an emergency incident? What is the publics perception of quality emergency services concerning response time? What response time performance would be reasonable and effective in containing the fire, stopping the loss, and saving lives when considering the common types of incidents and fire risks faced by SBFD? With the SBFD being a career fire department, references to the national consensus standard for career fire departments should be used (NFPA 1710 Standard for Career Fire Departments). Although the NFPA performance recommendations are considered an industry best practice, fire departments working with their governing bodies can implement response performance goals that better suit their communities.

382 of 496

Community Risk Assessment/Standards of Cover San Bruno Fire Department 137
Triton recommends that tiered response performance objectives be developed based on the population density and risks present. This methodology will effectively segregate the service area into response zones reflecting community expectations and fire department capabilities. The following two figures provide examples of response performance goals based on population and risk response zones. The first example is the first due response of a single unit utilizing the industry best practice response time metric, from the time the call is received at 911 to arrival on-scene at the 90th percentile. Figure 136: Example of a First-Due Single-Unit Response Standard Density Description Response Time Goal Urban Greater than 1,000 persons/square mile 9 minutes or less at 90% Suburban 5001,000 persons/square mile 12 minutes or less at 90% Rural Less than 500 persons/square mile 15 minutes or less at 90% The following example represents the first-alarm response to a moderate-risk structure fire, utilizing the industry best practice response time metric. Figure 137: Example of First Alarm Response (3 Engines, 2 Medic Units, & 1 BC) Density Description Response Time Goal Urban Greater than 1,000 persons/square mile 11 minutes or less at 90% Suburban 5001,000 persons/square mile 16 minutes or less at 90% Rural Less than 500 persons/square mile 18 minutes or less at 90% Fire departments throughout the United States use the practice of establishing risk zones based on risk and population density. Using risk or demand zones provides a more accurate picture of service-delivery performance. This is especially relevant for fire departments such as SBFD, which provide emergency response to substantial and diverse service areas in the 5.5 square mile city.

383 of 496

Community Risk Assessment/Standards of Cover San Bruno Fire Department 138
The preceding response standards are presented as examples. The previous discussion provides SBFD with the information necessary to establish response standards and targets. Establishing response standards and performance goals should be viewed as a strategic planning tool for community loss control. Therefore, San Bruno Fire Department is encouraged to begin the process as soon as feasible to assist with future planning needs.

384 of 496

Community Risk Assessment/Standards of Cover San Bruno Fire Department 139
Section IV: FINDINGS & RECOMMENDATIONS

385 of 496

Community Risk Assessment/Standards of Cover San Bruno Fire Department 140
Findings & Observations The following section outlines some of Tritons more significant findings and observations during this study based on the data received onsite observations and stakeholder interviews. In addition, these follow many of the critical issues listed by the Fire Chief, including career development & secession planning, policy development & revisions, strategic plan development, and addressing community development that is outpacing fire department resources. Operations & Deployment Historical incident records show that most service demand occurs in San Brunos Station 51 response area, particularly to the North of Station 51. Based on the data, Station 51 is located in an adequate location. Coverage gaps are created during busy periods between 8 a.m. to 6 p.m. Additional significant new development in this high response zone justifies additional operational staffing at Station 51. During the study period, SBFD attributes an increasing service demand to homeless persons. Although most of these were EMS-related, other calls involved fires and other incident types. SBFD maintains IGAs with other departments to initiate a closest forces response model utilizing Automatic Vehicle Location (AVL) technology. SBFD relies heavily on automatic aid to fill its operational ERF requirements. Operational policies, training, procedures, and activities of the other fire departments are not necessarily consistent with SBFD's standards. This has sometimes created challenges during incidents that require a multi-agency response. It was noted from line personnel that operational and training consistencies were generally better with those Auto aid agencies from the South. Response Performance There is an inability to consistently meet response performance goals and NFPA best practice time measurements throughout the SBFD area. Based on the data provided, the call processing time, overall performance of 60 seconds or less, 90% of the time, was within NFPA 1221 standards.

386 of 496

Community Risk Assessment/Standards of Cover San Bruno Fire Department 141
The San Bruno Police Department dispatch center answers many of the calls for SBFD, and the call answer and call transfer times to San Mateo County Public Safety Communications are not well documented and are non-existent. NFPA 1221 benchmarks recommending that 911 calls be answered within 15 seconds, 90% of the time (within 20 seconds, 95% of the time), are not able to be determined due to insufficient data by the San Bruno City Police Dispatch Center. SBFDs turnout time performance goal is 60 seconds or less at 90% for all call types. Overall turnout times were 2 minutes, 32 seconds at 90% during the study period. SBFDs travel time performance goal is 4 minutes, 0 seconds at 90%. SBFDs travel time performance was 5 minutes, 31 seconds, at 90% for all incidents during the study period. SBFDs first unit response time performance goal is 5 minutes, 0 seconds, or less at 90% for all call types. For all incident types during the study period, SBFDs first-arriving unit response time was 7 minutes, 9 seconds at 90%. SBFDs total call received to first unit arrival response time performance goal is 6 minutes, 30 seconds, or less at 90% for all call types. For all incident types during the study period, SBFDs first-arriving unit response time was 7 minutes, 36 seconds at 90%. SBFD currently does not regularly conduct performance and outcome measurements. Personnel & Staffing Although NFPA 1710 recommends 4-person staffing on engines and aerial apparatus, SBFD does not maintain this standard as a minimum. SBFD currently has FTEs on the books to staff with four on two shifts on Truck 51 but regularly works down to three as a minimum. The current daily minimum staffing on both engines is currently three. SBFD estimates that it would require an additional seven firefighters to maintain 4-person staffing on all apparatus, which would improve its ERF. Four-person staffing would improve deficiencies in total staffing needed for SBFD critical tasking and alarm assignment totals. Access to professional career development training for officers, firefighters, and other staff appears to be limited.

387 of 496

Community Risk Assessment/Standards of Cover San Bruno Fire Department 142
SBFD does not have a formal succession plan in place. SBFD currently has no additional operational management staff other than the Fire Chief and Fire Marshal. Numerous inputs received stated that the current management staff FTEs is inadequate with the numerous program responsibilities. Fire Stations & Facilities As discussed in this report, Station 51 and Station 52 are both over 63 years old and in very poor condition. Each facility has numerous deficiencies and has likely reached its useful life as a functional modern fire station. Station 51 is currently in a suitable location for response coverage and to remain a City Hall-based fire station. Station 52 could be moved to a different location for better overall system-wide response coverage, improved operational and functional station layout and design, and a site for potential training facilities within the city. The current station location is adequate, and relocating it to an area in the general vicinity does not adversely affect response coverage and, in some cases, improves coverage. SBFD currently lacks an adequate training grounds, training tower, or classroom facilities within the city. SBFD currently houses Reserve Truck 151 outside the city of San Bruno as there are no available apparatus bays within the two fire stations for storage. Miscellaneous Findings & Observations It was noted by numerous personnel that there had been several attempts at cooperative ventures with neighboring agencies via Intergovernmental (IGAs) or Joint Power Authority (JPA) agreements. The on-duty shift mechanic program has seen good success based on stakeholder input. The current program is based in a modified apparatus bay at Station 51. SBFD currently does not have a Capital Facilities Replacement Plan or a Strategic Plan. Many of SBFDs standard operating guidelines, policies, and procedures are outdated or nonexistent. There was universal stakeholder input received at all levels about the high level of regard, support, enthusiasm, spirit, and camaraderie within SBFD.

388 of 496

Community Risk Assessment/Standards of Cover San Bruno Fire Department 143
Proposed Strategies & Recommendations Response Performance Recommendation 1: The department should start conducting performance and outcome measurements. SBFD needs to look at ways to provide performance and outcome measurements to share with the community and the elected officials. This could include documenting both property loss and property saved. It is a powerful message to demonstrate every year that SBFD experienced a $4.5 million fire loss for the year and was able to save $8.9 billion of property. Other measurements could include: How often is the fire contained to the room of origin? How long does it take to get water on the fire? How long does it take to get fire control? How many animals have been saved for the year? How often is an effective firefighting force on-scene within 8 minutes? Outcome measures will determine if a program or practice is working. Each year the City of San Bruno approves a budget to provide funding to operate the agency. Does the funding allow the organization to develop and implement what they believe are the best strategies to improve services? Developing outcome measures permits the city and the fire department to determine if program activities are beneficial. Fire Stations & Facilities & Organizational Structure Recommendation 2: Consider replacing both Station 51 and Station 52 with new facilities. Both fire stations are over 65 years old and are in unacceptable condition for modern fire station facilities. Numerous reasons are cited in the report for each. Station 51 could be rebuilt in its current location as a city hall-based fire station as the current location meets all travel times and goals. Station 52s current location also meets travel time goals but could be relocated (see Recommendation 6) to attain a more suitable location, improving overall time measurements for many portions of San Bruno.

389 of 496

Community Risk Assessment/Standards of Cover San Bruno Fire Department 144
Recommendation 3: Consider replacing Station 52 with a new facility in a more strategic alternative location. Station 52 is currently located in a residential neighborhood and would be better if relocated and rebuilt in a more suitable location. AP Triton recommends a potential general area, as identified in the red circle, with a desired preferred location of a vacant lot at the intersection of San Bruno Ave & Glenview. The data shows that response times from the new proposed location still meet the Citys response time objectives and can improve them in some areas.

Figure 138: Four-Minute Travel Time Distance from Station 51 & Proposed Station 52

390 of 496

Community Risk Assessment/Standards of Cover San Bruno Fire Department 145
The preceding figure shows the 4-minute travel time distances from both Station 51 and a newly relocated Station 52 near the proposed preferred location of San Bruno Avenue & Glenview Drive. The travel time distance of a relocated Station 52 still adequately covers all areas of Station 52s response zone and improves response times to some areas to the South and into Station 51s response zone. From the proposed new Station 52 location, San Bruno Avenue allows much quicker access to most areas to the east. From Skyline Blvd to El Camino Real, San Bruno Avenue has only six traffic signal lights, all operated by Opticom traffic control devices, and is a two-lane road its entire length allowing much faster travel speeds and the ability to pass vehicles pulled over on the shoulder safely. Station 52s current route east using Sneath Lane from Skyline Blvd to El Camino Real has seven traffic signal lights, with not all having Opticom traffic control devices, two stop signs, is much steeper, has a 30-mph posted speed limit, and is only one direction each way for half of the route making travel time much slower for fire apparatus with limited ability to pass vehicles pulled over on the shoulder safely. The next figure shows the proposed preferred location site. This space allows for an adequate site to house a modern-day fire station facility and possibly incorporate small training facilities within the site, including a training tower, open space training area, and classroom facility. Figure 139: Proposed Preferred Location for Potential SBFD Fire Station 52

391 of 496

Community Risk Assessment/Standards of Cover San Bruno Fire Department 146
Recommendation 4: Consider shared services with outside agencies when efficiencies can be recognized and duplication eliminated. Currently, SBFD shares multiple services with outside agencies, including SBFD soon providing a training Captain for shared training with Central County Fire, and SBFD sharing AVL responses, which constitutes a significant out-of-district impact for some agencies, including San Bruno. In approximately 2015, SBFD embarked on a consolidation study with Central County Fire Department shortly after the City of Milbrae entered into a contract for service with Central County. Still, the study resulted in SBFD staying autonomous due to issues including the lack of representation on the Joint Powers Authority (JPA). The City of Millbraes current IGA with Central County expires in 2024, which leads to interesting potential opportunities for both agencies. The two agencies have considered collaborative opportunities in the past, as previously stated, and stakeholders at all levels at San Bruno submitted input on this potential collaborative partnership opportunity. Any potential shared services efforts should be carefully studied to determine the financial and operational impacts, potential benefits and efficiencies gained effects on employees, issues of representation, and other considerations for SBFD. Recommendation 5: Consider building training facilities and infrastructure for San Bruno. If San Bruno embarks on station reconstruction projects for Station 51 and Station 52, small training facilities should be considered to be built in either location. If Station 51 were to use the current city hall location to rebuild, a small training center could be configured on that current site. If the newly proposed Station 52 site was considered for rebuilding, that location could also house a small training facility with possibly more space than at Station 51. If San Bruno is to remain autonomous into the future, having adequate training facilities within the city is an important goal. Recommendation 6: Find a location for Reserve Truck 151 to be stored and equipped within the city of San Bruno. The reserve truck is currently kept off-site and should be housed within the city and better equipped as a reserve apparatus. The reconstruction of a new Station 51 could provide an adequate location for the reserve truck to be housed.

392 of 496

Community Risk Assessment/Standards of Cover San Bruno Fire Department 147
Recommendation 7: Provide more suitable facilities and equipment for the on-duty shift mechanic program. San Bruno is finding success with the on-duty shift mechanic program. However, the current apparatus bay and facility at Station 51 has been modified by raising the roof and is inadequate for this purpose. The reconstruction of a new Station 51 could provide an adequate location with proper equipment for this program to be housed. Operations & Deployment Recommendation 8: Consider hiring enough additional firefighters to staff Truck 51 to ensure a minimum of 4-person staffing daily. The department currently has positions on the books to staff with four on two shifts but regularly works down to three. The minimum of four meets NFPA 1710, helps the Effective Response Force data and improves the critical tasking total staffing needed for alarm assignments. Therefore, these two positions should be converted to full-time, and a third FTE should be hired to meet the minimum truck staffing. It is well documented that 4-person truck companies maintain much greater efficiency and safety when operating on fire and emergency scenes. This configuration allows for a more flexible on-duty shift mechanic program to continue with the ability of the mechanic to perform their emergency repair duties when needed while maintaining the truck in service. Recommendation 9: Consider hiring enough additional firefighters to ensure a minimum of 4-person staffing daily on Engine 51 and Engine 52. The current daily minimum staffing on both engines is currently three. The minimum of four meets NFPA 1710 standards and improves the critical tasking total staffing needed for alarm assignments. Based on Triton's risk analysis, increasing staffing to a four-person company model will result in an enhanced Effective Response Force for potential fires and other significant events to all occupancies, most notably for high-risk occupancies. Four-person staffing meets the two-in, two-out OSHA respiratory protection standard. SBFD would need to hire six additional FTE Firefighter positions to reach the goal of four-person minimum staffing for the two fire engines combined. Four-person staffing for communities like San Bruno are policymaker-based decisions based on fiscal resources and limitations and the needs and desires of the community.

393 of 496

Community Risk Assessment/Standards of Cover San Bruno Fire Department 148
Recommendation 10: Consider conducting a management staffing analysis for the potential hiring of additional management staff. SBFD currently has only two administrative management personnel, the Fire Chief and the Fire Marshal Battalion Chief. The current management staff is inadequate, and an additional Chief Officer should be considered to assist in the overall management workload. This will result in greater efficiencies, including maintaining and implementing new programs and redistributing the numerous program responsibilities that current personnel at all levels manage. Miscellaneous Recommendations Recommendation 11: Continue to support and update San Bruno Fire Departments succession planning and career development programs. Succession planning and career development will be important for San Bruno, especially If San Bruno is to remain autonomous into the future. SBFD should continue supporting succession planning for each critical position within the organization. This should include all promoted positions: Firefighter/Driver, Captains, Battalion Chiefs, Fire Marshal, and the Fire Chief. Consider utilizing NFPA 1021: Standard for Fire Service Officer Professional Qualifications as a general guide. SBFD should consider training options for personnel, such as the National Fire Academys Command & Control classes, Managing Officer Program, and Executive Officer Program. Recommendation 12: Develop and update standard operating guidelines and all policies and procedures. SOGs and Policies for SBFD are outdated, and updating them is a priority. Triton received numerous amounts of stakeholder input on the need to update policies. The policies have been outdated due to numerous revolving Fire Chiefs and administrations, and the current new Fire Chief recognizes the need and desires to take on this challenge and will have great success. Specifically, one area needing updated policies and procedures is for water rescue response. SBFD lacks the proper PPE equipment, training, and response guidelines to adequately and effectively respond to water rescue events.

394 of 496

Community Risk Assessment/Standards of Cover San Bruno Fire Department 149
Several personnel shared their concerns regarding a recent significant mutual aid water rescue incident. Once new updated guidelines, policies, and procedures have been developed, all personnel should be trained in the guidelines. Recommendation 13: Consider developing a Strategic Plan for San Bruno Fire Department. A strategic plan is a living management tool that provides short-term direction, builds a shared vision, documents goals and objectives, and optimizes the use of resources. With the growth and service demands increasing, a Strategic Plan will help SBFD with its future planning efforts. A formal capital facilities and apparatus replacement plan should be developed and maintained as part of the strategic planning process. Recommendation 14: Consider writing and implementing a Firefighters Safety Highway Response SOG. Numerous stakeholder feedback was received on this topic to address basic firefighter safety while responding to highway accidents. SBFD has more freeways on all sides of the city than most other jurisdictions do. As a result, firefighter and law enforcement freeway safety has become a pressing issue due to a high number of critical and fatal accidents involving first responders and freeway motorists. Recommendation 15: Consider further analyses of the call answering times, call processing times, and specifically call transfer times from the San Bruno Police Dispatch Center to San Mateo County Dispatch Center. The San Bruno Police Department Dispatch Center answers many of the calls for SBFD, then transfers them to San Mateo County Dispatch, and the hand-off times are not well documented and the actual call answer & call transfer times are non-existent. NFPA 1221 standard benchmarks recommend that 911 calls be answered within 15 seconds, 90% of the time (within 20 seconds, 95% of the time). Unfortunately, this benchmark was unable to be determined due to insufficient data. A more detailed analysis should be conducted for data on the actual call answering times of the San Bruno Police dispatch and call transfer times that the San Bruno Police dispatch center is taking to get the calls transferred to San Mateo County.

395 of 496

Community Risk Assessment/Standards of Cover San Bruno Fire Department 150
Once a call is at San Mateo County dispatch, the data shows the call processing time of 60 seconds or less, 90% of the time, was within NFPA 1221 standards. Because of questions that arose in the CAD data provided by San Mateo County Dispatch for this study, it is recommended that further analysis on the accuracy of the CAD data is conducted, specifically looking at the time stamp benchmarks provided on all incidents. It is further recommended that SBFD look into a Computer Aided Dispatch (CAD) CAD to CAD transfer system or network. By creating an interconnected network of CAD systems, public safety agencies can communicate faster and more efficiently and track data appropriately. Recommendation 16: Consider studying turnout time performance measures and possible causes. SBFDs turnout times were well above the performance goal of 60 seconds or less at 90% for all call types. Overall turnout times were 2 minutes, 32 seconds at 90% during the study period. With the new Continuum program that the agency has available as an RMS add-on, turnout times can be self-tracked over time, and SBFD can provide an internal analysis of the data provided to work on improvement measures. SBFD has already identified this deficiency and has made progress in turnout time improvement. It should be noted that the current poor station configurations and conditions for both Station 52 and Station 52 contribute to the turnout time deficiency, as it was noted by several personnel having to navigate around workout equipment in the apparatus bay to get onto apparatus in addition to poor station layouts and inefficient designs. New station facilities and better designs would improve the turnout performance measures. Recommendation 17: Find suitable locations for workout exercise areas outside of the apparatus bays at both Station 51 and Station 52. There is a significant need for workout exercise areas outside the hazards of the apparatus bays in both SBFD fire stations. The safety and health risks of exercising in apparatus bays with diesel exhaust present, fuel vapors, turnouts, post-incident medical bio and carbon contaminants, and cramped space next to fire apparatus all contribute to the health and safety risks for firefighting personnel and other staff using the exercise equipment.

396 of 496

Community Risk Assessment/Standards of Cover San Bruno Fire Department 151
This risk and concern was noted by several SBFD personnel during the stakeholder interviews. New replacement station construction of both fire stations would eventually alleviate this risk; however, it is recommended that SBFD work to find suitable locations for exercise equipment outside the apparatus bays in the immediate future.

397 of 496

Community Risk Assessment/Standards of Cover San Bruno Fire Department 152
Section V: APPENDICES

398 of 496

Community Risk Assessment/Standards of Cover San Bruno Fire Department 153
Appendix A: Risk Classifications The following are the risk classifications determined by incident type. Fire Low Risk These incidents are considered low in risk and are minor in scope and intensity. It requires a single fire apparatus and crew to manage fires involving passenger vehicles, fences, trash or dumpster, downed power lines, residential or commercial alarm investigations, or an odor investigation. Moderate Risk These incidents are the first alarm response needed to manage a moderate fire risk incident. These incidents include smoke in a building, small outside building fires, commercial vehicle fires, a single-family residence, a lightning strike to a building, an automatic fire alarm at a high-risk occupancy, or a hazardous materials pipeline fire. High Risk These incidents are a second alarm response needed to manage a high-fire risk incident. These incidents include smoke in a high-life hazard property (school, skilled nursing, etc.), single-family residences with injured or trapped victims, multi-family residential buildings, or a moderate-sized commercial/industrial occupancy. Maximum Risk A third alarm response is needed to manage a maximum fire risk incident. These incidents include a hospital, assisted living facility, fire in an apartment building, high-rise building fire, a large commercial or industrial occupancy, hazardous materials railcar, or storage occupancy. Incident assignments will include additional command staff, recalling off-duty personnel, or mutual aid assistance for other critical tasking needs. EMS Risks Low Risk A single EMS unit can manage a low-risk EMS incident involving an assessment of a single patient with a critical injury or illness, no-life threatening medical call, lift assist, or standby. Moderate Risk A two-unit response is required to control or mitigate a moderate-risk EMS incident. It involves assessing and treating one or two patients with critical injuries or illnesses or a motor vehicle crash with 1-2 patients.

399 of 496

Community Risk Assessment/Standards of Cover San Bruno Fire Department 154
High Risk
A multiple-unit response is required to control or mitigate a high-risk EMS incident. It involves 3-8 patients with injuries ranging from minor to critical. Patient care will involve triage, BLS, ALS treatment, and a coordinated transport of patients.

Maximum Risk
A multiple-unit response is required to control or mitigate a maximum-risk EMS incident. It involves more than nine patients with injuries ranging from minor to critical. Patient care will involve triage, BLS, ALS treatment, and a coordinated transport of patients. If this is an active shooter incident, the response may require a casualty collection area unit to treat patients not in the hot zone.

Technical Rescue
Low Risk
A single fire unit can manage a low-risk technical rescue incident involving minor rescues, such as a child locked in a vehicle, elevator entrapment, or minor mechanical entrapment.

Moderate Risk
A two-unit response is required to control or mitigate a moderate technical rescue risk incident. Support is not usually required from a technical rescue team. This type of incident involves a motor vehicle crash that requires patient extrication, removal of a patient entangled in machinery or other equipment, or a person trapped by downed power lines.

High Risk
A multiple-unit response is required to control or mitigate a high-risk technical rescue incident. This type of incident may involve full-scale technical rescue operations ranging from structural collapse to swift water rescues. It may involve multiple motor vehicles that require extrication, commercial passenger carriers, or a vehicle impacting a building.

Support is usually required from a technical rescue team. In addition, this incident may require multiple alarms.
400 of 496
Community Risk Assessment/Standards of Cover San Bruno Fire Department 155
Maximum Risk A multiple-unit response is required to control or mitigate a maximum-risk technical rescue incident. Support is required from a specialized technical rescue team and may have multiple operations locations. This type of incident will involve full-scale technical rescue operations such as victims endangered or trapped by structural collapse, swift water, or earth cave-ins. This incident will require multiple alarms and may expand beyond the identified critical tasking. Recall that off-duty personnel or assistance from auto or mutual aid may occur during a disaster or when additional alarms and command staff are needed. Hazardous Materials Low Risk A single fire unit can manage a low-risk hazardous materials incident involving carbon monoxide alarms and other unknown hazmat investigations without symptomatic victims, less than 20 gallons of fuel, natural gas meter incident, downed power lines, equipment, or electrical problems, or attempted burning. This includes automatic alarms that may originate from a hazardous material. Moderate Risk A two-unit response is required to control or mitigate a moderate-risk hazardous materials incident. Direct support is not usually required from a hazardous materials team. This type of incident involves a carbon monoxide alarm with symptomatic patients, a fuel spill of 2055 gallons, or a gas or petroleum products pipeline break not threatening any exposures. High Risk A multiple-unit response with a hazmat team is required to control or mitigate a high-risk hazardous materials incident. For example, support is needed for a Level 2 Haz-Mat incident that involves establishing operational zones (hot/warm/cold) and assigning multiple support divisions and groups. This response includes a release with 38 victims, gas leaks in a structure, hazmat alarm releases with victims, flammable gas or liquid pipeline breaks with exposures, fuel spills greater than 55 gallons, fuel spills in underground drainage or sewer systems, transportation or industrial chemical releases, or radiological incidents. Additional assistance may be required to expand operations past the identified critical tasks.

401 of 496

Community Risk Assessment/Standards of Cover San Bruno Fire Department 156
Maximum Risk A multiple-unit response is required to control or mitigate a maximum-risk hazardous materials incident. Support is required from an on-duty hazmat team and their specialized equipment. This type of incident involves establishing operational zones (hot/warm/cold) and assigning multiple support divisions and groups. Examples include nine or more contaminated or exposed victims, a large storage tank failure, a hazmat railcar failure, or a weapon of mass destruction incident. This incident will require multiple alarms and may expand beyond the identified critical tasking. Recall that off-duty personnel or assistance from auto or mutual aid may occur during a disaster or when additional alarms and command staff are needed. Wildland Urban Interface Low Risk A single fire unit can manage a low-risk wildland firefighting incident involving a fire minor in scope, structures not threatened, and Red Flag conditions do not exist. These include low-risk wildland or grass fires, an outside smoke investigation, illegal or controlled burns, or small vegetation fires. Moderate Risk Multiple units are needed to manage a moderate-risk wildland firefighting incident involving a significant fire in the brush or brush pile at a chipping site, grass, or cultivated vegetation. Red Flag conditions do not exist, and structures may or may not be threatened. High Risk Multiple units or alarms are needed to manage a high-risk wildland firefighting incident. This level is associated with Red Flag warnings with structures that may or may not be threatened. This fire involves a significant wildfire in the brush, grasses, cultivated vegetation, and woodland areas. Additional alarm assignment, command staff, recall of off-duty personnel, and mutual aid assistance may require the operations to extend beyond the identified critical tasks.

402 of 496

Community Risk Assessment/Standards of Cover San Bruno Fire Department 157
Appendix B: Summary of the Stakeholder Interviews Introduction to the Stakeholder Interviews Triton interviewed stakeholders representing various of the San Bruno Fire Department's internal and external stakeholders. These interviews aimed to understand better issues, current service levels, concerns, options regarding the emergency service delivery system, opportunities for improvements, and expectations. It is important to note that the information solicited and provided during this process was in the form of "people inputs" (stakeholders individually responding to Tritons questions), some of which are perceptions reported by stakeholders. All information was accepted at face value without an in-depth investigation of its origination or reliability. The project team reviewed the information for consistency and frequency of comments to identify specific patterns or trends. Based on the information reviewed, the team identified a series of observations, recommendations, needs, and general comments that were significant enough to be included in this report. Stakeholders were identified within the following groups: Elected Officials, San Bruno City Management & Department Heads, Rank & File line personnel, Chief officers, Administrative Staff, and Community Leaders. Elected Officials, City Management, and City Department Heads What strengths contribute to the successes of the San Bruno Fire Department? SBFD is great to work with and has some of the most fantastic staff in the region. The new Fire Chief has hit the ground running and doing well. The new wave of entry-level hires are progressive. Our prevention division has progressed and is now a fully-functioning division. The new Fire Chief has a lot of trust and support from within. We have a humble group of Firefighters that love what they do. We have a great working relationship between city departments. The fire department has a strong sense of community. They do their job well, are dedicated, devoted, and work as a cohesive team.

403 of 496

Community Risk Assessment/Standards of Cover San Bruno Fire Department 158
What does San Bruno Fire Department do well? SBFD provides a high level of medical service in the field. The SBFD members have a lot of pride in the community and their work. The Crestmoor mitigation project has been great. SBFD operates with limited resources so they do a good job and work hard. What are some areas in which you think the fire dept could make improvements? Seeing the city grow, the department needs to concurrently grow alongside the community and the demand of service. Replacing both Station 51 and Station 52 had numerous responses as a high priority. Our fire stations are embarrassing to the public. We could have more diversity within the organization. SBFD does not compensate as much as it could. Personnel costs are challenging. Our reserve truck is not equipped and should be. Our fire stations are not up to modern standards. We have to provide good fire stations for them to safely and adequately function in. Its a priority to get four firefighters on both Truck 51 and Engine 51. Its better for EMS service to have staffing of 4 on Engines. Fire prevention needs to be in the same building as administration. The City needs to put more priority into the facilities. They are so far gone that no one cares about them. Further studying the consolidation question should possibly be asked again. Re-engage with the community. What do you see as San Brunos greatest risks? Infrastructure. Future development and growth. Wildfire. We have open spaces that havent been taken care of, most notably the Canyon area fire hazard. We have an inadequate water distribution system. The pipeline explosion. We need to retain and maintain our staff for long term stability.

404 of 496

Community Risk Assessment/Standards of Cover San Bruno Fire Department 159
What do you see as the top critical issues face by the San Bruno Fire Department? Future growth. The YouTube and Tanforan developments will tax our system. The City is growing fast and the fire department needs more funding for services. Serving new development. The Tanforan project with biotech campus, 1000 units, office & research, and retail will be challenging. The ability to keep up with future growth. If you could change one thing in the fire department, what would it be? Improve and rebuild the two fire station facilities. We need community meeting rooms in the fire stations. How would you describe the level of services provided by the fire department? The public views SBFD in a good light. Our fire department is very well respected in the community. The fire marshal and inspectors have become a crucial part of the business community and are doing well. Officers, Rank & File, Firefighter Line Personnel What strengths contribute to the successes of the San Bruno Fire Department? A high percentage of those interviewed stated the department's success was due to the department's culture and the employees that work for San Bruno Fire. The high number of calls San Bruno gets allows everyone to stay proficient. Many line personnel expressed how proud they felt working for an organization that other organizations throughout the region are recognizing. The recent change that occurred during the hiring process to involve more of the fire department within the selection process was a positive thing. We have a lot of pride in our culture. We had really good hires the last 5 years, both lateral and entry level. We had a revolving door of Fire Chiefs but have a great one now. We had 11 chiefs in 22 years. We now have a progressive Chief. Fire prevention is doing a great job as we have lots of development in 5 years. Our EMTs and Paramedics are top-notch.

405 of 496

Community Risk Assessment/Standards of Cover San Bruno Fire Department 160
The on-duty mechanic program has been very successful. Its an exciting time to be at San Bruno Fire. We are starting over. If we are to be self-sufficient, then lets do it. What are some areas in which you think the fire dept could make improvements? We need an apparatus bay, preferably in a new station to house the reserve apparatus. Need more staff as we have lots of program assignments and are spread thin. We have two of the oldest stations in the area that need replaced. Need female quarters in Station 52. We need an admin BC to help take the load off. The AVL is pulling us out of the area too much, needs to be re adjusted. A current safety risk is our health and wellness. We have cardio and exercise workout equipment next to the engine exhaust in the apparatus bay. We are 15% under median in pay and benefits in San Mateo County. Tell us about your daily of staffing 3,3,4 working down to 3,3,3. Is it adequate staffing day-to-day for your responses? Day-to-day operations definitely run better when the 4th was on duty on the truck. It complicates things when the 4th isn't backfilled because of leave or vacation. Many examples were given of how the fourth allows SBFD to do more from allowing the mechanic to continue to work on a maintenance project. The 4th allows an engine to stay in service when a medic has to ride in with AMR which is much more frequent now. Engine and truck companies would be able to move quicker with two in and two out with a four-person crew. Four-person staffing meets NFPA National standards and is much safer for our San Bruno crews. It is a national standard that we should meet. The truck needs four as it is the medical backup after the engine and often gets dispatched and the firefighter often rides in with AMR. We need four-person staffing on all units, we currently figure out how to make it work each time but not optimal. Our daily staffing should be at 10,10,10 minimum, with the truck always staffed at 4.

406 of 496

Community Risk Assessment/Standards of Cover San Bruno Fire Department 161
What do you see as San Brunos greatest risks? Multi-family occupancies. Wildfire in the Canyon, urban interface, WUI. Earthquake. Aircraft accidents from the airport. A major mall development possibly coming. The gas pipeline. The train tracks and train frequency. Hazardous materials responses What do you see as the top critical issues face by the San Bruno Fire Department? The most critical issue raised by personnel by far was the current poor condition of the two aging fire station facilities. San Bruno lacks the opportunity to train within the city as the lack of a training tower places a burden on shift personnel to go out of the city to conduct routine training. SBFD lacks a Deputy Chief and support staff in training. SBFD lacks professional development and succession planning for personnel. Juggling numerous projects and tasks with the high call volume is a big concern. SBFD needs to make sure the organization keeps up with the community's growth and the demand for services. Not having enough daily staffing. AMR not sending ALS Paramedics is a big problem. It takes our resources away when having to ride in to the hospital. If you could change one thing in the San Bruno Fire Department, what would it be? Replacing our two fire stations with modern facilities. Four-person staffing. Have a training tower.

407 of 496

Community Risk Assessment/Standards of Cover San Bruno Fire Department 162
You have significant mutual aid partnerships rely on. How well do you work with Mutual aid (MA) partners? During the interviews, a common theme was identified that training and MA partners from the South were stronger than the MA partners to the North. There were concerns with agencies pulling out of the regional training, which could affect responses and working together in the future. MA partners response lacks access to keys and fire system information. We work well with MA partners and they like it when we arrive on-scene. In your opinion based on your response experiences, do you feel your two fire stations are located in the right area of your city? A very high percentage of those interviewed stated that Station 52 should be located in a better location. Most commonly stated South of its current location. The same high percentage of those interviewed agreed that Station 51 was in the appropriate location. There needs to be a location within the city to store our reserve apparatus. Based on the locations of stations 61& 63 from South San Francisco and Station 37 from Central (Milbrae) our Station 51 is located in a good location. Based on the location of MA Stations 64 and 38, Station 52 could be located further South at Glenview & San Bruno Avenue. When leaving Station 52, its a quick turn, turn, turn three times, which is very difficult to do on a blind corner coming out of a residential neighborhood. In your opinion, what are the most serious problems or safety risks in your response area? Freeways and Highways are a serious risk and concern. Congestion and Access issues on tight roadways. Alternative dwellings in locations and occupancies not expected to be there. Concern over Truck 51 being called out of the city because of the AVL dispatch. Citizens are now living in garages and attics in large numbers.

408 of 496

Community Risk Assessment/Standards of Cover San Bruno Fire Department 163
Think back to a situation where you felt powerless to help a resident in need. What could have helped you in that situation? The situation that stood out the most from many personnel for this question was being on the recent flash floods that occurred which was a response into a MA area for a water rescue call. Several other water rescue calls with different stories were also mentioned. The need for proper PPE, equipment, and training would have better outcomes. Frustration with the inability to turn things over to health services or DPS to address hoarding and other enforcement issues when found on calls. Fire Department Chief Officers & Administrative Staff What strengths contribute to the successes of the San Bruno Fire Department? The department takes care of its employees. SBFD is a very progressive department. We have lots of motivated, educated, driven personnel. The new Fire Chief has brought in fresh ideas and morale has improved. The fire department is a big family and they acknowledge each achievement. What are some areas in which you think the fire dept could make improvements? We have a lot on our plate and take on a lot of programs. Lots to be responsible for. We are lacking in policies and procedures. We need a professional development program. Our fire stations are embarrassing to walk into. We lack command staffeither a Deputy Chief or Admin Battalion Chief. The City of San Bruno needs to invest in their fire department if they intend to keep it. The work space in the fire administration office is cramped with old equipment. It needs to be a more efficient setup. There is no security in the entry way. Tell us about your daily of staffing 3,3,4 working down to 3,3,3. Is it adequate staffing day-to-day for your responses? Auto aid is close, so 3,3,3, staffing is workable, but it would be a better benefit to have four-person staffing. The four-person staffing allows us to use two-in, two-out and split crews into teams. Currently, Daily City, San Mateo Consolidated, Redwood, and Menlo Park all have four-person staffing. San Bruno only has three-person staffing.

409 of 496

Community Risk Assessment/Standards of Cover San Bruno Fire Department 164
What do you see as San Brunos greatest risks? Non sprinklered buildings. The San Andreas fault line. Wildland Urban Interface fires. Transportation systems including SFO, Bart, Cal Trans, & Freeways. What do you see as the top critical issues face by the San Bruno Fire Department? The current condition of the fire stations. Station 52 should be located near Skyline and San Bruno Avenue. We could be pushed into consolidation someday due to necessity to maintain. The county maintaining proper ambulance coverage. Currently its not adequate. If you could change one thing in the fire department, what would it be? We could benefit by having an admin BC as the BCs are very busy. Station 52 needs to be in a better location. The location of station 51 at City Hall is good but the station needs to be replaced. How would you describe the level of services provided by the fire department? Excellent and we have good cooperation with our MA companies. Community Members & Others What strengths contribute to the successes of the San Bruno Fire Department? I know lots of firefighters and they are always training and keep their skills up. We have a lot of Paramedics that are very good. They have fast responses. The firefighters are on top of things. What does San Bruno Fire Department do well? They did hands on CPR at the Senior Center which was great. They do the Stop the Bleed program with the police department. They are involved in a lot of community activities and get out into the community. The fire department is a good community partner. What are some areas in which you think the fire dept could make improvements? The fire stations are old and probably not up to the standards of today. Community concern regarding the condition of the two fire stations has come up.

410 of 496

Community Risk Assessment/Standards of Cover San Bruno Fire Department 165
What do you see as San Brunos greatest risks? The multifamily dwellings and condos. What do you see as the top critical issues face by the San Bruno Fire Department? Our fire department has a really big job and a lot of responsibilities. How would you describe the level of services provided by the fire department? They are excellent at what they are called to do.

411 of 496

Community Risk Assessment/Standards of Cover San Bruno Fire Department 166
Appendix C: Table of Figures Figure 1: San Bruno VFD (1934) ........................................................................................................ 5Figure 2: SBFD Organizational Structure (2021) .............................................................................. 5Figure 3: SBFD Service Area ............................................................................................................. 6Figure 4: Mutual & Automatic Aid Fire Station Locations in San Mateo County ....................... 8Figure 5: SBFD Administrative & Support Staffing ........................................................................ 10Figure 6: SBFD Operational Staffing .............................................................................................. 11Figure 7: SBFD Current Staffing Model .......................................................................................... 11Figure 8: SBFD Firefighters per 1,000 Population (2022) ............................................................... 13Figure 9: San Bruno Fire Department Revenues .......................................................................... 15Figure 10: San Bruno Fire Department General Fund Expenditures .......................................... 16Figure 11: San Bruno Fire Department Expenditures by Category ............................................ 16Figure 12: San Bruno Citywide General Fund Projections .......................................................... 17Figure 13: Criteria Utilized to Determine Fire Station Condition ................................................. 19Figure 14: SBFD Station 51 .............................................................................................................. 20Figure 15: SBFD Station 52 .............................................................................................................. 21Figure 16: Summary of the San Bruno Fire Station Features (2022) ............................................ 22Figure 17: Criteria Used to Determine Apparatus & Vehicle Condition ................................... 24Figure 18: SBFD Frontline & Reserve Apparatus Inventory (2022) .............................................. 25Figure 19: SBFD Frontline Command & Other Vehicles .............................................................. 25Figure 20: Economic Theory of Vehicle Replacement ............................................................... 27Figure 21: San Bruno Population (20102020) .............................................................................. 33Figure 22: San Bruno Population Density ...................................................................................... 34Figure 23: San Bruno Percentage of Population by Age Risk .................................................... 36Figure 24: San Bruno Percentage of Population with Disabilities............................................... 36Figure 25: San Bruno Percentage of Population Without Health Insurance ............................ 37Figure 26: Percentage of Population with Income Below the Poverty Level ........................... 38Figure 27: Percentage of Population Speaking English "Only" and "Very Well" ....................... 39Figure 28: San Bruno Educational Levels 25 Years & Older ........................................................ 40Figure 29: San Bruno Housing TypesOwner-Occupied or Renter-Occupied ........................ 41Figure 30: Three-Axis Risk Classification Process ........................................................................... 42Figure 31: Heron's Formula Example ............................................................................................. 43Figure 32: Probability or Likelihood of Occurrence ..................................................................... 44Figure 33: Consequence to the Community ............................................................................... 44Figure 34: Impact on Operational Forces .................................................................................... 45Figure 35: SBFD Fire Response Risk Assessment ............................................................................ 46

412 of 496

Community Risk Assessment/Standards of Cover San Bruno Fire Department 167
Figure 36: Fire 3-Axis Risk Classifications ........................................................................................ 46Figure 37: SBFD EMS Response Risk Assessment ........................................................................... 47Figure 38: EMS 3-Axis Risk Classifications ....................................................................................... 47Figure 39: SBFD Technical Rescue Response Risk Assessment ................................................... 48Figure 40: Technical Rescue 3-Axis Risk Classification ................................................................ 48Figure 41: SBFD Hazardous Materials Response Risk Assessment ............................................... 49Figure 42: Hazardous Materials 3-Axis Risk Classification ............................................................ 49Figure 43: SBFD Wildland Fires Response Risk Assessment .......................................................... 50Figure 44: Wildland 3-Axis Risk Classification ................................................................................ 50Figure 45: San Bruno Average Daily High Temperatures ............................................................ 52Figure 46: San Bruno Average Wind Speeds ............................................................................... 53Figure 47: San Bruno Average Monthly Precipitation ................................................................. 54Figure 48: San Bruno Drought Conditions (July 2022) ................................................................. 54Figure 49: SBFD Earthquake Risk .................................................................................................... 56Figure 50: San Bruno Earthquake Probability ............................................................................... 57Figure 51: San Bruno Landslide Hazard Map ............................................................................... 58Figure 52: San Bruno Wildfire Hazards ........................................................................................... 61Figure 53: San Bruno Tsunami Hazard Map .................................................................................. 62Figure 54: San Bruno FEMA Flood Zones ....................................................................................... 63Figure 55: FEMA Belle Air Flood Map ............................................................................................ 64Figure 56: San Bruno Zoning Map ................................................................................................. 68Figure 57: San Bruno Target Hazards ............................................................................................ 69Figure 58: San Bruno School Locations ......................................................................................... 70Figure 59: San Bruno Assembly Occupancies ............................................................................. 72Figure 60: San Bruno Institutional & Childcare Facilities .............................................................. 74Figure 61: San Bruno Multifamily Occupancies ........................................................................... 75Figure 62: San Bruno Tall Buildings Map ........................................................................................ 77Figure 63: San Bruno Large Buildings ............................................................................................ 79Figure 64: San Bruno Energy Systems ............................................................................................ 82Figure 65: San Bruno Average Daily Traffic Counts ..................................................................... 83Figure 66: SBFD 2020 Fires and Fire Loss and Property Damage ................................................ 86Figure 67: Intentionally Set Fires ..................................................................................................... 87Figure 68: ISO Earned & Available Credits ................................................................................... 87Figure 69: Comparison of ISO Class Rating (California) .............................................................. 88Figure 70: SBFD Service Demand (20182021) ............................................................................. 90Figure 71: Responses by Incident Type ......................................................................................... 91Figure 72: Monthly Response Workload (20182021) .................................................................. 92

413 of 496

Community Risk Assessment/Standards of Cover San Bruno Fire Department 168
Figure 73: Daily Response Workload (20182021) ....................................................................... 92Figure 74: SBFD Hourly Workload ................................................................................................... 93Figure 75: SBFD Unit Workload (Incidents) by Apparatus ........................................................... 94Figure 76: Average Time on Scene by SBFD Apparatus ............................................................. 95Figure 77: SBFD All Incident Demand Density .............................................................................. 96Figure 78: SBFD All Incident DensityNight Hours ....................................................................... 97Figure 79: SBFD EMS Incident Demand......................................................................................... 98Figure 80: SBFD Structure Fire Locations ....................................................................................... 99Figure 81: SBFD Structure Fires by Hour of Day ........................................................................... 100Figure 82: Frequent Response Addresses ................................................................................... 100Figure 83: SBFD Travel Time Overlap (04 Minutes) ................................................................... 101Figure 84: ISO1.5-Mile Engine Distance from SBFD Stations ...................................................... 102Figure 85: ISO5-Mile Truck Distance from SBFD Stations ............................................................ 103Figure 86: ISO Distance Limit (05 miles) ..................................................................................... 104Figure 87: Effective Firefighting ForceApparatus ................................................................... 107Figure 88: Effective Response ForceFirefighters ..................................................................... 108Figure 89: Unit Hour Utilization ...................................................................................................... 109Figure 90: Concurrent Incident Percentage .............................................................................. 110Figure 91: Unit Concurrency ........................................................................................................ 110Figure 92: Summary of Performance Goals ............................................................................... 112Figure 93: Call Processing by Incident Type............................................................................... 114Figure 94: Call Processing by Hour of Day ................................................................................. 114Figure 95: Turnout Time Performance by Incident Type ........................................................... 115Figure 96: Turnout time Performance by Hour of Day .............................................................. 116Figure 97: Turnout Time by Unit at the 90th Percentile ............................................................... 116Figure 98: Travel Time Performance by Call Type ..................................................................... 117Figure 99: Travel Time Performance by Hour of Day ................................................................. 118Figure 100: First Unit Response Time Performance .................................................................... 119Figure 101: First Unit Arrival Performance by Hour of Day ........................................................ 119Figure 102: Call Received to First Unit Arrival by Call Type ....................................................... 120Figure 103: Call Received to Arrival by Hour of Day ................................................................. 121Figure 104: Utilization Rate ........................................................................................................... 122Figure 105: Population Projections .............................................................................................. 123Figure 106: Workload Projections ................................................................................................ 123Figure 107: CFAI Staffing Recommendation Based on Risk ..................................................... 125Figure 108: Structure Fire w/Hydrants ......................................................................................... 126Figure 109: Structure Fire without Hydrants ................................................................................ 126

414 of 496

Community Risk Assessment/Standards of Cover San Bruno Fire Department 169
Figure 110: Commercial Structure Fire ........................................................................................ 127Figure 111: High-Rise Structure Fire .............................................................................................. 127Figure 112: Wildland FireLow Risk ............................................................................................. 128Figure 113: Wildland FireHigh Risk ............................................................................................ 128Figure 114: Aircraft Emergency ................................................................................................... 128Figure 115: Hazardous MaterialsLow-Risk (Investigation) ...................................................... 129Figure 116: Hazardous MaterialsHigh-Risk (Response)........................................................... 129Figure 117: Emergency Medical Aid .......................................................................................... 129Figure 118: Motor Vehicle Accident ........................................................................................... 129Figure 119: Major Medical Response .......................................................................................... 130Figure 120: Technical Rescue (Water Bay/Near Shore) ........................................................... 130Figure 121: Technical Rescue (Rope Rescue) ........................................................................... 130Figure 122: Technical Rescue (Confined Space Rescue) ........................................................ 131Figure 123: Technical Rescue (Trench Rescue) ......................................................................... 131Figure 124: SBFD Structure Fire w/Hydrants ................................................................................ 132Figure 125: SBFD Expaned Structure Fire .................................................................................... 132Figure 126: SBFD High-Rise Structure Fire .................................................................................... 132Figure 127: SBFD Wildland FireLow Risk.................................................................................... 133Figure 128: SBFD Wildland FireHigh Risk ................................................................................... 133Figure 129: SBFD Hazardous MaterialsLow Risk (Investigation) ............................................. 134Figure 130: SBFD Hazardous MaterialsHigh Risk (Response) ................................................. 134Figure 131: SBFD Emergency Medical Aid ................................................................................. 134Figure 132: SBFD Motor Vehicle Accident .................................................................................. 135Figure 133: SBFD Major Medical Response ................................................................................ 135Figure 134: SBFD Technical Rescue Water (Bay/Near Shore) .................................................. 135Figure 135: SBFD Technical RescueTrench Rescue ................................................................ 136Figure 136: Example of a First-Due Single-Unit Response Standard ........................................ 137Figure 137: Example of First Alarm Response (3 Engines, 2 Medic Units, & 1 BC)................... 137Figure 138: Four-Minute Travel Time Distance from Station 51 & Proposed Station 52 .......... 144Figure 139: Proposed Preferred Location for Potential SBFD Fire Station 52 ........................... 145

415 of 496

Community Risk Assessment/Standards of Cover San Bruno Fire Department 170
Appendix D: References 1 2020 United States Census, U.S. Census Bureau. 2 AMR in the San Mateo Community website. 3 www.data.census.gov/cedsci/ 4U.S. Census, QuickFacts website. 5 County of San Mateo website. 6 www.census.gov/data.html 7National Fire Protection Association, 2007; Urban Fire Safety Project, Emmitsburg, MD.8 www.census.gov/data.html 9 Quality Improvement for the Fire and Emergency Services. 10 www.usa.com/carpinteria-ca-natural-disasters-extremes.htm 11 City of San Bruno General Plan 2009 Report. 12 www.pge.com/en_US/safety/emergency-preparedness/natural-disaster/wildfires/community-wildfire-safety.page?WT.pgeac=Wildfire_CrossPromo-Community. 13 dot.ca.gov/programs/traffic-operations/census. 14 Crime Data Explorer, Federal Bureau of Investigation. 15 http://projections.planbayarea.org/

416 of 496

City Council Agenda Item
Staff Report

CITY OF SAN BRUNO
DATE: May 27, 2025
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Alex D. McIntyre, City Manager
PREPARED BY: Ari Delay, Fire Chief
SUBJECT: Consider Introducing, Reading by Title Only and Waiving Further Reading of an Ordinance Entitled “An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of San Bruno Designating Fire Hazard Severity Zones and Finding the Action Exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act” BACKGROUND:

The Panorama Fire, which erupted on November 24, 1980, in San Bernardino County, California, was a devastating wildfire that marked a significant event in the State’s history.

Burning 28,000 acres near Panorama Point along State Route 18, the fire, fueled by intense Santa Ana winds, rapidly spread through Waterman Canyon and into the city of San Bernardino, destroying 325 structures, including 310 homes, and claiming four lives. At the time, it was the most destructive wildfire in San Bernardino County’s history and the fourth most destructive in California, highlighting the vulnerability of urban-wildland interface areas to fast-moving fires.

The disaster underscored the need for improved fire preparedness, defensible space measures, and community resilience, influencing local fire management policies and leaving a lasting impact on the affected communities and became one of the catalysts for the California State Legislature to develop Public Resource Code 4201 that mandated Fire Hazard Severity Zones be developed in State Responsibility Areas (SRA).

Eleven years later, the devastating 1991 Oakland Hills Fire burned 1520 acres, destroyed 3,469 homes, and killed 25 people. This fire devastated a community not previously identified as a hazard zone, as it was located in a local responsibility area (LRA). At that time the Oakland Hills Fire was the most devastating and destructive fire on record and eventually led to the adoption of Assembly Bill 337 (AB 337) in 1992 directing the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE) to evaluate, identify, and recommend fire hazard areas within LRAs where local agencies bear the financial responsibility for wildfire prevention and suppression.

AB 337 added Sections 51175- 51188 to the California Government Code, establishing the framework for designating Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones (FHSZ). CAL FIRE last updated the LRA Very High FHSZ maps in November 2008. At that time, no Very High FHSZs were identified or recommended within the City of San Bruno.

The State Fire Marshal, a division within CAL FIRE, is responsible for the ongoing review and development of LRA Fire Hazard Severity Zone maps statewide. In 2021, the State Legislature passed Senate Bill 63 (SB 63), further expanding the responsibilities of the State Fire Marshal.

The bill amended Government Code Section 51178 to require the identification of not only “Very 417 of 496
Item 7b.

Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
May 27, 2025

Page 2 of 5 ends

San Bruno City CouncilMay 27, 2025

San Bruno City Council
May 27, 2025